[ExI] Perjury

[SR Ballard]

I’m not Natasha of course, but as a woman who has experienced sexual assault, I can firmly say that you do not necessarily remember every detail of what happened, such as the date or time.

I remember mine only by accident, as it was so late on Thursday night that it was actually Friday the thirteenth, somewhat around the “witching hour”, or about 3:00 or so. It was my last year of high school (2012-2013), I was finally 18, so it was at least October. However my dad threatened to kill me so I moved into a women’s shelter for three months. 

But I just double-checked and there were no Friday the 13ths during the period where this happened. So does that mean I wasn’t assaulted just because I can’t remember the date? Or the exact group of people I was with before? Or the exact words I said to him?

I do however remember getting 100% on my exam (that I was 90 minutes late for) the next morning, and calling my friend to buy me plan B. Highest score in 3 years for my school. The guy who cheated off me got 93. I don’t remember his name, but he was nice and needed a diploma so he could get a good spot in something-or-other to support his girlfriend and baby.

But if your friend is always right, well, then you should trust her. I don’t know. I didn’t watch the testament of either one of them because I’ve tried to stop watching the news. Too stressful for me.

I have serious concerns about the #metoo movement, I feel like it’s beginning to become (or has become) a panic or hysteria almost, but it’s social suicide to mention that among both my family and my friend group. I wasn’t alive then, but it reminds me of news clips I have watched and read about the Satanic Panic in the 80s. TBH I wish I could associate with people who were more open minded. “Lefty” culture, at least in the 20-30 y/o range has become intolerably toxic and in a way shockingly anti-intellectual.

-SR Ballard

> On Oct 4, 2018, at 6:06 PM, Jeff Davis <jrd1415 at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Natasha writes:
> >Relevant to H+ is legislation on human rights for enhancing, FDA rules, etc. I agree with this. But I do not enjoy >reading posts that dis others based on assumption. Many right wingers support science and H+ ideas.
> Dear Natasha,
> I hold it axiomatic that women are more intuitive than men.  Where men have evolved to be able to use physical strength -- force and violence -- to achieve their aims, women are compelled to employ "feminine wiles", a combination of intuition and smarts.  (If someone wants to take issue with this generalization, have at it.)
> Then too, it seems reasonable to presume that women should be better able than men to understand female behavior because they ***ARE*** women.  Men get to see women as they present themselves to the world, whereas women are privy to all of womankind's most closely guarded "secrets".  
> 
> So what I conclude is that women are (1) more intuitive and (2) have the advantage of knowing about women from "the inside".
> Okay. So now Natasha, I'm almost ready to pose the question I've been leading up to. Normally, I would not prejudice your answer by first citing another answer from another woman, but as back-and-forth is limited here, I will make an exception in this case.  I know a woman who is astonishingly intuitive, an absolutely incredible "reader" of people.  (She is Egyptian, an entrepreneur, living in Cairo, a native Arabic speaker, but educated in British private schools.)  When I mentioned to her, in passing, that my wife and I were watching the SCOTUS confirmation spectacle, she stated, unasked, that the woman -- Ms Ford -- was lying.  (Up to then, having only my dull male intuition to go on, I admit I was swayed by Ms Ford's emotional presentation.)
> I was somewhat startled at her instantaneous certainty, but knowing her unerring -- as in never wrong -- talent for reading people, I asked her why.  Here is her unedited, instant messaging reply:
> "Too many reasons why I knew she was lying. And although I trust my instincts about people because I was literally never wrong, I usually hold back my judgement & monitor closely the patterns & behaviors. First you NEVER forget vivid details about your worst humiliation episodes in your life. And she forgot EVERYTHING, time, place, witnesses but only remembered the “incident” in exact same details we have all watched in the 80s & 90s movies. Then she didn’t want to appear publicly but she contacted the WSJ [sic Washington Post] 4 times in a week.  
> The best part is her precise “feelings” while narrating her speech. Feelings/passion definitely make you lose control. She was passionate & in control. Against human nature. 
> While he lost control & raged at the Dems at the end of the testimony. You can’t control hurt or anger when you’re deeply wounded. Which again is the total opposite of her situation although it should have been if she were not lying. 
> Last part is pure sociopolitical, too many studies I have contributed to & discussed about diverting the political narrative to employ emotions (feelings) to drive politics
> 
>                                                ********************************************
> 
> Now add to this Feinstein's almost-unnoticed comment re Ms Ford's accusation:
> 
> "I can't say everything is truthful, I don't know..."
> 
> ...and we have two woman questioning Ms Ford's truthfulness.
> 
> So, Natasha, would you care to offer your take on this, as a woman, with what I axiomatically consider to be a woman's superior intuition and personal experience? 
> 
> Best, Jeff Davis
> 
>           "Everything's hard till you know how to do it."
>                                                 Ray Charles
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20181004/f32fee62/attachment.html>