Shifting Whom We Disbelieve is Just New Bias and Prejudice and an Opportunity for New Perpetrators

Guilt by allegation, prejudice against males, presumptions of lying, this is not progress, it's just a shift in the opportunity for a new perpetrator class. That's what came across to me in the "hearing" yesterday with Brett Kavanaugh and Christine Blasey Ford.

Bias, including gender bias, remain in society today, and our acceptance of discriminating against individuals on this basis simply makes us perpetrators of discrimination. The important lessons are the lessons of working to avoid the injustices of prejudice and bias and that applies to everyone, even men.

The issue is relevant here, because as I've documented many times, Obamacare is also an unequal piece of legislation that reflects insurance company and governmental partnerships that support women OVER men. Gender bias against men is evident in Obamacare's coverage of physical exams, paid for women, not men, domestic violence counseling paid for women, not men, sterilization paid for women, not men. Shifting bias and prejudice is harmful to someone, it simply is someone ELSE.

Yesterday was a victory for bias against men. The hearings were conducted by a group of frightened Congresspeople, terrified of being called anti-woman if they questioned Dr. Ford's salacious accusations in a thorough and meaningful way. Sure, Dr. Ford wasn't on trial, but NEITHER WAS BRETT KAVANAUGH. Even those who objected to the proceedings' unfairness carefully protected Dr. Ford's "victim" status, rendering the hearings themselves, to me, ridiculous.

Since Brett Kavanaugh's behavior and responses have been the subject of much criticism, though no Brett Kavanaugh fan, I here critique why these hearings were a waste of taxpayer money in my opinion, of course.

From Dr. Ford's babyish voice and the "I'm terrified," claim to the two demands for caffeine, that struck me as hardly the behavior of someone terrified. From the 100 percent certainty that the perpetrator was Brett Kavanaugh and the equal 100 percent certainty that as an underage drinking teenager at a country club party that she had only "one beer," I did not find Dr. Ford believable.

Even Dr. Ford's touted reference to meeting up with Mark Judge and saying, "Hello," to him in the grocery store after the incident did not ring true to me. In my opinion, most teenage girls would shy away from such contact weeks after such an incident if they recognized someone from that incident rather than initiate it. The subsequent "verification" of the sighting of Mark Judge by Dr. Ford based on the truth that Mark Judge worked in the grocery store, was a published fact in Mark Judge's book in 1997. Also not persuasive.

Dr. Ford's story was prepared and refined and retold countless times, solidifying it into memory as anyone can be influenced by being told they're fat, or stupid, or a victim over years and years, ultimately believing the untrue. There were no aha revelations, no gotcha moments.

Dr. Ford's denial that she knew the current best approach for interviewing victims of sexual abuse as a multi-degreed professor of psychology was unbelievable even as she threw in some scientific or medical language to bolster her own understanding of herself.

This hearing, to me, was at best a colossal waste of US taxpayer money for a salacious he said-she said story about teenage misconduct, underage drinking, privileged lives at the country club and lack of parental oversight from three decades ago and at worst might end up being another governmental stamp of approval for the anti-male bias that's become acceptable, a new age of injustice.