(This column originally appeared in the Toronto Sun)
By: Candice Malcolm
September 21, 2018
The #MeToo movement continues to pick up momentum, but as it grows, we’re seeing the movement abandon its integrity, fairness and credibility.
The latest iteration comes through a vague accusation south of the border against U.S. Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh.
A woman’s accusations were presented on the eve of Kavanaugh’s confirmation vote — after he’d completed in-depth FBI background checks and extensive Senate Committee hearings — that made accusations about an alleged sexual assault that happened 36 years ago, while the two were in high school.
The accuser doesn’t remember where or when the alleged event took place, or how many people were in the room. Regardless of her wobbly story, a group of opposition politicians, celebrities, and classmates have come forward to say they believe the accuser.
Many insist that the woman not be asked to testify publicly, as that could “re-victimize” her. They want a man’s life and career destroyed, without any questions asked.
This is where the #MeToo movement jumps the shark and becomes just another tool of the radical Left.
It’s important and necessary to expose individuals who use a position of power to sexually harass and assault employees or other vulnerable people. And if Kavanaugh did attempt to rape this woman, as she claims, he definitely should not be given a seat on the Supreme Court.
But at the same time, justice must be pursued in accordance with the rule of law. Canada and the U.S. have developed legal traditions over centuries, rooted in the common law tradition of our English political ancestors.
Certain rights must be granted in pursuit of truth and justice, including due process, the presumption of innocence and the right to a fair trial.
But our fair and just legal tradition is contradicted by some of the demands of activists in the #MeToo movement.
Similar to those who believe Kavanaugh is automatically guilty based on an accusation, our feminist Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has likewise said that women must not just be heard, they must be believed.
(Ironically, when Trudeau himself was accused of sexually assaulting a reporter at a music festival in 2000, he changed his tune and spouted some nonsense about men and women “experiencing” things differently.)
Contrary to the insistence that we believe any and all accusations, our legal tradition is built to look at the relevant facts to determine guilt or innocence. It’s called due process.
In many #MeToo situations, including with ex-CBC host Jian Ghomeshi and former Ontario PC Leader Patrick Brown, holes have been found in the accusations.
Some of the women’s stories contained contradictions, their believability was put into question and their motives were found to be self-serving or political.
The issue was no longer about truth and justice, but about ruining a man’s career or seeking revenge against men more generally.
Last fall, radical feminist and Teen Vogue columnist Emily Lindin flat-out stated the true intentions behind the #MeToo movement.
“I’m actually not at all concerned about men losing their jobs over false sexual assault/harassment allegations,” she posted to social media. “If some innocent men’s reputations have to take a hit in the process of undoing the patriarchy, that is a price I am absolutely willing to pay.”
In the eyes of radical feminists, all men are guilty regardless of the facts. They’re more interested in...(READ MORE)