The mainstream press, now including Rosie Dimanno, are very interested in undercutting the "believe survivors" langugage, and both these cases are great examples for them to use to do so. Kirkland was sought out by the CBC to make this point, and a wider point about double standards in expectations for men's behaviour compared to women's.
I think the lawsuit threats from Moore has quieted them down for a bit, but either way there will be more on this. If she actually serves them they will have a field day with it, and if she doesn't they'll just resume once it becomes apparent she is not going to sue.
I think they are equally invested in creating an equivalency between men and women that doesn't exist. One of the arguments was that the issue was power not gender. It's power, but most of the time it is male power.
There were a multitude of clues in the manner in which Kirkland phrased himself. He did a lot of implying while avoiding answering direct questions. I should think that would be a big red alert to any so-called journalist. The biggest clue is that he said the sex was consensual.
Regardless of what Moore does, they won't go after her again because they know they let themselves be had. That Moore has proof things did not transpire the way Kirkland claimed.
He had several complaints.
His first is that Moore took advantage of him simply by virtue of being an MP even though the sex was entirely consensual.
That isn't the way it works. As long as the sex is entirely consensual, and there is no parliamentary rule against it, MPs both male and female can have sex with whomever wants to have sex with them.
Next he claimed that she had plied him with alcohol knowing he was on powerful medications and that he had accepted because she is a nurse. He even brought his medication list along because he thought it was a consultation.
She then followed him to his hotel where they had consentual sex.
Next she kept texting him and showed up unannounced when he was playing golf with friends and later on his doorstep in his hometown.
So, the accusation was, she took advantage of her position to get him stuplified by a combination of drugs and alcohol, even though she is a nurse. He didn't invite her to his hotel but somehow she ended up following him there where whatever they did was consensual. Then she started stalking him until he got firm when she showed up on his doorstep.
The reporters she has threatened to sue elaborated on Kirkland's story. They liberally embelished it without asking any questions.
Yes we believe survivors, but we also ask them the obvious questions. Like, did you feel intimidated by her? and "Did you respond to her texts? How did she get your personal information? Did she have it because she is a committee member? How did she find out where you were golfing and why was she in that area?
Nope. Suddenly reporters have no questions. They don't bother checking HoC records. They paint Moore as a sexual predator and stalker who took advantage of a drugged out emotionally vunerable vet.
But then we find out the first time they were at the office it was as a group and it was a general offer with everyone pouring their own drinks. Afterwards the party moved to a patio where the drinking continued. Kirkland said he was drinking non-alcoholic beer. Moore then had to go back to vote.The vote was happening at 10:40PM. Let's agree she invited him back to the office with her. This was when he assumed he was going for a medical consult because she is a nurse? Well okay. So they go back to the office and she goes to vote. Either he waited for her until almost midnight, or he returned to his hotel. If she had just showed up at his hotel door he would not have used the term "followed".
He claimed he was with friends on the golf course. I hope the investigator speaks to them.
Turns out he picked her up at the airport in Winnipeg and drove her to his house.
He has no good answers when confronted with the discrepencies. He is suddenly not doing any more interviews, or he isn't being asked. The journalists don't want to expose themselves as fools.