# Lying whore. **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [April 10, 2006, 10:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lying-whore/352153 "2006-04-10T22:26:47Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![The\_King\_of\_Soup](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/a87d85/32.png) [@The\_King\_of\_Soup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_King_of_Soup)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2006, 12:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lying-whore/352153/61 "2006-04-11T12:34:16Z")
**Huerta88** , when you encounter the belief, let alone the pronouncement, that a woman is a “whore” when there’s no evidence that she performs illicit sex acts for hire, it’s okay to dismiss it. Such a belief or pronouncement, unsupported by any facts, is stupid, hurtful and too often carries the implication that a victim of sexual assault precipitated the crime, or was a willing, paid participant, making the incident not a crime at all. Women are not immune to this attitude, as you can personally attest, apparently. I’ll bet your GF’s mother’s words on first hearing of the accusations were _not_ “That poor whore. I hope the men who did this get what’s coming to them.” **BabaBooey** , when you needed to insult a woman whom you believe to have lied, you grabbed the word “whore.” To say that “whore” was merely a generic insult without any connotations of sexual availability and/or poor character isn’t credible. When someone cuts you off in traffic, I’ll wager you don’t say “stupid, inconsiderate arsonist.” The word was a baseless accusation that carries specific meaning regarding the incident: namely that to have sex with a woman you’ve paid for the privilege is at worst a collaborative crime in which the woman is equally guilty, not a victim. Or is _any_ woman who annoys you a whore? Are the two concepts that closely connected in your mind? Say, **BabaBooey** , where were _you_ the night of March 13th? ---
**Author:** ![Jackmannii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackmannii/32/311_2.png) [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2006, 12:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lying-whore/352153/62 "2006-04-11T12:37:09Z")
I’m waiting until official word is out and a decision is made on whether or not to file charges, before revising my initial opinion that players were involved in something sleazy (at the very least, an unsavory coverup). I think all of you are ignoring the strongest evidence against the players, stronger even than any DNA could be. From Allan Garganus’ op-ed piece in the Sunday N.Y. Times (describing the typical state of affairs at the players’ off-campus house): _“Neighbors complained to the university to little avail. Middle-class white residents, come to ask for late-night noise reduction, were routinely cursed. The beer-can litter and the welter of S.U.V.'s suggested what went unmonitored inside the house.”_ **They drove SUVs.** What other evidence could you possibly need to show that they are fiends? ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2006, 12:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lying-whore/352153/63 "2006-04-11T12:47:31Z")
I think premature judgement abounds on both sides. _Something_ happened to the young lady and we need to get to the bottom of it. It’s possible that nobody on the team touched her. It’s possible that they did but left no evidence behind. It’s possible someone else did it. Just as it was premature for the university to cancel the rest of their season, it’s now premature to proclaim her a liar. ---
**Author:** ![SnakesCatLady](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/4af34b/32.png) [@SnakesCatLady](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SnakesCatLady)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2006, 12:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lying-whore/352153/64 "2006-04-11T12:50:01Z")
All I will add to this thread is my opinion that if the woman made up this story I hope she is prosecuted. I don’t have enough evidence to decide one way or the other yet, although the lack of DNA evidence doesn’t look good for her side. An accusation of rape is not a joke. It is especially traumatic for a woman to have to report that she has been raped. A false accusation just makes it harder on the real victims. ---
**Author:** ![Huerta88](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/82dd89/32.png) [@Huerta88](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Huerta88)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2006, 12:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lying-whore/352153/65 "2006-04-11T12:59:21Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#): > > I think premature judgement abounds on both sides. _Something_ happened to the young lady and we need to get to the bottom of it. It’s possible that nobody on the team touched her. It’s possible that they did but left no evidence behind. It’s possible someone else did it. Just as it was premature for the university to cancel the rest of their season, it’s now premature to proclaim her a liar. If by “_something_ happened” you intend to include the possibility that “nothing at all other than an overactive/diseased/spiteful imagination happened,” then you will have fairly defined the universe of possibilities sufficiently broadly so as to include what we know of, say, the real-life cases of Tawana Brawley and the Runaway Bride. Otherwise, I’m thinking that’s a form of jumping to conclusions in itself. ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2006, 1:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lying-whore/352153/66 "2006-04-11T13:10:45Z")
> [@Huerta88](#): > > If by “_something_ happened” you intend to include the possibility that “nothing at all other than an overactive/diseased/spiteful imagination happened,” then you will have fairly defined the universe of possibilities sufficiently broadly so as to include what we know of, say, the real-life cases of Tawana Brawley and the Runaway Bride. Otherwise, I’m thinking that’s a form of jumping to conclusions in itself. Perhaps. I’m reluctant to believe the “made the whole thing up” possibility but that’s out there too. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_One](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/45deac/32.png) [@Evil\_One](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_One)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2006, 1:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lying-whore/352153/67 "2006-04-11T13:13:17Z")
Let’s look at this from both possibilities. Let’s say the accusation is true. Why would the woman make the accusation? To get justice, of course. If the accusation is partially true, i.e. she was treated badly but not raped, she could be trying to punish those who mistreated her or following onto the next possibility. If the accusation is false, attempted extortion would be the only reason I can think of as to why she would do this. Perhaps she thinks that some hush money will come her way to make the inevitible civil suit go away. And a civil suit has a lot more credibility if it’s based on an event that was extensively investigated as a criminal matter. ---
**Author:** ![Huerta88](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/82dd89/32.png) [@Huerta88](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Huerta88)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2006, 1:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lying-whore/352153/68 "2006-04-11T13:24:59Z")
> [@Evil One](#): > > If the accusation is false, attempted extortion would be the only reason I can think of as to why she would do this. I am still looking for the originals of the report cited herein, but this link alleges that at least one study has found a number of reasons for false allegations (which at least some of the literature would conclude are not as rare as hen’s teeth). If true, then it may be important to question whether our “reluctance” (_pace_ **Bob** ) to suspect “made the whole thing up” is factually, or ideologically, founded. [http://ncfm-dc.org/issues/rape/whywomenlieaboutrape.htm](http://ncfm-dc.org/issues/rape/whywomenlieaboutrape.htm) > [@](#): > > A U.S. Air Force study, The False Rape Allegation in the Military Community (1983), investigated 556 cases of alleged rape, and found a 60% rate of false rape accusations. As part of the study, women who were found to have made false accusations were asked “Why?” > > Motivations Given by the Women Who Acknowledged They Had Made False Accusations of Rape > > Reason Percent > Spite or Revenge 20 > To compensate for feelings of guilt or shame 20 > Thought she might be pregnant 13 > To conceal an affair 12 > To test husband’s love 9 > Mental/emotional disorder 9 > To avoid personal responsibility 4 > Failure to pay, or extortion 4 > Thought she might have caught VD 3 > Other 6 > Total 100 > > The study found that most false accusations are “instrumental” – they serve a purpose. If the purpose isn’t avoiding guilt or getting revenge, it might serve a more focused purpose, for example telling her parents “I didn’t just go out and get pregnant - I was raped”; or telling her husband “I didn’t have an affair; it wasn’t my fault, I was raped.” > > An unrelated Washington Post article, “Unfounded Rape Reports Baffle Investigators” (6/27/1992) also found a wide range of motivations to falsely accuse men of rape. Anger towards boyfriends was common. One woman had her boyfriend spend 13 months in jail before she acknowledged that she lied. One woman accused her newspaper delivery man of raping her at gunpoint because she needed an excuse to be late to work. ---
**Author:** ![crowmanyclouds](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crowmanyclouds/32/19884_2.png) [@crowmanyclouds](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/crowmanyclouds)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2006, 1:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lying-whore/352153/69 "2006-04-11T13:29:18Z")
> [@Huerta88](#): > > Well, but the problem remains “apparently raped.” When will we (generically) decide that the “apparently” bar has been cleared? I hope it is not the moment a woman (or man) says “I was raped” – with nothing more… Well, but the problem remains “apparently robbed.” When will we (generically) decide that the “apparently” bar has been cleared? I hope it is not the moment a woman or man says “I was robbed” – with nothing more. CMC fnord! ---
**Author:** ![Huerta88](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/82dd89/32.png) [@Huerta88](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Huerta88)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2006, 1:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lying-whore/352153/70 "2006-04-11T13:57:08Z")
> [@crowmanyclouds](#): > > Well, but the problem remains “apparently robbed.” When will we (generically) decide that the “apparently” bar has been cleared? I hope it is not the moment a woman or man says “I was robbed” – with nothing more. > > CMC fnord! Of course not, and I hope you don’t think people are being thrown in jail or pilloried in the press the minute someone says “He robbed me,” especially when there’s (as yet) no evidence and the circumstances were murky. I’ve had two cars stolen. On neither occasion did the police feel that grand theft auto merited sending out a squad car. On the second occasion, I got into the MOAB with my insurance company (as long as we’re in the Pit, F you very much, State Farm), who seized on the fact that when the car was recovered (heavily damaged), the PD (accurately) reported “no signs of forced entry” and noted “verify if complainant gave keys to any third party.” The ins. co. insisted, for weeks, that I tell them who else in my “household” had access to my keys, and took the position that I must have lent the car to someone. My household consisted of me and a bunch of empty beer cans at the time. ---
**Author:** ![Zeriel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/58956e/32.png) [@Zeriel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zeriel)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2006, 2:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lying-whore/352153/71 "2006-04-11T14:00:44Z")
> [@crowmanyclouds](#): > > Well, but the problem remains “apparently robbed.” When will we (generically) decide that the “apparently” bar has been cleared? I hope it is not the moment a woman or man says “I was robbed” – with nothing more. > > CMC fnord! I don’t know what you intended with this but it sounds like a sensible attitude to me. ---
**Author:** ![An\_Arky](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/87869e/32.png) [@An\_Arky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/An_Arky)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2006, 2:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lying-whore/352153/72 "2006-04-11T14:06:24Z")
What gets me about this case is that the coach resigned and the team’s season was cancelled right off the bat. Geez, coudn’t they have waited until they had more information? ---
**Author:** ![Huerta88](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/82dd89/32.png) [@Huerta88](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Huerta88)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2006, 3:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lying-whore/352153/73 "2006-04-11T15:23:31Z")
> [@An Arky](#): > > What gets me about this case is that the coach resigned and the team’s season was cancelled right off the bat. Geez, coudn’t they have waited until they had more information? There are two separate issues, I think, and I tend to think he would have had to resign when it came out that all the drinking (some of it probably underage) and stripper-hiring was going on at quasi-“team” functions about which (one suspects) he knew. That was, arguably, bad judgment on his part even if no sexual assault of any type occurred. Canceling the season, I agree, was jumping the gun. ---
**Author:** ![Huerta88](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/82dd89/32.png) [@Huerta88](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Huerta88)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2006, 3:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lying-whore/352153/74 "2006-04-11T15:40:14Z")
> [@Huerta88](#): > > my insurance company (as long as we’re in the Pit, F you very much, State Farm), who seized on the fact that when the car was recovered (heavily damaged), the PD (accurately) reported “no signs of forced entry” and noted “verify if complainant gave keys to any third party.” The ins. co. insisted, for weeks, that I tell them who else in my “household” had access to my keys, and took the position that I must have lent the car to someone. My household consisted of me and a bunch of empty beer cans at the time. I should have unpacked the point I was making a bit further. In my case, the ins. co. was wrong to suggest that my car had not been stolen and to keep insisting on this position even after I urged them and the police to consider other proof (e.g., they refused to take fingerprints, as I challenged them to, and ignored the fact that the car turned up in a ghet-TO that, demographically, would not likely be the destination of any of my friends or family). However, they were not insane or illogical to at least consider the possibility that the situation did not rise to the level of “theft” as defined by law (and the insurance policy). What if I **had** lent my keys to my ex-GF, and she honestly thought that my failing to take them back when we broke up meant she could still use my car if she needed to? What if my housemate figured, share and share alike, and “borrowed” my keys? It wasn’t true, here, but the fact that the insurance company considered it tells me (apart from the obvious fact that they’d prefer not to pay) that such situations occur not-infrequently when a car is reported “stolen” (if nothing else, my state like many others imposes stiff penalties and attorneys’ fees for ‘bad faith denial of insurance claim,’ which tells me my carrier was not likely invoking a purely-frivolous defense). ---
**Author:** ![you\_with\_the\_face](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/ecccb3/32.png) [@you\_with\_the\_face](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/you_with_the_face)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2006, 4:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lying-whore/352153/75 "2006-04-11T16:02:42Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#): > > I think premature judgement abounds on both sides. _Something_ happened to the young lady and we need to get to the bottom of it. It’s possible that nobody on the team touched her. It’s possible that they did but left no evidence behind. It’s possible someone else did it. Just as it was premature for the university to cancel the rest of their season, it’s now premature to proclaim her a liar. I agree. I’m actually surprised by how quickly people have rushed to judgement in this case based this finding. The Duke scandal has been in the press for a couple of weeks now and the first thread about the subject is a screed against the accuser. Interesting. You would think that with the whole Kobe thing behind us, people would be mindful not to weigh too heavily towards one side versus another until _all_ pertinent facts are in. But folks seem all to eager to believe what they want to believe, and seize upon whatever supports their case. So suddenly the absence of DNA evidence is proof that someone is a lying whore. That’s like saying this ([http://abclocal.go.com/wabc/story?section=local&id=4061329](http://abclocal.go.com/wabc/story?section=local&id=4061329)) is proof that the author is a murderous, sadistic scumbag. But it’s not proof, either way. They are both pieces of evidence, but you can’t make a judgement about someone’s behavior based on those pieces alone. Why do people apparently feel so personally invested in the matter that they have to condemn _anyone_ at this time? Especially since no one except the parties involved really knows what happened? People just need to slow the fuck down. And check their biases at the door, while they’re at it. ---
**Author:** ![Contrapuntal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e274bd/32.png) [@Contrapuntal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Contrapuntal)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2006, 4:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lying-whore/352153/76 "2006-04-11T16:30:44Z")
> [@lissener](#): > > It seems to me they wouldn’t ask for samples from the team in the FIRST place if that were true. Point of clarification: They were not asked; they were ordered by a judge. Some legal analysists think that this raises constitutional issues and will be a problem for the prosecution if this case comes to court. > [@Marley23](#): > > I’m not sure anybody who is reporting knows that. The defense has a vested interest in making this information public, and the prosecution does not. I deplore trials being conducted in the press but the DA has set the bar very low in this one. The defense attorneys are simply fighting fire with fire. And as has been noted, there is no dispute about the result of the tests, which the students have said from the beginning would exonerate them. > [@The king of Soup](#): > > What I do know is that there’s no evidence presented here to suggest that the woman is a whore, that neither college students, strippers, nor women, as a group, are necessarily whores, and that women have often been labelled “whores” as a way to justify mistreatment, including sexual abuse. you are entirely correct that calling her a whore is unjustified. However, if you wanted to call her a [thieving drunk who assaults police officers](http://www.wral.com/news/8513890/detail.html?rss=ral&psp=news) you would be on safe ground. From the link– > [@](#): > > New information about the victim has been divulged, concerning charges arising from an incident that occurred several years ago. According to a 2002 police report, the woman, currently a 27-year-old student at North Carolina Central University, gave a taxi driver a lap dance at a Durham strip club. Subsequently, according to the report, she stole the man’s car and led deputies on a high-speed chase that ended in Wake County. > > Apparently, the deputy thought the chase was over when the woman turned down a dead-end road near Brier Creek, but instead she tried to run over him, according to the police report. > > Additional information notes that her blood-alcohol level registered at more than twice the legal limit. Apparently, she is not unfamiliar with criminal behavior associated with the pursuit of her vocation. ---
**Author:** ![astro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9dc877/32.png) [@astro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/astro)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2006, 5:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lying-whore/352153/77 "2006-04-11T17:09:51Z")
Latest News [DA Plans To Proceed With Case Despite No DNA Matches](http://www.wral.com/news/8600601/detail.html) > [@](#): > > RALEIGH, N.C. – Durham County District Attorney Mike Nifong said he plans to move forward with his case against three members of Duke University’s men’s lacrosse team despite DNA results that do not match evidence collected from a woman who says the athletes raped her. ---
**Author:** ![HubZilla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ccd318/32.png) [@HubZilla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HubZilla)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2006, 5:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lying-whore/352153/78 "2006-04-11T17:35:03Z")
> [@astro](#): > > Latest News > [DA Plans To Proceed With Case Despite No DNA Matches](http://www.wral.com/news/8600601/detail.html) It almost sounds like a witch hunt. The DA is going to get these guys no matter what. This is starting to sound like [Tawana Brawley](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tawana_Brawley). ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2006, 5:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lying-whore/352153/79 "2006-04-11T17:39:57Z")
I don’t know about a witch hunt. He’s already been investigating very publically for weeks, and I’m not surprised he’s decided not to drop it yet. I would say the big question is this: > [@New York Times](#): > > Nifong said most rape cases did not depend on DNA testing. If that is true, I can’t call this a witch hunt. If it’s not true, maybe it is. ---
**Author:** ![crowmanyclouds](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crowmanyclouds/32/19884_2.png) [@crowmanyclouds](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/crowmanyclouds)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2006, 5:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lying-whore/352153/80 "2006-04-11T17:52:17Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > … > > > [@New York Times](#): > > > > Nifong said most rape cases did not depend on DNA testing. > > If that is true, I can’t call this a witch hunt. If it’s not true, maybe it is. How many rape cases depended on DNA, before DNA testing was possible? CMC fnord! [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lying-whore/352153.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lying-whore/352153.md?page=5)