As you tuck yourself into bed tonight, still cursing your many problems and present challenges, spare a thought for two men going through hell in Canada.
Last month, two Liberal members of parliament (MPs), Montreal’s Massimo Pacetti and Newfoundland’s Scott Andrews, were expelled from their party caucus after accusations by two female New Democratic Party legislators. A non-police complaint has not even been lodged, let alone tested, and the careers of the two men are all but destroyed.
The first female NDP MP found herself on a bus with Liberal leader Justin Trudeau. Both were traveling to the funeral of Ottawa terrorist victim Corporal Nathan Cirillo. She asked if Trudeau knew of “allegations” by a second female MP regarding Scott Andrews. This first female MP made no mention then of her own later accusations against Massimo Pacetti.
After this conversation with Trudeau, the first female MP then claimed to the whips of both her party and the Liberals that Pacetti “forced” himself on her earlier in the year, without “explicit consent.” Consistent reports from this meeting indicate that she did not say no and even handed Pacetti a condom.
The abysmal treatment of Pacetti and Andrews highlights two disastrous undercurrents in society today. Firstly, in one stroke Trudeau acted entirely against the Liberals’ stated platform. Unlike in the United States, the capitalized term “Liberal” refers to centrist and conservative parties in Canada and Australia respectively. Emphasis on political rights and individuals freedoms by these groups bears resemblance to the classical liberalism of John Locke and the American Founding Fathers. As wide-ranging as classical liberalism can be, innocence before guilt is an irrevocable cornerstone of this philosophy.
Though Trudeau took the cheaper, illiberal path, we cannot blame him alone. Politicians’ “leadership” choices often reflect the idiosyncrasies of a very sensitive, partially indoctrinated electorate, and the SJWs who try and whip it into an anti-due process frenzy. The good chunk of society which finds the claims spurious and preposterous fears speaking out and being labelled rape apologists.
This phenomenon is exemplified in the affirmative consent debate in the US, where the overwhelming number of online comments even on sites such as CNN have lambasted lower evidentiary standards and the reversal of the burden of proof in college “investigations.”
Justin Trudeau, perhaps pondering the next death blow to due process.
Secondly, the Pacetti-Andrews witch hunt demonstrates the complete absolution of female responsibility in sexual encounters. A woman can now hand a man a condom and, after they engage in sex, imply that she was sexually assaulted. Oh wait, did the female NDP MP actually want Pacetti to make a condom balloon animal? Or a makeshift water bomb to be thrown at their mutual Conservative opponents? Or was she proselytizing him with a safe sex message before his next session of intercourse with his own wife? These are the sorts of ridiculous alternative conclusions handing someone a condom entails.
If anything, the accusations against Pacetti in particular only reinforce the fact that feminist notions of “affirmative consent” infantilize women. Men are presumed to give consent merely by the act of sex taking place. Women, on the other hand, can give the explicit signal of handing you the condom and still require an inquisition to establish if this is what they really want. Given this direction, will spontaneously touching your wife of ten years affectionately on the buttocks during a stroll now amount to a sexual offense? After all, did you ask her?
The most disgusting aspect of this sordid affair is that the accusations are on the moderate side of the spectrum. If saying you handed a man a condom before sex lands him in political oblivion, what about when a woman alleges a politician drugged her, similar to the slew of accusations being thrown at Bill Cosby?
And what if the first female MP had left out from the beginning the part about handing Pacetti a condom, just as she did here. The march against Pacetti and Andrews would only have accelerated. Uncovering the innocence of men like Pacetti more often than not depends on ridiculous claims made by the accuser, not any purported due process enforced by society. If a woman keeps her accusations non-fantastical and consistent with dates and events (such as when a UVA frat party actually took place), the accusation is treated as gospel by countless SJWs, media outlets and segments of a populace reminiscent of sheep.
Inasmuch as I sympathize with Pacetti and Andrews, the horrendous treatment they are receiving may eventually serve the justice of other men accused in equally ridiculous circumstances, without the “plaintiffs” even bothering to formally complain. Right now, though, we’ve witnessed another nail in the coffin of due process. Let’s just hope Lazarus makes an appearance soon.
Don’t Miss Future Articles Like This: Follow Us On Twitter