The rather insipid and illogical slogan “Believe All Women” rose to prominence during the #MeToo movement, gaining momentum during Justice Kavanaugh’s turbulent and dramatic Supreme Court nomination hearings. While some see the phrase as an attempt to encourage accusations to be taken seriously and in good faith, more often than not it has become a lazy retort to the criticism of any form of accusation made by a women in public life. Those who dare to question the legitimacy of such accusations, or request evidence before leaping to judgement, are silenced as servants of toxic masculinity fueled by a desire to “silence” women.
On its face, the phrase “Believe All Women” is just as absurd as the phrase “Believe All Men” when used to infer reliability without the need for evidence. Indeed, the measurement of truthfulness based upon gender is just as ridiculous as calling for people to “Believe All White People” or “Believe All Black People.” Scientists have yet to discover such a genetic predisposition to honesty or dishonesty, and this claim of sex-based rectitude becomes even more questionable when many of the same people who cry “Believe All Women” also demand that we accept that gender is a meaningless social construct. If women can be men, and men can be women, what does “Believe All Women” even mean?
What makes the broader “Believe All Women” movement even harder to take seriously is their strange penchant for choosing women who are proven liars to stand as proof that women cannot possibly lie. The ultimate example of such an oxymoronic beacon of truth is Elizabeth Warren, who has been trying to stir the wave of “Believe All Women” into a tsunami, with Bernie Sanders’ campaign in her sights.
In a geriatric scandal which no-one had any desire for, Elizabeth Warren leaked a story from 2018 which alleged that Bernie Sanders told the Massachusetts Senator that “he did not believe a woman could win” the presidency. After Bernie Sanders categorically denied these allegations, CNN displayed their famous bipartisan integrity by assuming the premise that Warren’s claims were true. Warren then received rapturous praise for “handling sexism” after she refused to shake Bernie Sanders’ hand, indignantly stating “I think you just called me a liar on national TV.”
Recommended
The important point to note here is the unfair advantage which Warren and her supporters are attempting to leverage over her apparent friend Bernie Sanders, where she is free to make accusations of sexism (without evidence) while concurrently refusing to allow Sanders to even rebut these accusations. The issue is not whether or not this alleged interaction occurred, but why evidence is inconsistently ignored in favor of illogical assumptions of gender-based integrity in the cynical pursuit of political advantage.
In a just world, the validity and reliability of such accusations are judged based upon evidence (for which Elizabeth Warren has none), and the character of the accuser and the accused. The brutal fact is that Elizabeth Warren is a proven liar. She falsely claimed to be of Native American heritage for decades for career and political gain, even plagiarizing her supposed Cherokee seafood recipe for a 1984 cookbook “Pow Wow Chow”...from the land-locked state of Oklahoma. Nevertheless, we are told that we must “Believe All Women!” What about when Elizabeth Warren stated that her children went to public schools when she was confronted by pro-charter school protesters, despite the fact that her son “mostly attended private schools?” Still, we must “Believe All Women!” Finally, what about her claims that she was fired from a teaching position because she was “visibly pregnant,” despite an earlier interview which seemed to contradict her claims?
We are currently being dragged down a very dangerous path which is leading us away from true equality and towards the political monopolization of subjective and cynical inequality. Unless we push back against the sexist notion that we can deduce honesty from gender alone, characters like Elizabeth Warren will continue to intentionally profit from its application.
Let’s try and return to a world where honesty is judged based on evidence and history of character, rather than whether or not the accuser has a vagina and the accused has a penis.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member