Does anyone dispute the fact that the 'false allegations of rape are common' myth is dangerous?

[redqueen]

I'm mystified at some of the responses to the thread I posted which showed how very rare false rape allegations are.

That we even have to have this debate should be yet another indication of how far we have to go in combating rape culture.

For no other crime is there so much energy dedicated to focusing on false allegations.

People of color, especially black people, are unfairly incarcerated all the time. Where are the cries that all criminals should go free, to avoid this?

And it is also interesting to me that we can counter right wing talking points here all day, and no one will insinuate that since no one has voiced such talking points here, the discussion is somehow unnecessary or unwelcome.

But try to discuss the talking points used to maintain rape culture, and somehow that's a different story? Can anyone explain why?

[trumad]

1. Just a small group here on DU with a mission

They're fucking cowards in mho.

[redqueen]

13. What I don't get is how this mission isn't more obvious.

We can talk about right wing bullshit all day and no one says 'who said that here? why are you posting this?'

So seriously - WTF is going on?

[el_bryanto]

197. It's not a sufficient explanation, but it has to do with ease of empathy

Guys look at a situation of false rape and naturally empathize with the victim in that situation which is the guy - they look at an actual rape and have a harder time empathizing with the victim in that situation which is a woman. It's naturally easier to empathize with people who are like you. That's why white kids often get slaps on the wrists from white juries while black kids need to be straightened out; they can empathize with a white kid but not a black kid.

Of course once you look at the facts; that explanation is revealed to be a terrible excuse. I'm all for empathy, and think this site in general could do with a little more of it; but when the statistics so clearly imply that most woman who claim to be raped were actually raped, than you should override your empathy a little bit to find justice.

That's my theory at any rate.

Bryant

[Comrade Grumpy]

62. We're going to miss your always helpful commentary.

[intaglio]

71. Ooops

my error

[pintobean]

76. Where would you get a silly idea like that?

nt

[trumad]

194. alert fail

Nice try.

[Comrade Grumpy]

224. I didn't alert on you. I don't need to do that.

Alert fail call-out fail, I suppose.

[etherealtruth]

228. Your post suggests a certain dishonesty

It gives the impression of targeting certain posters to alert on. I am not suggesting that you have alerted (how would I know?), what I am suggesting is expressed glee and implied grander design

[Comrade Grumpy]

239. You're right. I was being dishonest: I'm not going to miss Trumad.

But I wasn't calling on people to alert on him or her. There is no need for that. Trumad has already been so alerted on and had so many posts blocked in a short period that he/she will shortly be leaving us for a time-out. I think that speaks more to Trumad's posting style than any grand design (and that's what I was referring to).

And, yes, I suppose there is a certain glee. Certain posters are unnecessarily hostile and rude. We need less of that. Even me.

[etherealtruth]

246. I agree that we all have our own unique reactions to posters

Your "certain posters" are not going to be the same as my "certain posters" ... I do alert on DU3, but infrequently and usually on the <10 post posters posting something that appears very inappropriate. (didn't prior to DU3/ I actually thought the mods did a pretty good job).

I have come to believe "alert stalking" exists ... it makes me very sad for DU. My guess is that it is carried out (iff it is really carried and not just my false belief) by a very few members.

I am not a big fan of overt rudeness, but do participate in some pretty cantankerous exchanges and agree we could use more civility (I have believed that for the last 9 years).

I am actually glad you took the time to post an explanatory (and polite) reply. Not that you care that it makes me feel better ... it does. It makes the DU experience better.

[Comrade Grumpy]

250. Have a nice afternoon.

I alert on people very rarely, and even then, only for the most egregious offenses. I recently alerted on someone who began his/her reply with "Fuck you!" Oddly enough, the panel of jurors did not agree with me.

I think our jury system is hopelessly messed up. I see posts that should be blocked given a thumbs up; I see posts that seem patently inoffensive blocked. It seems like a lot of jurors are basing their decisions on whether they agree with the post or poster in question rather than on whether the post is appropriate.

I don't know what to do about it. Maybe have moderators make those decisions?

And I, too, suspect there is "alert stalking" going on. I think the solution to that is to require alerters to identify themselves.

[etherealtruth]

252. "I think the solution to that is to require alerters to identify themselves. "

Not a bad idea, at all

[madinmaryland]

159. Once again, another inciteful comment. nt

[gollygee]

2. I agree 100%

If people are concerned about people wrongfully imprisoned, anti-racism work is the place to be, because that's where it happens the most.

[redqueen]

8. Exactly. It's so obvious what's going on.

I don't understand why so many people here are so upset by others trying to have this conversation.

[Cal Carpenter]

65. And reading the book The New Jim Crow is a fantastic way to see how deeply embedded this problem

is in our so-called justice system.

Pardon me for butting in here, I just can't refrain from recommending this book at any possible opportunity.

http://newjimcrow.com/

[gollygee]

67. +1

Also, Slavery By Another Name

[redqueen]

74. Thanks for sharing that.

I call it the "justice" system.

[Squinch]

269. Which would lead one to conclude that wrongful imprisonment isn't REALLY what is

making those posters upset.

[Bjorn Against]

3. I think far too often people confuse reasonable doubt with false allegations

There are lots of cases of reasonable doubt in which there is not enough evidence to imprison the person charged with the crime, but just because there is not enough evidence does not mean the victim made the story up.

[redqueen]

9. Excellent point.

Thank you.

[boston bean]

10. There are some who float that 45% of reported rapes are false accusations.

just letting you know.

[Bjorn Against]

15. That is certainly not my belief

[boston bean]

18. I wasn't saying it was. I was just letting you know.

Didn't mean for it to come off like that.

[xulamaude]

19. Yes, this exactly. nt

[99Forever]

4. You are entitled to your own opinion.

Not your own set of facts.

[xulamaude]

7. So, what are the "facts" then?

Educate us. Again.

[redqueen]

11. Please no.

I think the 'your statistics are wrong so we should stop talking about how the 'false allegations of rape are common' myth is dangerous and reinforces rape culture, and instead talk about math!' shit is covered thoroughly in that other thread which has been derailed to death. Let's just leave that derail over there if at all possible.

[xulamaude]

17. Okay :)

ETA - seeing as how I was given one of the responses I thought I'd get ("fact" shouting) I have no problem with letting 99 drop

[99Forever]

12. The FACT is that ...

... the claim made by this poster of a ".6%" false allegation rate was patent bullshit. Round numbers, 1 out of 4 of those cases resulted in a NOT GUILTY or INNOCENT verdict.

Just because you don't like the FACTS doesn't change them.

[boston bean]

16. You think that means the allegations were false?

please prove to me that is the case.

[tkmorris]

27. It certainly doesn't mean they are TRUE

They may be, they may not be. It is unknown.

That''s the problem with this. Your cause is just, your passion is admirable, but your logic is lacking.

[boston bean]

157. How is my logic lacking when I

said the same thing. It is unknown. your comprehension may be lacking. it is UNPROVABLE.

It is however not likely that 24% of women LIE about being raped.

[rrneck]

37. I think there's a difference

between the number of rapes that occur and the number of rapes that can be proven in court.

[99Forever]

69. Granted.

However, prosecutors and cops are hardly a unbiased judge of which are or aren't "legitimate." I trust not a single word out of either of those sources. They BOTH lie, unrelentingly.

[rrneck]

106. I agree. We're not supposed to trust them.

There will always be bias. At issue is the source of the bias. So, for example, is the bias the result of misogyny in the criminal justice system, or is it the result in the realities of the difficulty of prosecuting certain crimes because of a lack of physical evidence?

And even those two possibilities become intertwined since juries have to be drawn from the general population and will reflect the mores of our society, which may be prejudiced against any number of groups of people. So it's entirely possible to have a rad fem prosecutor who won't prosecute a rape case because she knows she'll never get a conviction in a misogynistic society and she's got a gigantic caseload and a mortgage to deal with.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

85. that would be the court system that is overwhelmingly run by men.

[rrneck]

98. Well, that assumes a gender based conspiracy, which is a pretty sexist thing to say.

The court system runs on rules of evidence, no matter who sits in the drivers seat. Rape cases are difficult to prosecute, and prosecutors have to work with available resources. But in this context we can't get beyond generalities and statistics, the particulars of which are also the subject of debate.

But if you want to blame the fact that the court system is run overwhelmingly by men, I would expect you to produce some evidence that their gender results in an unjust system. You know, just like in court.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

103. DU is not court. Skinner said. That is why the jury system on DU runs like it does.

I assumed nothing. Just stated the fact that the court system is run by Men. You took the assumption of guilt upon yourself when you posted the reply you did.

When a discussion board becomes a court of law ...

Oh lord, rrneck ... to laugh is good.

That was funny, thanks. I needed that.

[rrneck]

136. Courts are

triers of fact. Facts are not gender specific but constitute empirical evidence.

It is entirely possible to have a discussion without any reference to the real world, but such discussions are pretty useless and amount to little more than internal monologues or emotional pap. So if you want to point out that the court system is overwhelmingly run by men in a discussion about the difficulty of prosecuting rape, your implication is that somehow that difficulty is the result of gender.

Do you think the difficulty in prosecuting rapes is because of the prevalence of men in the criminal justice system, and if so do you have evidence to support that opinion?

[Tuesday Afternoon]

141. questions for you, rrneck.

how would you like to be tried in a court run by Women? Would you like that? Would you think you were being fairly represented?

I will take you answers off the air as I am out the door for work where I must once again remind everyone that I am paid less on the dollar than my (equal across the board) male counterparts.

ciao.

[rrneck]

146. I wouldn't mind a bit.

Two reasons come to mind.

One is that the court system depends on evidence exclusive of the gender of the authorities that run the system.

Another is that the vast majority of women, just like the vast majority of men, are fair and just human beings who desire what is right and fair for their fellow human beings. I believe in people.

And indeed I don't doubt that your get paid less than men doing the same job. There is a reason for that, and that reason probably goes far beyond the possibility that somebody dislikes you.

[NobodyHere]

192. How would I like to have an all woman jury?

Well George Zimmerman didn't mind...


*runs*

[xulamaude]

108. Tell me, who wrote the rules of evidence? nt

[rrneck]

129. The same people that made your post possible.

Age of Enlightenment
The Age of Enlightenment (or simply the Enlightenment or Age of Reason) was a cultural movement of intellectuals beginning in the late 17th- and 18th-century Europe emphasizing reason and individualism rather than tradition.[1] Its purpose was to reform society using reason, challenge ideas grounded in tradition and faith, and advance knowledge through the scientific method. It promoted scientific thought, skepticism, and intellectual interchange.[2] It opposed superstition and intolerance, with the Catholic Church as a favorite target. Some Enlightenment philosophes collaborated with Enlightened despots, who were absolute rulers who tried out some of the new governmental ideas in practice. The ideas of the Enlightenment have had a long-term major impact on the culture, politics, and governments of the Western world.

Magna Carta
The American Constitution is the supreme law of the land, recalling the manner in which Magna Carta had come to be regarded as fundamental law. This heritage is quite apparent. In comparing Magna Carta with the Bill of Rights: the Fifth Amendment guarantees: "No person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law." In addition, the United States Constitution included a similar writ in the Suspension Clause, article 1, section 9: "The privilege of the writ habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion, the public safety may require it." Each of these proclaim no person may be imprisoned or detained without proof that he or she did wrong. The Ninth Amendment to the United States Constitution states that, "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." The framers of the United States Constitution wished to ensure that rights they already held, such as those provided by Magna Carta, were not lost unless explicitly curtailed in the new United States Constitution.[83][84]

Rules of Evidence
The rules of evidence were developed over several centuries and are based upon the rules from Anglo-American common law brought to the New World by early settlers. Their purpose is to be fair to both parties, disallowing the raising of allegations without a basis in provable fact. They are sometimes criticized as a legal technicality, but are an important part of the system for achieving a just result.

Perhaps the most important of the rules of evidence is that, in general, hearsay testimony is inadmissible (although there are many exceptions to this rule). [In the United Kingdom the Civil Evidence Act 1995 sec 1 specifically allows for admission of 'hearsay' evidence, legislation also allows for 'hearsay' evidence to be used in criminal proceedings]. This makes it impossible for the accuser to induce friends or family to give false evidence in support of their accusations because, normally, this evidence would be rejected by the presiding authority or judge. There are several examples where presiding authorities are not bound by the rules of evidence. These include the military tribunals established by the United States of America and tribunals used in Australia to try health professionals.

So, to answer your question, men wrote them. You're welcome.

[xulamaude]

145. Could have just said "men" and saved yourself the trouble. Thanks though. nt

[rrneck]

150. No trouble.

You could have just not asked such a silly question. Of course, if I hadn't included all the other information it would have been much easier to attribute all the inevitable deficiencies in the criminal justice system to the male gender. That's interesting, and it made it worth going to the trouble to provide about not only all the good that men have done, but the role of men in the creation of the benefits which you enjoy today.

As is often the case it seems, the issue is not justice or genetics but perception management. It makes me wonder how many special interests have devolved into exercises in perception management for ingroups more interested in supporting their own confirmation bias for their own egotistical ends. And of course, how many businesses and cultural entrepreneurs capitalize on that market for their own profit. Ours is a service economy after all.

[xulamaude]

152. Silly question. nt

[rrneck]

155. Why is it silly? nt

[Katashi_itto]

115. Hmmm might that make a more systemic problem?

Not so much gender but educational?

[Tuesday Afternoon]

121. possibly but, ya know ... a problem is still a problem wouldn't you agree?

[Katashi_itto]

126. Oh I'm not disputing that there's a problem. The trick is to get the PTB to recognize there is one

now you and I could agree that it's gender based. But going up to the existing good old boys network and say that to them won't get you anywhere. But if you say it "systemic" or "Educational" based. You might get farther.

Course I am on alot of painkillers from surgery and am maybe just looking at it wrong, but my two cents

[Tuesday Afternoon]

137. I will go there with you for a bit ... but, I have to go to work where I am paid less on the dollar

than my otherwise equal male colleagues ...

However I will leave you with these three comments before I go:

1. systemic. Yes, The Patriarchal System is systemic.

2. educational. Yes, the Educational System is Patriarchal.

and round and round we go.

3. Until the patriarchy decide to help and change the stats quo, the boat will continue to rock.

Rock On.

and

Peace Out, My Brother.

[Katashi_itto]

139. Very good points

[rrneck]

138. A problem is still a problem but a solution for the problem depends

on understanding the cause of the problem.

[tblue37]

38. O.J and Zimmerman both were acquitted of crimes they clearly were guilty of.

In both cases it was because those who had to determine their guilt and/or the system itself were on their side--or at least heavily stacked against any attempt to get justice for their victims through the courts.

[Comrade Grumpy]

44. It helps to have the money to buy good legal representation.

It seems like it's not guilt or innocence that matters as much as cash.

[xulamaude]

93. It's too bad then that women don't have much cash

because it is possible to sue for damages from rape in civil court.

But, of course, very few attorneys would take the case unless the perp or others (like a property management company that refuses to install requested locks) has 'deep pockets'.

[99Forever]

57. Which what to do with what?

Are you saying that everything that comes out of a prosecutor or cops mouth is unshakably true? Even after having gotten PROVED wrong in 1 out of 4 cases?

Oh and BTW, neither OJ or Zimmapunk were tried in Great Britain. You are a stickler for "facts," aren't you?

[Ms. Toad]

203. A "not guilty" conviction does not mean the allegation is proven wrong.

It means that the prosecutor did not provide admissible evidence which established, beyond a reasonable doubt (a pretty high standard), in the minds of a jury selected from a culture in which rape is still the subject of jokes and disbelief (absent visible physical wounds) sufficient facts to convict.

In the UK (a country which keeps detailed enough statistics - and comparison to other crimes), the conviction rate in cases which were deemed sufficient to warrant prosecution was 47% - 59% the rate of conviction for burglary, theft, and other violent offenses. In other words - similar cases which are strong enough to convince the people who deal with crimes every day that there is a strong enough case to go forward, are still rejected by juries; juries which are less intimately familiar with crime than those who choose to prosecute crimes, and which are subject to the same rape culture in which rape and rape survivors who are not physically brutalized are treated with skepticism and often ridicule.

I don't have statistics for the US - but they are likely to be similar.

http://www.informationisbeautiful.net/visualizations/rape-a-lack-of-conviction/

[99Forever]

222. Bullshit.

A not guilty verdict means NOT GUILTY. Period.

End of law lesson, counselor.

[boston bean]

234. So you are saying that if a prosecution fails to get a conviction in a rape case

that the woman lied? Just curious... and JUST asking..

[Ms. Toad]

237. I actually am.

I also teach law. From your understanding of the law, I suspect you don't.

[99Forever]

238. In Great Britain?

[Ms. Toad]

243. Nope. The US. n/t

[99Forever]

248. Well golly gee willikers...

... guess I have about the edjimakation you have on the subject then, eh?

BTW, telling me you are a lawyer, doesn't exactly raise my view of you.

[Ms. Toad]

256. Actually, not.

A fair amount of US law is derived from UK law - and tracing the law (and understanding the similarities and distinctinos) is actually is part of a legal education in the US, and the meaning of a "not guilty" determination in a criminal trial is essentially the same in the US as it is in the UK. (Aside from the obvious that, source of some of the statistics, aside - this discussion was not a UK centered discussion.)

Telling you I was an attorney wasn't intended to raise (or lower) your view of me. It was intended to respond to the sarcastic comment you made, which seemed to suggest I don't have a clue what I'm talking about. This particular issue happens to fall squarely within an area that is both largely misunderstood by the general public - and within my expertise.

[kwassa]

46. Not guilty does not mean innocent.

It simply means that the charges cannot be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. That is all it means.

It does not mean that the charges are false, either, simply that they are unproven.

[99Forever]

63. Not guilty does not mean guilty.

It MEANS that the charges cannot be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Your condescending crap aside

It does not mean that the charges are true, either, simply that they are unproven.

That is the essence of NOT GUILTY. You might like it, but that IS reality.

[kwassa]

79. What is your point? and what condescension?

My point is that the 27% failure-to-convict rate is not an indication of false accusations. This percentage reveals nothing about false accusations at all.

What is your point?

[kcr]

244. Yes, not proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

It doesn't mean the woman lied. It just means the prosecution couldn't prove its case.

[99Forever]

251. It also doesn't mean "the woman" didn't lie.

And what the OP did, was to equate THE PROSECUTORS AND COPS opinion as PROOF that the allegations were true. That is where the BULLSHIT is. Cops lie. Prosecutors lie. All the damn time. Truth or justice is irrelevant to most of them, all they care about is convictions.

[xulamaude]

254. "And what the OP did"

Are you talking about this OP and this thread? Or are you talking about some other OP/thread?

[99Forever]

259. The other one...

... but it appears this was little more than a continuation of the other. You can draw your own conclusions as to why.

[xulamaude]

264. It'd be helpful if you stated that clearly and maybe left

a link to it then.

Because, frankly, you were not making any sense.

[99Forever]

266. I am being attacked from multiple fronts for having the audicity...

... to not take a militant anti-male poster at their word in regards to the veracity of their claims. So pardon me for not taking time out to bring you up to speed. I'll try and do better in the future.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024238358

[xulamaude]

267. Attack, attack, attack!

Just saying that I could not understand what you were talking about.

Didn't mean to chap your butt.

[99Forever]

273. And now you can understand what I was talking about.

So state your piece.

[99Forever]

278. You're right.

It does "chap my ass" when people are phony to me, as you were with your origin snarky fucking dig at me. Clearly you had zero interest in "understanding what I was saying" or you would have commented after I provided the link YOU fucking asked for. Passive/aggressive attacks are still attacks, just VERY cowardly ones.

Who do these people think they are fooling?

[cinnabonbon]

120. And some may be unprovable

because the rape kits were thrown out, so there's less evidence to use. Like in that news article posted here a couple of days ago.

[niyad]

268. and how many thousands of rape kits are sitting, untested, in evidence lockers all around the

country. pretty obvious that rape is not a priority for law enforcement at all. and people question institutional bias, yes?

[cinnabonbon]

270. yeah. :(

It seems obvious to me that this type of crime is not treated as severely as it should be. I mean, at this point they're practically destroying evidence, or not even collecting it, because of their own reasons.

It's enough to make a person incredibly furious.

[Spider Jerusalem]

51. The standard of proof in a criminal trial is "beyond a reasonable doubt"

"not guilty" doesn't mean "innocent", it means that the defence was able to create reasonable doubt in the minds of the jurors. If the defendant says "we'd both been drinking and she invited me to come back to her place; there was intercourse, yes, but it was consensual" and the accuser says "he held me down and tore my clothes off and raped me", you have a case of he said/she said, and in many cases the jury will find for the defendant (because it's her own fault for being dressed like that/leading him on/whatever). That doesn't equate to "innocence", though.

[1StrongBlackMan]

102. I have been party to jury selection discussions on rape/sexual assault cases ...

In just about every case, the defense attorneys would "joke" that their preferred panel would be 9 women and 3 (retired) marines. The thinking goes, you want women on the jury because women tend to be more judgmental of other women because "if it wasn't her fault, than it could to me" and they wanted the marines because in that macho environment, it is likely that they (or someone they knew) had been in a situation that went too far and the assault was justified "because she led him on."

I am not saying that the defense bars assessment is true; but it is their thinking.

[Spider Jerusalem]

135. Which is really about what I'd expect...

Although there've been studies that have found that mostly-female juries are more likely to return a guilty verdict against a male defendant in a rape trial, so this sounds like one of those "common sense" things that isn't really true.

[1StrongBlackMan]

144. This was better than 15 years ago ...

and since I no longer practice (and no longer have to concern myself with panels), I have not kept up with the studies

[1StrongBlackMan]

90. Please see Post #3, above. n/t

[Katashi_itto]

97. +100, but given this another gender wars thread it all goes to trash

[redqueen]

99. You might as well be saying that threads which expose income inequality are part of a "class war".

Threads which challenge rape culture are not part of a "gender war".

[Katashi_itto]

100. hmmm, I'll give you that you seem to be one of the ones that seem to post fairly.

Maybe I am getting to twitchy about trashing threads. What exactly do you mean by rape culture first?

[redqueen]

105. One reason rape victims don't come forward --

women, children, men, boys, all victims of any kind -- is that they worry they will not be believed.

The idea that victims often lie about having been raped reinforces the tendency not to report the crime.

This idea, that false allegations of rape are common, is not true. It is a talking point used by people who benefit from rape culture. The fact that such propaganda silences victims is a manifestation of rape culture.

[Katashi_itto]

113. Well I totally agree with that. Ok reread your post and it very reasonable.

Not trashing the thread. Not sure if I'd have anything to since your summary is very succinct.

Sorry the gender wars just has me very twitchy. Tired of trying to wind through posts of spew.

Sitting here recovering from hip replacement and just don't have the patience

Anyway Good post!

[1StrongBlackMan]

117. Well ...

You might as well be saying that threads which expose income inequality are part of a "class war".

THAT will never be an issue because those calling rape culture challenging threads a part of a gender war, do not feel (directly) adversely affected by rape challenge, except when they have been annoyed by someone suggesting that their antipathy and/or actions enables a culture that they don't believe exists. However, they DO feel, directly and adversely affected by the income inequity that they do believe exists.

[Ms. Toad]

161. In a criminal trial - there is no such thing as a verdict of "innocent."

Not guilty merely means that the evidence presented was not sufficient to prove that either a crime was committed or, if one was, the person charged is the one who committed it. It does mean the allegation was false - and in a culture in which far too many members still believe that "no" means "yes, but I have to say 'no' in order to preserve my reputation," andthat no woman can be raped against her will, and that pregnancy cannot result from rape, and so on - many jurists (drawn from that culture) require far more to convict people who commit rape than they do to convict for any other crime.

(An "innocent" verdict in a criminal matter only comes after a conviction is reversed, after jail time, in order to establish the right to compensation from the state for false imprisonment. It is extremely rare - and unlikely to be included in any general statistics about trial verdicts.)

[99Forever]

220. Kewl.

Let's nitpick semantics.




Call out the Grammar Patrol.

[Ms. Toad]

235. It is actually a very real difference.

"Not guilty" says nothing at all about the truth of the allegation - not even that the jury doesn't believe the allegations. To find "not guilty," every single juror can still believe the accused is actually guilty of the crime - and still return a verdict of not guilty if a single juror believes that a reasonable person could reach a different conclusion based on the evidence presented. (That is what beyond a reasonable doubt means.)

"Innocent" means that after a court has found someone guilty and that person has served time, the conviction has been reversed. As a step toward seeking compensation from the state, a court must generally determine 50+% that the allegations against that particular person were false.

In both cases, the allegations could actually be either true or false. But in the case of a "not guilty" verdict, there is no assessment at all about innocence (or the truth of the allegations). Only an assessment by the jury that a reasonable person could conclude that either the crime wasn't committed - or that it was committed by someone else.

In the case of a verdict of innocent (declaration of innocence), there is a decision by the court that the allegations were false.

When you assert that, "Round numbers, 1 out of 4 of those cases resulted in a NOT GUILTY or INNOCENT verdict" contradicts the claim of ,"'.6%' false allegation rate," you are equating the two - "not guilty" and "innocent." Legally, and in terms of what they mean about the truth of an allegation," they are extremely different.

(And, frankly, even if you hadn't inserted "innocent" into your statement, the way you are using the numbers makes it clear you are equating "not guilty" with "innocent" or "false allegation." They aren't the same - and it isn't just semantics. Ask anyone who has been released via the Innocence project, and who has been denied compensation for false imprisonment because the reversal of their conviction is not sufficient to establish their innocence.)

[99Forever]

236. A whole bunch of blah blah...

.. to try and pretend you made some deep point.

If ya got nothin', baffle 'em with long winded bullshit.

Here's the deal, when someone is found NOT GUILTY, the one thing it damn sure DOESN'T prove, is that the allegation was TRUE. You can retype your personal opinions till your fingers bleed, it will never change that FACT.

[Ms. Toad]

242. Tell it to

Sam Sheppard's son, Douglas Prade, or Clarence Elkins. (Three cases I am intimately familiar with, in which "not guilty" meant something very different from "innocent.&quot

FWIW What I said was that a "not guilty" verdict says nothing, either way, about the truth of allegation. You are correct that it does not prove the allegation true. Similarly, it does not prove the allegation false.

[madinmaryland]

221. A GUILTY or NOT GUILTY verdict has nothing to do with whether the allegation is true or false.

A Jury bases it's decision based on the evidence presented in court. Just because someone is charged with a crime, based on an allegation, and then subsequently found not guilty of the crime, does not mean the allegation is false. It only means that the evidence as seen by the jury was not strong enough to find guilty.

[BainsBane]

257. The FBI provides statistics on false allegations

that show they are exceedingly rare. An acquittal is not a false allegation. Was the allegation that Zimmerman killed Trayvon Martin false? You use the endemic sexism in the justice system as evidence of false allegation? Do you also believe that African Americans are inherently more violent because they receive heavier prison sentences? Your post lacks anything resembling fact or logic.

The fact support exactly what Redqueen has shown and PROVE you wrong.

Only 3% of rapes ever result in a conviction and jail time. Rapists act with virtual impunity, which is exactly how misogynists want it. The false allegation meme is part of an ongoing effort to make sure that conviction rate is even lower.

[niyad]

52. right on schedule. and just remember, that statement works both ways.

[Matariki]

127. What does that even mean? That you've memorized a platitude?

How in the world does it relate to the OP?

[99Forever]

218. Reading is fundamental.

Try it sometime.

[BainsBane]

260. You start first

Here is a chart that shows rapes vs. convictions and false allegations. It is based on FBI numbers. Now what were you saying about reading?



http://theenlivenproject.com/the-truth-about-false-accusation/

[99Forever]

261. Was I speaking to you?

[BainsBane]

262. So you aren't interested in reading

or facts? What a shock.

[99Forever]

263. I'm not interested in you or anything you have to say. Period.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

5. Can anyone explain why? I will take a stab at trying to understand and answer -

But try to discuss the talking points used to maintain rape culture, and somehow that's a different story? Can anyone explain why? ....

The patriarchal system does not want to be exposed. The status quo wants to remain. Do not rock the boat.

[redqueen]

14. That's the only reason I can see. nt

[xulamaude]

21. I'd go the step further and say

that the reason they don't want us to talk about rape (and rape culture/permeating threat of rape) is because it is THE biggest weapon in the patriarchal oppression arsenal.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

26. it is the most violent and demeaning and warlike. raping and pillaging of women, yes.

you can't get any more personal than that.

detest it.

but, the economy of paying women cents on the dollar absolutely pisses me off, too.

[xulamaude]

29. Oh there's that too, for sure

but there really isn't anything quite as destructive to an individual's psyche/soul than rape.

And even those who are 'lucky' enough to not have been raped are still under the threat which carries it's own spirit-crushing weight.

Girls grow up knowing that they are prey.

[redqueen]

32. "Girls grow up knowing that they are prey."

This exactly. And little boys end up being prey all too often as well. They are just as silenced by this bizarre focus on false allegations.

Certain types of men will actually refer to women as "prey". The dehumanization of women and girls is another issue that gets the 'why are you talking about this here?!?!' treatment, derailed, etc.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

34. Girls grow up knowing that they are prey. -

Yes, and if they can't have us physically they will, by god, get us in our wallets. Either way, we pay.

[xulamaude]

35. Well said :) nt

[freshwest]

109. I define the problem as oppressing men leads to oppressing women...

The demands of the powerful begin on men as boys. It is passed through generations.

Someone asked some time back (he's on Ignore now) what was the most oppressive thing done to men, as he felt oppressed by the discussion, I answered him thus:

The worst thing done to a woman is to make her a concubine.

The worst thing done to a man is to make him a soldier.

That is biological determinism, and has nothing to do with whole person. It is treating people like livestock.

Part of rape culture IMO, is the programming of men to believe their function in life is inseminating the herd of women as part of their life's purpose, else all they have suffered and lost, some cases their lives, will mean nothing.

They have been used up and have no future except the one she bears. She can fix the problem, they can't. That is why you see some of these same characterists in the forced birth group. Momma will fix it, I don't know how, but somehow, she will.

That is separate from just hating women, but part of hating women is hating weakness and hating that in oneself, as it's fatal in their world, brutally enforced since childhood.

Men are taught from boyhood to be strong, not cry, that they had better be fully ready and willing to assault other people (fighting) and to kill. The MR group have taken this to its extreme, and so have many preppers and endtimers. It's pure survivalism for the individual in a chaotic world. But it just increases the chaos since it is unbalanced, B&W thinking.

It's not hard wired, as they claim, nor is it inevitable. There are tendencies, but a lot of one's responses or wiring is done after one is born, and some occurs many years later. Re: PTSD.

That underlies dehumanization. To make an army requires a perverted (or maybe not?) sense of team spirit and 'us against them.' Once one is taught that B&W way of thinking, it's applied to everything. Business, sex, nature, politics, oneself. A lot of men kill themselves in various ways or in suicide, because they don't have a gray area to live in. Winner vs Loser.

The Kipling poem "IF" says:

If you can meet with Triumph and Disaster
And treat those two impostors just the same

The poem is primarily about being humiliated and disrespected, not being accepted, lied about, and the weariness of having to deal with all the injustice of the world, knowing that one has to keep on doing right. Despite that you will never be given credit for any of it.

Has a rapist or racist or anyone who harms another learned any of the lessons in that poem?

No, nor are the their own masters.

Part of that training I spoke of earlier is needed to survive in dysfunctional human society, and even in the trials of life from nature itself, so it's hard to escape. Men have generally been forced into this task. Some take it on as a matter of pride, thus they cannot give it up. Others realize it should be a small part of their lives.

Still others resent the position that women hold but not being told 'of course, you will do this and that and go and die' when deep down they are still sane and afraid, not willing, but must to give up their feelings to survive that world.

They are told, in a very direct way as having been born with a penis, much as women because they are born with a vagine, are going to be told:

'Your life is not your own, your life and dreams mean nothing, who you would have been is not important, and we will take your freedom and your life one way of the other.'

And in giving up those feelings that are more honest and balanced, they will not treat women any better than they were treated.

I saw a while back a photo spread of young soldiers in Afghanistan here at DU. it was an artistic collection. No matter what else the men looked like, in their eyes, all I saw was the look of person who had just been as traumatized as any rape victim.

It was in their core, it coiuld not be taken away. Their sense of what life was supposed to be and their pride had been stripped away. It was not the 'thousand mile stare,' though.

The look was not sorrow or fatigue, it was shock, not the kind that can be faked, either, from one's entire view of life being destroyed. Helplessness, young and vulnerable, of all types.

My comment on the thread was:

'They all look as if they have just been raped.'

One can become an advocate or perpertrator from having lost their normal feelings. Our society, or our leaders, or maybe even the world itself demands ruthlessness at times.

Specialization leads a person to be the best at whatever they choose to do or is chosen for them by birth. I think we need to heal the man before we lecture him.

But I also would say that it is the job of men to do this work. As they will seldom be capable of showing their weakness to a woman, because they are afraid on a level that they can't escape. They want to hurt and maim and kill as their souls have been.

I could have written this better, but it's the best I can do as I'm very busy today. Just a few thoughts on the run.

[xulamaude]

111. "it is the job of men to do this work"

Agreed.

[cinnabonbon]

130. the way boys are taught

their emotions and dreams are worth little is dehumanizing and unfair. I wish we could create a world where it was easier to show their true selves without being hurt for it. Same for girls, of course.

I have to agree with you that these societies we live in aren't healthy for the human spirit. We should do more to improve them, so in turn our youngest can show us the best humanity has to offer. Not... being forced to be prey or soldier.

[1StrongBlackMan]

140. I think that argument has legs ...

I while back I shared a discussion I had with a white man supervisor (not mine, not even with my company) about racial power dynamics in corporate America. He made a comment that parallels went you stated.

During the post-conference decompression session, the guy argued that the Black male had it worse than Black females because White men are less threatened by Black females, so they (Black women) are allowed in the door (though ignored once they get in, but allowed in never-the-less).

I ended the conversation when he summed up his belief with: " ... At the end of the day, when push comes to shove, I can still f@$% the Black women (put her in her place)."

I was dumbfounded ... he proved that "the drunken tongue speaks the speaker's sober truth."

[xulamaude]

147. Good example.

I'm guessing he said it as a 'joke'.

[1StrongBlackMan]

154. Of course ...

He did. When everyone within hearing shot looked at him like he had lost his mind, he said, "I'm kidding ... Can't you guys take a joke!"

But sadly, that sentiment is not limited to white male.

On another occasion, I was talking with a Black male co-worker who was having problems with his (white) female supervisor. He told me, "I'd like to just take her and f@$% her brains out ... That'll show her who is boss."

I said, "Dude, I pretty sure that attitude is exactly why you are having problems with her."

[seabeyond]

158. i love seeing you bring your own experience into this discussion. totally love it.

i see it as uniting and not dividing. i see it as bring us to one. i see it as the stong black voice with the strong woman voice. and that simple sentence excites me so

love you ... man

[Electric Monk]

163. Welcome back. Good that you can speak for yourself again, instead of relying on Omega Minimo. nt

[seabeyond]

168. do not know what you are implying, i do not care. nt

[xulamaude]

178. Omega Minimo! LOL! nt

[Electric Monk]

206. It's awesome how you got my reference, for someone who only registered here a month ago.

How many accounts so far? Just curious.

[seabeyond]

210. it is against the rules to call out duers in this manner. i know. i did not and yet, just talking

posting history got a post of mine hidden. and i was told, talking about a posters history was against the rules.

just sayin'

[Electric Monk]

212. I see what you tried to do there, but it's really not the same.

[seabeyond]

216. as i said, just sayin'. you may not interpret it as the same. others may

[xulamaude]

232. Just one. I have however been reading DU

since around 2003 or so.

Don't need to be a member to read.

[1StrongBlackMan]

166. It is my only contribution ...

with respect to "women's issues." I can't/won't tell women what to think about gender issues, or how to act to deal with gender issues ... all I can do is call out men, when our conduct makes stuff worse.

[seabeyond]

171. and as always, appreciated and valued. nt

[1StrongBlackMan]

179. But the funny thing is ...

There is not a word I have written in these threads that are intended for female consumption ... I'm talking to the mens!

[seabeyond]

182. i like to hear it all. to better understand. maybe that would be a difference.

i have boys in my life. even amongst men, these conversations are important to me.

[redqueen]

187. My friend,

if there is one kind of male ally that all feminists recognize the desperate need for, it is the ones that address other men.

[1StrongBlackMan]

202. Awhile back ...

Melissa Perry-Harris said something that resonated with me (as it summarizes my beliefs).

She started by listing her active involvement in advocating for women's issues and Black issues. Then, she said: {something to the effect of} "But when I'm involved in advocacy for Gay causes and for my Gay friends, I realize my role is to shut my mouth and listen to their truths ... then, communicate that truth to my non-Gay friends ... that is my only role I can play in Gay Advocacy."

[redqueen]

205. She's a wise woman. nt

[LisaLynne]

6. No one should. nt

[redqueen]

20. True,

and it's discouraging to see that message ignored and a discussion derailed completely. Even worse to see some try to twist the discussion into a "gender war".

Fighting rape culture is not a "gender war" by any stretch of the imagination.

[LisaLynne]

22. Yes, that has been very discouraging.

To categorize a discussion of rape and rape culture as a "gender war" is just really disheartening. To have to argue some of this stuff on a supposedly progressive message board is just really sad.

[Nye Bevan]

23. Anyone who claims that false rape allegations are "common" is talking nonsense.

Fortunately the level of hatred and vindictiveness that is needed to ruin someone's life like that is not common at all.

[redqueen]

24. If you read the report from the UK, it's more often correlated with mental illness,

not hatred or vindictiveness.

[msanthrope]

59. If you think mentally ill people cannot have motives of hatred or vindictiveness,

I think you have a facile perception of the mentally ill.

[Drahthaardogs]

104. Define common please.

The quoted "study" is fairly poor, yet there are reasonably good British studies out there. Specifically


1999 British Home Office Study

or

2005 British Home Office Study.

The 2005 study is much more complete and shows a much lower incidence of false rape claims than the 1999 study. Still, over a 15-year period, it showed an incidence of around 3%.

This, would substantiate the claim that false accusations are indeed, "rare" and not common; yet they are orders of magnitude beyond the %.6 quoted earlier.

In my mind, the question then becomes how common or uncommon is 1 out of 33 ?

However, adding to the confusion is that fact that the UK has had an abysmal conviction rate for rape (even as late as 2002), and of course, they have a different set of laws, different burdens of proof, and a different social structure.

I would not extrapolate ANYTHING from the UK study and apply it to U.S. culture. I would, however, use it as a general line of evidence for an overall informational purposes.

[The Straight Story]

25. I will repeat what I said there, with an addendum:

Last thread:

0.6% is about the same as gun owners who commit crimes with their guns

Which means 99% don't.

Yet the many get labeled as suspicious, humpers, etc because of what those few do.

I wonder if it is acceptable to do so when it comes to guns but not other things (ie, to paint the many based on the few)?

The principle is the same. Maybe it is *because* of the few the many are upset and see such crimes as something to bring to light --- well, actually, crime in general. Most people don't go out and rob the local Taco Bell. But the ones that do make the news.

Most women don't falsely report rape. But when one does, because it is not normal, it gets reported on. Just like about every other story in the news which covers things involving out of the ordinary stories.

--------------------------

Addendum:

What I find more common is the failure of governments (state/local) to free up funding for rape testing kits (posted a few horror stories on those not all that god awful long ago). That problem leads to more unsolved/UN-prosecuted/etc cases which can make it seem there are more false allegations than there are.

From Slate:

But isn't the rate of false rape charges an empirical question, with a specific answer that isn't vulnerable to ideological twisting? Yes and no. There has been a burst of research on this subject. Some of it is careful, but much of it is questionable. While most of the good studies converge at a rate of about 8 percent to 10 percent for false rape charges, the literature isn't quite definitive enough to stamp out the far higher estimates. And even if we go by the lower numbers, there's the question of interpretation. If one in 10 charges of rape is made up, is that a dangerously high rate or an acceptably low one? To put this in perspective, if we use the Bureau of Justice Statistics that show about 200,000 rapes in 2008, we could be looking at as many as 20,000 false accusations.

...

Rumney's smart debunkings leave us with a group of American, British, Canadian, and New Zealand studies that converge around a rate of 8 percent to 10 percent for false reports of rape. Not all of these studies are flawless, but together they're better than the rest of the lot. They include a massive 1997 report on sexual assault by the U.S. Department of Justice, which includes data from 16,000 local, county, and state law enforcement agencies. The DoJ found that "in 1995, 87% of recorded forcible rapes were completed crimes and the remainder were classified as attempts. Law enforcement agencies indicated that about 8% of forcible rapes reported to them were determined to be unfounded and were excluded from the count of crimes."

...



On the law enforcement end, we heard from Steve Cullen, an Army attorney who's worked extensively as a prosecutor. He offered this cogent—and dire—explanation of the reverberations when women cry wolf about rape:

False reports have an incredibly corrosive impact on how sexual assault accusations are policed. Police treat sexual assault accusers badly—much worse than the lawyers do—much worse than the courtroom does. Forget what you see on "Law and Order SVU," the police end absolutely discourages victims from reporting. Why is this so? Because cops suspect just about every victim is another false accuser, because either he/she has personally dealt with such a problem, or has heard stories from his or her cop buddies to this effect (and yes, in my experience female cops can be even worse offenders). This police behavior is bad, and counterproductive—but it's real. Putting a real stigma on false reports might combat this a bit—and make it a little easier for actual victims at the police station.

False reports also have a disproportionate impact on juries. How I'd hate to be prosecuting a sexual assault right now. Often in sexual assault prosecutions there's no debate as to the sex, but everything falls on proving lack of consent—and can only be proven through a convincing and persuasive victim's testimony. Often, that victim's testimony has to overcome some less than ideal circumstances—she was drinking, people observed her flirting with the perpetrator etc. That's something she can own up to, and overcome on her own. What she can't do on her own is extinguish jury members' memory of reading of some spectacular false accusation case in the newspaper last month. Every false accusation that makes it into the news makes it that much harder for the real victims to receive justice.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2009/10/how_often_do_women_falsely_cry_rape.html

False reports hurt women in the long run - and for that reason we should all want to come down hard on those who do - not try to brush their crimes under the rug. Same with rapists - come down hard on them and don't screw around. Approve more funding for investigating, testing, prosecuting, and kick out non-violent drug offenders from jail to make space for those that abuse others.

[redqueen]

28. False reports hurt women far less than rape culture. nt

[xulamaude]

31. Got that right. nt

[Savannahmann]

36. You can't equate the two.

The Rape Culture is a question of moral and societal presumptions and behavior. The asinine belief that she was asking for it based upon how she was dressed. That mentality is being steadily pushed out of the realm of the acceptable. But the question of a legal charge of Rape is another one entirely. Each case must be judged on it's own merits. Each case must be judged by a jury that is free to believe whom they want, and consider the testimony, and evidence, in context with the cases laid out.

Switching to the alternative of guilty until proven innocent would not help prevent rape. It would in the end, be the destruction of or entire system of jury trials. The jury trial is vitally important to protecting the rights of the accused, as well as the victim. We want the guilty punished, but we need to make sure that the one accused is guilty. That is where the trial comes in. Where we place a check on the Government. Just because the police said he did it doesn't mean he is guilty. Tell us why you think he is guilty, what evidence is there?

I will absolutely support you if you call for long prison sentences for Rape. I will absolutely back you 100% if you want to increase the availability of science based evidence to the courts. But taking the position that the accused is guilty until proven innocent is where I will no longer back you. From the time the individual is accused, in my mind he or she will always be innocent until proven guilty. I'd hope that everyone has that mentality, because that is our duty to our fellow citizens.

[redqueen]

39. "taking the position that the accused is guilty until proven innocent is where I will no longer bac"

No one said that. That is a complete fabrication.

As I stated in the OP, the point was to counter the rape culture-enabling myth that false rape allegations are common.

Why would you invent such a claim, which I never said, and go on to say you won't back me on it?

Why>?

[seattledo]

282. The gun analogy is a bad one

"0.6% is about the same as gun owners who commit crimes with their guns"

We can take their guns, but we can't take their penises. That's the inherent difference that makes your argument invalid.

[Savannahmann]

30. I never said that the discussion was unwelcome, nor unwarranted.

I said that the statistical conclusion was flawed. http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4239713

If someone wanted to go by convictions, then it could be argued that 27% of those charged with Rape or Domestic abuse were falsely accused. I am going to presume that you would properly object to that conclusion.

The problem is in attempting to quantify the average numbers of something based upon the statistical evidence. You can't say that only .6% were false when that was all that was prosecuted by the CPS for false allegations any more than you can say that 27% were false based upon the conviction rate.

So my experience? Fine, in my experience 100% of the allegations are false. I worked in a warehouse on the night shift many years ago. I worked with four other guys, the one in charge, and then three other workers. We were broken into teams of two, and we set up the orders to be loaded the next morning onto trucks. We'd line the orders up near the door for the outgoing trucks in other words. One of my co-workers was positively identified by the victim as committing a rape. He was arrested, charged, and arraigned for the crime. The four of us had to go to the District Attorney and sign statements that on the night of the attack, he was in the warehouse working. He was my partner that night, so yes I am absolutely sure he was there that night. Again, he was positively identified by the victim.

Now, I could say that 100% of the rape claims were false based upon my limited experience. Yet, that would be a lie, and I eschew lies. What did I suggest was the best way to judge this situation? I said that it appeared that each case was evaluated by the jury on it's own merits. Each case should be judged based upon its own merits. The one I have personal knowledge of was dropped when the four other workers were willing to swear that the accused had an alibi. Even then the police told us that they thought we were all lying. In other words, they wanted to believe the woman, because now the case was in the crapper. There is literally no way you can operate off of a victim identification when she's already positively identified the wrong man.

http://www.innocenceproject.org/Content/DNA_Exonerations_Nationwide.php

I could suggest other sites, and I would. But what is the point of that one I have linked to? They use DNA evidence to exonerate people falsely convicted. I would personally like to see DNA evidence in every case possible, and in Rape cases that is very likely to be possible. I believe it would prevent the false convictions, and increase the likelihood of a conviction for the guilty. The links you provided said that convictions had risen to 73%, and one must assume that is because of increased use of science based evidence.

I don't believe that my position on this subject, nor the study you linked to, is in anyway hateful towards women, nor is it unreasonable to point out the painfully obvious flaws in the report. What I believe I am advocating is a case by case approach with as much scientific evidence as possible for those cases. I want to make as sure as humanly possible, more sure if possible, that no innocent man or woman goes to prison. I also want to see the guilty punished, and the public protected from that guilty person doing anything like this again. But my desire for that second outcome does not permit me to accept a flawed study with an obviously erroneous conclusion.

Perhaps you can tell me if my position is unreasonable. I am always willing to listen, and consider.

[redqueen]

33. Wall of text, helpful. Did you even read the OP?

Because your reply, like the one above yours, seems to be more suited to the other OP.

[xulamaude]

41. The old 'I know a guy...'

I mean I get that that wasn't his point but:

The thing is though that most every single woman knows at least one woman/girl who has been raped/sexually assaulted (often herself) and usually more than just one.

In my adult life I'd say around 70-80% of the women I've known well enough to talk about this with have been raped or sexually assaulted. Add in unwanted sexualized touching that often isn't treated as assault but more as 'boys will be boys' (breast touching, forced kisses, etc) it'd bee 100%.

One hundred percent.

ETA - one hundred percent based upon a way bigger sample group than 1.

[redqueen]

43. Well said. The sexual assault that is implied to be harmless fun.

The stuff that people roll their eyes at, when you actually call it sexual assault.

Women used to be afraid of even mentioning those kinds of constant violations. The message that it's 'making something out of nothing' did its job well.

But ever since Laura Bates set up the Everyday Sexism project, more and more people, men and women, are finding their voices, and fighting against the constant effort to normalize this shit.

[Ms. Toad]

213. When people trained in determining which cases are supported by evidence

have dramatically different conviction rates based on the nature of the crimes, it is indicative that the way the juries treat the crimes is different.

Conviction rates (in the UK where statistics are more complete and easier to find): Burglary 70%; theft 85%; violent offenses (which I believe excludes rape) 68%. Rape: 40%. In other words, of the crimes the limited pool of professionals evaluating the evidence deem appropriate to prosecute, the rate at which juries are willing to use that same evidence to deprive someone of their liberty is roughly half that of other crimes.

Juries of laymen are still, largely, reluctant to deprive someone of their liberty merely on the word of someone who accuses them of rape - even when those trained to objectively evaluate the evidence believe the accused raped the survivor.

So the lower conviction rate - relative trials for other crimes evaluated by the same prosecutors as trial-worthy - ought to at least make you ask the question, "Why do the (controlled and limited group of) prosecutors (with intense exposure to evidence and survivor statements) misjudge rape cases so badly in contrast to other crimes - or is it the juries (many of which, because of how juries are selected, are not exposed to crime on a systemic basis)?"

[TheKentuckian]

40. You ought to address your misinterpretation and possible distortion of statistics in your other

thread and come back to have a more honest conversation about this. You are the one who is substituting one number for another and trying to package it as fact. You falsely claimed that .6% of rape accusations as false based on the percentage of time someone was charged with making a false accusation when there is no reason to correlate those two data points.

Your point is valid as far as it goes but your evidence is misinformation, deceptive, and comes off like a call for the presumption of guilt.

[redqueen]

42. "comes off like a call for the presumption of guilt."

No, it doesn't.

[TheKentuckian]

47. Your stats do not support your argument and to me it does, I see little other point in the assertion

and the willful use of misleading data to collaborate the argument.

[Ohio Joe]

45. The MRA group will always fight the facts...

They will try to drag the discussion to such things as conviction rate and how bad it is if an innocent gets convicted, and anything else they can think of to distract from the point. Their purpose is to put out any old bullshit in order to try and keep women as second class citizens.

[redqueen]

48. Just as rightwingers would do in most threads here, if they could get a foothold. nt

[Ohio Joe]

50. Agreed

The completely open misogyny is obscene and I have no idea why it is allowed.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

83. Ba-Zinga!!

[xulamaude]

49. This is where seabeyond would have said

'thank you joe'

[Electric Monk]

56. What, did seabeyond get PPRd or something?

So it would seem.... flagged for review.... good thing she has you to speak for her....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=139846&sub=trans

[xulamaude]

58. Hi Monk.

Did you have something to say about the OP?

[Electric Monk]

66. It's a no win situation. I'm already guilty of being male. nt

[xulamaude]

70. You said it, not anyone else here. Remember that. nt

[Electric Monk]

73. Already guilty in your books, no matter what I write, say, or do. Yes, we understand each other. nt

[xulamaude]

77. Christ, Monk, your mindreading leaves a lot to be desired....

not to mention 'putting words into my mouth' and all that.

Again, do have something to say about the OP?

[Comrade Grumpy]

91. Oh, my. DU's total post count probably dropped 10% today.

[99Forever]

75. I have no idea what the "MRA group' might think.

Nor do I give a fuck. But that doesn't give the OP free reign to post her or cops and prosecutors opinions as facts. The FACT is, that said cops and prosecutors lost 1 in 4 of those cases. Their bias is quite clear.

Sorry if that puts your undies in bunch.

[Ohio Joe]

78. You keep saying that... Why do you keep trying to intentionally misrepresent the OP?

It has been said before but I'll say it again... Conviction rate and false allegation are simply not the same thing. I find it amazingly dishonest of you to continue trying to equate them... And very telling.

[kwassa]

82. Losing does not indicate bias.

I don't know where you came up with that.

Prosecutors take on cases on the their ability to make them stick based on the evidence they have.

A 73% conviction rate is quite high. Pretty successful.

[niyad]

53. it really is quite simple--the patriarchy maintains power by keeping women in fear, keeping them

from living full and complete lives. part of the way this is accomplished is through rape culture. we cannot have discussions pointing out how woman-hating and ugly this is, because then the patriarchy would lose one of its favourite weapons to keep women under control, living in fear.

[Tumbulu]

133. so true

in my public life people describe me as courageous ....but inside I am scared to walk in any big city, scared to drive older vehicles that might break down. Have had break downs and will not take rides with strangers for help. Was one of the first to get a cell phone to be able to call for help. Men in my world (farming) never even think about this silliness. They drive old vehicles, and fix them when they break, they do not worry that someone will rape them on the side of the road.

The things that women worry about are endless it seems and that is in this country where we are supposedly so liberated! We are certainly not liberated from fear. It is blasted at us 24/7.

Mind you I have done many adventurous things on my own, but I always have had to fight this fear of attack that is in the atmosphere.

[NoOneMan]

54. What would DU be without RAPE plastered on the front page every day?

Oh, how I miss the vaginal knitting days

[xulamaude]

60. What would the world be like if RAPE

wasn't a common thing every day?

[Tuesday Afternoon]

110. Imagine that ...

I wonder if they can ...

[niyad]

271. did you see this latest outrage in india?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024240923

[xulamaude]

272. I hadn't, but I have now.

JFC.

[redqueen]

89. Rape is an epidemic that affects many lives.

Is it a problem for you, that some of us care to discuss the issue?

[Comrade Grumpy]

55. How common is the "false allegations of rape are common" myth?

The precise numbers can be contested, but they are pretty indisputably low. Looks like 10% on the high side.

I'm sure you can pull up a couple of posts on this discussion board and some others from dark corners of the internet and blogosphere. But is this really a big problem other than in this tempestuous teapot? I guess you could point to the dreaded "MRA," but you know, I'm fairly well-informed, and I never even heard of "MRA" before I encountered these endless threads. I imagine "MRA" as a handful of unhappy guys posting diatribes from their basements. Going after those guys seems like tilting at windmills to me. I mean, really, who pays any attention to them?

I think some of it may a reaction to the presumption that EVERY accusation of rape is valid, one that seems to be shared by many posters here. The Duke fiasco is a case in point: Many, many people here convicted those lacrosse players because of preconceived notions about not just sex, but race and class.

[redqueen]

61. As I said in the OP

... we can counter right wing talking points here all day, and no one will insinuate that since no one has voiced such talking points here, the discussion is somehow unnecessary or unwelcome.

But try to discuss the talking points used to maintain rape culture, and somehow that's a different story? Can anyone explain why?

I get that you only have a few arrows in the "SEE THEY DO LIE!" quiver, but bringing up reactions to the Duke case in your effort to ensure that this thread is derailed, too? Really? You're that desperate?

[Comrade Grumpy]

86. I'm not desperate at all, and I actually responded to your thread in good faith.

I said right off the top that the number of false allegations is indisputably small.

I then wondered how big a problem this whole "false allegations" thing really is.

Pardon me for actually mentioning a real false allegation that was prominently played out here over thousands and thousands of posts. I mentioned it making the point that some people appear to believe EVERY allegation merely because it was made, and because it plays into preconceived notions. The Duke thing was even juicier because it wasn't just sex, but race and class, too. (I know, I know. Those privileged white male athletes should have been guilty, darn it, but that just wasn't the case.)

So then you accuse me of supporting the "see they do lie!" folks. Sorry. God forbid we should actually reference an actual well-known (and instructive) false allegation.

And then you accuse me of derailing your thread, apparently as part of some conspiracy. Tell ya what. If you want threads where all you get is group think and mutual back-patting, stay in HOF.

You take a good faith post and use it to attack the poster. You're that desperate?

[xulamaude]

96. "stay in HOF"

JFC. You actually said that.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

107. does that read like: KNOW YOUR PLACE ...?

cos it did to me. Tone.

[The2ndWheel]

122. Not really

And then you accuse me of derailing your thread, apparently as part of some conspiracy. Tell ya what. If you want threads where all you get is group think and mutual back-patting, stay in HOF.

That's not know your place. That's, there's a place over there if you want certain answers.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

124. still sounding like Know Your Place --

Sorry. It just does.

[The2ndWheel]

149. The OP is opening up a question to anyone

If a certain answer isn't given, or is given, it's then derailing the OP. If you want a certain answer, there is a place to go for that answer. If you're opening up a specific question to the floor, where anyone can answer it, and a specific and relevant incident is brought up in response to the question, how can the thread be derailed?

It's not know where to ask a question. It's know where to go if you're looking for a certain response to a question.

[polly7]

112. No, he actually said this:

And then you accuse me of derailing your thread, apparently as part of some conspiracy. Tell ya what. If you want threads where all you get is group think and mutual back-patting, stay in HOF.

Creative, dishonest editing ............. it never fails. Which is why many people have stopped even trying to reply to any of this anymore - every fucking word is twisted into something ugly.

[xulamaude]

116. "every fucking word is twisted into something ugly"

"fucking" is an ugly word when used in this context. IMO.

[polly7]

119. No, it's a word I only use in frustration.

Frustration I feel when I see people demonized dishonestly for stating a valid opinion.

[xulamaude]

123. Well, Polly, you see it your way and

I see it my way.

I tend to get frustrated when people tell me to 'go someplace else' when this is, ostensibly, a free world/message board.

You don't see me (or many of the HoF contributors posting on this thread) telling certain men to get out of GD if they don't like something, do you?

[polly7]

128. He didn't tell you to 'go someplace else'.

Reread what he wrote. But then one couldn't play victim, and that would be just about the end of the world here for some - as is obvious by needing to dishonestly edit his actual post and intent.

And ....I've seen HOF contributors do a whole hell of a lot worse, believe me.

[xulamaude]

143. Right. He said "stay in HOF"

as I quoted him as saying originally.

That it was prefaced by "If you want threads where all you get is group think and mutual back-patting" is no less dismissive.

[polly7]

148. You chopped his sentence and intent to get your 'quote'.

And I agree with him. This is a discussion board for all. If you don't want opinions that may even go against what you're discussing, you probably should be in a safer place because obviously, being so attacked/disagreed with, is nearly a cardinal sin here for some.

[xulamaude]

151. What's with all the "play the victim" and "sin" stuff, Polly?

I also said that it's a free discussion board. How is it then that he can tell 'us' to stay in HoF (for whatever reason) and not have someone call him on it?

Again, I don't tell him to stay in some other group if he doesn't like what 'we' say. What do you think would happen if I did?

[polly7]

153. What's with all the 'sin'?

One little teeny mention of it - why the exageration?

As to the play the victim - yes, there's a lot of it being done here, day after day after day. I think women are far more able than you seem to - every woman I know in RL is able to discuss things like this and hold her own without trying so hard to be seen as a victim because someone disagrees.

He didn't tell you to stay in HOF. Reread his whole sentence - but you've obviously tied your wagon to your creatively edited quote, so I doubt you'll even consider the intent behind it.

What would happen if you told someone that - absolutely nothing.

[xulamaude]

156. Polly, this IS the whole sentence:

"If you want threads where all you get is group think and mutual back-patting, stay in HOF."

He did tell 'us' to "stay in HOF".

Arguing valid concerns about rape/rape culture is not playing the victim. It is arguing valid concerns about rape/rape culture.

[polly7]

160. Finally! you posted the 'whole sentence'.

And what's wrong with it?, it would apply to anyone posting about topics they only want one sort of reply to.

I never said arguing valid concerns about rape/rape culture is playing victim. Twisting the words of others as you did above, is playing victim.

[xulamaude]

167. As I said before,

prefacing "stay in HOF" with the stuff he said before it is no less dismissive.

I did not "twist" his words. I am not "playing victim". Really. I have way bigger things to be victimized about.

Like rape.

[polly7]

172. You seem to need to find it dismissive, I'll give you that.

I'm also a survivor of rape and brutality .... I don't need to demonize people who never had a thing to do with it.

[boston bean]

173. Who has "demonized someone who never had anything to do with it"?

[polly7]

180. It happens here ALL the time.

Hell, even I was called a rape-apologist by someone in your group for doing the same thing as I am here today, protesting the deliberate twisting of posters' words and intent. I think it's pathetic.

[boston bean]

185. I see a lot of twisting and I saw a lot of twisting back then too.

No one is demonizing anyone, you have quite the way with accusations and twisting what others are saying. It's the truth, polly.

I too was screamed and belittled and attacked by someone on the same subject back then too, who knows NOTHING about me. It happens, we need to move on. Not good to live in the past like that.

[polly7]

188. It's the truth that I'm a rape-apologist?

Really?

No, I don't need to twist anything, the posts are all here to be read by anyone.

I'm not living in the past, just answering questions. But I completely understand why you want to move on.

[boston bean]

193. TWIST TWIST TWIST

NO I DID NOT SAY THAT.

You are living in the past of DU, time to move on Polly.

As I tried to tell you, the same thing happened to me.

[polly7]

196. As I said, you have very good reason for wanting to 'move on'.

It's like Bush's war and the need not to look back. I haven't anything in my past here I'm ashamed of, so bringing up here how I and other women who don't follow along with your group have been treated and labeled doesn't bother me at all. I see you continue to describe women (I'm sure it includes me) over and over ad-nauseum there as rape-apologists/enablers/pathetic creatures desperate for the attention of men, etc. etc. etc. Do you object to it being mentioned here in GD for some reason?

[boston bean]

198. Well, if that is what make you DU enjoyable, rock on.

No your posts don't bother me at all, personally. I think you are very wrong sometimes.

[polly7]

199. No, being treated that way isn't enjoyable at all.

For me, or the many other posters here who've had to put up with it.

Are you denying that women here who don't adhere to your divide/blame/shame agenda aren't called horrible things in your safe group?

[boston bean]

200. Well, sometime we aren't treated nicely on DU, I can attest to that myself.

[xulamaude]

175. Who said I was "demonizing" him?!

Wow.

[polly7]

183. I did. nt.

[seabeyond]

164. yes. the statement to stay out of GD with a progressive issue. and said in different ways thru out

the thread. as a matter of fact, i could argue that the very OP is a suggestion this conversation stay out of GD. can you imagine any other progressive issue being told to stay out of GD.

[boston bean]

165. hello!

[seabeyond]

170. hi, lol. nt

[The2ndWheel]

209. That's incorrect

Nobody said the issue shouldn't be talked about in GD. Not even close to anything like that. It was that if you just want a certain response to a question, there is a place to get that certain response, and it's not in GD.

[seabeyond]

219. peruse the thread. there is a couple that say, consensus had, none on gd. firstly. and secondly,

i am suggesting this make up of the Op is implying the same. we may disagree. that is how i read the OP

disagreeing is ok

[Comrade Grumpy]

245. I'm sorry, but that's utter bullshit.

GD is open for discussion. But it carries that downside that someone might disagree with you.

If you can't handle disagreement, then you can have your discussion in a safe place like HOF and PPR anyone who doesn't toe the proper line.

[seabeyond]

247. i have never shied from disagreement. so i hardly see that is an issue for me. nt

[Comrade Grumpy]

186. I told you to stay in HOF if you can't stand open discussion in GD.

HOF is a protected sanctuary for like-minded folks (or is it just women?).

General discussion is for, well, discussion. People sometimes have different viewpoints in GD.

I think you are strongly making the case that you are more comfortable in HOF, where no one will ever disagree with you or challenge your world view.

[boston bean]

190. Who told you that they didn't want you to post in this thread?

[xulamaude]

191. How many posts do I have in HoF? How many do I have in GD? nt

[redqueen]

195. You brought up a case from 7 fucking years ago,

to try to claim that "many posters here" have a "presumption that EVERY accusation of rape is valid".

That's not addressing my points in the OP. That's not an argument put forward in good faith. That's not an effort to engage in, well, discussion.

That's not disagreeing with me, or challenging my worldview.

That is a blatant distortion intended to derail the topic in the OP.

And we can and do get the same shit in HoF, on a regular basis, from visitors who are often PPRd shortly thereafter.

[redqueen]

201. And no, it's not just women. Men post in HoF, too. nt

[Comrade Grumpy]

223. Okay, I thought someone posted that you had to be a woman to be a HOF member.

[xulamaude]

249. Oh really?

Kind of doubt it was a member of HoF......

[seabeyond]

253. stating i do not mind confrontations suggest to you i do not like confrontations? really? lol

and ya, i think that it is a given there will be disagreement in GD and i do believe that your intent was to say, keep it in hof. we can disagree there. but, my point went beyond your post and addressing others stating feminist issues need to stay out of GD and the Op itself is suggesting just that.

oh wait... take note. i just said we can simply disagree. hence, reinforcing what i already stated. i do not NEED all to agree. cause i am that good.

[xulamaude]

255. He was talking to me, sea

but since we're the same person I guess that shouldn't matter!

[seabeyond]

258. are we? well, i am honored, as we are one. lol

[redqueen]

114. Are you surprised?

I'm sure as hell not.

[xulamaude]

118. Not at all. :)

[heaven05]

64. the 'false rape accusation' theory

comes because of fear of male loss of some kind of individualized concept of who or what a male is supposed to be. The buy in to this is the false notion of accusations being 'common' so as to distract from the many horrible violations women go through everyday, against their consent, because of them somehow being viewed as a lesser human created to be dominated by the male of the species. It's a civil and human rights issue. Women cannot be viewed as someone not worthy of human respect and personal dignity. Accept this 'myth' to your own detriment. And yes it is dangerous. No dispute.

[Android3.14]

68. The outrage, on both sides, is odd

It appears that anyone who even mentions the possibility of a false allegation is guilty of promoting rape culture, and anyone who makes an over-generalized remark about men is an off-their-rocker feminist.
What is obvious to me is that everyone agrees on almost every point: rape is bad, false allegations are bad, trivializing rape is bad, lack of a conviction is not synonymous with a false allegation nor is a claim of rape proof of rape, we as a society should do more to prevent rape, there are elements in our culture that allow or even encourage behaviors that lead to rape just as there are cultural elements that encourage behaviors that lead away from rape.
It looks to me that the biggest outrage is from people who see an American "rape culture" that others may not see, and they are pissed that others lack the same passion and conviction.

[redqueen]

81. Is "outrage" about the myth that poor people are lazy odd?

Nobody here says that. But if you were to post proof that they aren't, would anyone pop in and say it's odd that people are "outraged" by such talk, which is common on the right?

The false rape allegations are common myth may not be something you encounter often, but trust me when I tell you that feminists hear it on a regular basis. Feminists are going to discuss the issues we deal with on a regular basis in our efforts to fight rape culture. What is "odd" is that democrats and progressives would complain about that.

If other people aren't as passionate, they don't participate in the discussions.

The people who are so very annoyed that we dare to discuss these issues aren't just not passionate about the issue.

[Android3.14]

233. I am a feminist...

And I don't hear about it "all the time".
But that, again, is beside the point.
Take this interaction right now.I don't have a conflict with you. I'm observing and commenting on the conflict you are having with others. Yet anyone would note that your response towards me is aggressive, even hostile.
I think my point has been demonstrated that my lack of passion for your cause, despite being in agreement and voting in tune with the viewpoints you have expressed, is cause enough for you to be pissed off at me.
Again, I just find it odd.

[redqueen]

265. I honestly do not see where you are getting hostility from that.

Would you please kindly share the parts which come across as hostile?

[Android3.14]

274. The entire tone is hostile

For example, you used the term "kindly", but it is clear that your intent is something other than kindness. Judging from the OP and the interaction that you encourage on this thread and others, it is apparent that you create a hostile environment that is antithetical to the promotion of your stated positions because it unnecessarily alienates a broad range of people.
It is unfortunate.

[redqueen]

276. Just now, I used "kindly" sincerely.

And in that post, I simply asked some questions, and made a few assertions. Was it my quoting your adjectives that seemed hostile? I wasn't intending them to be scare quotes. Just making clear that I was using your terminology, and not my own.

Do you have any concrete examples of hostility?

I have been hostile with exactly one poster here, for reasons which, if you read their other posts here, should be very obvious.

[NoOneMan]

101. "everyone agrees on almost every point"

bingo.


I think everyone is just sick of eachother.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

72. No, I do not dispute that

Put in a more direct way,with the double negative removed, it is a myth that false rape allegations are excessive, whatever the actual percentage may be. When false rape accusations do occur, they need to be prosecuted vigorously. But rape itself is a much, much larger problem than false rape allegations.

[ismnotwasm]

80. God I hope not

But there probably is

[hrmjustin]

84. I never reported on my rape because I did not think people would believe me.

I was 17 and did not think this happened to boys and I thought they would laugh at me. Also he was my boyfriend and I thought people would say your Bf can't rape you. I was young and did not know.

Think of how many people get away with rape because the victim is afraid they will not be believed.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

87. ^^THIS^^

[hrmjustin]

88. .

[redqueen]

92. I'm sorry that happened to you.

The same thing happened to me, I didn't report because I was on a date with him. I'd had sex with him before.

We've all seen this play out so many times, and we've seen how it goes for the girls who do come forward.

I wish more people would think of how many women keep silent, for the same reasons we did.

[hrmjustin]

94. I also was still in the closet to many people at that time and was afraid to come out.

[redqueen]

95. Male victims are silenced by other myths, too.

e.g. 'men are strong and could fight an attacker off' or 'men always want sex'

[Prophet 451]

281. Or just plain ignoring them

According to what stats I could find (and given that male victims report even less than female victims, stats amount to a best guess), something like 1 in 33 men are raped during their lifetimes and there seems to be even less support for us than there is for female victims.

[cinnabonbon]

131. I'm really sorry

he committed that crime against you. You didn't deserve it.

[Matariki]

125. The same things occured to me reading that other thread

I was going to comment on pretty much the same thing but sometimes it just seem like too much work arguing the obvious over and over.

I doubt we'd ever see anyone here arguing to let 99% of murderers or whatever go free in case one might be innocent. And if someone did argue that, they'd definitely get piled on for it.

[johnp3907]

132. So well said.

The second paragraph in particular. We should be farther along at this point. How can we have meaningful discussions and debates when we can't even start out on the same page?

[Tumbulu]

134. Well stated

and the nuts who post this sort of stuff should go to another board. I do not see them as anything resembling a Democrat or a liberal. Which I thought this board was for.

[MineralMan]

142. I think it's very dangerous.

If people assume any sort of likelihood that rape accusations are fake, they will be more likely to disbelieve such an accusation. That is very dangerous for women, who will possibly be less likely to report a rape.

[Shandris]

162. Unless some troll is posting completely inane comments that I haven't bothered to read...

...I'd guess that the answer to this question: "People of color, especially black people, are unfairly incarcerated all the time. Where are the cries that all criminals should go free, to avoid this?"

is

"Right next to the calls to let all rapists go free."

Why is it so goddamned hard to find a post on so many topics that doesn't contain silly levels of hyperbole? Who the fuck is asking for every convicted rapist to go free? And if someone -is- asking for every rapist to go free, why the fuck are they still posting here?

[boston bean]

169. It's shorthand really..

you will see the argument that women claim rape falsely up to 45% of the time, because they regretted sex and that the criminal justice system is biased against men and that women victims hold all the cards.

It' frickin upside down world.

[Shandris]

174. Ahhh, okay. Thank you for that BostonBean.

Yeah, that's an atrocious argument. I've seen infographics that have that spiel on it. I'm surprised anyone really takes it seriously, but there are all kinds in the world I suppose.

I'd think pushing that figure (the 45% tripe) is definitely detrimental to people bringing forward rape cases; I don't see how it's even a question. Policy and rhetoric can and do shape the actions of people, absolutely.

[seabeyond]

177. there is a thread about UK stating false claim at .6%. at least two men said this.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024238358

it is very hard for a women to listen to a man state:

I'd still prefer to see a guilty as hell person go on a 99 women rape spree walk the streets, as opposed to the one guy who never even touched her serve a day in prison.

[Shandris]

181. Thank you Seabeyond

I too find that difficult to read; I have to wonder if the poster meant to imply the old adage about 99 guilty walking free than 1 innocent suffer, but if so then it certainly was worded (incredibly!) poorly and, even then, isn't necessarily an appropriate adage for the situation - nor is it really proper for me to try to interpret what the poster -might- have meant, even though I have a natural inclination to try to given how...odious the stated response is. Kind of like a 'There just cant be any way thats what he meant' reaction, if that makes sense.

At either rate, to that poster I would say: There has to be a better alternative to aspire to than that!

[historylovr]

176. Well said.

I have nothing but contempt for those who push the lie that women make up tales about rape as a matter of course. It is very dangerous, as you say. Why do they do it? To keep from having to understand the reality so many of us have dealt with/will deal with.

[jimlup]

184. It happened to my son...

Sorry I know it happens. Just say'n

[Jim Lane]

189. One difference about rape allegations

You write, "For no other crime is there so much energy dedicated to focusing on false allegations." One possibility is that false allegations are easier, and therefore probably more common, in rape cases than for other major crimes.

In a murder case, for example, there's usually a dead body. I know there are times when a person has disappeared and yet a defendant is charged with murdering him or her, and there may be a few cases where it looks like suicide but the defendant is charged with cleverly setting up a murder to look that way. Nevertheless, usually it's undeniable that a crime occurred. That guy's still lying on the floor, he's still got two bullet holes in him, and he's still dead, no matter how any defense attorney tries to spin it. The only issue at trial is whether the defendant is the person who pulled the trigger.

Some rape cases are like that, too. The woman was walking through the park, a guy jumped out of the bushes and raped or tried to rape her, the police arrested someone, and the issue at trial isn't whether there was a crime but whether this defendant was the criminal.

In many other rape cases, though, the jury has to decide whether a crime occurred at all. It's clear that the defendant had sex with the woman, but he says it was consensual and she says it wasn't. Quite often there's little or no objective evidence that would help a jury decide which version to credit.

In both rape and murder, there can be a false accusation that the defendant was the person who committed what was clearly a crime. In rape, however, there's much more scope for an additional type of false accusation, that of falsely alleging that there was a crime.

In a society completely free of rape culture and patriarchal influence, therefore, one would still expect to find more false accusations of rape than of many other crimes, and, consequently, more concern about false accusations.

Of course, there can be many other factors influencing the presence or absence of false accusations, and the presence or absence of concern about false accusations. I'm just noting that the "he said - she said" aspect creates a problem with comparing rape cases to other criminal cases.

[etherealtruth]

204. Does anyone dispute the fact that the 'false allegations of rape are common' myth is dangerous?

I came to your thread late (an awful long funereal day) ... so I have the advantage of reading through your thread prior to answering your question.

sadly, the answer is 'Yes' ... over and over. Admittedly their are a good number of posters that posted thoughtful answers and did not try to diminish the issue of rape ... however, there is an alarmingly high number that appear to answer the question: Does anyone dispute the fact that the 'false allegations of rape are common' myth is dangerous? YES

[Electric Monk]

208. I'm sure that being falsely accused really fucking sucks, too. How does one live that down? nt

[boston bean]

214. Of course it "really fucking sucks".

Know what also really fucking sucks is trying to make it more difficult for women who ARE raped to come forward and get justice in the system. And doing this by saying women are lying about it up to 45% of the time. Do you not see that side of the coin? which is the side of the coin being discussed here in this thread.

NO ONE has said that a false allegation doesn't really fucking suck, what they are saying is that bogus stats, should not gain traction, cause guess what, 96% of women and men DO NOT LIE. What's one of the main reasons women don't come forward? Well, they are scared they won't be believed. Using that tiny percentage of false allegations to make it seem like most women do LIE about being raped, is what is disgusting as hell. What about justice for victims of rape? Do they not enter the equation?

Does pointing this out mean that someone doesn't recognize and agree that a false accusation really fucking sucks? No, it doesn't.

[etherealtruth]

225. I am beginning to think the game consists of

... trying to convince others that the "feminist" point of view is that a person falsely accused of a crime (rape, murder, arson, robbery ... ) is that it is "OK".

I have never a read a post or an opinion that did not find false accusations/ false convictions as anything other than horrific. It certainly seems to be what is thrown out there by the "anti-feminists" out there ... somehow feminists seem to universally abhor false accusations(/convictions) of any crime ... and RAPE. This should not be a novel idea, but I am beginning to believe it is for the prolific anti-feminist posters

[seabeyond]

226. step further. i get more pissed at the few false claim than actual act cause it hurts ALL victims

of rape. and that is not slighting my pissed at a rape.

[Electric Monk]

227. Holy putting words in someone else's mouth, Batman. The irony here is incredible. nt

[etherealtruth]

231. What words were put into someone elses mouth?

You opted not to reply to the posts affirming your post ... yet it offends you that the intentions of posting this are questioned (especially after complete agreement) ... ?

[etherealtruth]

217. Being falsely accused of anything is horrific

It is hideous whether one is falsely accused of rape, robbery, drug trafficking ... whatever. Regardless of the small percentages of rape reports being identified as small, the human it impacts can be devastated

I do not believe that is what this post is about, though. The post appears to be regarding the use of "false accusations of rape" occurring in a small percentage of reported rapes being used to diminish the crime of rape and I would offer further discourage this already under reported crime from being reported.

There are false accusations made regarding robberies, vandalism, assault (non-sexual), vehicular accidents ... (I have not looked at statistics regarding the false reporting of these crimes but I would guess that it is equal to or greater than that of false rapes) ... yet victims of those crimes are not afraid or hesitant to report them ... burglary victims are not doubted from the start unless there is EVIDENCE indicating falsehoods. I think it would be very disingenuous to state that victims of rape are offered the same respect.

[boston bean]

229. Being falsely accused of lying about rape, that sucks too......

[etherealtruth]

230. Without doubt

[pediatricmedic]

207. Agree with OP, but the myth has legs and may not be a myth

They myth has power because of the recent high profile cases showing that some rape allegations are actually false. These verified false allegations actually push this out of the myth category into factual reality. The next question is how often these actually happen, which nobody is quite sure of. I would guess that false allegations are quite small and occur in maybe 1% of the reported cases. Even at 1%, that is enough to have a new false allegation story pretty much daily in the United States alone. Would that qualify as common or not?

[seabeyond]

211. maybe putting the few out there is actually reinforcing a myth instead of their being "legs" hence,

the need to debunk the myth

[madinmaryland]

215. I don't think anyone can deny that there are false allegations of rape. The statistics I have seen,

though, paint a very nebulous picture. Most studies seem to imply between 2-8%. Where it gets nebulous is what they define as a "false allegation". Some even define a false allegation as "non-forcible rape". And this is only for rapes that are reported.

Also need to consider that at least 75% of rapes are never reported and your have a real infinitessal percentage that are falsely accused.

I think we can say there are false accusations of rape, but they are no way the norm.

[davidn3600]

240. "For no other crime is there so much energy dedicated to focusing on false allegations"

Not every rape case is obvious that a rape occurred. Unlike other crimes, the act of the crime is obvious. In murder cases, you usually have a dead body. In burglary/theft cases, something is missing. In assault cases, someone is obviously injured. Most criminal cases it is clear a crime has been committed. Sometimes with rape, it's obvious. But many times in rape cases, it is not so clear and depends on the testimony and credibility of the victim. That's why "false allegations" is a bigger issue with rape than most other crimes.

Say this scenario... A man and a woman get plastered drunk. They leave a party together. The woman wakes up the next morning after having sex and cant remember consenting, nor much else of that night. She goes to the police and claims she was raped. The man claims he doesn't remember much either but that she was jumping on him. There is no other witness to the act. There is no evidence of bruising or physical injuries on the woman. What do you want the jury to do? Technically, yes it is rape since she was so drunk she couldn't consent. But he was legally drunk too, so he couldnt have consented to sex either. For all we know, he was half passed out and she was riding him all night. We just don't know!

Are you suggesting that the jury should convict that man?

[Electric Monk]

277. And there it is. You just stepped in it. That's why this was a bad thread from the get-go.

The outcome was planned before you even showed up.

[Rex]

241. No, have no idea really, not if all these cries I hear about the first amendment having any due

fair here. I personally get pissed off at people that don't want to talk about rape culture in GD. I don't know why they care so much to not care in those threads, just trash the thread as I've been told a million times by others now.

Let the people that want to talk about it, talk about it. First amendment and all that stuff right? Why would someone want to step on my right to talk about it in GD?

I believe if any discussion seems unnecessary or unwelcome, there are tools in place to hide those threads. The admins made them and they do work.

I would like to discuss a lot of things in GD, but don't. Too many authoritarians here.

[DonCoquixote]

275. No

Because whenever anyone says ANYTHING is common, it can be dangerous. Add to it somethign where the onus of proof is on the woman, it gets outright vicious.

Now, it should be noted, we as a society have a problem with "innocent UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY." That goes for all the people who think Casey Anthony should fry, even though her prosecutors were idiots, and any MAN OR WOMAN that the media convicts before one day in court has happened.

However, the idea that "false accusations are common" is very much the same as "you know the (expletive deleted) is lying", which is something that demands, at the very least, outright denial, if not shame. The fact that some men promote that is sad.

Anyone think I am wrong?, then kindly provide some blue links to PROVEN STATISTICS to prove your point about how "common" this is. It is not like crimes, especially Rapes are not one of the most researched and documented things there are. If flase accusations are so "common" then no doubt there are stats to prove it. However, I think my proverbial bet money is safe, safer than a Swiss Bank account.

Seriously, the idea that guys get on a liberal board to score potshots against women is sad.

[Zorra]

279. It's dangerous, absolutely. People need to be taught to report a rape immediately after the rape, so

that there is a much greater chance of evidence of a rape, and little chance of the rape allegation being determined to be unfounded.

Unfortunately, most any allegation of rape with no tangible supporting evidence and/or no eyewitnesses is naturally going to be suspected to be an unfounded allegation.

Reporting a rape a week after the rape occurs, after all the evidence is gone, leads to suspicion that the allegations are false. Reporting a rape that can be contested as consensual a week later is going to lead to suspicion that the allegations are false, because any evidence of trauma heals in the meantime, and any other tangible sign of possible rape disappears.

Prosecutors hate losing cases, and they are going to be reluctant to prosecute a case where there is no evidence but hearsay. Give them unnatural bruising, body fluids, evidence of a struggle, DNA evidence, cops finding victims in a state of shock or extreme distress...these things give a prosecutor something to work with.

Generally, the longer a person waits to report a rape, the more difficult it is to prove rape.

Calling the cops and reporting that you were raped after consensual sex with someone you brought home from a bar a week after the incident occurred is an allegation that will be difficult or impossible to prosecute effectively and successfully.

Yes, there is shame, stigma, fear, and all the other myriad nasties that come along with being raped. But rape needs to be reported right away, end of story. every hour that goes by will make the rape more difficult to prove, and could lead to another "false allegation of rape statistic".

Few juries are willing to send someone to prison for many years when the only evidence against the alleged rapist is testimony like "s/he raped me last week."

[Prophet 451]

280. The other thread wasn't derailed at all

Several people, including myself, pointed out big methodological problems with the study and you chose to abandon the thread rather than defend the study. That's not derailing, that's just getting a result you don't like.

Now, in regards to the OP question: Yes, I'd agree that the perception that false allegations are common is dangerous. However, knowing that A0 false accusations do happen (albeit in a tiny minority of cases, granted) and B) that both our legal systems (I'm British) operate on presumption of innocence; I'm rather at a loss as to what can be done with that information. We obviously can't simply assume the guilt of everyone accused which, whether you mean it to or not, is how these discussions often come across.