This thread has gone far enough. "Be kind." -Ilona Anne Coggswater

PJPOWER

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJPOWER said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

cincybearcat said:

PJ_Soul said:

brianlux said:

PJ_Soul said:

unsung said:

People are having careers ruined by a simple accusation on incidents that allegedly happened more than ten years ago.  

A little more proof should be required before convicting these people, but a simple accusation is all that seems to be needed.

Nobody is getting convicted without proof, that is a lie.

I also don't at all see how it happening 10 years ago changes anything - I don't feel bad for someone who has their career ruined because they are accused by a bunch of people of sexual abuse or misconduct (depending on the details of the misconduct), be it last week or 10 years ago.

I do think the specific circumstances matter though, and have said many times that any hysteria related to accusations is beyond unhelpful. I also think that there needs to be some room for redemption in some cases (not others). That does NOT mean the #metoo movement isn't valuable. I worry about the fact that people seem to want to either embrace the movement without any criticism, or focus on what you're saying and therefore reject it outright. It's just more hysteria.

We cannot, btw, rely solely on criminal convictions here. Accusers DO deserve a chance - a lot of mostly men seem to have decided to reject accusations altogether unless there are criminal charges, and that is not cool IMO. I 100% acknowledge that some women make false accusations..... But most do not. Yes, we need to be rational. The anti-#metoo'ers/accusation deniers are not being any more rational than those who don't know the difference between harmless flirting and sexual harassment or assault.

I really hope your not putting me in that category.  That would be a bit like saying I hate Dinosaur Jr! And what about Germaine Greer, one of the last centuries greatest Women's Rights advocates?  https://www.theguardian.com/books/2018/jan/23/germaine-greer-criticises-whingeing-metoo-movement

No I wasn't Brian... Unsung maybe, though I'm only going off that one comment of his, and leaping to conclusions, lol. But if he needs proof in all cases, then that's not going to work. There is a well-established reason behind why accusations might not come out until years later, at which point no proof that would hold up in court exists (and likely never existed at all - it was a he said/she said from the beginning), even if the statute of limitations hadn't expired... And I'm not good with sexual predators getting off the hook that easily. Such crimes are NOT comparable to other crimes in terms of establishing proof, and those who think they are or should be don't understand the issue properly at all, nor the nature of the crime in most cases.

But really I was speaking generally - there are a LOT of people like that from what I can tell via the media/social media.

Wait - you don’t need proof?  That’s not how the legal system works. Or are you saying the court of public opinion doesn’t need proof?

Maybe I’m missing what you consider to be proof. 

depends what you consider proof. if there is no DNA from an instantly-reported rape, there really is no "proof". But, if you look at the facts, i.e; what each party stands to gain/lose, behaviour, witnesses, etc. 

I can't imagine many women would come forward and go to the lengths of being publically shamed and humiliated just because a guy dumped her or didn't pay attention to her at the bar or turned down her movie treatment. that would be downright psycho. 

Not to delude the movement, but i’ve seem women (and men) do some pretty psycho things after being dumped.  Logic and reason go out the window for some when angry or experiencing strong negative emotions.  The motive could merely be revenge.  I think that time frames do matter when recollection of events surrounding an allegation this serious come into play.  One of the first things a lawyer is going to do is attack the credibility of the accuser’s memory.

yes, but my point is to take it to that extreme of:

-if the accused is in the public eye, the accuser is basically asking for their lives to be ruined
-if the accused is not in the public eye, and the accuser takes it all the way to court,  that can take years and loads of cash. that just doesn't happen. 

trauma like that doesn't wash from your memory. it just doesn't. 

It’s not quite as simple as that.  In fact, many many people that experience trauma either forget about it entirely or do not remember the event accurately.
http://www.istss.org/public-resources/remembering-childhood-trauma.aspx

cincybearcat

HughFreakingDillon said:

cincybearcat said:

PJ_Soul said:

brianlux said:

PJ_Soul said:

unsung said:

People are having careers ruined by a simple accusation on incidents that allegedly happened more than ten years ago.  

A little more proof should be required before convicting these people, but a simple accusation is all that seems to be needed.

Nobody is getting convicted without proof, that is a lie.

I also don't at all see how it happening 10 years ago changes anything - I don't feel bad for someone who has their career ruined because they are accused by a bunch of people of sexual abuse or misconduct (depending on the details of the misconduct), be it last week or 10 years ago.

I do think the specific circumstances matter though, and have said many times that any hysteria related to accusations is beyond unhelpful. I also think that there needs to be some room for redemption in some cases (not others). That does NOT mean the #metoo movement isn't valuable. I worry about the fact that people seem to want to either embrace the movement without any criticism, or focus on what you're saying and therefore reject it outright. It's just more hysteria.

We cannot, btw, rely solely on criminal convictions here. Accusers DO deserve a chance - a lot of mostly men seem to have decided to reject accusations altogether unless there are criminal charges, and that is not cool IMO. I 100% acknowledge that some women make false accusations..... But most do not. Yes, we need to be rational. The anti-#metoo'ers/accusation deniers are not being any more rational than those who don't know the difference between harmless flirting and sexual harassment or assault.

I really hope your not putting me in that category.  That would be a bit like saying I hate Dinosaur Jr! And what about Germaine Greer, one of the last centuries greatest Women's Rights advocates?  https://www.theguardian.com/books/2018/jan/23/germaine-greer-criticises-whingeing-metoo-movement

No I wasn't Brian... Unsung maybe, though I'm only going off that one comment of his, and leaping to conclusions, lol. But if he needs proof in all cases, then that's not going to work. There is a well-established reason behind why accusations might not come out until years later, at which point no proof that would hold up in court exists (and likely never existed at all - it was a he said/she said from the beginning), even if the statute of limitations hadn't expired... And I'm not good with sexual predators getting off the hook that easily. Such crimes are NOT comparable to other crimes in terms of establishing proof, and those who think they are or should be don't understand the issue properly at all, nor the nature of the crime in most cases.

But really I was speaking generally - there are a LOT of people like that from what I can tell via the media/social media.

Wait - you don’t need proof?  That’s not how the legal system works. Or are you saying the court of public opinion doesn’t need proof?

Maybe I’m missing what you consider to be proof. 

depends what you consider proof. if there is no DNA from an instantly-reported rape, there really is no "proof". But, if you look at the facts, i.e; what each party stands to gain/lose, behaviour, witnesses, etc. 

I can't imagine many women would come forward and go to the lengths of being publically shamed and humiliated just because a guy dumped her or didn't pay attention to her at the bar or turned down her movie treatment. that would be downright psycho. 

Yeah I thought maybe I was thinking too literally about proof.

A he said she said situation is still very difficult. But multiple accusers is “proof” in my mind for sure.

cincybearcat

oftenreading said:

Dr. Blasey Ford is sure having a wonderful time right now with her moment of fame, isn't she? And people wonder why women don't report. 

I heard reports of death threats?!?!? What the hell is wrong with people

HughFreakingDillon

cincybearcat said:

oftenreading said:

Dr. Blasey Ford is sure having a wonderful time right now with her moment of fame, isn't she? And people wonder why women don't report. 

I heard reports of death threats?!?!? What the hell is wrong with people

did al franken's accuser get death threats? I highly doubt it. 

brianlux

cincybearcat said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

cincybearcat said:

PJ_Soul said:

brianlux said:

PJ_Soul said:

unsung said:

People are having careers ruined by a simple accusation on incidents that allegedly happened more than ten years ago.  

A little more proof should be required before convicting these people, but a simple accusation is all that seems to be needed.

Nobody is getting convicted without proof, that is a lie.

I also don't at all see how it happening 10 years ago changes anything - I don't feel bad for someone who has their career ruined because they are accused by a bunch of people of sexual abuse or misconduct (depending on the details of the misconduct), be it last week or 10 years ago.

I do think the specific circumstances matter though, and have said many times that any hysteria related to accusations is beyond unhelpful. I also think that there needs to be some room for redemption in some cases (not others). That does NOT mean the #metoo movement isn't valuable. I worry about the fact that people seem to want to either embrace the movement without any criticism, or focus on what you're saying and therefore reject it outright. It's just more hysteria.

We cannot, btw, rely solely on criminal convictions here. Accusers DO deserve a chance - a lot of mostly men seem to have decided to reject accusations altogether unless there are criminal charges, and that is not cool IMO. I 100% acknowledge that some women make false accusations..... But most do not. Yes, we need to be rational. The anti-#metoo'ers/accusation deniers are not being any more rational than those who don't know the difference between harmless flirting and sexual harassment or assault.

I really hope your not putting me in that category.  That would be a bit like saying I hate Dinosaur Jr! And what about Germaine Greer, one of the last centuries greatest Women's Rights advocates?  https://www.theguardian.com/books/2018/jan/23/germaine-greer-criticises-whingeing-metoo-movement

No I wasn't Brian... Unsung maybe, though I'm only going off that one comment of his, and leaping to conclusions, lol. But if he needs proof in all cases, then that's not going to work. There is a well-established reason behind why accusations might not come out until years later, at which point no proof that would hold up in court exists (and likely never existed at all - it was a he said/she said from the beginning), even if the statute of limitations hadn't expired... And I'm not good with sexual predators getting off the hook that easily. Such crimes are NOT comparable to other crimes in terms of establishing proof, and those who think they are or should be don't understand the issue properly at all, nor the nature of the crime in most cases.

But really I was speaking generally - there are a LOT of people like that from what I can tell via the media/social media.

Wait - you don’t need proof?  That’s not how the legal system works. Or are you saying the court of public opinion doesn’t need proof?

Maybe I’m missing what you consider to be proof. 

depends what you consider proof. if there is no DNA from an instantly-reported rape, there really is no "proof". But, if you look at the facts, i.e; what each party stands to gain/lose, behaviour, witnesses, etc. 

I can't imagine many women would come forward and go to the lengths of being publically shamed and humiliated just because a guy dumped her or didn't pay attention to her at the bar or turned down her movie treatment. that would be downright psycho. 

Yeah I thought maybe I was thinking too literally about proof.

A he said she said situation is still very difficult. But multiple accusers is “proof” in my mind for sure.

I know a guy who was given life in prison for a rape I would bet $10,000 he didn't commit.  Plus, there was no physical evidence.  It was he said/ she said.  This is not bullshit.  I am not making this up.  Bad shit happens all around.

unsung

PJ_Soul said:

unsung said:

People are having careers ruined by a simple accusation on incidents that allegedly happened more than ten years ago.  

A little more proof should be required before convicting these people, but a simple accusation is all that seems to be needed.

Nobody is getting convicted without proof, that is a lie.

I also don't at all see how it happening 10 years ago changes anything - I don't feel bad for someone who has their career ruined because they are accused by a bunch of people of sexual abuse or misconduct (depending on the details of the misconduct), be it last week or 10 years ago.

I do think the specific circumstances matter though, and have said many times that any hysteria related to accusations is beyond unhelpful. I also think that there needs to be some room for redemption in some cases (not others). That does NOT mean the #metoo movement isn't valuable. I worry about the fact that people seem to want to either embrace the movement without any criticism, or focus on what you're saying and therefore reject it outright. It's just more hysteria.

We cannot, btw, rely solely on criminal convictions here. Accusers DO deserve a chance - a lot of mostly men seem to have decided to reject accusations altogether unless there are criminal charges, and that is not cool IMO. I 100% acknowledge that some women make false accusations..... But most do not. Yes, we need to be rational. The anti-#metoo'ers/accusation deniers are not being any more rational than those who don't know the difference between harmless flirting and sexual harassment or assault.

I really hope your not putting me in that category.  That would be a bit like saying I hate Dinosaur Jr! And what about Germaine Greer, one of the last centuries greatest Women's Rights advocates?  https://www.theguardian.com/books/2018/jan/23/germaine-greer-criticises-whingeing-metoo-movement

No I wasn't Brian... Unsung maybe, though I'm only going off that one comment of his, and leaping to conclusions, lol. But if he needs proof in all cases, then that's not going to work. There is a well-established reason behind why accusations might not come out until years later, at which point no proof that would hold up in court exists (and likely never existed at all - it was a he said/she said from the beginning), even if the statute of limitations hadn't expired... And I'm not good with sexual predators getting off the hook that easily. Such crimes are NOT comparable to other crimes in terms of establishing proof, and those who think they are or should be don't understand the issue properly at all, nor the nature of the crime in most cases.

But really I was speaking generally - there are a LOT of people like that from what I can tell via the media/social media.

Shocking.

Conviction isn't necessary?  But they are convicted in the court of public opinion which can be worse.

How many false accusations have come out over the years?   We owe it to the accused to have their day in court.  It is their right.

PJPOWER

brianlux said:

cincybearcat said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

cincybearcat said:

PJ_Soul said:

brianlux said:

PJ_Soul said:

unsung said:

People are having careers ruined by a simple accusation on incidents that allegedly happened more than ten years ago.  

A little more proof should be required before convicting these people, but a simple accusation is all that seems to be needed.

Nobody is getting convicted without proof, that is a lie.

I also don't at all see how it happening 10 years ago changes anything - I don't feel bad for someone who has their career ruined because they are accused by a bunch of people of sexual abuse or misconduct (depending on the details of the misconduct), be it last week or 10 years ago.

I do think the specific circumstances matter though, and have said many times that any hysteria related to accusations is beyond unhelpful. I also think that there needs to be some room for redemption in some cases (not others). That does NOT mean the #metoo movement isn't valuable. I worry about the fact that people seem to want to either embrace the movement without any criticism, or focus on what you're saying and therefore reject it outright. It's just more hysteria.

We cannot, btw, rely solely on criminal convictions here. Accusers DO deserve a chance - a lot of mostly men seem to have decided to reject accusations altogether unless there are criminal charges, and that is not cool IMO. I 100% acknowledge that some women make false accusations..... But most do not. Yes, we need to be rational. The anti-#metoo'ers/accusation deniers are not being any more rational than those who don't know the difference between harmless flirting and sexual harassment or assault.

I really hope your not putting me in that category.  That would be a bit like saying I hate Dinosaur Jr! And what about Germaine Greer, one of the last centuries greatest Women's Rights advocates?  https://www.theguardian.com/books/2018/jan/23/germaine-greer-criticises-whingeing-metoo-movement

No I wasn't Brian... Unsung maybe, though I'm only going off that one comment of his, and leaping to conclusions, lol. But if he needs proof in all cases, then that's not going to work. There is a well-established reason behind why accusations might not come out until years later, at which point no proof that would hold up in court exists (and likely never existed at all - it was a he said/she said from the beginning), even if the statute of limitations hadn't expired... And I'm not good with sexual predators getting off the hook that easily. Such crimes are NOT comparable to other crimes in terms of establishing proof, and those who think they are or should be don't understand the issue properly at all, nor the nature of the crime in most cases.

But really I was speaking generally - there are a LOT of people like that from what I can tell via the media/social media.

Wait - you don’t need proof?  That’s not how the legal system works. Or are you saying the court of public opinion doesn’t need proof?

Maybe I’m missing what you consider to be proof. 

depends what you consider proof. if there is no DNA from an instantly-reported rape, there really is no "proof". But, if you look at the facts, i.e; what each party stands to gain/lose, behaviour, witnesses, etc. 

I can't imagine many women would come forward and go to the lengths of being publically shamed and humiliated just because a guy dumped her or didn't pay attention to her at the bar or turned down her movie treatment. that would be downright psycho. 

Yeah I thought maybe I was thinking too literally about proof.

A he said she said situation is still very difficult. But multiple accusers is “proof” in my mind for sure.

I know a guy who was given life in prison for a rape I would bet $10,000 he didn't commit.  Plus, there was no physical evidence.  It was he said/ she said.  This is not bullshit.  I am not making this up.  Bad shit happens all around.

That’s fucked up.  Wonder what tipped the scale over the standard “beyond a reasonable doubt”?  I’ve known a couple people that were wrongly accused of sexual assault due to having pissed off a woman, but they were never charged and they fortunately had pretty solid alibis.  People that do not think this happens are being naive.  One of them ended up being out a couple thousand dollars in lawyer charges (which was a pretty big burden to him in college).

Meltdown99

I am absolutely fucking dumbfounded by how many people think its ok that woman can say so and so did this to me ... I have no proof, but I don't give a shit if I ruin his reputation...

I sincerely hope, that any of you who take a person word at face value that ruins a person career, has someone accuse you wrongfully and cost you $$$ defending yourself only to still have a ruined reputation.

brianlux

PJPOWER said:

brianlux said:

cincybearcat said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

cincybearcat said:

PJ_Soul said:

brianlux said:

PJ_Soul said:

unsung said:

People are having careers ruined by a simple accusation on incidents that allegedly happened more than ten years ago.  

A little more proof should be required before convicting these people, but a simple accusation is all that seems to be needed.

Nobody is getting convicted without proof, that is a lie.

I also don't at all see how it happening 10 years ago changes anything - I don't feel bad for someone who has their career ruined because they are accused by a bunch of people of sexual abuse or misconduct (depending on the details of the misconduct), be it last week or 10 years ago.

I do think the specific circumstances matter though, and have said many times that any hysteria related to accusations is beyond unhelpful. I also think that there needs to be some room for redemption in some cases (not others). That does NOT mean the #metoo movement isn't valuable. I worry about the fact that people seem to want to either embrace the movement without any criticism, or focus on what you're saying and therefore reject it outright. It's just more hysteria.

We cannot, btw, rely solely on criminal convictions here. Accusers DO deserve a chance - a lot of mostly men seem to have decided to reject accusations altogether unless there are criminal charges, and that is not cool IMO. I 100% acknowledge that some women make false accusations..... But most do not. Yes, we need to be rational. The anti-#metoo'ers/accusation deniers are not being any more rational than those who don't know the difference between harmless flirting and sexual harassment or assault.

I really hope your not putting me in that category.  That would be a bit like saying I hate Dinosaur Jr! And what about Germaine Greer, one of the last centuries greatest Women's Rights advocates?  https://www.theguardian.com/books/2018/jan/23/germaine-greer-criticises-whingeing-metoo-movement

No I wasn't Brian... Unsung maybe, though I'm only going off that one comment of his, and leaping to conclusions, lol. But if he needs proof in all cases, then that's not going to work. There is a well-established reason behind why accusations might not come out until years later, at which point no proof that would hold up in court exists (and likely never existed at all - it was a he said/she said from the beginning), even if the statute of limitations hadn't expired... And I'm not good with sexual predators getting off the hook that easily. Such crimes are NOT comparable to other crimes in terms of establishing proof, and those who think they are or should be don't understand the issue properly at all, nor the nature of the crime in most cases.

But really I was speaking generally - there are a LOT of people like that from what I can tell via the media/social media.

Wait - you don’t need proof?  That’s not how the legal system works. Or are you saying the court of public opinion doesn’t need proof?

Maybe I’m missing what you consider to be proof. 

depends what you consider proof. if there is no DNA from an instantly-reported rape, there really is no "proof". But, if you look at the facts, i.e; what each party stands to gain/lose, behaviour, witnesses, etc. 

I can't imagine many women would come forward and go to the lengths of being publically shamed and humiliated just because a guy dumped her or didn't pay attention to her at the bar or turned down her movie treatment. that would be downright psycho. 

Yeah I thought maybe I was thinking too literally about proof.

A he said she said situation is still very difficult. But multiple accusers is “proof” in my mind for sure.

I know a guy who was given life in prison for a rape I would bet $10,000 he didn't commit.  Plus, there was no physical evidence.  It was he said/ she said.  This is not bullshit.  I am not making this up.  Bad shit happens all around.

That’s fucked up.  Wonder what tipped the scale over the standard “beyond a reasonable doubt”?  I’ve known a couple people that were wrongly accused of sexual assault due to having pissed off a woman, but they were never charged and they fortunately had pretty solid alibis.  People that do not think this happens are being naive.  One of them ended up being out a couple thousand dollars in lawyer charges (which was a pretty big burden to him in college).

It really shocked a lot of people.

On the other end, I know a few women who have been majorly traumatized by rape where the accusations were solidly proven.   Humans can be the worst things on the planet. 

They can  best too- so I'm going to try to stay away (I know, again), from this thread because I find it depressing as hell and try to focus more on the good things people do.

PJPOWER

brianlux said:

PJPOWER said:

brianlux said:

cincybearcat said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

cincybearcat said:

PJ_Soul said:

brianlux said:

PJ_Soul said:

unsung said:

People are having careers ruined by a simple accusation on incidents that allegedly happened more than ten years ago.  

A little more proof should be required before convicting these people, but a simple accusation is all that seems to be needed.

Nobody is getting convicted without proof, that is a lie.

I also don't at all see how it happening 10 years ago changes anything - I don't feel bad for someone who has their career ruined because they are accused by a bunch of people of sexual abuse or misconduct (depending on the details of the misconduct), be it last week or 10 years ago.

I do think the specific circumstances matter though, and have said many times that any hysteria related to accusations is beyond unhelpful. I also think that there needs to be some room for redemption in some cases (not others). That does NOT mean the #metoo movement isn't valuable. I worry about the fact that people seem to want to either embrace the movement without any criticism, or focus on what you're saying and therefore reject it outright. It's just more hysteria.

We cannot, btw, rely solely on criminal convictions here. Accusers DO deserve a chance - a lot of mostly men seem to have decided to reject accusations altogether unless there are criminal charges, and that is not cool IMO. I 100% acknowledge that some women make false accusations..... But most do not. Yes, we need to be rational. The anti-#metoo'ers/accusation deniers are not being any more rational than those who don't know the difference between harmless flirting and sexual harassment or assault.

I really hope your not putting me in that category.  That would be a bit like saying I hate Dinosaur Jr! And what about Germaine Greer, one of the last centuries greatest Women's Rights advocates?  https://www.theguardian.com/books/2018/jan/23/germaine-greer-criticises-whingeing-metoo-movement

No I wasn't Brian... Unsung maybe, though I'm only going off that one comment of his, and leaping to conclusions, lol. But if he needs proof in all cases, then that's not going to work. There is a well-established reason behind why accusations might not come out until years later, at which point no proof that would hold up in court exists (and likely never existed at all - it was a he said/she said from the beginning), even if the statute of limitations hadn't expired... And I'm not good with sexual predators getting off the hook that easily. Such crimes are NOT comparable to other crimes in terms of establishing proof, and those who think they are or should be don't understand the issue properly at all, nor the nature of the crime in most cases.

But really I was speaking generally - there are a LOT of people like that from what I can tell via the media/social media.

Wait - you don’t need proof?  That’s not how the legal system works. Or are you saying the court of public opinion doesn’t need proof?

Maybe I’m missing what you consider to be proof. 

depends what you consider proof. if there is no DNA from an instantly-reported rape, there really is no "proof". But, if you look at the facts, i.e; what each party stands to gain/lose, behaviour, witnesses, etc. 

I can't imagine many women would come forward and go to the lengths of being publically shamed and humiliated just because a guy dumped her or didn't pay attention to her at the bar or turned down her movie treatment. that would be downright psycho. 

Yeah I thought maybe I was thinking too literally about proof.

A he said she said situation is still very difficult. But multiple accusers is “proof” in my mind for sure.

I know a guy who was given life in prison for a rape I would bet $10,000 he didn't commit.  Plus, there was no physical evidence.  It was he said/ she said.  This is not bullshit.  I am not making this up.  Bad shit happens all around.

That’s fucked up.  Wonder what tipped the scale over the standard “beyond a reasonable doubt”?  I’ve known a couple people that were wrongly accused of sexual assault due to having pissed off a woman, but they were never charged and they fortunately had pretty solid alibis.  People that do not think this happens are being naive.  One of them ended up being out a couple thousand dollars in lawyer charges (which was a pretty big burden to him in college).

It really shocked a lot of people.

On the other end, I know a few women who have been majorly traumatized by rape where the accusations were solidly proven.   Humans can be the worst things on the planet. 

They can  best too- so I'm going to try to stay away (I know, again), from this thread because I find it depressing as hell and try to focus more on the good things people do.

Yes, humans can do things that defy all logical explanations.  I saw a woman ramming her car over and over into her ex’s appartment because he wouldn’t answer her calls.  Not that I know the specifics of the situation, but this was clearly an overreaction and turned out badly for her...humans be crazy!  

F Me In The Brain

Meltdown99 said:

I am absolutely fucking dumbfounded by how many people think its ok that woman can say so and so did this to me ... I have no proof, but I don't give a shit if I ruin his reputation...

I sincerely hope, that any of you who take a person word at face value that ruins a person career, has someone accuse you wrongfully and cost you $$$ defending yourself only to still have a ruined reputation.

How are they meant to have proof for so many scenarios imaginable?  
I don't disagree that the false accusations are awful and that they happen....but I just think that proving some of these things is not really possible.  
Corroboration through multiple sources that experienced similar issues is what some have been able to do....

PJ_Soul

The truth about false assault accusations by women

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-45565684?SThisFB

Either Brett Kavanaugh or Christine Blasey Ford is lying. We don't know which one.

Here's what we do know.

According to various academic studies over the past 20 years, only 2-10% of rape accusations are fake (Prof Ford's lawyer says she believes this was attempted rape).

Two to 10% is too many, but it is not a big proportion of the total. Fake rape accusations get a lot of attention.

Both the Duke Lacrosse team case in 2006 and the alleged University of Virginia gang rape in 2014 were widely covered by the media. They were terrible miscarriages of justice - but they were not representative.

False rape accusations very rarely lead to convictions or wrongful jail time.

A useful article in Quartz by Sandra Newman points to research from the British Home Office showing that in the early 2000s, of the 216 cases that were classified as false allegations, only six led to an arrest.

Of those, only two had charges brought against them and those two were found to be false.

The idea that lots of men are going to prison because they've been falsely accused of rape isn't supported by the facts.

Moreover, official figures suggest the number of rapes and sexual assaults which are never reported or prosecuted far outweighs the number of men convicted of rape because of fake accusations.

Indeed it far outweighs the number of fake accusations, period.

Figures from the US Bureau of Justice Statistics suggest only 35% of all sexual assaults are even reported to the police.

Image copyright Reuters

Image caption Prof Ford says Brett Kavanaugh pinned her to a bed and tried to take off her clothes

It's also useful to look at what we know about the kind of people who make fake accusations to see if Prof Ford fits a pattern.

According to Sandra Newman, every academic study on the issue finds that the most common type of fake accuser is actually a teenage girl trying to get out of trouble.

Often it's her parents who report the "rape" attempt. The studies suggest the false accusation can often stem from something as absurd as finding an excuse for missing curfew.

According to a 2017 report by the US National Institutes of Health, fake accusers "were primarily motivated by emotional gain. Most false allegations were used to cover up other behaviour such as adultery or skipping school".

In many cases the fake accuser has a history of lying to authorities or committing fraud. She may well have a criminal record.

In the Duke lacrosse team case, the woman in question, Crystal Mangum, had reported a previous assault in which no one was charged, she had a felony conviction and ultimately went to prison herself.

Christine Blasey Ford clearly does not fit this profile.

She is not a teenager, she has no history of fabrications, she doesn't have a criminal record and, as far as we know she isn't trying to cover up some other behaviour.

None of this proves that Prof Ford is telling the truth but it does suggest we should be skeptical of the notion that it is common for women to say they've been sexually abused when they haven't.

It's not.

PJPOWER

PJ_Soul said:

The truth about false assault accusations by women

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-45565684?SThisFB

Either Brett Kavanaugh or Christine Blasey Ford is lying. We don't know which one.

Here's what we do know.

According to various academic studies over the past 20 years, only 2-10% of rape accusations are fake (Prof Ford's lawyer says she believes this was attempted rape).

Two to 10% is too many, but it is not a big proportion of the total. Fake rape accusations get a lot of attention.

Both the Duke Lacrosse team case in 2006 and the alleged University of Virginia gang rape in 2014 were widely covered by the media. They were terrible miscarriages of justice - but they were not representative.

False rape accusations very rarely lead to convictions or wrongful jail time.

A useful article in Quartz by Sandra Newman points to research from the British Home Office showing that in the early 2000s, of the 216 cases that were classified as false allegations, only six led to an arrest.

Of those, only two had charges brought against them and those two were found to be false.

The idea that lots of men are going to prison because they've been falsely accused of rape isn't supported by the facts.

Moreover, official figures suggest the number of rapes and sexual assaults which are never reported or prosecuted far outweighs the number of men convicted of rape because of fake accusations.

Indeed it far outweighs the number of fake accusations, period.

Figures from the US Bureau of Justice Statistics suggest only 35% of all sexual assaults are even reported to the police.

Image copyright Reuters

Image caption Prof Ford says Brett Kavanaugh pinned her to a bed and tried to take off her clothes

It's also useful to look at what we know about the kind of people who make fake accusations to see if Prof Ford fits a pattern.

According to Sandra Newman, every academic study on the issue finds that the most common type of fake accuser is actually a teenage girl trying to get out of trouble.

Often it's her parents who report the "rape" attempt. The studies suggest the false accusation can often stem from something as absurd as finding an excuse for missing curfew.

According to a 2017 report by the US National Institutes of Health, fake accusers "were primarily motivated by emotional gain. Most false allegations were used to cover up other behaviour such as adultery or skipping school".

In many cases the fake accuser has a history of lying to authorities or committing fraud. She may well have a criminal record.

In the Duke lacrosse team case, the woman in question, Crystal Mangum, had reported a previous assault in which no one was charged, she had a felony conviction and ultimately went to prison herself.

Christine Blasey Ford clearly does not fit this profile.

She is not a teenager, she has no history of fabrications, she doesn't have a criminal record and, as far as we know she isn't trying to cover up some other behaviour.

None of this proves that Prof Ford is telling the truth but it does suggest we should be skeptical of the notion that it is common for women to say they've been sexually abused when they haven't.

It's not.

But, and this is directly from the study mentioned and linked in the report:
“A large proportion, 20% of complainants, said that they did not know why they filed a false allegation. The results confirm the complexity of motivations for filing false allegations and the difficulties associated with archival studies. In conclusion, the list of Kanin is, based on the current results, valid but insufficient to explain all the different motives of complainants to file a false allegation.”

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/28213722/

PJ_Soul

PJPOWER said:

PJ_Soul said:

The truth about false assault accusations by women

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-45565684?SThisFB

Either Brett Kavanaugh or Christine Blasey Ford is lying. We don't know which one.

Here's what we do know.

According to various academic studies over the past 20 years, only 2-10% of rape accusations are fake (Prof Ford's lawyer says she believes this was attempted rape).

Two to 10% is too many, but it is not a big proportion of the total. Fake rape accusations get a lot of attention.

Both the Duke Lacrosse team case in 2006 and the alleged University of Virginia gang rape in 2014 were widely covered by the media. They were terrible miscarriages of justice - but they were not representative.

False rape accusations very rarely lead to convictions or wrongful jail time.

A useful article in Quartz by Sandra Newman points to research from the British Home Office showing that in the early 2000s, of the 216 cases that were classified as false allegations, only six led to an arrest.

Of those, only two had charges brought against them and those two were found to be false.

The idea that lots of men are going to prison because they've been falsely accused of rape isn't supported by the facts.

Moreover, official figures suggest the number of rapes and sexual assaults which are never reported or prosecuted far outweighs the number of men convicted of rape because of fake accusations.

Indeed it far outweighs the number of fake accusations, period.

Figures from the US Bureau of Justice Statistics suggest only 35% of all sexual assaults are even reported to the police.

Image copyright Reuters

Image caption Prof Ford says Brett Kavanaugh pinned her to a bed and tried to take off her clothes

It's also useful to look at what we know about the kind of people who make fake accusations to see if Prof Ford fits a pattern.

According to Sandra Newman, every academic study on the issue finds that the most common type of fake accuser is actually a teenage girl trying to get out of trouble.

Often it's her parents who report the "rape" attempt. The studies suggest the false accusation can often stem from something as absurd as finding an excuse for missing curfew.

According to a 2017 report by the US National Institutes of Health, fake accusers "were primarily motivated by emotional gain. Most false allegations were used to cover up other behaviour such as adultery or skipping school".

In many cases the fake accuser has a history of lying to authorities or committing fraud. She may well have a criminal record.

In the Duke lacrosse team case, the woman in question, Crystal Mangum, had reported a previous assault in which no one was charged, she had a felony conviction and ultimately went to prison herself.

Christine Blasey Ford clearly does not fit this profile.

She is not a teenager, she has no history of fabrications, she doesn't have a criminal record and, as far as we know she isn't trying to cover up some other behaviour.

None of this proves that Prof Ford is telling the truth but it does suggest we should be skeptical of the notion that it is common for women to say they've been sexually abused when they haven't.

It's not.

But, and this is directly from the study mentioned and linked in the report:
“A large proportion, 20% of complainants, said that they did not know why they filed a false allegation. The results confirm the complexity of motivations for filing false allegations and the difficulties associated with archival studies. In conclusion, the list of Kanin is, based on the current results, valid but insufficient to explain all the different motives of complainants to file a false allegation.”

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/28213722/

Why do you find that quote especially interesting? Keep in mind that's 20% of 2 - 10% of accusers, not 20% of accusers.

Meltdown99

Go through the proper authorities, not the media.  I don’t give a sit if .000000001% are fake, some innocent men’s lives are getting ruined from vindictive asshole self righteous woman...

PJ_Soul

Meltdown99 said:

Go through the proper authorities, not the media.  I don’t give a sit if .000000001% are fake, some innocent men’s lives are getting ruined from vindictive asshole self righteous woman...

There are no proper authorities to go through when the statute of limitations has expired and/or there is no physical evidence and the authorities tell her there is nothing they can do.

I wish I could hear you and others like you sound that adamant about all the millions and millions of lives and careers ruined for women whose real accusations have been shot down by asshole self righteous men.

F Me In The Brain

Meltdown99 said:

Go through the proper authorities, not the media.  I don’t give a sit if .000000001% are fake, some innocent men’s lives are getting ruined from vindictive asshole self righteous woman...

What does that equate to -- 1 out of every how many?  Millions, billions?  My math skills are not what they once were.

F Me In The Brain

And, I give a sit.

I give lots of sits.

cincybearcat

PJ_Soul said:

Meltdown99 said:

Go through the proper authorities, not the media.  I don’t give a sit if .000000001% are fake, some innocent men’s lives are getting ruined from vindictive asshole self righteous woman...

There are no proper authorities to go through when the statute of limitations has expired and/or there is no physical evidence and the authorities tell her there is nothing they can do.

I wish I could hear you and others like you sound that adamant about all the millions and millions of lives and careers ruined for women whose real accusations have been shot down by asshole self righteous men.

Yup, it's a problem.  Just like we shouldn't believe the man we shouldn't just believe the woman.  What #metoo is (or should be?) about is the fact that women should not be afraid to bring these things up AND they should be take seriously.  Doesn't always mean the man will be held accountable...if the law doesn't fall on the woman's side.  Society has to stop knee jerk believing 1 side or the other.

PJ_Soul

cincybearcat said:

PJ_Soul said:

Meltdown99 said:

Go through the proper authorities, not the media.  I don’t give a sit if .000000001% are fake, some innocent men’s lives are getting ruined from vindictive asshole self righteous woman...

There are no proper authorities to go through when the statute of limitations has expired and/or there is no physical evidence and the authorities tell her there is nothing they can do.

I wish I could hear you and others like you sound that adamant about all the millions and millions of lives and careers ruined for women whose real accusations have been shot down by asshole self righteous men.

Yup, it's a problem.  Just like we shouldn't believe the man we shouldn't just believe the woman.  What #metoo is (or should be?) about is the fact that women should not be afraid to bring these things up AND they should be take seriously.  Doesn't always mean the man will be held accountable...if the law doesn't fall on the woman's side.  Society has to stop knee jerk believing 1 side or the other.

I've probably said something against mass hysteria and knee jerk reactions a dozen times in this thread alone. And frankly, outside of a few fanatics I've seen online, I've never run into anyone who thought taking 100% of accusations at face value no matter what was reasonable, or who denied that there are a small number of false accusations. I'm not sure why some people act like this is a common. It's not.