Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #501  
Old 09-08-2016, 02:57 PM
Manda JO is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Posts: 11,406
Those are arguments for not listening to someone, or at least not listening without skepticism. They aren't arguments for people being silent.

Let's say a guy at work grabs my tits. I have no evidence. I can't tell anyone?

Let's say five women all report the same story. Not enough evidence to convict him, but you're saying it's wrong to even consider that they might be telling the truth?
  #502  
Old 09-08-2016, 03:11 PM
Spice Weasel is offline
Guest
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Michigan
Posts: 16,870
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
I did answer. "Hard cases make bad law."
My case is typical of sexual abuse victims, so I didn't see that as applying to me.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc
I'm asking society to have standards that don't depend on taking every single person's word for everything.
Good news everyone! Society has standards that don't depend on taking every single person's word for everything.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc
So what you want in a he-said/she-said situation is a presumption of guilt rather than innocence.
Of course I want a presumption of guilt for the person who molested me. Yes, how very unfair I'm being to that poor, put-upon child-molesting sociopath. You're still making the mistake of thinking we're talking about innocent people being harmed. No innocent people are being harmed in this case. None. We're not on the outside looking in, which is where your philosophy comes from, we're on the inside looking out. I don't have to guess who's innocent or guilty, I know. And based on that knowledge I am entitled to act in any way I see fit (within the constraints of the law, obviously) to make the world safer and help others.

You people, on the outside, having to make decisions about who to believe, that's your own problem. Feel free to consider things like a) overall credibility of person making the claim, or b) corroborating evidence. I don't care. If you were my mother and you knew, and you looked the other way, and then you punished me for it, you can go straight to hell. If you were my grandmother and you didn't take me at my word, you can go straight to hell. My abuser's business associate? Stranger off the street? Person who doesn't know either of us? I don't give a fuck, though I'm definitely not inviting anyone over to Sunday dinner who can't take me at my word. I have already accepted that injustice is a permanent part of this experience.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc
I understand why it seems scary or objectionable to let 9 torturers/murderers of children out on the streets to keep an innocent man out of prison. Would you also feel then that it's okay to put 9 innocent men in prison to keep one child torturer/murderer off the streets? Or is it at 5 of each that the threshold is reached?
You're undermining your own argument by pointing out how arbitrary your own standard is. And again, this side conversation, while interesting, has nothing to do with talking openly about your own rape experience.
  #503  
Old 09-08-2016, 03:12 PM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 12,343
Five women reporting it is far different. The police and prosecutors will (or should) think so too. This was a key part of my point earlier on why you should report things to the police even if your one report will not result in a successful prosecution. Either it will add to the total mass of evidence later, or will dissuade the attacker from doing it again, knowing that the protestations of innocence ring much more hollow the second or especially the fifth time.
  #504  
Old 09-08-2016, 03:14 PM
Spice Weasel is offline
Guest
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Michigan
Posts: 16,870
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
Five women reporting it is far different. The police and prosecutors will (or should) think so too. This was a key part of my point earlier on why you should report things to the police even if your one report will not result in a successful prosecution.
Okay, so just so I have this straight... if someone at work grabs my tits, I'm obligated to report it to the police but I'm obligated not to tell my employer?
  #505  
Old 09-08-2016, 03:17 PM
Steophan is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 9,019
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dangerosa View Post
And organizations have to balance the safety and rights of the purported victim with those of the accused. To discover a woman was actually raped by a fellow employee - and during the eighteen months it took to work through the justice system, she had to face him every day on the job because she needed to earn a living and retain her professional status - and nothing at all was done to help keep her safe from him because he's "innocent until proven guilty" is negligent. And if she wasn't safe - if one day she is working late and he comes into the office and beats the shit out of her - well, you've got a lot of legal issues.
They should do so, of course, but they should do so in a way that doesn't harm either the accused or the accuser. Ensuring that they do not work in close proximity, ensuring there's always more than two people about, and so on.

But if, after a thorough investigation, there truly is no evidence beyond someone's word that something happened, then in any professional situation people should act as though the accused is innocent.

A policy that no worker should have to be alone with someone they don't wish to be with would be one response to this, as it doesn't require anyone being accused of anything.
  #506  
Old 09-08-2016, 03:20 PM
Steophan is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 9,019
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spice Weasel View Post
More to the point, why should I give a shit about my abuser's reputation? Do you know what it's like to be so violated physically and emotionally, to be so fucked in the head for years, to believe someone loves you and has your best interests at heart and have them use that to isolate and abuse you -- and then see that person walk around consequence-free while YOU have to deal with all the fallout? YOUR relationships destroyed, YOUR sex life fucked up, YOUR money spent on therapy bills and it's never, ever his problem? My Mom didn't even divorce him until six years later. Seriously, how can you possibly argue that I should give a shit? It's not ''unfair'' to him to call him out for what he did, he's a fucking child molester.
Why? Because you could be falsely accused of a crime one day, that's why. It's understandable that you don't care about that particular individual, but you should care about the principle of not condemning people without proof, if not for ethical reasons then for selfish ones.
  #507  
Old 09-08-2016, 03:23 PM
JRDelirious is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Displaced
Posts: 15,909
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spice Weasel View Post
Also, looking at the example of the 1 innocent man of 10... we know for a fact that 9 of them rape and torture children, but we let them all go free instead of condemning one innocent man to prison.

There's no other way to interpret this than, ''One innocent man going to prison is worse than (at minimum) 9 children being tortured and murdered.''

What?
No, "What?" to that example.

The maxim about "better ten criminals go free than one innocent be condemned", is NOT about when we know it for an absolute fact, about trading ten known monsters for one innocent as if it were a hostage swap. It's about needing to meet burdens of proof and standards of evidence before the Law and not railroading people.
  #508  
Old 09-08-2016, 03:23 PM
Chimera is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: In the Dreaming
Posts: 24,689
Wait, she should protect HIS reputation, even though his guilt is indisputable, because someone else might be falsely accused somewhere?

Dude, I was falsely accused by the woman who was fucking assaulting me in my sleep, actively planning to kill me and telling everyone else that I was beating her. I don't give a flying fuck about her "reputation" other than to sincerely hope that people who have come to know her since we were married come to know the truth of what an evil piece of shit she is.

I'm not interested in keeping MY silence just because I was falsely accused. Nor am I interested in giving people like the subject of this OP the "benefit of the doubt". He fucking did it, and he deserved far worse than he got.

Last edited by Chimera; 09-08-2016 at 03:26 PM.
  #509  
Old 09-08-2016, 03:25 PM
Spice Weasel is offline
Guest
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Michigan
Posts: 16,870
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steophan
Why? Because you could be falsely accused of a crime one day, that's why. It's understandable that you don't care about that particular individual, but you should care about the principle of not condemning people without proof, if not for ethical reasons then for selfish ones.
If I am falsely accused of committing a crime that would be terrible, but it has no ethical relationship to accurately accusing someone of committing a crime.

As Manda Jo pointed out, your argument is an argument for being skeptical of an accusation, it is not an argument for being silent if you are a victim.

Last edited by Spice Weasel; 09-08-2016 at 03:26 PM.
  #510  
Old 09-08-2016, 03:25 PM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 12,343
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steophan View Post
Why? Because you could be falsely accused of a crime one day, that's why. It's understandable that you don't care about that particular individual, but you should care about the principle of not condemning people without proof, if not for ethical reasons then for selfish ones.
This. /thread
  #511  
Old 09-08-2016, 03:26 PM
Steophan is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 9,019
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spice Weasel View Post
There's no other way to interpret this than, ''One innocent man going to prison is worse than (at minimum) 9 children being tortured and murdered.''
Well, yeah, it is worse, assuming the 9 children aren't being tortured and murdered by the state.
  #512  
Old 09-08-2016, 03:31 PM
Spice Weasel is offline
Guest
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Michigan
Posts: 16,870
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
This. /thread
Yeah, not hardly. The two have no relationship to one another. You only think they do because in your mind you're the one doing the assessing and having to judge who is telling the truth. Being the actual victim of the crime, I have no such assessing or judgment to do. There is no moral burden on me. That's your societal burden to bear, but I promise, it's not nearly as painful as being sexually abused and having nobody believe you.
  #513  
Old 09-08-2016, 03:34 PM
Spice Weasel is offline
Guest
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Michigan
Posts: 16,870
And hey, let's not confuse the law with everyday life. i wouldn't want my abuser to go to prison without the evidence to convict him. That's a legal standard I respect.

Am I going to post flyers all over his neighborhood about what he did to me? You can bet I've fantasized about it, but no. I'm not that vindictive.

Am I going to bend over backward to protect his reputation? Hell no.
  #514  
Old 09-08-2016, 03:36 PM
Paranoid Randroid's Avatar
Paranoid Randroid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Dayton, OH
Posts: 1,947
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spice Weasel View Post
Being the actual victim of the crime, I have no such assessing or judgment to do.

Exactly. If you want to argue about the ethics of accepting someone's word without proof, fine. But that's for other people to decide -- if I know the absolute truth about someone's guilt of rape then I'm under no obligation to keep it secret.
  #515  
Old 09-08-2016, 03:43 PM
Spice Weasel is offline
Guest
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Michigan
Posts: 16,870
Also, Slacker, you didn't answer my question:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spice Weasel View Post
Okay, so just so I have this straight... if someone at work grabs my tits, I'm obligated to report it to the police but I'm obligated not to tell my employer?
I'm curious if the fact that I work for a sexual assault and domestic violence center changes your view of my obligation to my coworkers and our clients.
  #516  
Old 09-08-2016, 03:44 PM
Manda JO is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Posts: 11,406
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
Five women reporting it is far different. The police and prosecutors will (or should) think so too. This was a key part of my point earlier on why you should report things to the police even if your one report will not result in a successful prosecution. Either it will add to the total mass of evidence later, or will dissuade the attacker from doing it again, knowing that the protestations of innocence ring much more hollow the second or especially the fifth time.
But by your logic we can never get to five, because no one is allowed to speak to anyone except the cops.
  #517  
Old 09-08-2016, 03:51 PM
Manda JO is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Posts: 11,406
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steophan View Post
Why? Because you could be falsely accused of a crime one day, that's why. It's understandable that you don't care about that particular individual, but you should care about the principle of not condemning people without proof, if not for ethical reasons then for selfish ones.
It's not condemning. I don't have the power to put people in jail, or to compel others to believe me. I am in individual relating my experiences. How is that wrong?


Like, seriously, your neighbor gets drunk and punches you in the face. You can't prove it. Do you really think it's immoral to tell people at work how you got a black eye?
  #518  
Old 09-08-2016, 03:53 PM
JRDelirious is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Displaced
Posts: 15,909
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spice Weasel View Post
And hey, let's not confuse the law with everyday life. i wouldn't want my abuser to go to prison without the evidence to convict him. That's a legal standard I respect.



Am I going to post flyers all over his neighborhood about what he did to me? You can bet I've fantasized about it, but no. I'm not that vindictive.



Am I going to bend over backward to protect his reputation? Hell no.

Sounds good to me. It's up to the rest of us in society to weigh the credence we give you (and him) and it's on us, not on you, what WE do (or fail to) about it. You should not be compelled to protect him when you are certain of your claim.
  #519  
Old 09-08-2016, 04:06 PM
Acsenray is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 36,132

Stupid Privileged White Kid Gets 6 Months for Rape, Father describes it as "20 minutes of action"


But we are being told in this thread that victims are obligated to keep quiet, and if they don't keep quiet, the people they tell who have power over their environments are obligated not to act, unless there's a criminal conviction.

I say again that this is not the purpose of the justice system. It is not there to preempt all social actions against someone violating social norms. It's not there to replace our individual judgments about people in our social groups.
__________________
*I'm experimenting with E, em, and es and emself as pronouns that do not indicate any specific gender nor exclude any specific gender.

Last edited by Acsenray; 09-08-2016 at 04:07 PM.
  #520  
Old 09-08-2016, 04:34 PM
Dangerosa is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Twin Cities, Minnesota
Posts: 22,539
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steophan View Post
They should do so, of course, but they should do so in a way that doesn't harm either the accused or the accuser. Ensuring that they do not work in close proximity, ensuring there's always more than two people about, and so on.

But if, after a thorough investigation, there truly is no evidence beyond someone's word that something happened, then in any professional situation people should act as though the accused is innocent.

A policy that no worker should have to be alone with someone they don't wish to be with would be one response to this, as it doesn't require anyone being accused of anything.


I've spent most of my life in big corporations - even with hundreds of positions, it isn't easy to separate two people without career consequences for one of them. Say I'm a project manager on a high profile project. My lead developer makes a bunch of very inappropriate comments. To separate us, one of us will have to take a less prestigious assignment - one of us will take a career hit. And the project - either way - will take a hit on delivery. Who takes the career hit?
  #521  
Old 09-08-2016, 04:57 PM
Steophan is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 9,019
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dangerosa View Post
I've spent most of my life in big corporations - even with hundreds of positions, it isn't easy to separate two people without career consequences for one of them. Say I'm a project manager on a high profile project. My lead developer makes a bunch of very inappropriate comments. To separate us, one of us will have to take a less prestigious assignment - one of us will take a career hit. And the project - either way - will take a hit on delivery. Who takes the career hit?
None of this stuff is easy, but this seems to be the only fair way to do things while the investigation is ongoing. But you state as fact that he made some inappropriate comments, so presumably you have the proof and can back it up. Otherwise, my second option, of ensuring you are never alone together, would mean that either he wouldn't do it again or you'd have corroboration if he did.

But, unfortunately, bad shit happens to people and it can fuck up their careers. Sometimes it's someone's fault, sometimes it isn't. I don't have an answer to that, but I still don't believe that it's right to punish people on the basis of uncorroborated accusations.
  #522  
Old 09-08-2016, 05:03 PM
Acsenray is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 36,132

Stupid Privileged White Kid Gets 6 Months for Rape, Father describes it as "20 minutes of action"


Quote:
Originally Posted by Dangerosa View Post
And the project - either way - will take a hit on delivery. Who takes the career hit?

I know what I would say. You talk to the employees and make the hard decision about whom you believe more.

But I have a feeling that the person you're asking might have a different idea.

Because apparently being accused of sexual misconduct is an injustice that should be protected from by all means necessary.

However, being the victim of sexual misconduct is just a fact if life. And it's more important to keep your mouth shut rather than harm anyone's reputation.

I'll have to say, this attitude is not new. After all, for much of recent human history—and currently still in some countries around the world—victims of rape are far more harshly punished if they speak up than actual rapists are. I just was under the impression that we were starting to leave this behind us.
__________________
*I'm experimenting with E, em, and es and emself as pronouns that do not indicate any specific gender nor exclude any specific gender.

Last edited by Acsenray; 09-08-2016 at 05:04 PM.
  #523  
Old 09-08-2016, 05:10 PM
Manda JO is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Posts: 11,406
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steophan View Post
None of this stuff is easy, but this seems to be the only fair way to do things while the investigation is ongoing. But you state as fact that he made some inappropriate comments, so presumably you have the proof and can back it up. Otherwise, my second option, of ensuring you are never alone together, would mean that either he wouldn't do it again or you'd have corroboration if he did.

But, unfortunately, bad shit happens to people and it can fuck up their careers. Sometimes it's someone's fault, sometimes it isn't. I don't have an answer to that, but I still don't believe that it's right to punish people on the basis of uncorroborated accusations.
Why is it less wrong to punish someone credible just because they don't have evidence?
  #524  
Old 09-08-2016, 05:24 PM
Spice Weasel is offline
Guest
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Michigan
Posts: 16,870
This ''victims of crime should keep their mouth shut'' thing isn't even an ethical argument anymore, it's become an issue of reason, and it been demonstrated with multiple proposed scenarios to be logically inconsistent. It is blown to smithereens by any attempt to apply it to the real world. ''Oh, um, gee, these are hard cases,'' ''Oh, well, I don't have all the answers...'' Welcome to the real world, where context is everything and hard decisions must be made and someone always gets the short end of the stick. You want to always give the victim the short end of the stick, regardless of the circumstances. We're just supposed to suck it up and deal because being raped is a fact of life, but being falsely accused of a crime is a special exception to how terrible the world is allowed to be. What irrational bullshit.

Nobody in the world would get the shit beat out of them by someone they know and not tell everybody ''Can you believe what that asshole did to me?" just because there were no witnesses. And if it was your wife getting raped, you'd be fantasizing about taking a length of rebar to that fucker's head, not asking her to provide corroborating evidence lest she ruin her rapist's reputation. Give me a break.
  #525  
Old 09-08-2016, 05:24 PM
Dangerosa is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Twin Cities, Minnesota
Posts: 22,539
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steophan View Post
None of this stuff is easy, but this seems to be the only fair way to do things while the investigation is ongoing. But you state as fact that he made some inappropriate comments, so presumably you have the proof and can back it up. Otherwise, my second option, of ensuring you are never alone together, would mean that either he wouldn't do it again or you'd have corroboration if he did.

But, unfortunately, bad shit happens to people and it can fuck up their careers. Sometimes it's someone's fault, sometimes it isn't. I don't have an answer to that, but I still don't believe that it's right to punish people on the basis of uncorroborated accusations.
Why does a woman have proof of inappropriate comments? People engaging in serious harassment aren't stupid enough to say the bad stuff with an audience. No, they wait until they need to come over to talk to you about something, then stick in in while no one else is paying attention. Or they are just fine for months, then you are out of town at a conference together and its like you don't even know the asshole.

What you are likely to get from witnesses is "yeah, Joe can be kind of a jerk, but I've never seen him step over the line."

If a woman has been very on the ball, she's documented what was said, when and where - but its going to be a journal of her experiences - easily written off as faked if people choose not to believe her.
  #526  
Old 09-08-2016, 05:29 PM
Acsenray is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 36,132

Stupid Privileged White Kid Gets 6 Months for Rape, Father describes it as "20 minutes of action"


An accusation is evidence. That's how it works in the law. Why is an accusation of sexual misconduct suddenly so special that we should be obligated to ignore it? And why in the case of accusations of sexual misconduct do we all have to suddenly treat our normal lives like we are in a court of law?

This idea of "corroboration" is laughable for a type of misconduct that often takes place in private. By the way, Shariah law requires that an accusation of rape by a woman must be supported by the testimony of four male eyewitnesses. Otherwise she might just be prosecuted for adultery. Sound familiar?
__________________
*I'm experimenting with E, em, and es and emself as pronouns that do not indicate any specific gender nor exclude any specific gender.

Last edited by Acsenray; 09-08-2016 at 05:31 PM.
  #527  
Old 09-08-2016, 05:32 PM
Spice Weasel is offline
Guest
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Michigan
Posts: 16,870
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dangerosa View Post
Why does a woman have proof of inappropriate comments? People engaging in serious harassment aren't stupid enough to say the bad stuff with an audience. No, they wait until they need to come over to talk to you about something, then stick in in while no one else is paying attention. Or they are just fine for months, then you are out of town at a conference together and its like you don't even know the asshole.
Don't forget the part where the fact that you chose to continue working there is evidence that nothing all that bad really happened and is proof that you are a lying whore. If you really felt so threatened by that person you would have found another job. No rational person would put her career ahead of her perceived safety.

That's really what this all boils down to, isn't it? Rape is special because women are lying whores.
  #528  
Old 09-08-2016, 05:42 PM
Manda JO is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Posts: 11,406
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spice Weasel View Post
Don't forget the part where the fact that you chose to continue working there is evidence that nothing all that bad really happened and is proof that you are a lying whore. If you really felt so threatened by that person you would have found another job. No rational person would put her career ahead of her perceived safety.

That's really what this all boils down to, isn't it? Rape is special because women are lying whores.
And because a bad thing that might just possibly happen to me even if I am a good person is a Travesty but a bad thing that almost certainly won't happen to me is something that people just have to live with.
  #529  
Old 09-08-2016, 05:43 PM
Chimera is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: In the Dreaming
Posts: 24,689
I dunno, this sounds to me like more of the same "keep your mouth shut when bad things happen to you, because no one wants to hear it and they'll just think bad of you for being the victim."

Fucking Tone Policing to use a modern term. "you sound like a whiner" "victims are losers" "you're making me uncomfortable".

Kinda like when my previous boss would be a complete ass, and make very irresponsible or unacceptable statements to me, most of them couched in stories or oblique references so he could claim he never said what I heard and he certainly meant. Before he left, he was a fucking HERO and no one would speak ill of him, and they certainly didn't want to hear my experiences with him. Months after he left, the floodgates opened and I heard how much of an asshole he was and how he was regularly openly admonished in management meetings for his asshattery.

But yeah, same basic thing. Shut up and take it. Stop whining. Life sucks, it's your turn, just be a man and put up with it.

Lots of bad shit happens in this world because we try so hard to tell people NOT to speak up about it. How long was Cosby abusing people? Yeah, because women were told to shut up, they wouldn't be believed, they would be attacked for it. How long did Sandusky get away with what he did? How long did Jimmy Saville get away with it? Well, just like my boss, they had people supporting them on high and allowing them to get away with it, and they were surrounded and protected by people telling the victims to shut up.
  #530  
Old 09-08-2016, 05:52 PM
Steophan is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 9,019
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acsenray View Post
An accusation is evidence. That's how it works in the law. Why is an accusation of sexual misconduct suddenly so special that we should be obligated to ignore it? And why in the case of accusations of sexual misconduct do we all have to suddenly treat our normal lives like we are in a court of law?

This idea of "corroboration" is laughable for a type of misconduct that often takes place in private. By the way, Shariah law requires that an accusation of rape by a woman must be supported by the testimony of four male eyewitnesses. Otherwise she might just be prosecuted for adultery. Sound familiar?
An accusation is evidence, so is a denial by the accused - it's evidence he hasn't done what he's accused of. If we don't give them equal weight, what's to stop me getting anyone I don't like, or who is standing in the way of my promotion, or whatever, sacked by simply accusing them of saying something inappropriate?

An accusation is the beginning of a process, not the end of it. All an accusation should do is start an investigation, whether that's in a criminal or civil court or in your day to day life. Are you seriously telling me you'd believe anything anyone said without question, to the point of cutting friends or family members out of your life, sacking your employees, denying students an education, without any sort of check to see if it's even remotely plausible?

As for the Sharia law bollocks, in every other legal system you need actual proof to convict someone of rape, not just an accusation. And that's the way it should be, and hopefully the way it will stay.
  #531  
Old 09-08-2016, 05:52 PM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 12,343
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spice Weasel View Post
That's really what this all boils down to, isn't it? Rape is special because women are lying whores.
Jesus fucking Christ. I wanted to leave my participation in this thread at the point where I said "/thread". But you are offering a perfect illustration of how the internet mob can tar and feather and defame someone whether they stand up for themselves or not, but especially if they don't.

So no, it has nothing to do with any of the bullshit you are spewing. My answer would be the same if two straight white guys came back from sharing a hotel room on a business trip and one of them said the other had stolen money out of his wallet while he was in the shower. One of them is guilty of something bad; but absent any corroboration, there is no way of knowing whether it is lying and trying to frame someone, or stealing money. And it would be wrong to treat either of them as less than completely aboveboard as long as that is the case.

Last edited by SlackerInc; 09-08-2016 at 05:55 PM.
  #532  
Old 09-08-2016, 05:57 PM
Steophan is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 9,019
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spice Weasel View Post
That's really what this all boils down to, isn't it? Rape is special because women are lying whores.
No, the point is that rape isn't special, at least from a legal perspective, and shouldn't be treated differently to other crimes. The same levels of proof should be required for a rape accusation as for one of theft, or physical assault, or any other crime. That goes for sacking someone due to it as well.

People - men as well as women - lie all the fucking time, about minor things and incredibly serious things, for any reason or for none at all. We know for a fact that some people - again, men and women - have lied about being raped. That's why any accusation needs to be investigated, and some evidence beyond just the accusation found, before any action is taken against the suspect.
  #533  
Old 09-08-2016, 06:03 PM
Spice Weasel is offline
Guest
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Michigan
Posts: 16,870
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acsenray View Post
I'll have to say, this attitude is not new. After all, for much of recent human history—and currently still in some countries around the world—victims of rape are far more harshly punished if they speak up than actual rapists are. I just was under the impression that we were starting to leave this behind us.
Some of us are. Change is happening. Times like this it means everything in the world to have allies. So, thanks.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chimera
Well, just like my boss, they had people supporting them on high and allowing them to get away with it, and they were surrounded and protected by people telling the victims to shut up.
People don't like to deal with victimization because it puts the lie to their belief that it's possible to be in a situation where you're totally helpless to prevent yourself from harm. If I'm being really cynical, the true motive is probably because it messes with their social obligations. People don't like conflict, and victimization immediately introduces a conflict into any social setting. When the victim disturbs the peace, they are in essence ruining all of the old, comfortable dynamics. I've had a lot of time to think about this.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Slacker
Jesus fucking Christ. I wanted to leave my participation in this thread at the point where I said "/thread". But you are offering a perfect illustration of how the internet mob can tar and feather and defame someone whether they stand up for themselves or not, but especially if they don't.
There's no internet mob here, there are three or four people disagreeing with you, and you getting really angry and defensive about it. ''Women are lying whores'' is a belief that impacts victims of rape and sexual abuse on a regular basis, so it is relevant to the conversation. If the shoe doesn't fit, don't wear it.

Since you've come back into the thread, would you care to address the question I've now asked you twice?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steophan
People - men as well as women - lie all the fucking time, about minor things and incredibly serious things, for any reason or for none at all. We know for a fact that some people - again, men and women - have lied about being raped. That's why any accusation needs to be investigated, and some evidence beyond just the accusation found, before any action is taken against the suspect.
Again, we are talking about two completely different things. That is, the right of a victim of a crime to talk about it vs. the right of a person to make up their own damned mind about what happened. I don't see any conflict there, but apparently you do.
  #534  
Old 09-08-2016, 06:05 PM
Steophan is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 9,019
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
So no, it has nothing to do with any of the bullshit you are spewing. My answer would be the same if two straight white guys came back from sharing a hotel room on a business trip and one of them said the other had stolen money out of his wallet while he was in the shower. One of them is guilty of something bad; but absent any corroboration, there is no way of knowing whether it is lying and trying to frame someone, or stealing money. And it would be wrong to treat either of them as less than completely aboveboard as long as that is the case.
Something similar to that happened to me, as it happens, except it was a former housemate who still had a key rather than in a hotel. Came into my room and stole some money, and I'm absolutely certain it was him. Of course I can't prove it, the police investigated and saw there was no actual evidence, and told me that unless they caught him that day with money in his pocket he couldn't explain there was nothing that could be done. I agreed with them, of course.

Now, people that know both of us will know he's a habitual criminal and I'm not, and be able to decide who to believe. Certainly my landlord believed me, and accepted why I didn't have the rent that month (and we arranged it so I wouldn't be paying cash from then onwards), but that's not the point.

The police also told me that one reason they don't automatically believe every accusation like that is because plenty of people will spend their rent money then lie that it was stolen, and there's no reason that anyone who doesn't know me shouldn't think that's a possibility.
  #535  
Old 09-08-2016, 06:07 PM
Manda JO is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Posts: 11,406
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steophan View Post
No, the point is that rape isn't special, at least from a legal perspective, and shouldn't be treated differently to other crimes. The same levels of proof should be required for a rape accusation as for one of theft, or physical assault, or any other crime. That goes for sacking someone due to it as well.

People - men as well as women - lie all the fucking time, about minor things and incredibly serious things, for any reason or for none at all. We know for a fact that some people - again, men and women - have lied about being raped. That's why any accusation needs to be investigated, and some evidence beyond just the accusation found, before any action is taken against the suspect.
Legal action, sure. Some investigation, sure. But if I have a trusted employee who has worked for me for years without a complaint and whose judgment and honestly have been demonstrated on many occasions come to me with a perfectly plausible complaint about a new guy? I'm going to believe her, and fire him.

Slacker is arguing that I can't take any action at all unless and until there is enough evidence to convict in a criminal court, and in fact my trusted employee is a bad person for telling anyone about the assault if she can't prove it.

Slacker, you still haven't answered the question--if my co-worker grabs my boobs, am I morally obligated to go to the cops but also morally obligated NOT to tell my employer?
  #536  
Old 09-08-2016, 06:08 PM
Spice Weasel is offline
Guest
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Michigan
Posts: 16,870
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steophan View Post
Something similar to that happened to me, as it happens, except it was a former housemate who still had a key rather than in a hotel. Came into my room and stole some money, and I'm absolutely certain it was him. Of course I can't prove it, the police investigated and saw there was no actual evidence, and told me that unless they caught him that day with money in his pocket he couldn't explain there was nothing that could be done. I agreed with them, of course.

Now, people that know both of us will know he's a habitual criminal and I'm not, and be able to decide who to believe. Certainly my landlord believed me, and accepted why I didn't have the rent that month (and we arranged it so I wouldn't be paying cash from then onwards), but that's not the point.
But SlackerInc is arguing you shouldn't have told anybody who knew him and you shouldn't have told your landlord. You should only have told the police. You have no right to tell anybody anything that might damage his reputation without evidence that will prove him guilty in a court of law.
  #537  
Old 09-08-2016, 06:10 PM
Steophan is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 9,019
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spice Weasel View Post
Again, we are talking about two completely different things. That is, the right of a victim of a crime to talk about it vs. the right of a person to make up their own damned mind about what happened. I don't see any conflict there, but apparently you do.
You have repeatedly denied that people should make up their own minds about what happened, rather saying that people should just believe you and not him.
  #538  
Old 09-08-2016, 06:10 PM
Manda JO is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Posts: 11,406
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steophan View Post
Something similar to that happened to me, as it happens, except it was a former housemate who still had a key rather than in a hotel. Came into my room and stole some money, and I'm absolutely certain it was him. Of course I can't prove it, the police investigated and saw there was no actual evidence, and told me that unless they caught him that day with money in his pocket he couldn't explain there was nothing that could be done. I agreed with them, of course.

Now, people that know both of us will know he's a habitual criminal and I'm not, and be able to decide who to believe. Certainly my landlord believed me, and accepted why I didn't have the rent that month (and we arranged it so I wouldn't be paying cash from then onwards), but that's not the point.
Slacker says you're not allowed to voice what happened to the people who know both of you. That even mentioning that it happened will unfairly prejudice them against him and he can't defend himself.

Or at least, that's what he'd say if he raped you. I don't know if you are allowed to mention that someone is a thief.
  #539  
Old 09-08-2016, 06:12 PM
Spice Weasel is offline
Guest
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Michigan
Posts: 16,870
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steophan View Post
You have repeatedly denied that people should make up their own minds about what happened, rather saying that people should just believe you and not him.
Is that what you got out of this?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spiece Weasel
You people, on the outside, having to make decisions about who to believe, that's your own problem. Feel free to consider things like a) overall credibility of person making the claim, or b) corroborating evidence. I don't care. If you were my mother and you knew, and you looked the other way, and then you punished me for it, you can go straight to hell. If you were my grandmother and you didn't take me at my word, you can go straight to hell. My abuser's business associate? Stranger off the street? Person who doesn't know either of us? I don't give a fuck, though I'm definitely not inviting anyone over to Sunday dinner who can't take me at my word. I have already accepted that injustice is a permanent part of this experience.
  #540  
Old 09-08-2016, 06:13 PM
Steophan is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 9,019
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manda JO View Post
Legal action, sure. Some investigation, sure. But if I have a trusted employee who has worked for me for years without a complaint and whose judgment and honestly have been demonstrated on many occasions come to me with a perfectly plausible complaint about a new guy? I'm going to believe her, and fire him.
Then you are a terrible employer, and certainly where I live that would be illegal. In most civilised places, except some American states, you can't fire someone without a reason like that.
  #541  
Old 09-08-2016, 06:14 PM
Spice Weasel is offline
Guest
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Michigan
Posts: 16,870
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steophan View Post
Then you are a terrible employer, and certainly where I live that would be illegal. In most civilised places, except some American states, you can't fire someone without a reason like that.
In the state I work you can fire someone for any reason at all (that's not explicitly protected under non-discrimination laws.)

Last edited by Spice Weasel; 09-08-2016 at 06:14 PM.
  #542  
Old 09-08-2016, 06:20 PM
Steophan is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 9,019
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spice Weasel View Post
In the state I work you can fire someone for any reason at all (that's not explicitly protected under non-discrimination laws.)
That's not the case in most other places. I'm aware that plenty of American states don't bother protecting employees. I can't help but wonder if that leads to the sort of attitude that it's fine to damage or destroy someone's life in other ways with an unfounded accusation.
  #543  
Old 09-08-2016, 06:21 PM
Spice Weasel is offline
Guest
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Michigan
Posts: 16,870
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steophan View Post
That's not the case in most other places. I'm aware that plenty of American states don't bother protecting employees. I can't help but wonder if that leads to the sort of attitude that it's fine to damage or destroy someone's life in other ways with an unfounded accusation.
Speaking of unfounded accusations, will you take back yours, since I just provided evidence against it?
  #544  
Old 09-08-2016, 06:27 PM
Steophan is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 9,019
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manda JO View Post
Slacker says you're not allowed to voice what happened to the people who know both of you. That even mentioning that it happened will unfairly prejudice them against him and he can't defend himself.

Or at least, that's what he'd say if he raped you. I don't know if you are allowed to mention that someone is a thief.
He quite clearly said exactly the opposite of this, saying (and I'm paraphrasing because I can't be bothered to find the quote) that it's not a problem to talk to those close to you as long as they're not going to widely publicise the name of the accused, and that it's the wide, public spreading of an unsupported accusation that's the problem.

Were it possible, I'd prefer that defendants remained anonymous until conviction, let alone with simply an accusation, but that would cause too many other problems and I don't see ways round them.

However, I believe that "innocent until proven guilty" is a good rule in general, as long as it's recognised that there are greatly varying standards of proof required in different situations. With something like leaving your kids with a babysitter requiring the least amount of evidence that the sitter is a paedophile, and sending him to prison needing the most. And other things like social interaction, employment, and so on requiring other amounts.
  #545  
Old 09-08-2016, 06:27 PM
Dangerosa is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Twin Cities, Minnesota
Posts: 22,539
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manda JO View Post
And because a bad thing that might just possibly happen to me even if I am a good person is a Travesty but a bad thing that almost certainly won't happen to me is something that people just have to live with.
Plus the belief that bad things don't happen to good people. Get cancer "did you smoke? Have an abortion? Eat poorly? Carry too much weight?" Get raped - "Were you drinking? How were you dressed? Were you flirting?" Your kid gets abducted or eaten by an alligator "You weren't watching him?" "Why did you let him go off on his own?" At a nightclub and get shot "well, gay...." Hurricane hits "God is punishing you for being bad."
  #546  
Old 09-08-2016, 06:34 PM
Steophan is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 9,019
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spice Weasel View Post
Speaking of unfounded accusations, will you take back yours, since I just provided evidence against it?
Are you not in America? I specifically said in my post you quoted that some American states allow it. I don't know of anywhere else in the first world that would allow it.

Where I live, in the UK, the most that could happen is that you could be suspended with full pay while an investigation is carried out, and if someone was (or believed they were) unfairly sacked it would go to court.

If it turned out the accusation was unsupported, they would get a significant amount of money in compensation, and have the right to get their job back. I find it hard to believe that anyone thinks it's acceptable to fire someone based solely on someone else's word.

You can fire someone for no reason in their probationary period (either as defined in the contract or a statutory maximum of I think 1 year), or for not being able to do the job, or whatever, but you still can't do it for an unfair reason. So if there was a documented complaint that was dealt with simply by sacking, there could be legal problems.
  #547  
Old 09-08-2016, 06:39 PM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 12,343
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steophan View Post
That's not the case in most other places. I'm aware that plenty of American states don't bother protecting employees. I can't help but wonder if that leads to the sort of attitude that it's fine to damage or destroy someone's life in other ways with an unfounded accusation.
Ah, and here I thought we could commiserate about how horrifying it would be if these kinds of people ever get control over the American legal system, but that wouldn't affect you.
  #548  
Old 09-08-2016, 06:41 PM
Spice Weasel is offline
Guest
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Michigan
Posts: 16,870
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steophan
However, I believe that "innocent until proven guilty" is a good rule in general, as long as it's recognised that there are greatly varying standards of proof required in different situations. With something like leaving your kids with a babysitter requiring the least amount of evidence that the sitter is a paedophile, and sending him to prison needing the most. And other things like social interaction, employment, and so on requiring other amounts.
I agree with all of this. I agree the media/mob justice approach is terrible. I even agree the defendant shouldn't be named to the media until a conviction is made. I totally agree with the legal standards and I totally recognize that standards change according to context. That is what I have been saying all along and what SlackerInc. is arguing against. In his view there is only one standard of evidence -- the legal standard -- and if you don't meet it, you have to suck it up. You acknowledge the standard of proof varies according to context. What higher standard of proof can you have than having actually experienced it?

You're being way too charitable with SlackerInc's position. It was much more extreme than you've noted. He said a victim is morally obligated to report it to the police or she is responsible for his future crimes but must take great care not to damage the perpetrator's reputation unless she can prove in a court of law what he did. He said the onus is on the victim to protect her rapist's reputation, but at the same time the onus is on her to prosecute him.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steophan
Are you not in America?
That wasn't the unfounded accusation I'm talking about. I'm talking about the one where I allegedly claimed everybody should believe me, with no evidence.

Last edited by Spice Weasel; 09-08-2016 at 06:43 PM.
  #549  
Old 09-08-2016, 06:45 PM
Dangerosa is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Twin Cities, Minnesota
Posts: 22,539
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steophan View Post
No, the point is that rape isn't special, at least from a legal perspective, and shouldn't be treated differently to other crimes. The same levels of proof should be required for a rape accusation as for one of theft, or physical assault, or any other crime. That goes for sacking someone due to it as well.

People - men as well as women - lie all the fucking time, about minor things and incredibly serious things, for any reason or for none at all. We know for a fact that some people - again, men and women - have lied about being raped. That's why any accusation needs to be investigated, and some evidence beyond just the accusation found, before any action is taken against the suspect.
Here we aren't talking about crime - in a legal sense - we are talking about unacceptable behavior and the consequences of it. We aren't talking about jail time - we are talking about "is it ok for me not to hire a guy because I know through a friend that he was let go from his last job for making inappropriate comments."

I have a friend - "Sandy" who was married for a long time to "Richard" Richard was a man-whore - and cheated on Sandy a lot. Eventually, the kids were older and the indiscretions too indiscreet - and she cut him loose.

Another friend of mine - "Toni" is good friends with Sandy. Toni had a job opening that she was the manager of the hiring manager for. Richard applied.

Should Toni have hired him?

What happened was Toni did hire him - or rather the manager under Toni did and Toni kept her concerns to herself - his sex life having little to do with job performance, Richard seemed like a good candidate, and he had once - long ago - done Toni a favor. And regretted it. Because it turns out the Richard's ethical problems were somewhat greater than just cheating on his wife. The contempt for women that he displayed with his wife also played out with his female coworkers - including his boss and Toni. He didn't follow process. He risked exposing confidential data. And he was lazy. All things Toni had heard from Sandy, but she thought maybe a bitter ex-wife was exaggerating. (Toni told me "I think Sandy has been overly kind to Richard in not trashing him nearly as much as he deserves.")

Another story. I was working in IT operations and we had a resume come across my desk from a guy who had most recently been working with a bunch of people I'd worked with at a prior job. He and I didn't cross, but my friends were still there. So I picked up the phone. "Hey, I have Jeff's resume in front of me....what do you think?" "Well, we didn't fire Jeff, but we made it pretty clear he should leave - he was falsifying the data on backups - turns out, they weren't running, but Jeff was logging that they were and not fixing the problem." (I took this to mean that they put him on a PIP with the intent of firing him at the end of 30 or 60 days and he said "screw it, I'm outta here.") We chose not to interview him. Now, maybe the buddy I called just really didn't like Jeff and it was all a lie to get some sort of revenge. But who am I going to trust - my buddy or a guy I've never met. And the downside of hiring someone who doesn't do his work and falsifies his process results is that the job doesn't get done - and that's my problem, I'm his boss.
  #550  
Old 09-08-2016, 06:48 PM
Spice Weasel is offline
Guest
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Michigan
Posts: 16,870
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
Ah, and here I thought we could commiserate about how horrifying it would be if these kinds of people ever get control over the American legal system, but that wouldn't affect you.
Once more, with feeling: We're not talking about the law.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spice Weasel
And hey, let's not confuse the law with everyday life. I wouldn't want my abuser to go to prison without the evidence to convict him. That's a legal standard I respect.

Am I going to post flyers all over his neighborhood about what he did to me? You can bet I've fantasized about it, but no. I'm not that vindictive.

Am I going to bend over backward to protect his reputation? Hell no.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:43 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017