Judge Brett Kavanaugh's opponents have so routinely dragged out a logical fallacy against his nomination to the Supreme Court that you have to wonder if logic is still being taught in school.
The fallacy argues that because his accuser, Christine Ford, is a woman she must be believed that Kavanaugh attacked her. Even though the evidence does not bear it out. She accuses, therefore he must be guilty.
Let's break it down into a syllogism:
A. All women are infallible.
B. Christine Blasey Ford is a woman.
Ergo, Christine Blasey Ford is infallible.
The fallacy is found in "A: All women are infallible", clearly unsupportable. It is an example of false inductive reasoning, in which the argument moves from specific instances (e.g. some women are telling the truth about being sexually assaulted) into a generalized conclusion (e.g. all women are telling the truth about being sexually assaulted).
Of course, Kavanaugh haters will insist that they are not claiming that all women should be believed simply because they are women. But you can see this assertion taking form, from subtle to straightforward.
For example: Women have no reason to lie about being attacked. That implies that all women who claim they were attacked in fact were. There's Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii) who told men to shut up and believe women who claim they were assaulted.
Or this lament that women don't have to present evidence: "[Women] have to offer far more than just their word." You might argue that some women have to offer far more than just their word, but that's not what was said. But here's a universal statement that's true. Anyone, man or woman, who accuses someone of a crime must "offer far more than just their word."
And this: "'Women everywhere are listening to Christine Blasey Ford’s voice cracking and feeling their own hearts break, just a little bit more, at the world we’ve all inherited,” tweeted the New York Times’ Sheera Frenkel." Are all women's hearts breaking? Not among some women in my life who, based on the evidence, don't believe Ford. (Right, the women in my life don't represent all women, but neither are they to be ignored as if they didn't exist."
Absolutely, attack victims should be heard and respected. But the accused also have a right to be respected and heard.
To execute a man we don't need proof of his guilt. We only need proof that it's necessary to execute him. It's that simple.