That may be why some people in the thread have decided to wait until a court judgment comes out. There are people in the thread who are asking, no, demanding that people make a judgment. But in order to do that, some people feel they would have to look at the stories of the women to see if they feel they’re credible. Since most people aren’t experts in rape psychology, they would have to look at the statements of the women from the filter of their own experience. Since everyone’s experience with that subject differs, people’s opinions on what’s reasonable in that situation differs as well.
So because a man committed a felony of making a false police report, consciously and deliberately, you have come to the conclusion that in a different case more than a dozen women are lying and every eyewitness report is a conscious and deliberate lie. Now you don’t tell us why you are certain that the man came to your place of work and wrote down your license number, but you do present it as a certainty. Maybe he confessed. But it sounds like the police actually did there job in this instance. As unpleasant for you as it was. I’m guessing that you are white in skin color. I’m also guessing that the man confessed to enhancing his report by framing you. I hope he served time for it. On the other hand, maybe this is a story made up entirely by you because you really can’t believe anything an eyewitness says according to you. It isn’t evidence. If you didn’t commit the crime (if it actually occurred), you definitely learned the wrong lesson. The lesson isn’t that eyewitness testimony is of zero value, it is that it must be taken in context with all of the evidence. And then weighed, including the credibility of each witness.
So basically you’re saying that someone is a bad person if they don’t believe what you believe when you believe it?
At the point you have enough information to satisfy yourself that Bill Cosby is a rapist, everyone else should also arrive at that same conclusion. When you decide that the information (that you know) changes, they should change their opinion at the same time.
Not only does the totality of the information available on this subject change, no one can know what it is. Almost everyone has read different accounts from different sources. People making conclusions on different pieces of information from different sources and then applying different assumptions leads to the conversation sounding like the telephone game at times.
Expecting everyone to come to the same conclusions at the same time, and demonizing them if they don’t, doesn’t seem very constructive to me.
First, I’ll say that I don’t think you have the totality of the information. Then I’ll say that as I’ve looked at the women’s stories and how they were obtained from sources I could find, I have more questions than answers about what happened. I’ve thought about detailing my doubts, but I’m still weighing if it’s worth it in a thread where people are demonizing people for expressing their doubts.
That’s a pretty weaselly answer. I hope you’re never in that situation or a similar one. But I set that question up to be subjective, so I’ll have to take you at your word that you wouldn’t believe her.
Some of the most horrible crimes in human history were never tried in court. That means they didn’t happen?
no, the difference between this and mob justice is that in the case of mob justice, an actual mob attacks and seizes someone and does something to him.
… No celebrity would do that in the Green Room!
In cases of rape, very commonly all you have is believing one side or the other. Insisting that something more has to be there in order to prove tape really just means that you have accepted rape as a routine element of our society and that the vast majority of rapists will get away with it.
No, there is a better position, in which you believe accusations of tape when the words and context support their credibility. That is not a much, much worse alternative.
[QUOTE=Heffalump and Roo]
That may be why some people in the thread have decided to wait until a court judgment comes out. There are people in the thread who are asking, no, demanding that people make a judgment. But in order to do that, some people feel they would have to look at the stories of the women to see if they feel they’re credible. Since most people aren’t experts in rape psychology, they would have to look at the statements of the women from the filter of their own experience. Since everyone’s experience with that subject differs, people’s opinions on what’s reasonable in that situation differs as well.
[/QUOTE]
I’m not really sure why some feel a judgment is mandated here. But for those that do, I think some people view this as a choice between ‘‘Bill Cosby is definitely a rapist’’ or ‘‘All these women are definitely lying whores.’’ I see a lot of grey area between. I feel like we can choose not to condemn Mr. Cosby while at the same time not propagate falsehoods about rape or rape psychology.
‘‘Everyone should be innocent until proven guilty’’ does not mandate the ‘‘women are lying whores’’ part. It’s totally fine to just say, ‘‘Let’s wait and see what the court thinks.’’
It’s not totally fine to say, ''Oh, these women are probably lying because [insert ridiculous theories and sexist notions about rape]"
I’ve already seen at least one person in the IMHO thread claim that Bill Cosby gets too much ass to need to rape women.
kstarnes thinks a woman can’t be forced to give a hand job, apparently.
SA (I think) finds it implausible that a woman would return to her rapist. Given that my Mom married hers, I find that one particularly difficult to let go.
The problem is, when people say, ‘‘No, that’s not an accurate thing about rape’’ or, ‘‘No, that’s actually a really misogynist way of looking at it,’’ others are interpreting that backlash as ‘‘No see Bill Cosby is totally a rapist.’’
I’m fighting for a little nuance in perspective here but fully acknowledge that may be an uphill battle.
Your heartfelt post is truly appreciated. I feel it necessary to clarify that at the time I reported it, I was a legally emancipated minor living in a different household and the abuse was no longer happening. I mistakenly understood that in these circumstances the counselor would not be mandated to report (I actually did some research prior to talking to my counselor.)
I was wrong because the accused had children in his custody, I had two younger stepsisters and a stepbrother. I was never permitted to see them again.
At any rate, I felt I was misled by the counselor. I still feel that way. I’ll spare you my mandated reporting rant, but my brief foray into the study of child welfare policy in grad school has left me with the impression that from a pure ‘‘prevention of harm’’ perspective, mandated reporting is really not all it’s cracked up to be.
In a situation in which it is unlikely that a court will ever rule, it’s really just a dodge.
So… what should we do? What’s our solution? I’m not going to call someone a rapist when the only evidence we have is someone’s word. That’s not good enough for me. People compare this to the OJ case, but the main issue there is that we had good evidence that he murdered his wife, and the court botched the case. This kind of thing happens. Here, it really is he-says-she-says. That’s not god enough for me, and it shouldn’t be good enough for you. But at the same time, rape just happens to be obnoxiously difficult to prosecute and deal with. So what do we do? How can we resolve this problem? I’d rather see the guilty walk free than the innocent imprisoned. That’s the core message of all western legal systems and one I hold in high regard. Do you have a better solution?
We are not in court. We are not prosecuting Cosby for a crime. So far no one is and it is very unlikely that any court of law will do so.
So every word you say about prosecution and walking free and imprisonment and legal systems is irrelevant.
If you can manage to recast your question in a way that reflects this reality then I can try to answer it.
What we are left with might be a difficult question but at least we will be considering the right one and not a false question about the law and criminal prosecution.
So the question is -
What’s the solution here?
Rape / sexual assault claims deserve to be taken seriously, and it doesn’t seem right to simply dismiss them.
At the same time, it also doesn’t feel “fair” to vilify Cosby on the basis of what we have heard so far - on accusations of what happened a long time ago that are not being rigorously examined, and on something that he really doesn’t have a good right of reply*
I think the truth of the matter is probably someone in the middle - that he did some pretty scummy things, that he was probably a bully and some of the sex he had was highly questionable - does this make him a 16 time rapist? There’s not enough evidence now, and there is not likely to be enough to conclude this.
- How do you go about refuting these allegations, that are never going to see the inside of a courtroom? Even were he able to “prove” his innocence (a near impossibility) in 75%, for the 25% for which he doesn’t have good “defence” will then be taken as true…he can’t win.
Okay.
Let’s say a person accuses another of raping them, but does not go through legal channels and provides no evidence that it took place, let alone that it was non-consensual if it did. The accused denies this.
How should I react to this? What action should I take? What if the accused is my friend, or family member? How should people in general react? Personally, I think that if I was called a rapist by people simply because someone accused me of raping them, I’d get a bit mad. And if this started to cause problems in my day-to-day life, I’d start considering suing someone.
I realize that this is a bit of a special case - Cosby is famous, rich, old, and unlikely to suffer to any substantial degree from these accusations. But the principle is what bugs me. I cannot rationally condemn this person based solely on accusations.
The short answer is that it’s wrong to try to force a hard, “objective” standard in cases like this.
It’s wrong to say “We should never decide that X is a rapist based only on the word of an alleged rape victim.”
It’s also wrong to say “We should always accept as true any allegation of rape.”
You have to take into account the subjective circumstances.
Who is the accused? What is his history? Who are the accusers? Individually do their accusations seem credible? Taken as a whole do the accusations seem credible? What do we generally know about the context? (Show business, powerful men, the commonality of sexual assault in our society)
Add it all up, in toto. You can’t look for a smoking gun because sexual assault is exactly the kind of bad act that is so easily perpetuated because so often there are no smoking guns.
Sexual assault isn’t like murder. It’s not rare or unlikely. No matter who you are, you know multiple people who have been sexually assaulted. No matter where you work, it’s likely someone has been sexually assaulted at your workplace.
You just have to use your judgment to balance these considerations.
It might seem unfair to call Cosby a rapist based “only on someone’s word” but it’s also unfair to dismiss as lies the word of women or men who have been sexually assaulted and hold no proof other than only their word.
It’s not just a few women or men. It’s thousands. And thousands. And thousands. In your country. In your city. At your workplace. In your school. At your home.
There’s no hard answer. I’m afraid that’s how the real world is.
“Misogynist” is a pejorative label. If you’re looking to change people’s nuance in perspective, it might help not to insult them while you’re doing it.
I don’t sense that much of this is about getting people to understand their perspective. Largely, it looks to me like there are some people who want to punish a few people who they don’t like under the guise of a topic that allows them to appear self-righteous. I’m not really opposed to that, but the broad brushing is tarring quite a few more people.
That’s a topic I’ve been thinking about lately, so if you’re ever interested in sharing, I’d be interested to read about it.
What’s at stake if someone chooses not to decide, besides getting insulted by you?
What is at stake is that we continue to live in a society in which rape and other forms of sexual assault are common and the perpetrators escape—not just criminal prosecution—but any consequences or censure at all.
What is at stake is that we continue to require that thousands and thousands of victims of sexual assault who have no proof other than their word to remain silent, or if they speak out to be blamed themselves or called liars or gold diggers or whatever else.
This is what people are talking about when they say we live in a rape culture.
Choosing not to decide means we continue to live in a rape culture.
I disagree. I’m willing to hear more of your arguments, but I’m not buying this one right now.
Rape is a very serious and heinous crime. It should be treated very seriously. If someone is considered a rapist, they should be dealt with severely.
If people can accuse people of rape based on an unsubstantiated story, that waters down the crime because the punishment will be less severe. If the punishment is just as severe, that puts anyone getting accused of rape at a severe disadvantage.
I’m not seeing extending the Bill Cosby case to the rest of society as an advantage. If it’s just this case that people are deciding, I don’t think it’s that important.
Why? Replace rape with almost any other crime and the problem becomes pretty clear. We just don’t do that. Accusation alone should not be enough.
Funny, several here have been called rape apologists for doing this.
Is it? What can be asserted with no evidence can be rejected with no evidence. Again, all we have is their assertion. I’m just stuck on this unfortunate point.
So… can we do anything about this other than blindly trusting women who make incredibly serious allegations?
Not implied by what I said. What I have said is that as things currently stand, there is information sufficient to make us reasonably certain Cosby is a rapist. What I have also said is that it is possible things could develop such that the information available would no longer be sufficient for that. What I have not said is that there can be no state of information that makes it reasonable for different people to have different judgments. That the present state isn’t an example of such does not imply that no state is.
Constructivity is not the only ideal in discussions like this.
I have the totality of the information available to me, and would seriously doubt that other casually-interested people who get their information from whatever comes across their various feeds online (in other words, the vast majority of people I am likely ever to discuss the issue with) have any relevantly different totalities available to them. What you’re saying here is that I’m mistaken to assume that when I’m talking to you I’m talking to someone who has basically the same sources of information as me. Maybe so! I’d definitely be wrong to draw conclusions about what you should think if that’s the case! It would actually be the case that I can learn from you. So then, please tell me what you know. Update my totality!
This statement is false. I gave a straightforward, true account. My answer was if anything hamfisted rather than weaselly. What led you to perceive it otherwise?
It is not about trust. It is about arriving at the most likely explanation for the facts.
This is what is known as “tone trolling.” (Not really a form of “trolling” by the strict definition of the term, but the phrase has come to mean what it means independently of the meaning of “troll.”) It is often undertaken as a way to downplay the stakes in a conversation, as you are doing here.
It is actually a bit of a fail as tone trolling, since it relies on an idea that “misogynist” is a pejorative. While anything can be used pejoratively, the term is a technical one with a clear definition. It would not be an insult to call some of the reasoning on offer in this thread misogynist–it would be a simple fact.
This is personalization, another tactic often used to downplay the stakes. I can’t speak for Second Stone but I myself have no idea who you guys are. I’m terrible with names. I have no like or dislike for any of you guys, and in a week I won’t even remember which of you is which. (Ahem Starving Artist excluded. It’s impossible to forget that guy.) There is no intent to “punish” here. There is the fact that we can be reasonably certain that Cosby is a rapist, and the fact that given that, trying to encourage people to withhold judgment is in fact an apologetic act on his behalf, and there is the fact that almost every argument given for this apologetic act can be seen (as Even Sven has ably documented) to be radically irrational (leading one to suspect motivated reasoning), or even downright, yes, misogynistic.
I don’t necessarily expect you to accept my categorizations of your comments as “tone trolling” and “personalizing” here and now. I certainly have not accepted such categorizations of comments I’ve made in the past “there and then.” But I have been there, and someone had to point out to me what I was doing, more than once, before I could see it and change my behavior much later, after reflection.
You do it all the time in your life for more common allegations. If anything, people are less likely to lie about tape than other mundane claims, like stealing office supplies.
An allegation of rape by a person claiming to be a victim is evidence. It’s perfectly good evidence, even in a court of law.
Whether it is good or bad evidence in a particular instance depends on the context and circumstances.
What I described above—evaluating accusations in a particular circumstance in the relevant context—is not blind trust. It’s using your judgment. And you use your judgment in that way all the time in your life.
Agreed that this is not blind trust.
If these women has said “Bill Cosby turned into an alien and used mind control rays to rape me”, I wouldn’t believe them. If they had said that Justin Bieber had raped them, I wouldn’t believe them. If one said he punched her, and another said he drugged her, and another said he threatened her kids, I would probably withhold judgement. If they had all just popped up this week, I might withhold judgement.
But we have quite a few stories showing a very believable pattern of systematically violating boundaries. This one does pass the smell test.
Do you guys really, honestly, really believe there is nothing to these stories? If God offered you a free Maserati if you guessed correctly, would you truly guess “Dude’s completely innocent, bitches be crazy”?