MeToo was the popular social movement responsible for causing a lot of men to lose their careers, livelihood, and credibility as decent hard-working human beings, due to the movement’s main tactics, which was to make maligned accusations of molestation, rape, or sometimes just unwanted sexual advancements towards their female accusers, which is obviously the least offensive of the three modes of grievance, but usually made by women who somehow felt slighted at the workplace.
To them the only type of solution for a wage discrepancy was for lucrative reparations to be made, and if they did not achieve what they felt they were entitled to, out came the no-holds-barred incendiary assaults via public humiliation and immflamatory accusations.
Whether it be from feeling overlooked, or perhaps even snubbed by the trifling wage difference between the two sexes at work, which isn’t due to discrimination or male chauvanism in the workplace like they would have you believe, but rather by things such as the merit and ablity of the worker.
Moreover, the amount of wealth that any given business can accumulate is equivalent to how much line is being towed by each individual in the company, and also what qualifications attribute to the most success in subordinate workers, which more often than not, involves things like physical strength, stamina, and endurance, but also the ability to keep a cool head, and not let emotions highjack one’s ability to use and find logical and reasonable solutions to problems that can otherwise induce a lot of stress and strain.
It didn’t happen by coincidence either, that the three malfeasances I mentioned earlier in the first paragraph had always seemed to have been perpetrated by men who were also found to be unnatractive and/or socially inept by their accusers, but to degrade them even further, they would describe the social clumbsiness of the men accused as being “creepy”…
I guarantee you this, that those types of accusations would not be made if the accused weren’t homely and/or awkward men to them, but were instead, confident men who looked like Channing Tatum or Brad Pitt. Not one utterance of their impropriety would be made. Not one!
Double standards like these is what keeps the system patriarchal, and is why the femmenist movement in general, seems to be completely occupied by frumpy-looking incompetent dykes.
And the female “victims” who came forth in droves to identify and out the innocuous men as so-called “sex offenders”, came just to glean the boons that the popular movement produced for them, which, in most cases, only proved to feed into their selfish desire for empowerment, that along with having acquired their highly-coveted victimhood status. Whatever it was, it was at the expense of poor unfortunate men who were often times wrongfully vilified.
The Subterranean 