Should false rape accusers be sued?

[–]JELLY__FISTER 19 points20 points21 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Terry_Bruce_Dick 7 points8 points9 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]chavelah 9 points10 points11 points 12 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]transsisterradio 3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

FBI reports from 1996 consistently put the number of "unfounded" rape accusations around 8%. In contrast, the average rate of unfounded reports for "Index crimes" tracked by the FBI is 2%.[14] However, "unfounded" is not synonymous with false allegation. Bruce Gross of the Forensic Examiner says that: This statistic is almost meaningless, as many of the jurisdictions from which the FBI collects data on crime use different definitions of, or criteria for, "unfounded." That is, a report of rape might be classified as unfounded (rather than as forcible rape) if the alleged victim did not try to fight off the suspect, if the alleged perpetrator did not use physical force or a weapon of some sort, if the alleged victim did not sustain any physical injuries, or if the alleged victim and the accused had a prior sexual relationship. Similarly, a report might be deemed unfounded if there is no physical evidence or too many inconsistencies between the accuser's statement and what evidence does exist. As such, although some unfounded cases of rape may be false or fabricated, not all unfounded cases are false. - Wikipedia

[–]chavelah 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]borizz 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]fia_bui 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]borizz 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]pvtshoebox 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

I am not a criminologist of a law enforcement officer, but my understanding is that investigators can label an official complaint as "unfounded" if they think that the interviewee has not lied, but also has not been a victim to any crime. A classic example I have found on a couple of sites explaining the definition of "unfounded" is the case in which a person claims their car was stolen, but hours after the complain, it is determined that a friend, authorized to use the car, had taken it without proper notice. The interviewee has not lied, but the interviewee was not victimized in the eye of the law.

The problem is that many local/university law enforcement agencies may have a prerogative to make a rape case "go away" by imprudently labeling it as "unfounded." That classification effectively means "we are not going to be looking into this."

A "false" claim is much more rare, and would only include cases in which direct evidence (cabby video cam, video of sex act, etc.) or a later confession proves that the interviewee was lying when the complaint was made.

[+][deleted] 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]fia_bui 4 points5 points6 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]sabian92 70 points71 points72 points 12 years ago (63 children) | Copy Link

[–]Terry_Bruce_Dick 5 points6 points7 points 12 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]sabian92 8 points9 points10 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]Terry_Bruce_Dick 5 points6 points7 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]sabian92 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Terry_Bruce_Dick 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 14 points15 points16 points 12 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]Pecanpig 18 points19 points20 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Pecanpig 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]sabian92 11 points12 points13 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]sdingle100 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]sabian92 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]justTheQTip 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Sorry, not sure what I thought I was doing, but I deleted my comment. Hanging it off yours:

I think false rape accusations deserve a harsher punishment than actual rape convictions. Here's why, if you disagree, discuss. Rape hurts, demoralizes, traumatizes, and potentially severely injures a person. We can all agree that this should be punished harshly. False rape allegations hurt, demoralize, traumatize, and effectively RUIN lives. Careers and future careers are killed, self worth is permanently destroyed EVEN WITH COUNSELING because the social repercussions are permanent. There is no coming back from it. Even if the person comes forward later and tells the truth, the record is there forever (in most states). I'm not saying that being raped doesn't suck and doesn't fuck you up. But it doesn't take your life away from you in the same way that becoming banned from life does.

[+]SirSkeptic -18 points-17 points-16 points 12 years ago (33 children) | Copy Link

[–]battlingfrog 17 points18 points19 points 12 years ago* (11 children) | Copy Link

Jesus Christ, what are you even saying?! Under what circumstances would it not be cruel and unusual punishment to put someone in prison with convicts of the opposite gender? What is the implication you are getting at here? That women who perjure deserve to be sexually assaulted/raped by male inmates for 5 to 80 years? What kind of freakish fucking underground-"justice" are you advocating? How do you feel about prison rape when it happens to men? Is it somehow okay all of the sudden that people in prison get raped in addition to serving a sentence if they are female? Gosh, I really thought that MRAs were against that sort of thing.

Seriously, lying abut rape is bad, but you really need to reexamine your motivations for implying that any person, male or female, deserves to be sexually violated. Especially for a bizarrely specific crime like a "false rape accusation" (for real, it's just called "perjury") that would be near-impossible to prove malicious intent for in most cases. Conviction rates for rape cases vary from study to study based on some difficult to determine variables (such as report rates and out-of-court settlements), but it's a far cry from 100%: some studies report it to be a low as 6%, this one estimates 18%. According to your sense of "justice", would you send every woman who failed to procure enough damning evidence against her rapist to a man's prison under a rape sentence? How would you distinguish between a false-rape accusation and a lack of eye-witness testimony, DNA evidence, etc.? Do those things not matter to you?

This is one of the most vindictive, irrational, and frightening threads I've ever fucking seen. Go ahead and down-vote me, but please, reconsider your opinions of rhetoric that encourage violence against women. This is the sort of thing that makes the Men's Rights movement look like glorified anti-feminism/organized misogyny.

[–]Is_It_A_Throwaway 8 points9 points10 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]battlingfrog 5 points6 points7 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]LordIntrepid 4 points5 points6 points 12 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]SirSkeptic -7 points-6 points-5 points 12 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Just calm the fuck down and think about what you've written!!!!!

We're not just talking about "women who perjure". We're talking about people who specifically make a fraudulent claim of rape knowing what will happen to their victims.

Making a fraudulent claim is not the same as simply not having enough evidence for rape, and must be proven beyond reasonable doubt in court.

As for the cruel and unusual punishment; as long as we have a male prison system that doesn't protect it's prisoners, every human being who is locked up in it is being subjected to cruel and unusual punishment. Why should female prisoners be exempt?

According to your sense of "justice", would you send every woman who failed to procure enough damning evidence against her rapist to a man's prison under a rape sentence?

Wow! Just wow! That's some interpretation you got there.

Ah, just checked your posting history - carry on.

[–]battlingfrog 3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago* (4 children) | Copy Link

We're not just talking about "women who perjure". We're talking about people who specifically make a fraudulent claim of rape knowing what will happen to their victims.

This is what perjury is. You're describing the same crime whether your talking about rape, murder, theft, or any other incident of framing another person; when a witness makes "fraudulent claims" under oath, that's perjury, and malicious intent is directly associated with it. Can the consequences of perjuring a false rape accusation be different? Socially, yes. But the tragic and disastrous legal results can be equally distressing when someone is falsely accused of, say, murder in the 3rd degree, such as this man who served a 34 year sentence for a crime he didn't commit. Whether or not there is a social difference in how the crimes are perceived, the law remains the same: the crime committed is falsifying information while under oath with the malicious intent of getting the wrong people caught (I realize that not every case of perjury has a direct "victim", but the crime committed remains the same in the eyes of the law. Sentences are already adjusted based on severity and intent...there is absolutely no fucking need to ramp it up to the cruel and unusual punishment you suggested).

Wow! Just wow! That's some interpretation you got there.

Nice response. A really well-thought out counter point ya got there. But seriously, my point in indicating these risks is that not all sexual-assault cases end in convictions, so how would you differentiate between a case of false rape accusation and a simple issue of mistaken identity? Or worse, what if a woman actually was raped by the defendant, but there wasn't enough evidence to convict him beyond a shadow of a doubt? There wouldn't really be any way to distinguish between that victim who couldn't collect enough proof against her rapist and an altogether fraudulent claim. Would you be alright with risking that innocent victim's safety for your vengeful, preposterous concept of justice?

You did not adequately respond to this question the first time I asked it, which makes me think you don't care enough to defend your own flawed logic.

But those are not even my main issues with what you're saying.

This is:

Why should female prisoners be exempt?

This is an immensely fucked-up mind-frame, and I sincerely hope you revise it. Everyone should be exempt from prison rape. The fact that it happens is unacceptable, and we should be taking every opportunity to reduce it, not to instigate it deliberately for some fucked-up concept of "fairness". That would be despicably unjust, not to mention fucking idiotic. And please don't tell me that you were just making a case for equality or that you were "talking about people" in general, because you specifically said men's prison: the implication was obviously that women who falsely accuse men of rape deserve to be placed in an outrageously dangerous scenario. Men being raped in an all-male prison is one issue and it's fucking horrible, but putting a woman in an all-male prison is going out of your way to ensure her sentence includes being raped. And that suggestion is fucking disgusting. The fact you would even think to try defending it rather than immediately retracting is very, very worrisome.

No one deserves to be raped ever. And if your activism is going to protest against prison rape in one instance when men are involved and then openly suggest it for women in the next, some serious introspection is required.

Not really sure what my posting history has to do with this. I think you'd find that, if you looked through, my arguments are backed-up with external sources and thoroughly thought-out. I disagree with some of what I believe is a poisonous attitude against women held by many members of this movement, and I've spoken against it consistently without changing my opinions. Just because I don't believe that "bitches are crazy" or that or legal system should bend itself over backwards to excessively penalize specific women doesn't mean I'm a troll; I'm just a guy asking you to think about your intentions and your attitudes before you speak. If that's not acceptable to you, then I think you ought to seriously reconsider your motivations for identifying with the MRM.

[+]SirSkeptic -6 points-5 points-4 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Okay, still on perjury; almost no perjury is malicious in intent. It almost always revolves around the theme of "No, officer, I wasn't drinking that night" or "No, your honor, I have no idea how that dope got in my glove box".

While trying to frame somebody for a crime with life destroying consequences may share some attributes with perjury it's still not the same thing. If you can't see a difference between telling a lie as a desperate way to save your own skin, and planning and executing an intentional frame up, then I suspect we have such a different frame of reference that to continue discussion would be futile.

You did not adequately respond to this question the first time I asked it

I thought I did. I'll explain in more detail. When I referred to :

must be proven beyond reasonable doubt in court.

Just like the charge of rape should be proven beyond reasonable doubt, so should the charge of making a fraudulent rape claim. The prosecute would have to prove that the person making the false accusation knew full well that the person they had accused did not rape them. Is that clear enough? I can go into even more detail if you like. Fraudulent rape accusations are as many and varied in detail as what some people are willing to call rape.

Somebody can make a false accusation of rape in many shades of grey. They may have actually been raped but identified the wrong attacker, they may believe they've been raped while the "attacker" believed it was consensual, they may have taken a bad trip and believed they had been raped. None of these show mens rea - a knowledge they were making a fraudulent claim.

Now we get to the darker areas of grey; when somebody makes a false claim knowing full well that it is false and what will happen to their victim. It may have been consensual sex and they make the claim to protect their reputation or get out of trouble for infidelity or from their parents. They may make the claim to get revenge on an ex partner. There may have been no sex at all and they want complete child custody, or just to hurt the other party out of spite.

If a prosecutor can prove, beyond reasonable doubt, that the false accuser made the accusation knowing full well that the accused hadn't raped them then the punishment should be severe.

openly suggest it for women in the next

I'm not suggesting that women should be raped, but that people who are so morally void that they will destroy another human life for petty reasons be subject to severe punishments.

I would love the prison/legal system to be more rational and safer. Rape should be completely stamped out in the prison system. And if it was, the false accusation problem wouldn't be as horrible.

I suspect our primary source of disagreement is your assuming the very worst interpretation of my throw away line, and me assuming that that worst interpretation as being trolling.

[–]battlingfrog 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

I'm not suggesting that women should be raped, but that people who are so morally void that they will destroy another human life for petty reasons be subject to severe punishments.

So it seems that, at this point in the conversation, you have all but completely renounced your explicit initial statement that false rape accusers should serve a rape sentence in a men's prison. You're now vaguely saying that the punishment should be "severe". So long as your conceptualization of a "severe" legal punishment doesn't include deliberately subjecting women to dangerous prison conditions (as it formerly did in your "throw away line") then I guess I no longer need to argue with you.

I would have preferred that you expressly retract that egregious suggestion, but I guess that the impressive amount of back-pedaling you did in this response will have to do.

[–]SirSkeptic -5 points-4 points-3 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]battlingfrog -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]AkiraZXE -3 points-2 points-1 points 12 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

They should be given the same sentence the "rapist" would have gotten if he'd gone to prison.

I agree - they should spend the next 5 to 80 years in a men's prison.

Look, I'll walk everyone through the chain of logic here. X knowingly and maliciously accuses Y of a rape that did not happen. Y is not only found innocent, but X, without a shadow of a doubt, is found to be, as stated above, falsely accusing Y knowingly and maliciously. Therefore, X should be subject to the punishment that Y would have been subject to should the truth never have been discovered. It is, from the very first moment, assuming that the accusation is false and malicious, not assuming that every case that does not end in conviction is like that. It's "in cases of false accusations", not "in cases where we're unsure".

At no point during this do we say "X should be raped" or "all rape cases that do not end in definite conviction on one end should end with conviction on the other". In fact, you'd have to already assume we're all out to use rape as punishment or whatever other boogeyman you've created for us in order to assume that's what's being said. Hell, it's not even saying how to go about it. It's not trying to completely rebuild the legal system from the ground up, nor is it saying it should just be shoehorned in there. It's a fairly general statement.

If you wanted to disagree with what is essentially a general attitude about how to reach justice, that's absolutely fine. If you want to break it down and explain, in far greater detail than he ever intended to go into, why it would not or should not work that way, even better! Hey, even I don't even agree with it either, but don't go pulling nonsense out of thin air to fit your predetermined notions of MRAs.

[–]battlingfrog 3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

At no point during this do we say "X should be raped"

Please, just stop. Stop defending a worldview that is so clearly messed-up; just because you are a Men's Rights Activist doesn't mean you have to support/condone the vitriolic things that come from other MRAs. The idea that false-rape accusers deserve to be raped is not a "boogeyman" of my invention, it is the deliberate implication of what /u/SirSkeptic said. And I think you know it.

Words have meanings, you can't just twist around something that someone says so that it has no further implications that the words written. The very obvious implication of saying that false-rape accusers should be sent to "a men's prison" is that women (yes, specifically women, otherwise the "men's prison" distinction would not be necessary to his point) who falsely accuse men of rape should be locked up with convicts of the opposite gender so that they are at constant risk of being sexually assaulted. As I said, the fact that a man in a men's prison is at express risk of being raped during his sentence is disgusting and unacceptable, but that does not in any way excuse the idea of bending over backwards in order to create more dangerous scenarios for anyone, regardless of their crime. That is not how justice works.

There is no other reason to specify "men's prison". There is no other context that would suggest anything other than the conclusion I (and most of the other rational people in this thread it seems, judging by the down-votes that comment has since received) have reached.

Don't walk me through this "chain of logic": I do not believe that the suggestion that we overhaul the gender policy of our prison system specifically to exacerbate the punishment of certain perpetrators has any such reasonable chain. I am not pulling "nonsense out of the air", I am directly contradicting a reprehensible and severely disturbing suggestion. Please, please, please don't act like you don't know what /u/SirSkeptic was saying just because you don't want to contradict a fellow MRA.

EDIT: Also, if you still have any remaining doubts as to the intention of /u/SirSkeptic's comment, take a look at his own response to me, in which he makes the exact argument I described, namely that females in prison shouldn't be exempt from being raped. Though he tries to back-track, it's very obvious that /u/SirSkeptic realized that he was suggesting false-rape accusers deserve to be raped as punishment for their crimes, and he thought that this subreddit would support him for it.

[–]sabian92 7 points8 points9 points 12 years ago* (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]Essemd 9 points10 points11 points 12 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]sabian92 -3 points-2 points-1 points 12 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]Pecanpig 13 points14 points15 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]sabian92 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Smitty1017 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]sabian92 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Smitty1017 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

tbh I don't think it is consent in the US law either, technically. But, good luck getting a rape charge to stick on a female if it happened.

I have a friend who had to take a plea for providing alcohol to a minor, to avoid a Criminal sexual conduct charge for her claim that he raped her. Despite the fact that it was her own booze that she brought over to our house, and that he was a minor also. (how does a minor provide someone else's own alcohol to them?) There was about 10-15 people who witnessed it, and knew she consented to it, because his bedroom in this apartment was a loft and you could hear everything. The cops threw out my account of the night, and said it was a lie despite being 100% truth, just because.

The girl even came back over the next day to see my roommate again, but then felt guilty that she cheated on her boyfriend so she made up the whole rape story. I guess he kind of had it coming through, I warned him not to mess with her because something seemed off about her and yeah...

But anyways, a few years prior to that in high school a girl took advantage of that same friend at a party using something she slipped in his drink. (his story to me was that he came to and she was on top of him naked, trying to get him hard.) He reported it, and got laughed at. The cops didn't so much as even question the female.

Laws may be written, but that really doesn't mean they are enforced.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–]everyone_hates_you_ 5 points6 points7 points 12 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]jeegte12 3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]everyone_hates_you_ -3 points-2 points-1 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]jeegte12 3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]SirSkeptic -3 points-2 points-1 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

It's interesting that you bring up 'an eye for an eye'. Most people seem to misunderstand that passage (as you seem to).

It was meant to limit the amount of punishment that could be doled out for a crime. eg. If somebody says something that offends you at work, you don't get to destroy their name and livelihood and maybe imprison them. You only get to say something offensive back to them.

If somebody assaults you, they get assaulted back (to the same measure) and allowed to go on with their lives, not locked in a box for 40 years and raped every day.

We could learn a lot from the 'eye for an eye' concept.

The rule of law is not some objective moral stand point, a lot of laws (particularly those named after a popular court case or victim) are written entirely for #feels.

It's why men aren't provided the same protections as women in rape law.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]SirSkeptic 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

First off: Yes. (see, it's unclear when you write something like that, unless somebodies asked a yes/no questions)

"eye for an eye": the law was put in place to limit punishments in most areas under roman law. JC then went one step further and said reply with less retribution than was allowed.

Second: "cruel and unusual punishment" - the state does it all the time. A physical punishment for a monetary crime, the taking of your children (most divorces), indentured slavery for life (life alimony=never being able to retire). Debtors prison. So when you say :

there are certain things that we do not allow the state to do

And claim cruel and unusual punishments are one of them, I'm not sure where your perspective comes from.

The suggestion that somebody who has attempted to get somebody else thrown into a violent environment should experience the same thing themselves seems fair to me. I did not suggest that women be thrown into thrown into a men's prison and raped, but that false rape accusers be subject to the same fate their victims would suffer.

Even though rape is implied by a men's prison, I mainly meant it to reflect the harshness of conditions. In Aus, the largest women's prison has proper inmate security, tennis courts, beauty salons etc, it's not that mush of a punishment.

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points0 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] -11 points-10 points-9 points 12 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[–]xXCptCoolXx 5 points6 points7 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]Zosimasie 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]xXCptCoolXx -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points0 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Nomenimion 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]sabian92 3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]raptorrage 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]sabian92 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]Nomenimion 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]sabian92 -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Arakin -3 points-2 points-1 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]lordslag 6 points7 points8 points 12 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

[–]Terry_Bruce_Dick 3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[–]lordslag 3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[–]Terry_Bruce_Dick 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–]lordslag 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]Terry_Bruce_Dick 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]Nomenimion 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]Terry_Bruce_Dick 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Nomenimion 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Terry_Bruce_Dick 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]lordslag -2 points-1 points0 points 12 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]Terry_Bruce_Dick 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]lordslag -2 points-1 points0 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]iongantas 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]apathos_destroys 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]5th_Law_of_Robotics 6 points7 points8 points 12 years ago (21 children) | Copy Link

[–]not_just_amwac 9 points10 points11 points 12 years ago (20 children) | Copy Link

[–]5th_Law_of_Robotics 9 points10 points11 points 12 years ago (19 children) | Copy Link

[–]not_just_amwac 6 points7 points8 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Bainshie_ 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

[–]5th_Law_of_Robotics 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

[–]LemonFrosted -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

[–]5th_Law_of_Robotics 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[–]LemonFrosted -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

Is it? What is the number?

2-6%.

So you're another one who doesn't believe this ever happens eh?

It happens, but it's not an epidemic. Also the law already has structures in place to deal with it. It's called "perjury" and it's a crime.

Being victimized is a terrible thing, and support networks for male victims is lacking in our society because of an ingrained culture of machismo that tells men to suck it up and deal with it. That should be addressed.

But this revisionist narrative trying to inflate false accusation into some widespread systematic oppression? Not only does it create a false representation of the social dynamic, the actual risk, and the underlying issues, but it makes MRAs look like fucking asshats playing a game of One Up.

for serious, half the shit around here is just "women face X problem? Well men have to deal with X+1!" You can have legitimate problems and challenges without needing them to be Das Wichtigsteproblem.

Progeria is a heartbreaking medical condition, and those affected deserve localized support. But it's also fucking rare compared to diabetes.

[–]5th_Law_of_Robotics 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

2-6%.

Of what? Total rape accusations, court cases, convictions? Where are your sources and descriptions of methodology?

It happens, but it's not an epidemic. Also the law already has structures in place to deal with it. It's called "perjury" and it's a crime.

Do you believe that most false accusers face a significant penalty for their crimes?

Progeria is a heartbreaking medical condition, and those affected deserve localized support. But it's also fucking rare compared to diabetes.

Imagine if there were a vocal activist group who insisted progeria literally never happens, when it does the sufferer deserves it, and any attempt to treat it or perhaps work towards a cure is a direct assault on diabetes sufferers.

Then imagine diabetes was half as common as it is and progeria 50x more common.

[–]LemonFrosted -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Honestly the primary disagreement seems to have nothing to do with statistics or penalties, and everything to do with the legal definition of rape.

Many around here seem convinced that the number of false rape accusations is "50x more common" because they're including a large number of legitimate accusations that they feel weren't rape.

In fact combing through our posting history the fairly obvious conclusion seems to be that you are, in fact, a rapist who says it wasn't rape.

Now this, of course, raises an interesting point that MRM has yet to even come close to thinking about dealing with: some men are actually rapists. Rape is a crime that factually happens. This is why the rape apologia, especially the "rape is totally not as common as women say it is" rhetoric, is particularly dangerous around here: it risks MRM becoming little more than a shelter for bad behaviour. Not that there's all that far to go, like I said: we're already in a race to the bottom by embracing charlatans like Elam.

So, were MRM interested in something other than jerking off over every sleight made by a woman this would be an important and critical question to the movement: how to address the members that use the MRM to justify their criminal activities?

That said I suspect the roots are in too deep. There's already a widespread notion around these parts that aggression and violence are "male nature" and that any suppression of these activities is orchestrated oppression. It's at most a tiny hop from here over to The Red Pill where "real men just take" is the motto of the day, all day, every day. Shit, don't even need to look too far to find another "women aren't fit to run the country" post, as though that were either true or relevant.

Ultimately this just further outlines the real problems that men face today: a hazy, ill defined, sense of masculinity, a host of conflicting messages (including many from toxic sources), and deep-felt insecurity and vulnerability from a loss of unquestioned entitlement.

[–]5th_Law_of_Robotics2 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Many around here seem convinced that the number of false rape accusations is "50x more common" because they're including a large number of legitimate accusations that they feel weren't rape.

BZZT!

Blatant and deliberate misreading.

I was using your analogy. I said make diabetes half as common as it is and progeria 50x more common than it is.

There are about 25 million suffers of diabetes in this country and and about 40 progeria sufferers.

My adjustment makes for 12.5 million compared to 2,000 so really I should have multiplied it by far more.

I never said false rape claims were 50x more common than actual rapes.

In fact combing through our posting history the fairly obvious conclusion seems to be that you are, in fact, a rapist who says it wasn't rape.

Bwahahahahaha!

Now this, of course, raises an interesting point that MRM has yet to even come close to thinking about dealing with: some men are actually rapists.

What an absurd statement. The MRM is pretty straightforward about actual rapists.

Rape is a crime that factually happens.

Way to stick it to that strawman.

Ultimately this just further outlines the real problems that men face today: a hazy, ill defined, sense of masculinity, a host of conflicting messages (including many from toxic sources), and deep-felt insecurity and vulnerability from a loss of unquestioned entitlement.

Let me guess the solution: more feminism?

[–]kragshot 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]LemonFrosted -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

Are you just a regular idiot, or are you a fucking idiot?

1) 2-6% is 2-6% of reported rape cases, not 2-6% of the population. By definition an unreported rape can't be a false report, so in absolute terms the relative number is significantly smaller.

2) Inflating the numbers and grandstanding in an attempt at painting it as an epidemic is intellectually dishonest and poisons the well, ensuring that the issue doesn't get taken seriously at all. There's a story about this called The Boy Who Cried Wolf. You might want to check it out.

3) Something the MRM isn't willing to face is the fact that a decent chunk of the men claiming they've been falsely accused are, in fact, rapists who don't consider their crime to actually be rape. Harbouring these people directly undermines the MRM's own efforts to remediate the issue of sexual violence directed at males.

And that in a nutshell is basically what the MRM has become: its own worst enemy.

The MRM is the biggest setback in men's issues in a generation.

[–]5th_Law_of_Robotics1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]LemonFrosted1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]5th_Law_of_Robotics1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]kragshot1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]5th_Law_of_Robotics1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]kragshot1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

So; you're calling me a rapist then? How dare you discount what happened to me. I'm sure that you would not do the same thing to a woman who claimed that she was raped; but it's fine for you to come in here and pull this shit on men who have been victimized.

By the way; that's funny because the courts ultimately said differently, considering that I was four towns away when the rape I was accused of committing supposedly happened and the woman who I was accused of raping was in fact trying to cover up an affair.

So, I guess that Brian Banks really raped Wanetta Gibson, right and he should still be in jail?

And the Scotsboro boys actually raped those two white women.

And Jesse Hunter actually was in Rosewood FL, raping white women there too, right?

And Heidi Jones was actually raped and she was lying when she recanted and said that she did it to keep from getting trouble for being late from work, right?

And William McCaffery should have stayed in jail when Biurny Peguro Gonzalez accused him of rape because even if he didn't do it, he could have, right?

You are the MRM's worst enemy.

And again, when some male who you actually care about is falsely accused, you just remember this conversation and your cavalier attitude to this situation. But then and again, you will probably believe that he was a rapist, regardless of the truth of the situation.

[–]aarghj 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]fia_bui 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]aarghj 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]fia_bui 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]McFeely_Smackup 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]texasjoe 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Nomenimion 5 points6 points7 points 12 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[+]Lurlur -8 points-7 points-6 points 12 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[+]Lurlur -8 points-7 points-6 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Nomenimion 5 points6 points7 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]pvtshoebox 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]fia_bui 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Can't speak for Nomeneninimimnuen... something. But of course they shouldn't. The principle of innocent until proven guilty should apply to everyone. Someone should only go to jail/be liable for damages if it can be absolutely proven they actually did something. I'm aware the standard of proof for civil cases is lower, but I think that's wrong too, at least it's wrong in cases where criminal liability is also involved (like the OJ case).

If someone makes an accusation, then the defence has the benefit of the doubt. If the defence sues for damages, then it goes the other way. To be honest, most false accusations probably won't be proven, but there's been so many times when proven false accusers with masses of evidence against them have gotten off scott free because "prosecuting them might deter genuine accusers" or "they've already paid enough for their crime" or they do get prosecuted but get a slap on the wrist like community service or a suspended sentence. That's the problem here.

I'd also support anonymity for both parties in serious criminal cases and false accusation cases related to them. Even if the courts (in theory) assume the innocence of anyone not proven guilty, it's no real consolation given that the media and society in general don't. The details of a case should be released, but any personally identifiable information should be anonymised before it's published.

[–]Lurlur 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]fia_bui 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Lurlur 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (34 children) | Copy Link

[–]Number357 7 points8 points9 points 12 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Um, the same way we differentiate between a man who had consensual sex and a man who is a rapist. If you can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant raped the accuser, than convict the defendant. If you can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the accuser lied, then convict the accuser. If you can't prove either way, then convict nobody. The problem is, even when here is clear evidence the woman lied, she is rarely prosecuted (in the US; it's starting to improve in other countries). For example, in the Hofstra case, the men were thrown in jail and subjected to abuse and death threats. Then, when a video surfaced that proved the sex was consensual, and the woman subsequently admitted she lied... she was not even charged. That's an issue. We charge men when there is little if any evidence they are guilty, and yet refuse to charge women when there is irrefutable evidence that they lied about the rape.

[–]Lurlur -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]Number357 5 points6 points7 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

In the US, prosecutors are ethically and legally bound to only bring charges against somebody if they honestly and reasonably believe they can prove that person's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. So charges should only be brought against the accuser under these circumstances. However, the same needs to apply to the initial rape accusation as well. Political pressure from feminists has, unfortunately, frequently caused prosecutor's offices to ignore this rule when bringing charges against a man accused of rape.

Somebody defending against a rape accusation or a charge of filing a false accusation should be held to the same standard; "beyond a reasonable doubt" in criminal cases. Which raises an interesting issue regarding college students accused of rape. Currently, the SAVE Act requires colleges in the US to expel a student accused of rape if a J-Board finds there is a 50.000001% chance they are guilty. If that's considered fair, then the same should apply to women accused of filing a false accusation: They get expelled if the J-Board is 50.00001% sure that the accuser lied. Obviously, feminists would argue that it's not fair to expel a woman just because she can't prove that she didn't lie... but then that same reasoning should apply to the man being accused, he shouldn't be expelled just because he can't prove he's telling the truth either.

[–]Nomenimion 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Lurlur 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Nomenimion 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (28 children) | Copy Link

[–]Lurlur -3 points-2 points-1 points 12 years ago (27 children) | Copy Link

I agree with your first comment there, a person's right to justice shouldn't be affected by anything outside of it but this isn't a perfect world. If it was we wouldn't even need to have this conversation.

You are trivialising a very serious and traumatic thing though. It's about a lot more than just 'putting on their big girl pants' and the risk of being convicted of falsely accusing their rapist would put a significant number of victims off reporting their rape.

People who falsely accuse someone of raping them are beyond contempt, they can do immeasurable damage to someone's life, career and reputation but if it came down to it, I know I'd rather have them on the streets than a rapist who could have been convicted.

It's all well and good talking hypothetically but it just doesn't work in the real world.

[–]Nomenimion 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (26 children) | Copy Link

[–]Lurlur -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (25 children) | Copy Link

[–]Peter_Principle_ 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (24 children) | Copy Link

[–]Lurlur 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (23 children) | Copy Link

Have you?

One of the major problems about this subreddit is that it examines every issue in a vacuum. It wants everything to be simple, black and white, bad guys get punished, good guys get rewarded. It forgets that this isn't how the world works.

Of course I think false rape accusers, of any gender, should be held accountable for the damage they cause. That's a no brainer. BUT, life doesn't always work out that way. I don't want actual rape victims (again any gender) to be put off reporting rape because if it came down to it, I'd rather that a violent, serial rapist was behind bars while a false accuser walked free. To me, that's also a no brainer.

People who try to use rape accusations as leverage or revenge are scum, I'm not denying that for a single second. They damage public perception of actual rape victims, make actual convictions more difficult and perpetuate victim blaming, of course they should pay but at what cost to others?

Greatest good for the greatest number. Life isn't fair.

[–]Peter_Principle_ 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

[–]Lurlur 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[–]Peter_Principle_ 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[–]Lurlur1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Peter_Principle_1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Didn't realise I had to lay everything out for you

You're pretty dense, aren't ya.

But no, I understand completely. After all, I hate rapists the same way you hate false rape accusers. The worst part about rapists is how it affects public perception of false rape accusers and makes them seem more believable. It makes it less likely that men who have been falsely accused of rape will be believed, and makes juries more likely to improperly convict men accused of rape.

Notice how, in the previous paragraph, I treat the victims of rape as completly irrelevant, like they aren't even important? That's you.

feed you facts

The issue here is your attitude, not mine. Doi.

The stupid thing is we are on the same side here

I'm not entirely sure your claim is true, but I've not seen what you have to say on feminist attempts to erode civil rights such as rape shield laws feminist rape training policies. What you've said so far isn't exactly encouraging.

[–]Lurlur1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Peter_Principle_1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Lurlur1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Peter_Principle_1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Is it just about anonymity?

No.

 What really bothered him about that case was that a   rape shield law prevented Tyson’s counsel from introducing  evidence of prior false accusations, which could have  demonstrated to the jury that the woman had a history of   lying about sexual encounters.

[–]Lurlur1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Peter_Principle_1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Lurlur1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Peter_Principle_1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Lurlur1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Peter_Principle_1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]fia_bui 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Nomenimion -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]Lurlur 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]fia_bui 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]kragshot 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Lurlur1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]kragshot1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]fia_bui 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 12 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]fia_bui 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Zosimasie -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]fia_bui -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]Zosimasie -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]fia_bui 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]Zosimasie 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]fia_bui 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]Zosimasie -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]fia_bui -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]Zosimasie -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]fia_bui1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Zosimasie0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 12 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]Crackerjacksurgeon 5 points6 points7 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Nomenimion 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]fia_bui 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Title	Should false rape accusers be sued?
Author	warkin
Upvotes	240
Comments	182
Date	January 13, 2014 8:51 PM UTC (12 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/1v4u29/should_false_rape_accusers_be_sued/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/should-false-rape-accusers-be-sued.1004910 https://theredarchive.com/post/1004910

Comments