OMG UPDATE: Like us on Facebook or follow us on Twitter to get updates on updates!

Updated on Tuesday, February 23

#23598

OMG: Kesha is obviously lying and never got raped. Spoiled brat decides she can accuse someone just to get out of a contract, and the SJWs eat it up so they can feel like they are making a difference. Pathetic world.

25 comments

  1. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  2. You can't make any definitive statements here, but I agree that the internet is jumping to her side prematurely. The consequences of a false rape allegation would be pretty catastrophic. Sony agreed to allow Kesha to work with other producers and not have Dr Luke anywhere near her, but apparently that wasn't enough. If she wants out of her contract, she's going to have to produce some proof of abuse. The legal system is based on a set of principles that exist for good reason, and it's very sad that so many people are quick to sell those up the river and fail to see the consequences of ignoring the burden of proof in this case

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. People seem to have forgotten the whole "innocent until proven guilty" thing.

      Delete
    2. Too many people still revert to thinking with emotions over logic, responding in terms of calculating social desirability and impression management, and crafting a popular opinion that follows the crowd. I wonder how they'd feel if it weren't Dr. Luke but rather their father or partner who was being accused

      Delete
    3. 2b, you get that logic is still just a thing invented by people as one possible way to think about problems, not some objective set of universal laws that can discern right from wrong, don't you?
      At the same time, emotions are neither the poison that destroys sound thought, nor are they - as you so cynically put it - tools for calculating social desirability and impression management. People engage with the world in their own ways - that way isn't necessarily superior or inferior to anybody else's.

      That doesn't mean their opinion is right, of course. But there's nothing wrong with look at the photos of a distraught woman sobbing, and sympathizing with her plight.

      Delete
    4. 2.c: How else do you propose one decides right from wrong rather than through objective reasoning? By the feeling in the pit of your stomach? By flipping a coin? My God. And as to your last point, I never said that - reading comprehension, not even once. I said she shouldn't be let out of her contract, and Dr. Luke shouldn't be vilified, until proof is produced. You've just illustrated the problem with emotional thinking. Thank you :)

      Delete
    5. 2d, first, by recognizing that objectivity is a myth. Right and wrong are predominantly social concepts arising through shared human interactions - and shared emotions.

      Understanding right and wrong requires and understanding of yourself, your own values, and an awareness of where those values come from. You need to interact with people, live your life, and try to gain a clear sense about what matters in that life.

      There are a handful of different approaches to this. I'm personally partial to the approach to reasoning described Nell Noddings' "An Ethic of Caring," though you can also look to more pluralist schools of thought. There's one ethicist here at Waterloo actually - Patricia Marino - who wrote a book called "Moral Reasoning in a Pluralistic World." It's good, you should check it out.

      Regarding my last comment, you implied that the average person's public outrage over this scenario was fundamentally insensitive, by suggesting that they'd feel differently if the accused wasn't Dr Luke but their father or partner. All I was doing was asserting my own belief that compassion is never a bad thing to have. I fully agree that Dr Luke shouldn't be vilified without proof (and I'm a big believer in an "innocent until proven guilty" justice system), though I feel a little differently about her being let out of her contract.

      Delete
    6. New entrant to this debate. 2.e no offence, but you come across as the early 20 something who has taken a couple philosophy courses and now thinks he/she knows how the world works, or a better approach to solving world issues than the system currently in place based on those courses. You just said not much by saying a lot. You offered no concrete solutions, just a reference to a book that frankly I have no motivation to check out based on the vagueness and impracticality of the answers you've provided. I would place the odds at 95% that your Facebook profile picture is a meme that contains the word "sheeple" in it.

      Delete
    7. 2.f covered things bluntly but well. What kind of precedent would that set by letting her out of her contract? That one can simply accuse another of a despicable and heinous crime without a shred of proof, ruining that person's reputation and perhaps livelihood in the process, whenever one finds oneself in an unpalatable situation? The majority of rape victims are telling the truth. But that doesn't mean we can blindly accept their claims without due process, as the results would be quite catastrophic for the minority that are falsely accused. Kesha was offered a generous alternative: record music with another abuser. She would be free of her tormentor. Yet this wasn't good enough. That was her choice. Until she can produce some proof, it is reasonable that she has to deal with this situation as it is if she won't accept a reasonable way out.

      Delete
    8. 2e here. 2g, I actually wasn't aware she was offered the opportunity to record music with a different producer. That feels like it's be fair to me. Respects her emotions without necessarily condemning the other guy in lieu of due process.

      2f, no offense taken. I don't think I expressed my views particularly clearly either - that was at best a hastily written, gut response. And I know I still have a lot to learn - though I promise my ideas about living life well come from more than just a couple courses (I hope my views on *anything* never come from just classes in school). No memes (or "sheeple" - I hate that word) in my profile page though - I'm too sarcastic for that. :p

      Delete
    9. 2.h: After reading your last response, you're cool people - I like the cut of your jib.

      Delete
    10. @2: Lying can be very costly. like lil kim

      Delete
  3. 2c There should be a name for this type of trolling, where you reach into the cesspool of postmodern philosophy in order to completely derail the conversation.

    "You do realize that logic is still just a thing invented by people as one possible way to think about problems, not some objective set of universal laws that can discern right from wrong, don't you?"

    "I'm sure you are well aware that we are mostly the product of our socialization. So it is nonsensical to blame me for that shitty thing I did; instead we should explore which of my experiences have possibly led me to do it."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Eh. I generally agree with a lot of postmodern philosophy; I wouldn't call it a cesspool. Though I would certainly never advocate using moral relativism to make excuses.

      2b's original comment struck me as callous and cynical. I dislike callous and cynical things, and wanted to speak to that. That's all there is to it. I am aware it steered away from the topic a bit.

      Delete
  4. Sounds like a lot of the 'rape' cases that happen on UW campus. Too many cucks these days to stand up and recognize feminists and SJW's for the useless faggot fucks they really are. A good example of these are 3 and 3a, who are are obviously massive cunt cucks.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 4, what rape cases on the UW campus? I've heard a few instances of women being assaulted in the areas just off of ring road (usually by people who commit 4 or 5 assaults before eventually getting arrested and charged), and I'm sure there is stuff that happens in the residences once in a while... but I haven't heard of any cases big enough that they made it into the media. Perhaps this is one feminist conspiracy that's all in your mind? :)

      Delete
    2. 4a you're just an ignorant retard.

      Don't you remember that huge blowout last year? Where all the feminists were claiming a rapist was stalking them? And then it turned out to be just some weird kid with aspergers who looked at them as they walked by?

      That kid got his school life ruined.

      Delete
    3. 4b The biggest thing I remember about last year was the guy caught jerking off next to Velocity after attempting to follow a female student home there.

      Delete
  5. I agree, it's in their pathetic nature to lie. 4b speaks the truth, those filthy, nasty animals will always just to get free money and popularity. There is no such thing as rape, it's a social construct designed by women to oppress men. Get it in your heads, people!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Obvious troll is obvious.

      Delete
  6. Who the fuck cares?...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You care enough to enter this thread and pretend you're above caring. If you have nothing of substance to provide, stay out. Simple as that. No one's buying the "too cool for school" act, kid.

      Delete
    2. I entered this thread to present a valid viewpoint to this issue. A post in a forum like this solicits discussion and this is simply one viewpoint to further that discussion. The substance I am providing is illuminating OP to the fact that some people don't care about this issue/see it as an issue for further debate. Unsure about what I am claiming to be above here, but perhaps your delusional ass can enlighten me. However, given the asinine nature of your previous remark, I'm not holding my breath.

      Delete
  7. >If you have nothing of substance to provide, stay out
    >kid

    Oh my goodness you're precious.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That breakdown, just superb. The critical thinking skills on this one are just too much, I can't handle it.

      Delete