Actual punishment for false accusations is becoming more of a thing. Much to Lena Dunham's disappointment (see Lena Dunham FLAT OUT FAKES "Rape" Story). Recently we've seen more and more women fined or jailed for their lying lies. The whole shebang. Legal officials seem to really be stepping up their game.

Here's another example: this faker lobbed false accusations at the father of her child. It didn't pan out so well for her.

A woman who made a series of unfounded sex abuse allegations about her ex-partner has been barred from seeing their four-year-old daughter. A High Court judge made the ruling after she concluded that the woman had caused 'significant harm' to the little girl.

Ms Justice Russell said the woman had made 'persistent and unsubstantiated' allegations about the youngster being sexually abused by her father.

Translation: no evidence.

'When viewed as a whole the harm caused to this child by her mother was significant,' said Ms Justice Russell. 'Not only was she found to have repeatedly subjected to intimate examinations, solely at the behest of her mother, she was prevented from having uninhibited relationship with her father as an infant.

'On any view, the repeated invasive intimate examinations ... were in themselves abusive.'

She added: '(The little girl) is a young and vulnerable child whose first few years of life were blighted by her mother's irrational, abusive and harmful behaviour.'

Yes, unabashed crazy leaves a lasting impression on kiddos. This crackpot not only wasted the time of law enforcement officials and forced her daughter to undergo multiple invasive, potentially damaging inspections. She impeded on the precious relationship between father and daughter. The woman managed to do nothing but rob her daughter of a mother since she lost visitation rights. But at least the child won't be stuck with this batty broad. She now lives with her father.

Thankfully the justice system did its job. Surprising considering how much the UK legal system has embraced feminism. After all, feminist rules demand we take a potential victim's word over evidence or due process (see Kesha Claims Rape With No Proof. Feminists Protest Due Process...). Such a policy would have left this poor girl to be repeatedly subjected to her mother's neurosis. All under the guise of pro-womanhood.

Progressives clearly want a social climate wherein women reign superior (see Sexist Hillary Clinton Says 'The Future is Female' and Feminist HuffPo Editor's New Year's Resolution? To Kill All Men...). This is a big no-no for obvious reasons, like human rights. But it specifically puts men, or in this case fathers, at a disadvantage when it comes to proving one's innocence. It also has the potential to interfere with a father's ability to protect his child. This is why due process matters.

Speaking of feminist crazy...

NOT SUBSCRIBED TO THE PODCAST? FIX THAT! IT’S COMPLETELY FREE ON BOTH ITUNES HERE AND SOUNDCLOUD HERE.