▲Does the UK's plan for anonymity "send a message" that rape accusers aren't to be believed any more than anonymity for rape accusers sends a message that the men and boys they accuse aren't to be believed?
▲Do you really think being falsely accused of rape is qualitatively no worse than being falsely accused of burglary?
▲When was the last time you heard of a man being falsely accused of burglary? Or robbery? Or murder? Or anything else aside from rape? Rarely, right?
▲If a woman falsely accused a professional man of burglarizing her house, robbing her, or murdering a loved one, how long do you think that claim would be taken seriously?
▲Now what about rape?
▲When was the last time you heard that a rape victim did not "come forward" because teen males accused of rape are afforded anonymity?
▲Never, right? That's silly, isn't it? Then why isn't it just as silly when it comes to adult males?
▲When the television news announces that a certain man, who is identified, has raped an acquaintance, don't you think that a lot of people who know the man can figure out, or make a pretty good guess, who the acquaintance is?
▲And how do you think that makes the acquaintance feel?
▲Wouldn't actual rape victims prefer that the men they accuse be anonymous so that no one can learn the victims' identities by inference?
▲When was the last time you heard of any of these occurring as a result of a false accusation of any crime other than rape: the persons accused are killed or kill themselves; they are beaten, chased, spat upon, or looked upon with suspicion long after they are cleared of wrongdoing? They lose not only their good names but their jobs, their businesses, and their friends?
▲Do you think that justice for rape victims is furthered by the public shaming and humiliation of the presumptively innocent, even innocent men?
▲Do you enjoy seeing presumptively innocent men accused of rape publicly shamed and humiliated?
Cheers to Lisa Longstaff
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
10 comments:
That last one is a killer. Wowee! And I think you've hit on something there.
They like the fact that any man accused of rape is named and humiliated. It is its own punishment.
They don't give a flying fuck about innocent men.
They don't give a flying fuck about innocent men.
***
That's right. They can't get as many convictions as they want so they want the charge itself to be a sentence.
Most rape allegations are false and one of the reasons that females make them is to extract some sort of vengeance on a man who in their warped mind has wronged them.They know that the chance of the innocent man being charged or even convicted is small but that even having him publicly named will achieve her purpose and ruin his life. This is why females are against anonymity, it's pure maliciousness. They can't do anything legally to a man who has insulted or jilted them so they're going to ruin his life. It's as simple as that and tells you a lot about the female mind and how it works. And let's just remember that it was MEN who instituted the system of justice,evidence, fair trials etc concepts that are alien to the female. In a female world, accusations would be tantamount to guilt with the mob exacting summary lynch mob punishment. Most of these stonings that sometimes take place in parts of the world are instigated by females and are against other females who they think were trying to steal their man. That's natural female justice for you and while from time to time men have been just as bad they have also made laws and done everything to eradicate lynch law and mob justice. I find it an absolute farce that Justice is represented by a female figure holding scales. Who the hell ever came up with that?
OT- Does anybody know if any (state or other) political parties have endorsed men's rights?
It's really hard being an MRA voter!
I've deleted multiple comments from the person I believe is the same troll who tries to comment here everyday. She says things like this: "I agree with anonymity, though not with a lot of the questions unfortunately."
"People do get falsely accused of other crimes all the time - not necessarily by the victims though."
This is the dishonest position of persons who oppose anonymity. There is no basis for saying it, and it reveals the commentator's true motives. The fact is, people are falsely accused of other crimes, but it is very rare, and even rarer that the charges result in an arrest.
She also says: "If a rape victim did choose not to come forward due to anonymity, I imagine it would be out of fear of retaliation before the rapist's identity was released or not being believed which they might see as more likely with anonymity."
Troll! That's the same lie being peddled by the sexual grievance industry.
"Without anonymity, more victims can come forward. It's obviously distressing for innocent men to be accused of rape, but it's also distressing for genuine rape victims to face a trial knowing how difficult it is to find evidence and how they'll have to relive the experience and be potentially torn apart by the defence."
And this gem: "To be honest, I doubt in most cases people could figure out who the acquaintance was."
And this: "As for people being tormented, still suspected, losing their jobs and families etc, that happens after a lot of false accusations, especially for serious high profile crimes such as murder."
I think most of us have a good idea who wrote this. She is trying to pass herself off as one of us, and says things like this: "I say all this because if someone on the same side sees flaws in many of the questions, anyone opposing anonymity will shoot them down easily. Hopefully pointing out obvious problems with arguments means they can be strengthened before being used with the opposition."
If I ever hear an argument that is valid, I will alter my approach to anonymity. Now go troll at your own blog.
"Without anonymity, more victims can come forward
What always seems to happen in these cases is that every wacko the guy ever said hello to comes out of the woodwork and claims she too was molested. Whether they do it for attention or it's just part of the female herding factor I cannot tell.
Besides, I'm not even certain that anything they have to say can be used in court so basically we have a situation where females are defaming a man in the media with none of their allegations having been proved.
Another problem with rape allegations is that the police are prone to believe a female's accusation with no real proof to back it up and will charge the man. They don't do this in other crimes if the man has an airtight alibi like he was on a plane in the middle of the Atlantic at the time of the crime regardless of how many witnesses claim he was the one who roobed the bank for example.That just put it down as a misidentification and let the guy go. But with rape even if some female known locally to be a drunk, slut or psycho makes an accusation the guy has a really hard time proving he was nowhere near her let alone didn't rape her.
Right, Anon 9:13. All of these rationales are nonsense, without basis in fact.
And by the way, if I started a blog called "The False Murder Society," I'd post a story every year or so. As opposed to one, two, three or four every DAY.
A quick shout-out to Amy Alkon for blogging about this issue, and citing a rather compelling example - coming from a man who WAS falsely accused, no less:
Anonymous Until Proven Guilty
This is a brilliant piece.
Nice and concise yet raises so many excellent points.
many thanks
Ok, I'm the anon poster who posted the comment Archivist has objected to. The reposting of the same comment was an accident due to my browser crashing as I explained in a subsequent post.
I have no idea who you think I am but I do not 'try to comment here everyday' and indeed only came across this blog 2 days ago from a link on a student forum I visit (no, nothing to do with rape, feminism or anything like that, mainly education but it has various general boards). The only way 'most of you' could have the faintest idea who I am is if you were psychic. I haven't posted anything like this before. Can't you see IP addresses or something? I don't have a blog or anything, hence posting as anonymous.
I am not in any way suggesting you alter your approach to anonymity (unless you're referring to your approach to anonymous comments on your blog) because I genuinely do agree with your position. I just thought the questions could be rephrased to make them more effective/stronger. I like arguments to be as strong as possible, which means removing any holes the opposition might point out. It is a shame that any criticism is treated with such hostility. To be fair, I can see why the multiple posting didn't help, but I swear that was an accident.
My personal rationale for anonymity is that an accusation, even if it turns out to be baseless, can be devastating, amounting to a horrific punishment for someone who is innocent until proven guilty. I believe that is incompatible with our justice system. I don't see why this shouldn't be extended to other crimes but am open to arguments on the possible disadvantages. The reason I mentioned people accused of other crimes is because I have an 'interest' (it seems the wrong word...) in miscarriages of justice which I consider to be one of the most awful things that can happen to a person. (This is a particularly horrible example that had a profound effect on me: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2006/feb/26/ukcrime.features) The experiences described on this site are often very similar to those I have read about of the wrongfully convicted (or sometimes wrongfully accused). However, the difference is that it is so easy to help those wrongfully accused of rape by allowing the accused to remain anonymous.
Post a Comment