". . . the fact is that some women do make false claims of rape [because they are mentally ill and vindictive and for] . . . other reasons, just as some men commit rape because they are mentally ill or violent sociopaths."
Read the entire piece here: http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/noble-lie-feminist-style_577309.html?page=1
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
17 comments:
Kathy, that is an excellent piece!! And as someone who was falsely accused of a rape that simply never happened, its encouraging to find responsible journalists writing about something that even American law enforcement is using "protocol perversions and semantics games" to hide from the public.
It helps to have the male defined as the aggressor before you go out on a call, this is less thinking for the cop on the beat.
Also pre-disposition is easier for the judges, no thinking required, just a pointed finger and a police state.
It's the prosecutors that have to think overtime to somehow put a digestable face on all those prosecutions,but they have no conscience,and are doubtfully human at all.
(keep it up)
For many state prosecutors, its all just billable hours. They will keep persecuting the innocent, as long as it continues to benefit them.
As you can see from the pdf I compiled at http://wimminz.wordpress.com/2011-03/false-rape-accusations/
This found that of EVERY SINGLE RAPE ALLEGATION MADE TO UK POLICE IN AN ENTIRE YEAR, fully 12% or approximately 1 in 6 were "false accusations"
The only POSSIBLE way for a rape allegation in the UK to be recorded / classified as a false allegation is if the accused admits, in interview, on tape, that is is a false allegation.
There are CLEARLY many false accusers that refuse to admit, in interview, on tape, that the allegation is false, these are NOT INCLUDED in the 12% figure.
I know of no other study that comes anywhere even remotely near the scope of this study, which takes every rape accusation in an entire country for an entire year as its basis.
sorry pierce / archivist, please edit last post, typed the wrong URL
correct link is
http://wimminz.wordpress.com/2011-03/an-analysis-of-uk-rape-stats/
Good work on finding those stats AFOR.
"For many state prosecutors, its all just billable hours. They will keep persecuting the innocent, as long as it continues to benefit them. "
Well said there anon.
In my case, after being cleared of the criminal charges the prosecutor
"volunteered" to be her
FREE counsel in the civil matter adjoining the same hearing.
I am sure the taxpayers paid the bill in this private matter.
When confronted with evidence that she was mentally incompetent the judge said
" I will see she gets the appropriate help in this matter."
I was very pleased with until I found the appropriate help was the prosecutor.
He sure did have an embarrassed look on his face when right after the trial she screamed out:
"you drove me into a mental hospital."
It would not have made a difference in the INSANE star chamber proceedings.
A bell cannot be un-rung, and I will never be the same after not having my basic legal rights in the courtroom.
S - ”its encouraging to find responsible journalists writing about something that even American law enforcement is using "protocol perversions and semantics games" to hide from the public.”
Speaking of “Lies”, how are your white-knighting, pussy-pass issuing efforts to get people to never blame the women who make FRA’s and to only ever blame law enforcement going?
And, to the lie more directly, let’s look at what Cathy Young actually states, shall we:
”In several surveys of prosecutors and law enforcement officials, estimates of the share of rape complaints that turn out to be false have ranged from one in eight to one in five.”
Nothing about any supposed “protocol perversion”, only that police and prosecutors themselves give us the best glimpse into what is actually happening, themselves guessing that the rate of false accusations (just going on the cases they see, which for prosecutors, is an already narrowed field) between 12 and 20%.
So where are these “protocol perversions” which you keep trying to insinuate are the entire reason we see FRA’s?
But, had you actually read the article you’d know that she makes no agreement with your avowed purpose of “never blame the women”. In fact, she gives the names and examples of women who she does blame.
Of course, if you had read the article, you’d have also seen that she makes reference to the work of Eugene Kanin. And, of course, we all know that you are the person who has repeatedly tried to discredit his studies by repeating the lie that he had found the primary reason for false allegations to be that women were late to work. Thankfully few if any bought into your effort to mock Kanin’s work by trying to make it look trite and non-serious.
Now, surely police and prosecutors are not blameless in the ensuing aftermath of a woman lying about being raped. But, sometime they do get it right. And it is in those instance where your true character begins to shine through. Even when individual woman are named, and their crime elucidated, you never offer one word of criticism for them directly (the true culprits), but rather you try to redirect the blame onto the men who actually got it right.
But, then again, I suppose that’s about par-for-the-course as it goes with right-wing “Churchians”. You guy’s simply cannot allow a woman, no matter what she’s chosen to do, be left to shoulder the burden of fault. As with your unacknowledged allies amongst the left-wing gender-feminists, who cling to a belief that whenever a woman falters, the blame can ultimately be laid at the feet of a man (or men). In your case, it’s always the men of law enforcement who’ve somehow seduced and manipulated the poor little woman into making and FRA, no isn’t it.
I’m sorry, but I must take a stance against your efforts to issue such a broad-based pussy pass to woman making FRA’s. They are the primary culprits. Always have been, and always will be. Even if police put up billboards urging women to make FRA’s and prosecutoers advertised that they would always prosecute their claims (even without any evidence) it still would fall to women, who are fully formed moral agents, to chose to do right or wrong.
Anonymous - ” In my case, after being cleared of the criminal charges the prosecutor
"volunteered" to be her FREE counsel in the civil matter adjoining the same hearing.”
On the plus side, if he entered his appearance on behalf of her on any civil matter, he was in clear violation of the rules governing the practice of all in every single state. All you need to do is show the Bar that he acted as both state advocate (prosecutor) and private representation (on the civil matter) regarding the same set of instances, and they will have to disbar him.
Give me the state, and I’ll try to get back to you with the exact rules you should take before the state Bar.
Anonymous - ”For many state prosecutors, its all just billable hours. They will keep persecuting the innocent, as long as it continues to benefit them.”
Actually, prosecutors are salaried employees and do NOT use a “billable hours” system. In most situations, they cannot even charge over-time no matter how many hours they put in on a case.
That’s one reason why most prosecutors (save for a small percentage of true rape activists) don’t like to do rape cases. Except where it is a clear-cut case of violent forcible rape, with DNA evidence, most rape cases are hard to prove. Cases that come down to the issue of “he said/she said” are extremely hard for prosecutors to win, and account for a significant portion of the 42% rate of acquittals.
In most states, either the state or the federal Victims Rights Acts make it difficult to decline to prosecute a case in which the alleged victim insists on taking it forward.
Now, to be sure, there are some prosecutors who do relish rape cases (i.e. Mary Kelett), who can basically get most of the rape cases being filed with their office routed to them (as other prosecutors don’t want to have to do them), and they will certainly stand out. But they are not representative of all prosecutors.
On the bigger issue of False Rape Allegations, and their multitude of attendant harms, not only is there plenty of blame to go around, and law enforcement has most certainly been a big problem WRT the way they have responded. But, don’t forget that they are often following the dictates of law makers in their respective legislatures, nor that it’s the press which has largely chosen to “name and shame” the accused while shielding the accuser. And don’t forget that it is the public sector which ostracizes the accused, and acts out against him – firing him, abandoning him, attacking him, and on occasion, killing him (often in cases where law enforcement is not contacted, and plays no role at all).
But, most off, never ever forget that none of these other issues would even come into play except for the choice of an individual of make a false accusation. Ultimately, the primary responsibility and blame for FRA’s falls on the person who chose of their own freewill to make that false claim.
Even though we may lack full recognition (by the masses) of it, we already hold the high-ground as far as truth and justice are concern on the FRA issue. We don’t need to copy-cat the gender-feminists and engage in any campaigns of lies and distortions, nor do we need to invent “boggy-man” conspiracies in order to find ways to blame men/patriarchy for women’s bad choices.
Some times police will go about it all wrong, and some times they’ll get it right. Same goes for prosecutors, the press, and even the public. But, in each and every case, the person who has always done wrong is the person who knowingly made a false accusation.
False accusation of rape are even more common than *I* think! I actually believed DSK's false accuser at first.
That's what I get for failing to assume the man is innocent: a plate full of crow!
False rape accusers are scum; the cops and prosecutors who enable them are scum.
There is no contradiction in this.
Anonymous - ” False rape accusers are scum; the cops and prosecutors who enable them are scum.
There is no contradiction in this.”
No, there is no contradiction in identifying both those who make FRA’s and those who’s subsequent actions serve to enable the furtherance of the FRA as both being scum.
But, you see, my fundamental issue with S in Boston is that he continuously refuses to acknowledge the former. He always gives the women who make FRA’s a pass.
If you read his many postings (easily identified as he almost always includes his trademark “Gender-raunch” language), what you will note is that he only ever makes allusion to either “perverted law enforcement getting rich” or “Raunch-culture practitioners empowering themselves by persecuting the accused”. What you will NEVER read from him is one word of condemnation for the women who’ve actually made the false allegations which lead to everything happening. You’ll even find in numerous instance where the lead story has been about a woman’s FRA lies being uncovered, and her subsequently being punished, he still cannot bring himself to say anything about the woman involved, but rather he will try to refocus the discussion towards LE and “Raunch-culture”.
He is, in fact, attempting to shift all blame away from the women who’ve committed the crime by trying to suggest that she was incapable of acting on her own (a somewhat common theme one sees from right-wing “Churchians” of woman not being fully-formed moral agents, but simply being seduced and manipulated by men into wrong-doing) and that greedy law enforcement or self-empowering “Raunch-culture” has somehow deluded the poor woman into making a false allegation. I’ve challenged him to acknowledge the culpability of those who’ve actually made false accusations, and thus far, he’s always declined to do so.
Now, don’t get me wrong. I fully recognize that there is in fact a whole “industry” which has formed around women sexual grievances. Pierce Harlan has given it the informal title of the Sexual Grievance Industry or SGI. And, I recognize that far to many within the law enforcement community are either all too willing “tools”, or as with some, active “agents” of this SGI and it’s demands.
And so too, many law makers have meekly gone along with the demands of the SGI and have created new legal dictates under which LE must now operate.
Combine these with the general recognition woman tend to receive as “victims”, and it all most certainly sets the stage for the enablement of FRA’s.
Yet, none of these would matter at all except for women, who ARE fully-formed moral agents, capable of making decisions to do right or wrong, choosing to make those many false allegations (many to others not a part of LE, who often act out violently on those false accusations).
The harms that befall men and boys falsely accused, whether we can identify them as coming by way of law enforcement directly (arrest, prosecution, etc), from the press and the public (loss of jobs, loss of friends, ostracism, etc), or even via vigilante “justice”, they all stem from the initial false allegation.
This is why I have such an issue with the attempt to always refocus blame and culpability away from those who actually made the false accusation, and put it off on the “boggy-men” of LE or the SGI. The fact is, it IS those who make the accusations who are always most to blame for everything that happens subsequently.
I hope I’ve made my position clear.
If you read his many postings (easily identified as he almost always includes his trademark “Gender-raunch” language), what you will note is that he only ever makes allusion to either “perverted law enforcement getting rich” or “Raunch-culture practitioners empowering themselves by persecuting the accused”.
***
Good point. Based on that, you'd think that these police departments were being run by the porn industry! A rather peculiar view of the false rape epidemic.
The bottom line Mr Werner, is America is now so perverted by years of the "gender-feminist construction" that it may very well take people outside the "misinformation Curtain" to challenge it.
MR Strauss's lawyer said it best when he said the American media circus is an attempt to "inflame" the public.
I believe scotts usage of the term "gender-Raunch" feminism is a simple amalgamation of the two dominant forms of feminism now being taught on American campuses.
Gender-feminism and Raunch-feminism have now replaced yer mothers "equality feminism" of 25 years ago.
[1 of 2]
Anonymous - "I believe scotts usage of the term "gender-Raunch""
I do understand his usage, and I also know that such people are quite influential (they usually term themselves “sex-positive” – at least as far as woman being what ever the hell they want to do sexually; but they also tend to be some of the biggest “rape culture” whiners. I’m not sure how they “square” those two seeming diametrically opposed positions).
My issue with him is not that I disagree that such people have had a large (negative) influence as far as encouraging women to make false claims (rape or DV) – I’m quite certain that they have. Nor is it even that I disagree that law enforcement hasn’t also contributed to a more false rape-friendly environment – I’m also quite sure they have done just that.
My real issue is that instead of putting the primary blame where it truly belongs – on those (women, primarily) who make FRA’s, he tries to refocus attention away from the culpability of women, and onto law enforcement as the reason why women make FRA’s. He imagines that there is some super-secret bounty system, by which federal dollars are handed out for each and every rape case handled. [doesn’t explain why some many would be found either false or unfounded, nor why so many would be declined for prosecution, if there was really some much money to be had. Nor does it explain why the same is occurring in other countries. It’s therefore obviously a silly notion at best, and a devious diversionary tactic at worst (a good bit of white-knighting on behalf of false accusers, and a de facto pussy-pass for them]
He’s not entirely wrong about the influence of those “sex-positive/rape-culture” types who form the bulk of the SGI. He’s just doesn’t understand where the main impact of their policies has influenced women making FRA’s.
The real reason that there would be more FRA’s today than in decades past is not because of any direct encouragement for women to make them (it does happen on college campuses, but not elsewhere), it is in simple fact, because there has been such an effort to encourage over-sexuality (sluttiness) in women, there has been a corresponding increase in the number of women for whom and FRA comes to be seen as a quick fix for their problems.
With more women than ever out cheating on husbands and boyfriends, it would be hard NOT to imagine that there are going to be far more instances in which a woman caught-out in some illicit activity is going to see an FRA as a sort of get out of anything card to play (I think that this is pretty much self-explanitory).
And, with more women engaging in hook-ups, booty-calls, and being F*-buddies; there is obviously going to be more instance of guilt, regret, and anger which leads to a desire for revenge. I think it’s also quite obvious why this would produce more FRA’s
And, in an environment where their “sisters” are getting loads of sexual attention, it’s also quite easy to see how an FRA would seem a useful way for some of the “over-looked” women to gain attention.
[2 of2]
The raunchiest of sex-positive feminists have had a role in creating more FRA’s alright. It’s just not as S has imagined that it occurs.
He needs to get over his protective instinct towards women who make FRA’s and learn to name and blame them. The influence of the SGI, “gender-Raunch”, and even the mishandling of many cases by law enforcement can be over-come if we can get better interdiction where is it truly needed – at the point of stopping individual women from choosing to make self-serving, yet potentially devastating to the accused, FRA’s.
I don’t think it’s any secret that I’ve long called for tougher laws which would allow for meaningful penalties, and laws which would recognize the falsely accused as the victims of a crime committed against them. The key is not the breaking of some imagined alliance between LE and the SGI (who don’t much like each other as it is), but rather to force women into making a cost/benefit analysis that includes the possibility of severe punishment and high cost for themselves before choosing to make FRA’s.
Post a Comment