From Dawg Pound to Bills Mafia - Browns Fans Leaving for the Bills

[716er]

8 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

So now you are just mixing up concepts all over the place.... he is innocent until proven guilty and there is no indictment so he is innocent. A civil court will (unless there is a settlement) rule on his liability under the civil law. 

 

I have been consistent throughout that I believe there was a pattern of worrying behaviour here, and I don't blame anyone for feeling uncomfortable about it. But he is an innocent man, that is simply a legal reality. Whether it is a moral reality, I don't know, I don't really get into making sweeping moral judgments on others but I still suspect something likely went on. 

 

None of which changes my core point. Guilt and liability are matters for the criminal and civil courts respectively (and they are two very different legal concepts and the two courts are doing very different jobs). They are not matters for the court of public opinion and down that road leads disaster. Deshaun Watson is an innocent man and is entitled to return to his career. The NFL may well judge that a suspension is still deserved at some stage and I would support that, but  people who are innocent in the eyes of the law are entitled to get on with their lives. 

 

He should be able to live his life as an innocent man and the public should be able to see him as the piece of crap he is. Nothing wrong with that. It's karma for what he did.

[MJS]

4 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

That's fine, I get it. Modern society decides what it thinks and sticks to it whatever. I don't want a society that gets away from the principles of innocent until proven guilty and one that believes in due process. That means standing up for those things (and let me be clear that it is those principles I am standing up for not Deshaun Watson) even when it is unpopular to do so. 

Browns fans aren't a court of law and don't need to presume innocence until proven guilty.

[longtimebillsfan]

8 hours ago, BuffaloBillsGospel said:

Do we really want to let the factory of sadness fans in? That would be like the cooler in Vegas standing next to you at the craps table. 

We have always had a great relationship with the Browns fan base.   We welcome all Browns fans with open arms.

[GunnerBill]

4 minutes ago, MJS said:

Browns fans aren't a court of law and don't need to presume innocence until proven guilty.

 

They are entitled to think whatever they like and take whatever decisions they wish with their own money, I said that right back at the start. I understand the way they feel but the presumption applies to society not just to a court. The legal default whether people like it or not is that he is innocent. 

[716er]

Just now, GunnerBill said:

The legal default whether people like it or not is that he is innocent. 

 

Not sure anyone has argued this, though.

[MJS]

Just now, GunnerBill said:

 

They are entitled to think whatever they like and take whatever decisions they wish with their own money, I said that right back at the start. I understand the way they feel but the presumption applies to society not just to a court. The legal default whether people like it or not is that he is innocent. 

It actually does not apply to society at all. It ONLY applies to courts. It has only ever applied to courts.

 

You can choose to apply that same standard to yourself if you want, but society is not required to take that stance. Browns fans are fully entitled and justified to believe the 20+ women who are accusing him.

 

And it obviously makes everyone wonder if Watson would be treated the same way by the courts if he wasn't a rich and famous sports figure. Joe down the street maybe gets indicted. And if you are going to claim that the rich and famous and elites of this world are not treated differently by the courts, we are just going to have to agree to disagree.

[BillsVet]

Human nature is that people are herd animals and right now that herd is in the virtue signaling of protesting against Watson.  

 

He might be the bad/twisted person that people suspect, but these things blow over and, as already stated, when/if the Browns start winning fans will go back.  

[fergie's ire]

Mike Ryan of the Le Batard Show has always been a very vocal Browns fan.  However, he has announced that he is done with them and is a fan free agent.  Might be fun to recruit him.  Maybe he has a charity we could support?

 

[GunnerBill]

1 minute ago, MJS said:

It actually does not apply to society at all. It ONLY applies to courts. It has only ever applied to courts.

 

You can choose to apply that same standard to yourself if you want, but society is not required to take that stance. Browns fans are fully entitled and justified to believe the 20+ women who are accusing him.

 

And it obviously makes everyone wonder if Watson would be treated the same way by the courts if he wasn't a rich and famous sports figure. Joe down the street maybe gets indicted. And if you are going to claim that the rich and famous and elites of this world are not treated differently by the courts, we are just going to have to agree to disagree.

 

It is a principle of the law that governs society and therefore the principle is embedded in the governance of a nation. It is established in case law in the US developed out of the interpretation of your written constitution. 

 

Browns fans are entitled to believe what they wish. Their belief is an irrelevance. 

[sullim4]

4 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

That's fine, I get it. Modern society decides what it thinks and sticks to it whatever. I don't want a society that gets away from the principles of innocent until proven guilty and one that believes in due process. That means standing up for those things (and let me be clear that it is those principles I am standing up for not Deshaun Watson) even when it is unpopular to do so. 

 

When it comes to throwing someone in jail, I agree with you, innocent until proven guilty.

 

When it comes to being a prominent public figure - the literal face of an organization, the standard is a lot lower.  It becomes a distraction for the organization.  It's why Cuomo resigned, it's why CEOs embroiled in sex scandals resign.  The fact that the Browns signed this guy to one of the largest contracts in NFL history, who has serious unresolved legal matters before him, and who structured his contract so he wouldn't lose pay should he be suspended by the league, I just don't know what to say.  They have no idea whether he's guilty or not -- but if the league determines he's guilty enough to be suspended, the Browns have ensured he will receive his money.  What a sick, twisted way to do business.

 

The Browns deserve every bit of criticism they're getting right now.  I welcome their fans with open arms.

[Real McClappy]

I'd have zero issues welcoming in Browns fans due to this matter as well.

 

If our FO pulled some crap like this I could no longer stand behind the team that I have been die hard for since 83.

[GunnerBill]

Just now, sullim4 said:

 

When it comes to throwing someone in jail, I agree with you, innocent until proven guilty.

 

When it comes to being a prominent public figure - the literal face of an organization, the standard is a lot lower.  It becomes a distraction for the organization.  It's why Cuomo resigned, it's why CEOs embroiled in sex scandals resign.  The fact that the Browns signed this guy to one of the largest contracts in NFL history, who has serious unresolved legal matters before him, and who structured his contract so he wouldn't lose pay should he be suspended by the league, I just don't know what to say.  They have no idea whether he's guilty or not -- but if the league determines he's guilty enough to be suspended, the Browns have ensured he will receive his money.  What a sick, twisted way to do business.

 

The Browns deserve every bit of criticism they're getting right now.  I welcome their fans with open arms.

 

Again, guilt is not determined by the NFL either. Guilt is a legal concept of the criminal law. Only a criminal court can find someone guilty. 

[Don Otreply]

1 hour ago, nedboy7 said:

 

Take a look at who is rotting in the prisons of America.  America has a prison industrial complex problem.  Welcome to democracy. 

What’s the option???

[RunTheBall]

Maybe it’s because we form such an emotional bond with our team that I can’t understand, and don’t believe, that true fans can just cut off their fandom and pick another team to root for and Cleveland has great fans. I think most are just venting.

 

If this were Buffalo and I was that much against signing Watson, I’d just stop watching the Bills and wouldn’t support them with my cash. When they got rid of him, I’d probably be back (but not happy they could make such a stupid move to begin with).

 

There’s no way I could pick another team and say “This is my team now” and feel 1% the passion towards that team. It’s in the blood.

 

 

[MJS]

3 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

Again, guilt is not determined by the NFL either. Guilt is a legal concept of the criminal law. Only a criminal court can find someone guilty. 

Anyone can determine guilt. Only a court can punish someone for guilt, so a court is held to a higher standard.

[GunnerBill]

Just now, MJS said:

Anyone can determine guilt. Only a court can punish someone for guilt, so a court is held to a higher standard.

 

Determining guilt and punishing guilt are both matters for the court. 

[HamSandwhich]

6 hours ago, KDIGGZ said:

Definitely not an innocent man, just not enough evidence to convict. He's a sick individual. Read the sports illustrated article. Do you think OJ didn't do it too? If it was your wife or girlfriend or sister who was sexually assaulted I bet you would feel much differently

Are we sure SI isn’t biased? 

[muppy]

4 hours ago, babulator said:

I get this 100%. I would not have been able to root for AB had we signed him a few years back. There's  handful of other folks that I could in no way get behind.

when teams swing for the fences to attain a coveted player, a player of that high a compensatory value, imo they can and Must vet this person to make sure he will meet the needs and accomplish what is required which is in the nfl WIN.  That's what matters right folks? Alledegly**** @-@  JUST WIN BABY. I mean I get it on a certain level. I want a Lombardi trophy for WNY too. Being female I have to admit it is gratifying to read the disdain and disgust with a person with those kinds of allegations floating around. .....but doesn't winning cure all ills ...if watson excels in cleveland will the throng that left return? Im tryin g to frame this as if it were MY team going through this.  Recently a discussion came up re: Gronk and some how fans felt about He coming to WNY conceivably. I think there would have been a part of the fanbase needing to swallow their disgust and rationalize that now He is "Our" scumbag..or in the case of watson "our" pervert.

 

People and their convictions are personal. I say welcome aboard fans from Cleveland. Just don't jump off if your team begin to win again. As far as watson is concerned the entire situation makes me want to scoff at BOTH teams frankly. I didn't follow the assault allegations thread but that is a LOT of allegations and a lot of smoke too but decided no fire?

 

snifffff I dont like the smell of it at alllll......I feel bad for the Brown fans for being dragged into this Mess.

Edited March 19, 2022 by muppy

[MJS]

Just now, GunnerBill said:

 

Determining guilt and punishing guilt are both matters for the court. 

Determining guilt is also something that each individual person does on a daily basis. Nobody is precluded from determining guilt in whatever matters they choose. They just don't have the power to do anything about it.

[GunnerBill]

Just now, MJS said:

Determining guilt is also something that each individual person does on a daily basis. Nobody is precluded from determining guilt in whatever matters they choose. They just don't have the power to do anything about it.

 

People can have a view of something somebody has or hasn't done but when I talk about guilt I talk about it as a legal concept of the criminal law. It is a matter for a criminal court and only a criminal court. It is not a matter for the court of public opinion. People can believe whatever they like. They can choose to act in whatever way they like on the basis of that, but it doesn't change the legal reality. 

[KDIGGZ]

3 minutes ago, HamSandwhich said:

Are we sure SI isn’t biased? 

They independently fact checked the story with receipts, text messages, DM's, interviewed friends. That person was not one of the plaintiffs she just wanted to get her story out there so it doesn't happen to someone else. Also, her timeline is from prior to any other reports so all of this happened before the people who are suing him.

She had nothing to gain from telling her story to SI and she's not suing him or going to the cops. She doesn't want to ruin her business. Very believable. You should read it if you haven't

[WotAGuy]

6 minutes ago, MJS said:

Determining guilt is also something that each individual person does on a daily basis. Nobody is precluded from determining guilt in whatever matters they choose. They just don't have the power to do anything about it.

It’s not really “determining” guilt. It’s having an opinion that someone is guilty. And we know about opinions…

[HamSandwhich]

4 minutes ago, MJS said:

Determining guilt is also something that each individual person does on a daily basis. Nobody is precluded from determining guilt in whatever matters they choose. They just don't have the power to do anything about it.

There is also an element that wants to bring guilt to signal things too. To make things look a certain way to their advantage, whatever the ends may be. There is an element that can glom onto something for hopes it will get things for them or bring them game, ala Stephanik in the Kavanaugh situation. The thing is, people want to act like people don’t lie, and even more so groups of people won’t lie. They can and have throughout history. 
 

I don’t know enough about the allegations or the situations surrounding this to make a valid argument. We only know what people tell us, that’s not enough to speak intelligently on it. So maybe everyone should step back and understand that you don’t know the facts. The facts may completely exonerate him if they were to come to light. Or he could certainly be guilty, but I don’t know, I can’t know. 

 

We would be better off as a society to not jump to conclusions or destroy someone’s character because we feel a certain way based on biased information we are taking in, however it is biased.
 

That said, another QB in the AFC to be dealt with, the arms race continues!  

8 minutes ago, KDIGGZ said:

They independently fact checked the story with receipts, text messages, DM's, interviewed friends. That person was not one of the plaintiffs she just wanted to get her story out there so it doesn't happen to someone else. Also, her timeline is from prior to any other reports so all of this happened before the people who are suing him.

She had nothing to gain from telling her story to SI and she's not suing him or going to the cops. She doesn't want to ruin her business. Very believable. You should read it if you haven't

Weren’t the allegations of actual actions? Not text messages? 

[KDIGGZ]

3 minutes ago, HamSandwhich said:

Weren’t the allegations of actual actions? Not text messages? 

And what kind of evidence would you like her to provide about a guy getting a private massage who acts inappropriate and gets aroused and keeps trying to get her to have sex with him? She called a friend right after it happened and she has text exchanges of her telling him she would not treat him because he acted inappropriate. All of this is from years prior to any allegations against him. So you think she was faking the text exchanges and telling her friend so that she could set him up in the future to...not sue him and get nothing out of it? Great plan on her part

[YoloinOhio]

2 hours ago, WotAGuy said:

It’s not up to me to define it. The law defines it and Watson was not charged with rape, it was sexual assault. Conflating the two I think gets to Gunner’s point about the court of public option being a slippery slope. I’m not defending Watson, but it’s a fact he was not charged with rape. 

I didn’t leave it up to you. It’s the Texas law. I meant that “if one defines it as…” because there may be other states that don’t. Also, he wasn’t “charged.” He’s being accused. 

Quote

What is the difference between sexual assault and rape?

Sexual Assault is the Texas law that is closest to the meaning of “rape.” In Texas, there is no law defining the word “rape” or an offense called rape. Under Texas law, if you are accused of rape, you would most likely be charged with Sexual Assault or Aggravated Sexual Assault. The Sexual Assault offense does not require intercourse or penetration, but instead can include only sexual contact.

https://saputo.law/criminal-law/texas/sex-crimes/sexual-assault/

[muppy]

6 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Not only not enough evidence to convict.... not enough evidence to give any reasonable prospect of conviction. That is why the grand jury didn't indict. Does that mean nothing happened? No, it doesn't but really what I believe is irrelevant. I believe that the justice system while imperfect is the best option we have for determining innocence and guilt and it is certainly better than the court of public opinion. I have spent most of the last 15 years of my career researching justice system models, looking at systems worldwide and advising governments of all political persuasions in the UK on justice system reform. I am deeply concerned about a growing trend in society towards mob mentality, driven by social media, and the court of public opinion with no checks, no balances, no objective standards replacing the justice system in terms of assessing guilt and driving punishment. 

 

And as to your final sentence, I say this honestly and sincerely, no I wouldn't. You either stand by your principles and your belief in the system or you don't. I do. However difficult the case. Indeed in a case in which a member of my family is involved currently where they have been left in an unfortunate situation (not a sexual assault  and I understand the particular sensitivity around such allegations) I have said to them that I cannot in good conscience support their position because from a pure legal perspective it doesn't make sense.

 

 

Respectfully, that is not for you to decide. That is for a court to decide. 

 

 

EDIT: And just to be clear I have said from pretty much the start of this story that I believe there is something to the allegations. But what I believe is not in any way a substitute for legal due process. A court of law decides on guilt or innocence (and on liability in civil matters) not the court of public opinion. On that point I am afraid I am totally immovable. 

I wanted to chime in regarding your views in the thread Gunner. To me it reads as if you are trying to interject logical thinking into a very emotionally divisive disgusting topic. The grand jury decisions not to pursue is also not soley based on watsons actions but what can be PROVEN........thats where it gets tricky. My own experience anecdotal to this thread if shared would be 100% truthful...but could it be proven today? NOPE. So for me the standard of proof needed to being charges isnt indicative of that guys true innocence. And thats where it will need to be decided, just where you come down on this situation using our own common sense, values and experience.  sniffffffff.........stinks.

 

m

[GunnerBill]

2 minutes ago, muppy said:

I wanted to chime in regarding your views in the thread Gunner. To me it reads as if you are trying to interject logical thinking into a very emotionally divisive disgusting topic. The grand jury decisions not to pursue is also not soley based on watsons actions but what can be PROVEN........thats where it gets tricky. My own experience anecdotal to this thread if shared would be 100% truthful...but could it be proven today? NOPE. So for me the standard of proof needed to being charges isnt indicative of that guys true innocence. And thats where it will need to be decided, just where you come down on this situation using our own common sense, values and experience.  sniffffffff.........stinks.

 

m

 

Correct I am. Justice is not about emotion. It can't be and shouldn't be. That is why we leave it to the courts not to public opinion. 

Edited March 19, 2022 by GunnerBill

[muppy]

3 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Correct I am. Justice is not about emotion. It can't be and shouldn't be. That is why we leave it to the courts not to public opinion. 

and courts and judges and prosecutors and jurors are also human with biases so lets not assume (which Im not saying you are) that this system always works and is perfect either.

 

good talk.

[CoffeeDrip]

My husband is one of the Browns fans defecting… mind you, he’s always been a secondary Bills fan as long as rooting for Buffalo wouldn’t hurt the Browns (which it normally does not). But he’s very angry - angry over the way Baker was treated, angry over Watson being brought in, angry over other off-season moves the team has made. So for now he’s just going to focus on the Bills. We’re tucking his Browns gear away for when Watson is inevitably off the team within five years and we’ll see what happens. He already owns several Bills shirts and a Diggs jersey so he’s prepared. 

[GunnerBill]

1 minute ago, muppy said:

and courts and judges and prosecutors and jurors are also human with biases so lets not assume (which Im not saying you are) that this system always works and is perfect either.

 

good talk.

 

Agree, the system is not perfect, it is not infallible. It is just infinitely better than the alternative. My concern is that over the last 20/30 years you are starting to see a creep towards the import into the criminal justice system of emotion. It needs to be resisted at all costs. 

[CoudyBills]

54 minutes ago, BillsVet said:

Human nature is that people are herd animals and right now that herd is in the virtue signaling of protesting against Watson.  

 

He might be the bad/twisted person that people suspect, but these things blow over and, as already stated, when/if the Browns start winning fans will go back.  

The human weakness, group think.

44 minutes ago, HamSandwhich said:

Are we sure SI isn’t biased? 

Media is unbiased, we all know this.

[4merper4mer]

My feeling Is that Watson probably committed some of the acts described based on both the sheer number of accusations and the known details about some of them. I don’t “know” anything for sure so I can understand a Browns fan being excited about the acquisition while another might be upset even to the point of switching teams.  I’m not sure why the second fan wouldn’t have switched already given Baker’s affinity for cheesecake.

[Little Dog]

11 hours ago, ndirish1978 said:

I wouldn't root for him as my QB, makes sense. 

I don’t know if he’s guilty or not. I do know he was never charged with a crime, and out 26 not one accusation stuck. The only people I hate worse than men who abuse women in any kind of way are people who abuse children in any kind of way. 

I don’t know the facts of what happened, until they come out I reserve judgment.

[qwksilver]

Goodell must be fuming due to the stain this POS QB and this POS owner have put on the NFL Shield. How sad.

 

I would have left had Vick been signed by the Bills, and he paid his dues. This POS learned nothing and got a huge pay raise. Unreal

 

Welcome to the bandwagon, there's plenty of room.

 

Edited March 19, 2022 by qwksilver

[ClaytonBillsFan]

6 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I don't believe 22 women are making it up either. But what I believe, what you believe, what anyone believes is irrelevant. We do not get to assess guilt or liability. There is a system and a process for that. Once you start saying "ah yes but in this case..." then you open any case up to others taking the same approach because they believe in something different. The justice system is imperfect, but it is a million times preferable to the court of public opinion. 

The guy is an NFL QB. He can get massages from professionals for free anytime, anyplace he wants. So trolling IG models and seeking "massages for aches and pains" when they dont do that stuff is beyond ridiculous. They estimate that about 16% of death row inmates are actually innocent so throwing blind allegiance to a known imperfect system and ignoring the eye, smell, and common sense tests is moronic. Even team masseuses said they have had to tell him No over and over and even asked the team to have other employees work with him and they arent in the 22. Yet they acknowledge that what he is accused of is his M.O. based on mutual experiences and they refused to talk to the Grand Jury because they didnt wanna lose their livelihoods. 

[LABILLBACKER]

10 hours ago, BigDingus said:

 

Big Ben got called names & had r*** jokes thrown his way his entire career over one public incident, so how does one just ignore the MANY women & dozen+ charges levied at Watson? People don't tend to overlook THAT many similar allegations. At some point, it feels like benefit of the doubt has been thoroughly burned.

2-3 women I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. 22 women,  dude you're a predator. He's going to be a pariah the rest of his career. Besides the Browns organization is just as dysfunctional as the Jets. This will be a struggle for him.

[GunnerBill]

Just now, ClaytonBillsFan said:

The guy is an NFL QB. He can get massages from professionals for free anytime, anyplace he wants. So trolling IG models and seeking "massages for aches and pains" when they dont do that stuff is beyond ridiculous. They estimate that about 16% of death row inmates are actually innocent so throwing blind allegiance to a known imperfect system and ignoring the eye, smell, and common sense tests is moronic. Even team masseuses said they have had to tell him No over and over and even asked the team to have other employees work with him and they arent in the 22. Yet they acknowledge that what he is accused of is his M.O. based on mutual experiences and they refused to talk to the Grand Jury because they didnt wanna lose their livelihoods. 

 

Again, I have never once said I don't believe the women. This is not so much about Deshaun Watson as it is about the core principles of the democracy that we live by. And I accept that the system is imperfect. But we either have a justice system and if we do we have to trust it or we delegate justice to mob rule and allow the court of public opinion to decide on guilt. I repeat that must be avoided at all costs. 

[TheBrownBear]

3 hours ago, Max Fischer said:

I understand your position in theory but find it very unfortunate and robotic, if not illogical. Let’s hope you are not running an orphanage and decide to rehire a person whom twenty-children accused of them child abuse but was not indicated. 
 

“The court of law says they are not guilty and I will not convict them in the court of public opinion. Besides the kids always liked his candy.”

Exactly.  I think GB is just digging in his heels here, but man, he comes across as incredibly obtuse and borderline autistic (I say this as someone with autistic family members).  And I'm not even sure why he's arguing for Watson's innocence or right to earn a living or whatever, since Watson is not only free, but has been given a $48 million dollar raise for sitting out a season (while still being paid) under extreme suspicion of committing some very deplorable acts.  It seems the real issue here for GB has nothing to do with the relative utility and efficiency of the criminal justice system, but some deep seated fear of the spread of the "mob mentality" (which, in reality when it comes to this case, is just people making up their minds that they don't like a guy who has been accused of sexual misconduct by 22 women).  Ask yourself this GB, if becoming a victim of opportunistic grifter women and the social media "mob" is such a readily existential threat, why aren't NFL quarterbacks being accused of sexual assault left and right (by 20+ women)?

[GunnerBill]

Just now, TheBrownBear said:

Exactly.  I think GB is just digging in his heels here, but man, he comes across as incredibly obtuse and borderline autistic (I say this as someone with autistic family members).  And I'm not even sure why he's arguing for Watson's innocence or right to earn a living or whatever, since Watson is not only free, but has been given a $48 million dollar raise for sitting out a season (while still being paid) under extreme suspicion of committing some very deplorable acts.  It seems the real issue here for GB has nothing to do with the relative utility and efficiency of the criminal justice system, but some deep seated fear of the spread of the "mob mentality" (which, in reality when it comes to this case, is just people making up their minds that they don't like a guy who has been accused of sexual misconduct by 22 women).  Ask yourself this GB, if becoming a victim of opportunistic grifter women and the social media "mob" is such a readily existential threat, why aren't NFL quarterbacks being accused of sexual assault left and right (by 20+ women)?

 

I think you should read my posts again. You seem to have a problem with comprehension. If you want to debate the utility and efficiency of the justice system with me let's do it. This is pretty much my area of expertise. 

[HappyDays]

1 hour ago, GunnerBill said:

Deshaun Watson is an innocent man and is entitled to return to his career. The NFL may well judge that a suspension is still deserved at some stage and I would support that, but  people who are innocent in the eyes of the law are entitled to get on with their lives. 

 

Yeah he is legally entitled to get on with his life. That doesn't mean an NFL franchise has to sell the farm and give him the most guaranteed money in NFL history to woo him to their team. Especially when the contract is very specifically written to mitigate his punishment as much as possible. Watson has at the very least shown a pattern of incredibly disturbing behavior and he comes out the other side of it with generational wealth. I respect our legal system as much as anyone and I accept that the underlying principle of innocent until proven guilty will sometimes produce bad results. I don't believe in mob justice. None of that precludes me or anyone else from judging Watson for his actions or judging the Browns for theirs. We know Watson was serially finding new massage therapists online. There are a number of credible accusations that he used those sessions to get his thrills and put those women in an awful position. The man that did that is now the face of an NFL franchise. There is room in the court of public opinion for men like that to lose their status in society.

 

Edited March 19, 2022 by HappyDays