TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

  • Subreddits

      Popular

    • /r/askTRP
    • /r/TheRedPill
    • /r/MarriedRedPill
    • /r/MensRights
    • /r/MGTOW
    • /r/PurplePillDebate
    • /r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen
    • Other

    • /r/AllPillDebate
    • /r/AlreadyRed
    • /r/altTRP
    • /r/AntiFeminists
    • /r/askFDS
    • /r/askMRP
    • /r/askRPC
    • /r/becomeaman
    • /r/BlackPillScience
    • /r/Chadfish
    • /r/Divorce_Men
    • /r/EverydayMisandry
    • /r/ExRedPill
    • /r/FemaleDatingStrategy
    • /r/FeminismStopsWhen
    • /r/GEOTRP
    • /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
    • /r/MalePsychology
    • /r/Male_Studies
    • /r/MenSupportMen
    • /r/MGTOW2
    • /r/MuslimRedPill
    • /r/newTRP
    • /r/PussyPass
    • /r/PussyPassDenied
    • /r/RedPillBooks
    • /r/RedPillParenting
    • /r/RedPillWives
    • /r/RedPillWomen
    • /r/RedPillWorkplace
    • /r/RPChristians
    • /r/seduction
    • /r/ThankTRP
    • /r/TheRedPillStories
    • /r/trpGAME
    • /r/TRPOffTopic
    • /r/TrueBlackPillMGTOW
    • /r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre
  • Blogs

      Popular

    • Dalrock
    • Heartiste
    • Illimitable Men
    • Return of Kings
    • Rian Stone
    • The Rational Male
    • Woujo
    • Other

    • Artful Prudence
    • A Voice for Men
    • Alpha Game
    • Black Label Logic
    • Caleb Jones
    • Captain Capitalism
    • Corporate Machiavelli
    • Days of Game
    • Deep Strength
    • Dicipres
    • Donal Graeme
    • Female Misogynist
    • Free Northerner
    • Gaming My Wife
    • Good Looking Loser
    • Hawaiian Libertarian
    • In Mala Fide
    • KillToParty
    • Kill Your Inner Loser
    • Krauser PUA
    • LaidNYC
    • Married Man Sex Life
    • NO MA'AM
    • Omega Virgin Revolt
    • Pook's Mill
    • Random Xpat Rantings
    • Red Pill Theory
    • Red Pill Wifery
    • RedPillDad
    • RedPillDoctor
    • Seasons of Tumult and Discord
    • Sigma Frame
    • The Feminine Woman
    • The Futurist
    • The Masculine Principle
    • The Modern Man
    • The New Modern Man
    • The Obsidian Files
    • The Power Moves
    • The Private Man
    • The Red Pill Room
    • The Red Quest
    • The Rules Revisited
    • The Spearhead
    • Troy Francis
    • Wintery Knight
    • Young Man Red Pill
  • Books
  • Dictionary
  • @TRParchive
  • Please help TheRedArchive stay alive

Woman admits to making false rape claim: apparently trying to ruin a man's life is a misdemeanor in New Holland .

andejoh

September 19, 2016
857 upvotes
/r/MensRights
http://archive.is/bfJAU
Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB
Share
Share Tweet Reddit Email
Post Information
Title Woman admits to making false rape claim: apparently trying to ruin a man's life is a misdemeanor in New Holland .
Author

andejoh

Upvotes 857
Comments 44
Date September 19, 2016 2:34 AM UTC
(9 years ago)
Subreddit Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/53fjof/woman_admits_to_making_false_rape_claim/
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/woman-admits-to-making-false-rape-claim-apparently.941375
https://theredarchive.com/post/941375
Top posts by andejoh

Sweden's 'man-free' feminist music festival is found guilty of discrimination by authorities

4768 upvotes
December 18, 2018
/r/MensRights

Another female college student charged with filing false rape report. Probably why feminists want schools to handle things. Lying to the police has consequences.

2599 upvotes
March 2, 2018
/r/MensRights

Man sues restaurant for charging "man tax".

2463 upvotes
October 5, 2017
/r/MensRights

Woman quits Trudeau's youth council over his anti-male, feminist, virtue, signaling. Trudeau back pedals claiming his remarks were taken out of context. It's nice when women stand up for men.

2397 upvotes
December 24, 2018
/r/MensRights

290,000 people in South Korea sign petition to require that women have the same military obligations as men. President office says we need to ask women if it's OK.

2345 upvotes
July 14, 2021
/r/MensRights

Husband and wife separate. Wife forges husband's name on document allowing her to give birth using a frozen embryo they created. Man sues to block child support.

2119 upvotes
April 12, 2017
/r/MensRights

Male nurses want to close gender gap by eliminating quota requiring 80% of nurses are women. Female nurses not for equality.

1798 upvotes
June 21, 2021
/r/MensRights

'America's daughters shouldn't be drafted against their will': Conservatives blast proposal that would require women to register for the military draft alongside men

1574 upvotes
July 25, 2021
/r/MensRights

Comments

[–]rubenbenjamin 30 points31 points32 points 9 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

The best thing about this article is that the guy is not named or ruined in anyway(hopefully)

[+][deleted] 9 years ago* (13 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–][deleted] 33 points34 points35 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

she' the criminal, proven.

[+][deleted] 9 years ago* (4 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–][deleted] 27 points28 points29 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

She ADMITTED it

[+]troe2339 -20 points-19 points-18 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

People have admitted to things they hadn't done before.

Edit: I'm not saying that's what I think happened. I'm just saying it could happen in some cases.

[–]Endless_Summer 8 points9 points10 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I'd be fine with them not listing her name until after conviction, but only if she's registered as a sex offender.

Since that likely will not happen, this is the best way for the public to be aware of this particular individual's shitty behavior

[–]Chipdogs 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It's necessary for defendants' names to be public record because it prevents the police/courts from carrying out secret trials and making people disappear.

[–]TheSummerain 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Naming the convicted...not having any problem with that at all.

It's a matter of public record anyway.

[+][deleted] 9 years ago* (4 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]Endless_Summer 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Would you agree she should be registered as a sex offender after conviction?

[+][deleted] 9 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]Endless_Summer 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

You think someone convicted of providing a maliciously false rape claim shouldn't be on any sort of registry? Then what is your answer for being able to warn others and prevent further victims?

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Google!

Registries are fuckin' evil. Shouldn't a person serve their time and move on with life or should we punish people forever?

Just as a side note, registries mostly harm men.

[–]Realdorksword 60 points61 points62 points 9 years ago (27 children) | Copy Link

I saw in the comments of the article that a woman was saying that it is at good to see that false accusers get the same treatment as rapists. lol. IS there such thing as misdemeanor rape? Good she is being punished but it is a crime that it is only a misdemeanor.

[–]bucknakid14 11 points12 points13 points 9 years ago (23 children) | Copy Link

Actually, kind of. In the states anyway it depends on what exactly you're charged with. There's a wide range of charges that would be considered "rape".

But I do see your point and cases like this are hard for me to decide on. On one hand, I agree that false rape accusations when completely proven to be false should carry a punishment almost as heavy as the rape itself.

On the other hand, I would never want a victim of rape, male or female, to feel like if they can't prove it happened that they shouldn't come forward. Its murky waters to me.

[–]MentalAsFog 22 points23 points24 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

But lack of conviction does not automatically mean false allegations. An accusation without hard evidence is fine, evidence of false allegations is what we would be looking for.

[–]ElGoddamnDorado 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

On the other hand, I would never want a victim of rape, male or female, to feel like if they can't prove it happened that they shouldn't come forward. Its murky waters to me.

That's retarded. Should we get rid of perjury as a crime too? Wouldn't want to discourage people from testifying on the off chance they might 'accidentally' intentionally give false information, right?

[–]bucknakid14 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

No, I'm talking about in cases where there's not enough evidence and it's a he said she said kind of thing. What if the judge decides to side with the aggressor? Says it sounds false even when it really did happen? Judges are assholes some times and don't always use their best (excuse the pun) judgement.

[–]ElGoddamnDorado 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

You don't prosecute for false accusations unless there is proof. It is not a "he said/she said" situation. What the fuck is so complicated about that? Did you not read the other response to you hours earlier saying that you don't prosecute without hard evidence? Seems like you're intentionally being obtuse so you don't have to admit there's actually a feasible solution to this. What a surprise.

[–]bucknakid14 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Wow. Calm down there. This particular situation is cut and dry.

But men get charged with rape without any evidence all the time. What makes you think it wouldn't go the other way around for people reporting?

[–]Tedesche -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

I think a lot of the fears about coming forward have to do with the fact that rape is traumatic, and going through the investigation/prosecution processes will almost invariably retraumatize the victim to some extent. Furthermore, despite me being against the lengths to which feminists say we should refrain from questioning accusers, there are some questions that do seem downright insulting for police to ask as initial investigative questions (e.g. "what were you wearing?").

However, what I suspect is the case with most victims who do not report is that it is not shame that keeps them from reporting (although feelings of shame are a common symptom from a lot of rape experiences), but rather the desire to just move on with one's life and forget about what happened.

That is one of the trickiest parts to the problem of rape—the fact that the victim frequently (and understandably) prioritizes their own healing process over pursuing justice. It's why I'm not against having no statutes of limitations for rape. And for those objecting to that on the grounds that the elapsed time makes it more difficult for the accused to prove their innocence, I would retort that the problem is really that the accused is being expected to prove their innocence at all. The real cost of waiting to report, unfortunately, should for one the victim pays in the time making it harder to prove they were raped.

This is just a really hard problem to solve. When the technology becomes available, I think I personally (assuming I was still alive, which is unlikely) would probably partake in some sort of implant that recorded everything I saw/heard, because that's the surest guard against virtually all sorts of crime there is. It's why I'm in favor of CCTV systems, even in places like public bathrooms (one can easily mitigate the threat of perverts by not putting them in the stalls).

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

While I agree with your sentiment, I don't see how eliminating the statutes of limitations would help with that. Should someone be charged with raping someone 40 years ago? Why should rape be the exception to the rule?

I don't know how long the victim has to proceed with the charges, but I would think it's long enough that extending/eliminating the statute would be justified.

[–]Tedesche 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

Rape can be extremely difficult to get over, and it's worse when it happens to children. Look at all the accusations of Bill Cosby and Jimmy Saville in the UK—it did take 20+ years for those people to come forward. So, yeah, I don't see the point in having a statute of limitations on that. Statutes of limitations are designed to prevent people from blackmailing others with the threat of prosecution for past crimes, but in the case of rape (and probably a few other crimes) there are good reasons to make exceptions.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

I don't know if "It's hard to get over" is a good enough argument. Looking at all other exceptions, they only take place if the crime is considered significant enough. Crimes against humanity, for instance, has no statute of limitations.

Furthermore, the statute of limitations has a further benefit - it encourages people to come forwards sooner. The longer you wait to come forwards with a rape claim, the less likely it is to result in a conviction. Encouraging people to take as long as they need is explicitly counterproductive.

[–]Tedesche 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago* (11 children) | Copy Link

I hear what you're saying, but I still think the trauma associated with rape is severe enough to make the exception. When there is a major emotional barrier to coming forward, it isn't fair to expect victims to be able to report so soon.

EDIT: Also, perhaps you do understand what trauma is like, but for those that don't—it isn't just "hard to get over." A lot of people seem to think trauma is just another word for "really sad," and don't understand what it actually is and how severe an impact it can have on a person's life. Expecting someone to report and deal with a trial while still struggling with trauma is completely unreasonable.

[–]SKNK_Monk 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

As a society, we have decided that setting someone on fire has a statute of limitations if they survive it.

[–]Tedesche 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Your point?

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

The thing is your argument is unprecedented. When else has something like this been granted because of the emotional burden?

The unfortunate thing is that the system isn't always perfect. Sometimes the victims don't get justice, and the perpetrators walk away scot-free. But defying the statutes of limitations for this isn't appropriate if you ask me.

Not to diminish your argument by comparison, but your argument is akin to saying "We should make rape cases guilty until proven innocent." It would help some victims get justice, but it's wrong.

[–]Tedesche 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

It is nothing like that bullshit. There are specific reasons for making allowances for trauma—and again, trauma isn't just extreme emotion. Precedent (or lack thereof) also isn't an argument against doing it, unless you're completely hidebound and afraid of new things. I fail to see how it inherently shifts the burden of proof to the accused—that is a separate problem that doesn't require limitless statutes to exist.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

As I said, I wasn't trying to diminish your argument by comparison. I'm just saying, in the same way that that argument strives to help victims but ends up unfair to the accused, that is how I view your position. The metaphor was not meant to go beyond that.

I appreciate that trauma is more than just emotion. We're in agreement on that.

The thing about precedent is that with it, your argument has a strong basis, but without it, you have to make a stronger basis for yourself.

[–]bufedad -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Rape can be extremely difficult to get over, and it's worse when it happens to children.

That's irrelevant to the discussion. Especially in a crime where it's her story versus his story.

She says she was raped, he says I don't remember what she's talking about.

He's being convicted of rape, just because so much time has passed that he doesn't even remember her.

Statutes of limitations are designed to prevent people from blackmailing others with the threat of prosecution for past crimes, but in the case of rape (and probably a few other crimes) there are good reasons to make exceptions.

Statutes of limitation are designed to prevent people from being charged with crimes when time makes it impossible to defend themselves.

[–]bufedad -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Furthermore, despite me being against the lengths to which feminists say we should refrain from questioning accusers, there are some questions that do seem downright insulting for police to ask as initial investigative questions (e.g. "what were you wearing?").

Considering any rape requires getting past the victim's clothing, this seems like it would be a pretty standard and necessary question in regards to rape.

It's why I'm not against having no statutes of limitations for rape.

You raped me on July 16th, 1996.

Now, prove your innocence, because they believe the victim (including the jury).

And for those objecting to that on the grounds that the elapsed time makes it more difficult for the accused to prove their innocence, I would retort that the problem is really that the accused is being expected to prove their innocence at all.

Rape is a he said/she said crime, especially 20 years later.

No statue of limitations means it's a she said crime, because you can't really rebut something 20 years later when you don't even remember it.

[+][deleted] -9 points-8 points-7 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

oh you are just clever misdemeanor rape : looks around sips coffee

[–]Realdorksword 6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I don't know about clever. My mom always said I was special though, that's why I get my own bus and this nifty helmet. :D

[+][deleted] -10 points-9 points-8 points 9 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

you're a damn fool: looks around sips coffee and hides laughter

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fi86MdRLG9M

EDIT:sorry bad joke but yes your comment was on point

[–]Temperfuelmma 9 points10 points11 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Anyone feel like #TeachWomenNotToLie. ?

[–]Tmomp 10 points11 points12 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It's like saying drunk driving is just operating the pedals and wheels of a car, ignoring that the consequences can destroy people's lives.

Should we teach women not to lie about rape?

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Surely you can sue for civil damages .

[–]iHeartCandicePatton 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

At least it's a crime at all

[–]decktip 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

just because she admitted to lying doesn't me she really lied.

Oh my sides. This comment just takes the cake, I hope it's trolling.

[–]andejoh[S] 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Just because he had text messages and another witness doesn't mean she lied either I guess. /s

[–]KombatWombat1 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

If a false report is made about someone else like this, their penalty should be whatever the penalty the charge carries. Would definitely curb false accusations of ask kinds.

[–]Mens-day-events 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Please spread the word for Global Ignore Women Day to show women what it really means to have your issues ignored. Please check out the event at the web page and spread the word =)

Browse all authors
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter