My “interpretation of Me Too” neglects to exist, too.
Those statistics were about “unfounded” allegations. That doesn’t mean they were false.
They can defend themselves all they want, and they can do so without denigrating the accuser. And at the same time, if they’re innocent, they can have their lawyers and investigators actually investigate and find evidence the accuser is lying. All this is possible without publicly denigrating a woman who just told their story.
I don’t care what you believe. I’m critical of actions, including public statements, that might make it harder for future victims and survivors to come forward. Believe anything you want. It’s what you say and do that matters. And feel free to say “I’m reserving judgment”, or “I’m not sure”. That doesn’t denigrate anyone.
LOL. This might “checkmate” this straw man, but not what I advocate for. Again, the accused (if innocent) can defend themselves and send out their lawyers and investigators to find proof of the truth, and all this can be done without making it harder for future victims to come forward by denigrating accusers. And if they find evidence of dishonesty, then I have no problem with them revealing that evidence.
And in all likelihood, nothing significantly bad will happen to them, no matter the truth. Right now, our society is massively tilted towards the accused, and towards abusers, and away from fairness and compassion to victims and survivors. I’m trying to tilt it to be compassionate and fair to victims and survivors. Nothing I’ve suggested puts innocent people at any more risk than exists now.
This is not a court, this is a message board. We are not obliged to uphold standards that apply to courts. Were I sworn to jury duty, I would not find Il Douche guilty, because such proof is not available. I am, however, entitled to my opinion of the slimy pustule on the butt of humanity. I can fairly say that these recent accusations have not affected my opinion.
If you’ve played chess more than casually, you would know that calling checkmate is not “Ha. Ha. I win.”
When you say it you are saying “I am confident enough in my position that I believe I have won. I ask you to judge it fairly and agree. If you do not, I agree to help you in good faith prove me wrong. If we do so I will concede.”
In the context of this debate it means I have made a complete argument which I stand behind and which was made in good faith. I ask you to acknowledge that it is true and fair and accurate. If you think it’s not, I will stop arguing for it, and instead take your side and help you prove it wrong.
I know you are more of the scream “ you cheated” throw the board in the air and storm out of the room type. But that’s what I mean when I say it.
Or something along the lines of the Black Knight, so recently disarmed. “Come back, you coward, I’ll bite your legs off!”
I agree.
(
I say “checkmate’” when I play chess and the occasion calls for it. Using the term while debating only looks pretentious.
And this?
A confident debater would never resort to such a tactic.
Ok. Show me wrong. I will work with you to understand.
Ok. If I am falsely accused and every word I say is true, could I go on the news and say:
“She is lying. She tried to extort money from me by threatening to accuse me of rape. She is housekeeper we tried to help. We talked to her and gave her a second chance when we caught her stealing. She snuck her boyfriend in and did drugs and had sex with him in front of our children when she was babysitting which is why we fired her. That is when she extorted us She is a person of low character and it is likely that she has done these kinds of things before. If you know her and have experience of her low character please come forward publicly or privately so that I can mount the strongest possible defense.”
Yeah, but I’ve seen you debate and watched you throw the table.
Prove it. Cite it, chapter and verse.
No.
These comments are not appropriate for this forum as it’s personalizing an argument. This is the 2nd note I’ve dropped for you in this thread. That’s the limit of my forbearance.
[/moderating]
NM
I just did, in the post you snipped. What I advocate for doesn’t hamper any honest media defense strategy. It might hamper the media defense strategies that rely on slut-shaming, but those are highly immoral and should be hampered.
Some of this doesn’t denigrate anyone. Some of this denigrates the accuser, but I wouldn’t have a problem with it if it was accompanied by proof. Some of this is slut-shaming and irrelevant to the accusations.
I don’t advocate for any laws restricting what the accused can say, but I think it’s wrong to denigrate an accuser without proof of dishonesty, and I think it’s extremely wrong and harmful to society to slut-shame (in general) and use slut-shaming as a defense. I also think a defense such as this could be accomplished without denigrating (without proof) or slut-shaming. If your hypothetical above is true, then it would be a remarkably easy defense – any decent lawyer and investigator wouldn’t have much trouble ferreting out proof of dishonest intent.
So, in my perfect #MeToo-frienly world, the accused can still say anything they like, but if they want to avoid risking harm to future women coming forward, they would avoid denigrating women without proof and slut-shaming entirely. If they ignore this, then IMO they ought to be criticized.
Understood.
Do you think it’s slut shaming to say she had sex in front of the kids while babysitting? The shame isn’t the sex. It’s doing it in front of the kids. It doesn’t matter though.
Can my lawyer say the same thing in front of the camera make the same points?
What about friends family and coworkers?
If I am being attacked on the internet can random strangers who don’t know me but have heard these things on tv or whatnot respond to the attackers and repeat these things?
If I knew the accuser because she had Also worked for me as a housekeeper, and she stole money from me, too? Could I come forward and say that?
If I knew her and didn’t like her is it ok for me to say what I thought about her?
Does mentioning that she waited decades before making the accusation public, is making a book tour, says that she regrets not asking for her alleged attacker’s tax returns, and thinks most people think rape is sexy, count as denigrating without proof?
Regards,
Shodan
I don’t see how anyone can reasonably advocate that a default position for any statement be belief or non-belief without examination.
Not believing someone is not the same thing as denigrating them. “I’m not convinced of your story/motive/honesty” is NOT the same thing as “You are a fucking liar.” Neither is pointing out factors that tend to confirm OR cast doubt on a position.
Burden of proof always rests with the claimant, whether the claim is, “He raped me,” or “The world is round,” or “Jesus is lord and savior.” Taking a position that someone must or should be believed based solely on the type of claim being made is not reasonable.
What if it’s true that Scylla is being extorted by a rape accuser, but he doesn’t have any proof of it? Does that mean he’s not allowed to defend himself and tell the truth that he’s being extorted by his accuser?
Then why is okay to denigrate the accused publicly without any proof of rape?
Are you of the belief that rape is only about power and not at all about sex?
I think it’s entirely possible to defend one’s self without denigrating a false accuser without proof. In the hypothetical scenario offered, the defense would be almost trivially easy; any half-decent lawyer could easily handle it.
I put forward no opinion on this – our society treats the accused just fine, in general. Much too gently, in many cases, IMO – Trump should well be drummed out of polite society, with no more chance at a public career than someone who was caught on tape bragging about child molestation. Prominent accused abusers generally suffer no significant loss, barring overwhelming evidence like against Weinstein or Cosby, whether the accusations are true or not.
Our society treats victims and survivors of sexual assault and rape like utter dog shit. That’s my focus, when it comes to this issue.