Take a stroll down memory lane with me, will you?  Back to the 2018 confirmation hearings of Brett Kavanaugh for the United States Supreme Court, when people were trying to figure out if he or his accuser Dr. Christine Ford was telling the truth.

To this day, not one witness can even place Kavanaugh and Ford at the same party at the same time.  However, expressing even the smallest amount of doubt about the most ludicrous claim – for example, gang rape – caused feminists to come out of the woodwork exclaiming “Believe All Women.”

This was absurd at the time.  It’s still absurd. Why would a person believe “all women?” What makes women empirically more trustworthy than men?  What if a woman abused a man?  What if a woman abused a woman?

Thankfully, we don’t have to rely on slogans or hashtags for justice in this nation.  We do have a court system that weighs – what was that called? Oh right – evidence and makes an impartial decision based on facts. People are innocent until proven guilty. 

What should happen if the so-called abuse or rape happened so long ago it’s beyond the reach of the court system?  Well, feminists had a ready answer to that back when they were hoping to block President Donald Trump’s Supreme Court appointment.

You believe all women, no matter how flimsy their accusations are. 


Now Joe Biden is being accused by a woman named Tara Reade of unsavory, predatory conduct, and feminists are changing their tune.  Susan Faludi wrote an op-ed in the New York Times which laments how Republicans are pouncing on this hypocrisy:

Tim Graham, executive editor of NewsBusters: “Where is the #MeToo movement on this story? What happened to their rigid ‘Believe All Women’ boilerplate?”

Fox News host Tucker Carlson: “the infuriating, the sickening hypocrisy of the media and the professional feminist movement. ‘Believe All Women!’ No they don’t.” 

White House adviser Kellyanne Conway: “Three magic words, ‘Believe All Women.’ I didn’t hear an asterisk; I didn’t see a footnote, ‘Believe All Women so long as they are attacking somebody aligned with President Trump, Believe All Women so long as they are — have a college degree or better or are — are for abortion in the ninth month.’”

Some feminists are saying that they’ll still vote for Biden, no matter what.  Others are pretending like they never ever said “Believe All Women” in the first place.  Instead, they’re saying they said “Believe Women,” and that nefarious conservatives added the “all” in there to trap Democrats for such a moment as this.

Yes, really.  She writes:

This is why the preferred hashtag of the #MeToo movement is #BelieveWomen. It’s different without the “all.” Believing women is simply the rejoinder to the ancient practice of #DoubtWomen.

If you are wondering what the difference is between the #believeallwomen hashtag and the #believewomen hashtag, you aren’t alone.  David French explains Faludi’s faulty reasoning at The Dispatch:

“Believe women” is decisively declarative, and it means something different from “hear women” or “respect women.” I shouldn’t have to type this sentence, but “believe” means “to consider to be true or honest” and to “accept the word or evidence of.” 

Words have meaning, and if you don’t intend the meaning, don’t use the word.

Yep.  Faludi contends that conservatives playing “gotcha” with this hashtag by adding the word “all,” and that “believe all women” was never a feminist hashtag anyway.

Feminists can engage in revisionist history all they want, but the New York Times is being roasted for this exquisite and unconvincing piece of backpedaling.

Ms. Faludi, we’re old enough to remember 2018.  We don’t believe all women, and we certainly don’t believe you.

Image Credit: Wikipedia

Hat Tip: New York Times

About The Author

Mark was a co-founder of the Tea Party Patriots, and served as the national coordinator. He left the organization to work more broadly on expanding the self-governance movement beyond the partisan divide. Mark appears regularly on television in outlets as diverse as MSNBC, ABC, NBC, Fox News, CNN, Bloomberg, Fox Business and the BBC. He’s highly sought after for the tea party perspective from print and electronic media outlets, from the Wall Street Journal, New York Times, L.A. Times, Washington Examiner, Politico and the The Hill. Mark blogs at MarkMeckler.com, and his opinion editorials regularly run in many of the leading political newspapers both on and offline. Mark has a BA in English from San Diego State University and graduated with honors from University of the Pacific, McGeorge School of Law in 1988. He practiced real estate and business law for almost a decade. For the last eleven years of his legal career he specialized in Internet advertising law. When not fighting for the future of our nation, Mark is an avid horseman, and lives in rural northern California with his wife Patty and two children.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

nineteen − 15 =