Wednesday, June 9, 2010

Rape accusers admit to lying about six Green Bay Packers, so why aren't they being vilified?

Two women who accused Green Bay Packers cornerback Brandon Underwood and six other Packers of rape were caught in a monumental lie.  "According to an Associate Press report, the two women changed their initial story, which would make proving guilt in this case very difficult. The pair of women (31- and 33-years-old) initially stated that they were held down by seven Packers players while the assault occurred. However, they went on to recant that story to point the blame squarely on Underwood."

The six men other than Underwood have been cleared (but that didn't stop the police and news media from naming them) and the police chief in charge of the investigation will not recommend that charges be pressed against Underwood due to the accusers' lack of credibility.  The ultimate decision about Underwood is now in the hands of the district attorney.  The police chief  "does have a hypothesis about what truly happened. 'I suspect most everybody was probably consuming alcohol to some degree. To what degree, I don’t think there was anyone who was passed out or totally inebriated.'"

Whether or not Underwood is charged, the damage has already been done, to him, and his six teammates.  Chalk it up as yet another in an endless cavalcade of cases where rape liars are permitted to blacken and destroy with impunity the reputation of any man or boy just by crying the "r" word.

Let us make something clear: the women have admitted that they falsely accused six men of a crime that is widely considered to be the most vile outside of murder. Some people consider rape worse than murder.  If rape is such a terrible thing, then lying about rape must also be a terrible thing. “Rape is such a serious crime that deliberately bringing a false accusation of rape should be an equally serious crime . . . . I believe that being falsely accused of rape is as traumatic as being raped, Prof. Alan Dershowitz once said.

So, are the two false rape accusers being vilified in the media as perpetrators of a vile deed?  Think again. In fact, the news coverage has paid little hardly any attention to the women's vile lies or the harm to the men falsely accused.  Reporters are concerned only with Mr. Underwood's fate: will he be charged?  Some reporters can't resist tying this case in with the Roethlisberger case. 

Despite falsely accusing at least six men of rape, the women, of course, are not named in the news reports.  (This is wholly consistent with our theory that a woman could rob a bank and kill twelve people in the process, but news outlets wouldn't identify her if she claimed one of the male tellers had groped her before she blew his head off.)  Rape advocates routinely insist that false rape claims are given far too much press. Here is an example of reality: false rape claims typically are minimized and trivialized.  They are rarely treated as "real," much less serious crimes.

While the women weren't named, what about the falsely accused men who were quickly cleared by police?  They, of course, were named.

Read that last sentence again, and try to reconcile the decision to name the innocent men but not the criminals.

Does anyone care about how the men feel?  One said: "I had nothing to do with anything that supposedly happened. Obviously NFL players are targets, but I don't know what happened, honestly. I wasn't involved. I don't like that my name is even attached to something like that." Another also went on record to express his unhappiness.  Source. Is their unhappiness about being named surprising?  False accusations of rape have severely stigmatized more human beings than false accusations of any other crime. See here.

So why reveal the men's names? Listen to the logic: "Especially in a case like this, people want to know who is involved," Lake Delton Police Chief Tom Dorner said.

That is correct, Chief. People do want to know the identifies of those involved; specifically, the women who lied that six men (and quite possibly a seventh) raped them.  Perhaps if their identities weren't shielded, the men wouldn't have suffered the ignominy of a vile rape lie.  That the women are granted anonymity while the men are not is morally topsy turvy, the product of political correctness run amok.

And this is where we've come as a society: reporters treat vile rape lies about six innocent men as wholly insignificant compared to the question about whether one man will be charged.  You see, the six men, like all men and boys falsely accused of rape, are just collateral damage in the "more important" war on rape.