I don't know any woman or man on the right who says that raping a woman or a man is great. And I don't know anyone on the right who says abusing children is a good idea. No one laughs at that. However, what people on the right also notice is sudden and vague accusations right before an election.

When someone is running for an election or about to become a Supreme Court justice, they are suddenly accused of assaulting someone many decades earlier, despite having been in public life all these years and holding high positions.

This raises simple questions for many people on the right: How true are these accusations? Why are they surfacing only now before the election? Why are they so vague? Why are they coming decades later when possible evidence has long been destroyed? Why are they taking place in a liberal state where the jury is believed to be biased and may not be able to acquit and go home safely?

When they cannot find convincing answers and the only response is that you should believe the accuser and not the person being accused, even though both parties are capable of lying and destroying lives, people then find the situation laughable.

People on the left claim that they are laughing at the rape victim in front of a television audience and criticize them for being cruel, but that's nonsense. They are laughing at what they perceive as election interference, with stories that emerge during elections and are not heard of again until another election approaches.

As I mentioned, most people I know on the right are religious individuals who are against rape or assault and are also committed to the protection of women, children, and men. They are alarmed when they hear some people on the left suggesting that children as young as 5 can make life-changing decisions, even though they cannot drive or drink until a certain age. It is this false moral superiority that people find amusing.

@simonateba