Look, that sounds like a terrible situation. However, if you’re suggesting his experience is an acceptable excuse to assume women are lying if they accuse a man of sexual assault, then go fuck yourself. I’m not even kidding.
Criminal charges require proof beyond a reasonable doubt. An accusation alone is not that. You paint it as assuming women are lying, but you instead want to treat their word as damning proof unto itself, while people like Crystal Mangum, Tracy West and Wanetta Gibson (to name some who got media attention) thoroughly leave the reasonable doubt in place.
And if you think anyone, without even considering gender should just be believed without any evidence, then you too, should go fuck yourself.
A judicial system does not function on feelings or beliefs. It functions on science. You need evidence in order to consider a position fact. Potentially ruining people’s lives because of personal feelings, is fucking evil.
Edit. The person you replied to mentioned nothing about assuming women are lying, all they said was that they are capable of doing so.
Everyone in here pretending that “believe women” means “convict the accused without any evidence.” Straw man city.
Edit- to add: one of the few insightful things Reagan ever said: “Trust but verify”. We can generally believe women about this, while also caring about actual evidence
Somewhere between 14,692 and 58,770 are going to be false accusations? That’s a lot. Like “a lot” a lot. Potentially 10K more than the annual number of gun deaths and 2x the number of gun suicides.
*Unclear if that’s an estimated number of rapes or the reported number of rapes. I’m assuming reported because it’s the only number we’ve got here and there’s no way to know the actual number with certainty.
Between 14k and 50k lives potentially ruined [out of roughly ~700k already destroyed]? It takes a special kind of willful ignorance to say that isn’t a lot, and a certain kind of stupidity to deny the evidence supporting it.
Edit: Added some words since reading comprehension is difficult for some.
Yes, we already knew this because of the data and the context of the thread. The other poster was not questioning that, which is why I only referenced the cases in which someone innocent could be falsely accused.
Yeah, that’s anecdotal. And irrelevant.
Look, that sounds like a terrible situation. However, if you’re suggesting his experience is an acceptable excuse to assume women are lying if they accuse a man of sexual assault, then go fuck yourself. I’m not even kidding.
Criminal charges require proof beyond a reasonable doubt. An accusation alone is not that. You paint it as assuming women are lying, but you instead want to treat their word as damning proof unto itself, while people like Crystal Mangum, Tracy West and Wanetta Gibson (to name some who got media attention) thoroughly leave the reasonable doubt in place.
How about 30+? At some point, the “bias against men” thing goes out the window when you’re dealing with someone like Trump.
No, not at all my argument.
And if you think anyone, without even considering gender should just be believed without any evidence, then you too, should go fuck yourself.
A judicial system does not function on feelings or beliefs. It functions on science. You need evidence in order to consider a position fact. Potentially ruining people’s lives because of personal feelings, is fucking evil.
Edit. The person you replied to mentioned nothing about assuming women are lying, all they said was that they are capable of doing so.
Everyone in here pretending that “believe women” means “convict the accused without any evidence.” Straw man city.
Edit- to add: one of the few insightful things Reagan ever said: “Trust but verify”. We can generally believe women about this, while also caring about actual evidence
So what is the evidence that the justice system doesn’t already believe them?
For one, the inexcusable number of untested and/or lost rape kits
I didn’t say any of… whatever windmill you’re fucking tilting.
And they didn’t say any of what you said…
I’m just saying that false accusations happen, a lot, and yeah, my one friend is just a single data point, OTOH:
https://www.nsvrc.org/publications/articles/false-reports-moving-beyond-issue-successfully-investigate-and-prosecute-non-s
“The article begins by reviewing up-to-date research suggesting that the rate of false reporting for sexual assault is in the range of 2-8%.”
That’s not me saying this, that’s the National Sexual Violence Resource Center saying this.
So in a year with 734,630 rapes*:
https://www.nsvrc.org/statistics
Somewhere between 14,692 and 58,770 are going to be false accusations? That’s a lot. Like “a lot” a lot. Potentially 10K more than the annual number of gun deaths and 2x the number of gun suicides.
*Unclear if that’s an estimated number of rapes or the reported number of rapes. I’m assuming reported because it’s the only number we’ve got here and there’s no way to know the actual number with certainty.
A lot? No. I call bullshit
Between 14k and 50k lives potentially ruined [out of roughly ~700k already destroyed]? It takes a special kind of willful ignorance to say that isn’t a lot, and a certain kind of stupidity to deny the evidence supporting it.
Edit: Added some words since reading comprehension is difficult for some.
That’s around 700000 lives definitely ruined mate, don’t know where you get 50k
Yes, we already knew this because of the data and the context of the thread. The other poster was not questioning that, which is why I only referenced the cases in which someone innocent could be falsely accused.
deleted by creator