I recently had an exchange in a relatively progressive sub for men's rights where all I said at first was that of the tiny percentage of rape accusations that were false, a tiny percentage of these false accusers were investigated or punished in any way.

This then slid until I was being accused of minimizing rape and being a terrible person because I believed that maybe 1 case in 1000 should be investigated alongside all the rape cases that we should also investigate. For the people I was arguing with, they seemed mutually exclusive. To them, it was impossible for me to want to increase investigations into rape claims and also into the people who accused men proven innocent. I never advocated for investigating the victim and accused equally at the same time. All I ever said was that I thought too few false accusers were ever scrutinized, and that we should take a look at them if the man is proven innocent beyond doubt and their case is bad.

So why is this such a misunderstood viewpoint? I was cited an article about two women whose rape cases were not investigated. I'm sorry for them, nobody should suffer through that, but that doesn't mean we can't push for investigations of false accusers after we've investigated whether any crime committed.

Geniunely looking for answers here.

And don't give me that "All women crave is power over men and solving their own issues" shit. That's shitty people, not representative of all women.

Thanks.