Kangaroo Courts are designed to bypass or short-circuit legitimate justice. Here’s how and why.

Feminist groups have long desired to change the level of proof for sexual Assault and Rape charges worldwide. Unlike any other criminal charge, Feminists believe men should be convicted on the basis of a female accusation. Feminists have been campaigning for years to have the judicial system changed so a man will be convicted based on the “Balance of Probability” which is used for low level offences such as traffic or shoplifting, rather than “Proven Beyond Reasonable Doubt” as it is for EVERY serious crime. This gets even more ridiculous with the completely unworkable ACTIVE CONSENT they are also pushing . Essentially, that means if a man cannot prove he had consent and consent wasn’t withdrawn, (How do you prove that?) then based simply on the credibility of the accuser, the man’s life is, well, finished!

Even the Radical Feminists know that’s a very long bow to draw so they found several ways to condition people to acceptance. First, Mass-Marketing of the idea men are vicious tyrannical Women beating patriarchs, hell-bent on terrorising poor innocent females. With support from the massively Left-Wing media, they’ve bullied sympathising Left-Wing Universities into believing they must shoulder responsibility and set up Independent hearings to preside over all accusations.

This firstly causes unqualified people to be making decisions about Male student lives, based on Non-lawful processes, without lawful procedures, ensuring points of law or correct evidence are virtually irrelevant. This process is removing innocent males from university studies at a ludicrous pace, hence, ending their professional careers all without any legitimate process. Under these hearings, if a male has or is even accused of having sex with a female, his entire life will be severely damaged. The new tool recently added is if a female has, (or states she has) consumed alcohol, the Male (and only the Male) has automatically committed Sexual Assault, even if she agrees the male didn’t see her drink!

Why are the Radical Feminists so determined to do this? See below the video for why.

My research shows Several reasons

• First, they want to condition the public to accept burden of proof doesn’t count where Feminists don’t want it to.
• Second, Radical Feminists want it believed women never lie (Me Too and Believe Her Movements)
• Third, University positions and qualified professional roles are valuable. Every male removed provides space for a female and reduces the number of qualified professional males
• Fourth, Radical Feminists believe men don’t deserve fair justice when accused by a female.
• Fifth, Complete empowerment of interactions. If men are scared of being turned into fertiliser based on nothing more than accusation, they don’t just become cautious of interaction with them, they become truly subservient.
• Sixth, If males know they can be turfed out of university after years of study based on nothing more than False Allegations, less males will even attempt higher education.

People who are relatively new to this think in the here and now. People who are only looking at a single change to laws or a single injustice, don’t see the big picture let alone the Long-Game.

All Far-Left Radical (Especially Human Rights Activist) Groups understand Rome wasn’t built in a day. They also understand if you try to group huge changes or make massive change in one step, opposition will be large. The people designing the process of change are happy for incremental change to occur gradually because this allows the changes to be slid through with the least opposition, gaining the maximum leverage with long-term purchase. The process is similar to the behaviour described in Escalating Demands.

Where too much opposition is met, the movement (this is why they use the term movement) simply slows or changes path. They always try multiple paths to the same goal, probing to see where the least resistance occurs.

Feminist pressure has found less resistance or resolve with universities due to their Far Left-Wing nature rather than the Judicial system. If we allow the University or any other Independent Hearing system to continue, that will eventually be used to call for Judicial change based on precedence.

Do I have an opinion why the war is being fought like this? Yes.

i’ve reached a logical conclusion that by removing as many males from positions of power by many means, all policy and legal decisions will be Female based.