So, after a hard day’s bludging, my manager Michael comes home, opens up his inbox and finds this email plea to sign a petition from some guy called Daniel Halfassed, I mean Daniel A’vard…

“It’s a sad day when a grown man in uniform feels the need to brutally bodyslam a 15 year old girl.

I’m still shocked after watching the CCTV footage. After the girl walks through an open gate, he and a group of officers chase after her — seconds later, the ticket inspector throws her against the fence, picks her up and body-slams her into the concrete. The group of officers stand around him looking on.

Yes, she was attempting to break the law by not paying for a ticket, but that is no excuse for his actions. How is throwing someone half your weight to the ground ever appropriate? He was angry and defensive, but even worse — Metro Trains has supported his actions saying the officer “exercised his functions reasonably.”

There was nothing reasonable about his actions. And it’s unbelievable that Metro Trains could condone this sort of violence towards passengers. Shockingly, after a complaint from the officer it’s now the 15 year-old girl being charged with assaulting the officer for slapping him.

This young girl could have been paralysed, acquired a brain injury, or worse. This kind of violence against anyone is unacceptable. Systemised and accepted violence is even worse — and it’s up to us, society, to say this is not tolerable and denounce violence wherever we see it. Authorised Officers often get a bad rap, but in this case it is justified. Metro Trains now has the opportunity to show some leadership by denouncing confrontational violence as a solution.

I’m asking Metro Trains to call to account the officer involved and provide anti-violence training to all Officers to prevent future abuse. Metro Trains should also offer counselling to any officers involved in violent incidents.”

So, being far too nice and liberal for his own good, Michael took a quick look at the video, thought “That’s bloody outrageous!” and signed the petition that the guy has put out there. Then, of course, someone at the MensRights subreddit pointed out that things are not quite as they seem, Mike took a slow look at the video and sure enough, the little shit hits the man first. She may even be trying to gouge his eyes, though that is not too clear. So now Michael finds himself in the embarrassing position of having signed a petition on behalf of someone who is, according to her own supporters’ footage, a violent criminal, all thanks to this Daniel A’vard guy who completely fails to point out that in between the girl going through the gate and the guy body-slamming her, the girls attacks the guy at least once. Nice one, Dan, after all, it’s not like a man has the right to defend himself from violent, possibly crippling, attacks. And don’t even get me started on the idea that if both protagonists had been female this might not have caused such a hubbub…

So in an attempt to make up for his mistake, Michael has started his own petition in support of the officer, which puts him (not to mention myself) in an odd position given how anti-authoritarian we both are. But the fact is that all sentient beings – be they man, pig, or Pigman – have the right to defend themselves against violent attacks, even if they are working for the State.

Petition here ( the good one, not the bad one)

Video below.

Remember that weird thing a week or so ago where this guy went down on this girl while other people filmed the entire thing, then it ends up on the internet and the girl yells rape? Turns out the smiling girl in the video was actually a willing participant! Who would have thought it?

According to the authorities, not only does the video show her smiling and pushing the guy’s head towards her crotch, but at one point the guy actually asks her if he should stop and she says ‘No, go ahead, continue.’! This is what it has come to, a guy can do something sexual with a girl who is smiling, who actually asserts her consent in front of witnesses and on camera, and he can still end up being portrayed as a rapist by feminist-led lynch mobs. This is how rabidly anti-male western society has become, all it takes is a woman’s word and a young man is looking at a very bleak future. And make no mistake, this is not Puritanism, this is misandry. If the sexes had been reversed and she had gone down on him while he smiled and said it was fine with him, who the fuck would have taken him seriously if he had yelled rape? Nobody, that’s who. Women don’t lie about rape, and every man is a secret rapist, that’s what feminism has taught society over the last few decades and a huge number of people have taken the message to heart.

But such proven cases of false rape accusation do nothing to stop feminist hatred. All the evidence says it wasn’t rape, but the loons at Hollaback continue to assert it was. According to someone called Sarah Fick the jackasses at her branch of Hollaback are “very disappointed” at the outcome. Ficke also claims that the girl’s obvious consent means nothing and that…

“If she was drunk at all, she was too drunk to consent,”

But…but… the boy was drunk as well! So both of them were too drunk to consent! OMG, they are both rapists! Yet mysteriously, Fick neglects to call for charges to be laid against the girl for having raped the boy! By Fick’s standards, they are both rapists, yet she wants only one of them charged! Funny how in feminist eyes a female who is drunk can’t consent but a male who is drunk can consent. Are they trying to imply that men are somehow superior? No, what Fick and her kind are about is “empowering” women by giving them the ability to yell rape every time they do something pervy and regrettable. And if the idea that only a drunk woman is unable to consent gets a few female rapists off the hook, I’m sure Fick won’t be crying too loudly about it.

Fick also claims that…

“If she was too drunk to remember anything, she was definitely too drunk to consent.”

Ah, but here is the thing. Was she too drunk to remember, or is that another way to absolve herself of blame? We have only the word of a girl who is now a proven liar, and even if the memory loss is genuine how do we know she was already that drunk at the time of the recorded incident? After the incident, she and the boy went off to his room and stayed there for three hours ( like Assange’s accusers, yet another rape victim who likes hanging out with the rapist after the crime), and that’s more than enough time to imbibe enough booze to make the whole week disappear. Again, it’s a typical feminist attempt to absolve women of blame while at the same time branding an innocent young man a dirtbag.

The news that there won’t be any charges is welcome, but there are still a couple of troubling aspects to this. First, the girl is not being charged with a false rape accusation that could have gotten the boy himself raped –  I hear rumors about that kind of thing occasionally happening to handsome young men who end up in jail – despite it being the one crime which we know for certain did take place. Today’s punishment is tomorrow’s deterrent, and by not punishing the girl for the evil thing she did, the law is telling other girls of equally low morality that they too can make such accusations with impunity. The second worrying aspect is that the University is conducting their own investigation. Given how low the standards of “evidence” are in such situations, it wouldn’t surprise me if the marsupials on the University Court simply took the girl’s word at face value and threw the boy out of school. Chances are, of course, that we will never learn the result of that particular inquisition as the media’s attention will have moved on to the next salacious bit of Hollywood gossip, or news of Beyonce photobombing yet another innocent fan.