[ SECRET POST #2406 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2406 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.


__________________________________________________



11.


__________________________________________________



12.














Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 04 pages, 077 secrets from Secret Submission Post #344.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

I'm guessing this is about the domestic violence allegations against Michael Fassbender and the fact that Sir Patrick is an advocate for feminism and speak out frequently about violence against women.

[raaj]

Oh okay THAT makes a lot more sense as something to be upset about.

[(Anonymous)]

the domestic violence allegations against Michael Fassbender

wait whaaaaaaat

[(Anonymous)]

An ex-GF said he assaulted her. There was never any evidence nor was there ever any official charges. Considering there has never been any repeat offenses (and generally abusers don't just stop abusing) nor a history of violent behavior (such as Chris Brown) and the accuser has apparently made false accusations before, it seems to be BS. But as we all know, on the internet everyone is guilty forever (even with no evidence).

[(Anonymous)]

Yeah I hate this Guilty Until Proven False stance that the internet takes. I'm still very much in favor of innocent until proven guilty... and in this case Fassbender seems to be innocent. I don't even give a crap about him as an actor, I've only seen him in X-Men.

[(Anonymous)]

That and the fact that she didn't accuse him until he became a well known actor made people suspicious. Didn't she try to claim it had happened a long time ago? I just recall the accusation popping up after a movie of his opened and people going: "interesting timing"

[(Anonymous)]

OP is probably drawing on that and on the fact that Patrick Stewart has very passionately spoken out against domestic violence before because he grew up with a father who was abusive towards him and his mother

[(Anonymous)]

sa

wait nvm, the ayrt already mentioned that part

op

[(Anonymous)]

Yeah, that's precisely it. I'd say "inb4 people dismissing it because of 'lack of evidence/she dropped the charges' (while simultaneously going 'but he's so hoooot' (because wow attractive and wealthy men have never silenced these kinds of accusations before)" but uh....

Re: op

[(Anonymous)]

Remember, Guilty Until Proven Innocent! Also "Sure There Is No Evidence OR History of Violent Behavior, COMPLETE AND TOTAL RUMORS=FACT!!!"

Re: op

[(Anonymous)]

I'm never going to be sorry for siding with survivors and potential survivors.

Re: op

[(Anonymous)]

How about liars?

Re: op

[(Anonymous)]

I will never be sorry for being on the side of survivors and the wrongly accused.

False accusations undermine the credibility of claims made by real survivors and also have a negative impact on public funds granted to survivor centers. What she did wasn't just morally wrong in the sense that she wanted to hurt his career or get attention for herself, it was wrong because she's hurting real survivors. You're on her side? Then you are NOT on the side of survivors.

Re: op

[(Anonymous)]

Alright, I accuse you of domestic violence.

Now hate yourself. GO.

There's a difference between guilty and accused. My brother was in court for ten years become some cunt tried to squeeze money out of my parents. My brother was 14 at the time and I've never known a more model citizen. He's one of those disgustingly straight and narrow, super nice people. I am not, but the point is that people lie and they do it for potential profit. Innocent until proven guilty. Period.

What he guy above me said is absolutely correct. Taking this stance does not help actual victims or survivors or whatever's trendy to call them these days.

Re: op

[(Anonymous)]

The fact that you will support anyone who says, "I'VE BEEN RAPED/ABUSED," regardless whether there's any evidence to support their claims, demonstrates that you care less about survivors than you do about self-aggrandizement and the abstract notion of a cause.

There are people out there who make false accusations. When I was in high school, it was common for 14- and 15-year-old girls to go after older guys and then joke about using statutory rape to "pay them back" if they did something to piss them off. You've just said that you would side with them.

And that's both ridiculous and detrimental to the actual cause.

Re: op

[(Anonymous)]

Echoing everyone about false accusations hurting actual survivors.

Potential survivors are not the same as liars; potential survivors are people who have not been abused but are in a position where they are likely to be. I'm on their side just as much as actual survivors and will do anything I can to keep them from becoming abused.

People who lie about being abused use resources meant for people who are abused and those are very limited in many places.

Re: op

[(Anonymous)]

But he's not hot. And there wasn't any evidence. And she did drop the charges. And she's made false accusations before.

Look, I'd be willing to believe her despite the lack of evidence and history of false accusations if only she'd claimed he'd done things that wouldn't necessarily leave wounds. But what she did claim was mostly stuff that would have left her a bloody and bruised mess that would have required medical attention IF she survived. And yet...

Re: op

[(Anonymous)]

She didn't report it immediately, but when she did, she was granted a restraining order by the courts. Those are not just handed out like candy. Someone on a legal end of things saw enough evidence to conclude he was a danger to her. She later dismissed the restraining order when they resumed their relationship, which also ended her legal suit against him.

Re: op

[(Anonymous)]

And she never needed medical treatment why?

In LA County, there is no legal requirement for evidence of the person requesting a restraining order being in danger.

NAYRT

[(Anonymous)]

TROs are actually fairly easy to obtain. And sorry, no evidence and no repeat instances from Fassbender? Not going to to believe it. Especially since that kind of abuse would have required at least a hospital visit.

Re: op

[(Anonymous)]

She may not have reported it immediately but she'd have to see a doctor and she was never treated for any of the injuries she says he inflicted on her. Burst ovarian cyst? No doctor visit. Blown out kneecap? No visit to the doctor. Broke her nose? Again, no doctor visit and no change in her appearance. Hmmm....

Re: op

[(Anonymous)]

But restraining orders are handed out like candy. And she's the one who chose to ignore it. It's probably because being with him got her more exposure in the long run.

Re: op

[insanenoodlyguy]

You have no fucking idea how the legal system works at all.

Re: op

[(Anonymous)]

I read an article that said that the day she gave as the date of the assault was a day that Fassbender could prove he was not at the location she claimed the assault had taken place in.

Re: op

[(Anonymous)]

NO FACTS! ONLY FEELS!!!!!