Topic: How often should sexual assault be used as a political tool?
Anonymous A started this discussion 7 years ago #78,889
What would the repercussions be anyway?
Anonymous B joined in and replied with this 7 years ago, 7 minutes later[^] [v] #920,530
Republican Senators say sexual assault is fake news and Trump agrees.
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU joined in and replied with this 7 years ago, 42 minutes later, 49 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #920,534
I too think it's unfair when a man who sexually abuses women could potentially be held accountable in a minuscule way for what he's done.
Anonymous D joined in and replied with this 7 years ago, 8 minutes later, 57 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #920,535
Sheila LaBoof joined in and replied with this 7 years ago, 8 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #920,536
so I guess he never did anything then, fine
Anonymous F joined in and replied with this 7 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #920,537
Sheila LaBoof replied with this 7 years ago, 8 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #920,538
then it will all sort itself out no probs
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU replied with this 7 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #920,539
@920,535 (D)
That was me being sarcastic. I just think it's weird, though not surprising, that whenever a man is accused by multiple women of being sexually abusive, the man is somehow painted as the victim.
That was me being sarcastic. I just think it's weird, though not surprising, that whenever a man is accused by multiple women of being sexually abusive, the man is somehow painted as the victim.
Anonymous G joined in and replied with this 7 years ago, 9 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #920,540
@previous (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
How often is the man innocent, when a group of women accuse the man?
How often is the man innocent, when a group of women accuse the man?
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU replied with this 7 years ago, 7 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #920,541
@previous (G)
I don't know the stats, but I don't like the whole approach to the matter. If 3 people came out and said they recall him stabbing people and stealing their wallets, I don't think people's first reaction would be to immediately deny anything of the sort ever could have possibly happened, and claim he is being framed. But because it's women accusing him of sexual assault, people view it much differently, in a way that reflects how inadequately we talk about/think about sex and consent.
I don't know the stats, but I don't like the whole approach to the matter. If 3 people came out and said they recall him stabbing people and stealing their wallets, I don't think people's first reaction would be to immediately deny anything of the sort ever could have possibly happened, and claim he is being framed. But because it's women accusing him of sexual assault, people view it much differently, in a way that reflects how inadequately we talk about/think about sex and consent.
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC joined in and replied with this 7 years ago, 24 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #920,549
@920,539 (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
People treat this kind of thing differently because of a lack of evidence. If people were being stabbed they could show their stab wounds, or they could produce police reports or doctors notes.
Also waiting a long time to report makes people suspicious. If I had heard that a group of people had all been stabbed but hadn't reported it to the police or gone to the doctor, I would be suspicious as well.
You wouldn't be skeptical?
People treat this kind of thing differently because of a lack of evidence. If people were being stabbed they could show their stab wounds, or they could produce police reports or doctors notes.
Also waiting a long time to report makes people suspicious. If I had heard that a group of people had all been stabbed but hadn't reported it to the police or gone to the doctor, I would be suspicious as well.
You wouldn't be skeptical?
(Edited 2 minutes later.)
Anonymous I joined in and replied with this 7 years ago, 5 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #920,550
@previous (Kook !!rcSrAtaAC)
> If I had heard that a group of people had all been stabbed but hadn't reported it to the police or gone to the doctor, I would be suspicious as well.
> You wouldn't be skeptical?
lol smh kms
> If I had heard that a group of people had all been stabbed but hadn't reported it to the police or gone to the doctor, I would be suspicious as well.
> You wouldn't be skeptical?
lol smh kms
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 7 years ago, 17 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #920,551
@920,549 (Kook !!rcSrAtaAC)
Also unlike other crimes, sex criminals are frequently convicted on testimony type evidence, so to be fair and just, one must automatically be skeptical
Also unlike other crimes, sex criminals are frequently convicted on testimony type evidence, so to be fair and just, one must automatically be skeptical
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC double-posted this 7 years ago, 30 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #920,553
Anonymous I replied with this 7 years ago, 5 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #920,555
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 7 years ago, 4 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #920,556
Anonymous J joined in and replied with this 7 years ago, 4 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #920,557
@920,555 (I)
Yeah, that’s the thing about kook. She doesn’t take away the pain; she just takes away the hope.
Yeah, that’s the thing about kook. She doesn’t take away the pain; she just takes away the hope.
Anonymous I replied with this 7 years ago, 3 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #920,558
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU replied with this 7 years ago, 2 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #920,560
@920,549 (Kook !!rcSrAtaAC)
Stab wounds don't remain open for 30 years. Not all stabbings result in police reports, and medical records are very easily lost or misplaced. It is very possible for a person to do a bad thing, and 30 years later the only evidence available that there was any wrongdoing is present in the minds of the individuals who witnessed it. I don't know what Kavanaugh did or didn't do, but I think in light of Weinstein, Cosby, Lauer, O'Reilly, etc. it's important to recognize that for years there have been people who everyone knew were sexual abusers, and who until basically the last 18 months, faced no repercussions for raping multiple people. I know women irl who have been raped and their abusers will for one reason or another likely never face any consequences. Given the incredible lack of seriousness with which this issue has been handled basically forever, even in the most obvious of cases, I think the default mindset should be "These accusations are incredibly serious and should be investigated as comprehensively as possible."
What instead we get is inane shit where it's automatically assumed the women are lying, the man is the real victim, five million men face false rape accusations every minute, etc. Which is another reason why it takes 30 years for people to come out about this stuff. It's deeply traumatizing, incredibly painful to share, and you can guarantee that as soon as you accuse a powerful person of sexual violence, you will be called a scheming, lying whore.
It's possible all 3 women are lying. It's possible all 3 women are telling the truth. It's possible the answer is somewhere in between. We'll find out more in the next couple of days, but if we can shift the starting position from "she's probably lying, it was so long ago." to "I don't know who's telling the truth but I'll judge the facts after they have all been presented" then I think we can actually maybe start to address the epidemic of unreported and underreported sexual violence present in the world.
Stab wounds don't remain open for 30 years. Not all stabbings result in police reports, and medical records are very easily lost or misplaced. It is very possible for a person to do a bad thing, and 30 years later the only evidence available that there was any wrongdoing is present in the minds of the individuals who witnessed it. I don't know what Kavanaugh did or didn't do, but I think in light of Weinstein, Cosby, Lauer, O'Reilly, etc. it's important to recognize that for years there have been people who everyone knew were sexual abusers, and who until basically the last 18 months, faced no repercussions for raping multiple people. I know women irl who have been raped and their abusers will for one reason or another likely never face any consequences. Given the incredible lack of seriousness with which this issue has been handled basically forever, even in the most obvious of cases, I think the default mindset should be "These accusations are incredibly serious and should be investigated as comprehensively as possible."
What instead we get is inane shit where it's automatically assumed the women are lying, the man is the real victim, five million men face false rape accusations every minute, etc. Which is another reason why it takes 30 years for people to come out about this stuff. It's deeply traumatizing, incredibly painful to share, and you can guarantee that as soon as you accuse a powerful person of sexual violence, you will be called a scheming, lying whore.
It's possible all 3 women are lying. It's possible all 3 women are telling the truth. It's possible the answer is somewhere in between. We'll find out more in the next couple of days, but if we can shift the starting position from "she's probably lying, it was so long ago." to "I don't know who's telling the truth but I'll judge the facts after they have all been presented" then I think we can actually maybe start to address the epidemic of unreported and underreported sexual violence present in the world.
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 7 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #920,561
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC double-posted this 7 years ago, 4 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #920,562
@920,560 (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
Stab wounds don't remain open for 30 years. Not all stabbings result in police reports, and medical records are very easily lost or misplaced. It is very possible for a person to do a bad thing, and 30 years later the only evidence available that there was any wrongdoing is present in the minds of the individuals who witnessed it.
That part of what you said is irrelevant. You asked why don't we compare sex crime allegations to stabbing allegations and I explained why.
I do wish that fewer.sex crimes happened, but I am not willing ti convict someone without evidence.
It is not fair, but it is right.
Stab wounds don't remain open for 30 years. Not all stabbings result in police reports, and medical records are very easily lost or misplaced. It is very possible for a person to do a bad thing, and 30 years later the only evidence available that there was any wrongdoing is present in the minds of the individuals who witnessed it.
That part of what you said is irrelevant. You asked why don't we compare sex crime allegations to stabbing allegations and I explained why.
I do wish that fewer.sex crimes happened, but I am not willing ti convict someone without evidence.
It is not fair, but it is right.
Anonymous I replied with this 7 years ago, 2 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #920,563
@920,561 (Kook !!rcSrAtaAC)
> What is right?
> Stab wounds don't remain open for 30 years.
this statement
> What is right?
> Stab wounds don't remain open for 30 years.
this statement
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 7 years ago, 32 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #920,564
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU replied with this 7 years ago, 9 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #920,565
@920,562 (Kook !!rcSrAtaAC)
It's not irrelevant. You said sexual assault is treated differently because of lack of evidence. I showed how a stabbing allegation can similarly have zero physical evidence to support it. In fact, most crimes committed 30 years ago would probably be impossible to prove based on physical evidence alone given the way physical things deteriorate over time. This is not unique to sexual assault. What is unique to sexual assault is the stigma associated with it, which is why it's such a weirdly polarizing issue.
I literally did not type the word "convict". Since neither you nor I are a judge as far as I'm aware, neither one of us can meaningfully convict anyone of anything. Kavanaugh himself is not on trial. The only thing that would happen would be that he might not get to be a Supreme Court Justice. Currently there are only 8 people in a country of over 330 million who have that job. He will not be placed in a uniquely disastrous position if he does not become the ninth one. I am not even asking you to think he did at least some of this stuff (though personally I do). My only asks were that you don't immediately assume she's probably lying and he's probably innocent, and that you let all the evidence be presented before drawing your final conclusion.
It's not irrelevant. You said sexual assault is treated differently because of lack of evidence. I showed how a stabbing allegation can similarly have zero physical evidence to support it. In fact, most crimes committed 30 years ago would probably be impossible to prove based on physical evidence alone given the way physical things deteriorate over time. This is not unique to sexual assault. What is unique to sexual assault is the stigma associated with it, which is why it's such a weirdly polarizing issue.
I literally did not type the word "convict". Since neither you nor I are a judge as far as I'm aware, neither one of us can meaningfully convict anyone of anything. Kavanaugh himself is not on trial. The only thing that would happen would be that he might not get to be a Supreme Court Justice. Currently there are only 8 people in a country of over 330 million who have that job. He will not be placed in a uniquely disastrous position if he does not become the ninth one. I am not even asking you to think he did at least some of this stuff (though personally I do). My only asks were that you don't immediately assume she's probably lying and he's probably innocent, and that you let all the evidence be presented before drawing your final conclusion.
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 7 years ago, 5 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #920,566
@previous (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
I just don't believe in negatively impacting someone's life for allegations that have no proof.
I just don't believe in negatively impacting someone's life for allegations that have no proof.
(Edited 1 minute later.)
Anonymous K joined in and replied with this 7 years ago, 2 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #920,567
@920,565 (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
Yeah, but if you just got stabbed, you are taking a picture of that wound... even if you have to borrow you're neighbors's Polaroid.
Yeah, but if you just got stabbed, you are taking a picture of that wound... even if you have to borrow you're neighbors's Polaroid.
(Edited 9 seconds later.)
Anonymous J replied with this 7 years ago, 11 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #920,568
@920,566 (Kook !!rcSrAtaAC)
Do you think that all sexual assault and harassment claims should be dismissed if they happened too long ago? How would you feel if a friend of yours was molested years ago, and could only speak out about it later?
Do you think that all sexual assault and harassment claims should be dismissed if they happened too long ago? How would you feel if a friend of yours was molested years ago, and could only speak out about it later?
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU replied with this 7 years ago, 1 minute later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #920,569
@920,566 (Kook !!rcSrAtaAC)
I don't know what you mean by "no proof". There is no video footage of Kavanaugh sexually abusing someone, turning to the camera, smiling and saying "My name is Brett Kavanaugh and I just committed a felony." There are multiple women accusing him of sexual abuse. He has testified multiple days before the senate. One of his accusers will testify tomorrow. The others may present their case in other ways over the next several days. If you have already decided that there is no proof, despite most of these accusations being made relatively recently, then you are prematurely prejudicing your outlook on the case. I don't want to make a court comparison since Kavanaugh isn't facing any legal jeopardy, but what you are doing is the equivalent of being a juror on a case that has heard the prosecutor's opening argument, first witness' opening statement, and decided the defendant is not guilty. You haven't heard the remaining 90% of the case, and you are already sure you know the likely outcome.
I don't think that's being "skeptical" so much as blatantly taking a side for reasons that don't really seem to have anything to do with evidence, since most of it couldn't possibly have been presented when you made up your mind.
I don't know what you mean by "no proof". There is no video footage of Kavanaugh sexually abusing someone, turning to the camera, smiling and saying "My name is Brett Kavanaugh and I just committed a felony." There are multiple women accusing him of sexual abuse. He has testified multiple days before the senate. One of his accusers will testify tomorrow. The others may present their case in other ways over the next several days. If you have already decided that there is no proof, despite most of these accusations being made relatively recently, then you are prematurely prejudicing your outlook on the case. I don't want to make a court comparison since Kavanaugh isn't facing any legal jeopardy, but what you are doing is the equivalent of being a juror on a case that has heard the prosecutor's opening argument, first witness' opening statement, and decided the defendant is not guilty. You haven't heard the remaining 90% of the case, and you are already sure you know the likely outcome.
I don't think that's being "skeptical" so much as blatantly taking a side for reasons that don't really seem to have anything to do with evidence, since most of it couldn't possibly have been presented when you made up your mind.
(Edited 43 seconds later.)
Anonymous L joined in and replied with this 7 years ago, 15 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #920,570
@920,566 (Kook !!rcSrAtaAC)
> I just don't believe in negatively impacting someone's life for allegations that have no proof.
LOL Who are you and what have you done with the conspiracy mongering Kook we all knew? Do you have her tied up somewhere? Is she okay? Can we speak to her?
> I just don't believe in negatively impacting someone's life for allegations that have no proof.
LOL Who are you and what have you done with the conspiracy mongering Kook we all knew? Do you have her tied up somewhere? Is she okay? Can we speak to her?
Anonymous G replied with this 7 years ago, 3 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #920,571
Not related but close enough to topic.
I was in a live in relationship with a gal who later disclosed that she had been raped 20 years in the past and had never shared that with ANYONE.
My next move without a real clue of what exactly to do was make a few calls and then get her to a Rape crisis treatment place. That was a great choice overall.
This is not a case of trying to go back and deal with the crime/perp. Only a case of moving on and working out the bugs in her life caused by the rape.
I was in a live in relationship with a gal who later disclosed that she had been raped 20 years in the past and had never shared that with ANYONE.
My next move without a real clue of what exactly to do was make a few calls and then get her to a Rape crisis treatment place. That was a great choice overall.
This is not a case of trying to go back and deal with the crime/perp. Only a case of moving on and working out the bugs in her life caused by the rape.
Anonymous J replied with this 7 years ago, 5 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #920,572
@920,570 (L)
This is a weird thing with conspiracy theorists that I've noticed too. They have little regard for evidence if it's something they're passionate about, but if there are claims against something they're sympathetic to, suddenly they're completely sceptical.
I have a relative who loves conspiracies. There is almost nothing he can't see some shadowy agenda behind. Apparently electric cars are a plot to limit movement because they can't go as far. But when the Trump-Russia thing is brought up, suddenly he's all "we don't know what happened there, it's probably nothing".
This is a weird thing with conspiracy theorists that I've noticed too. They have little regard for evidence if it's something they're passionate about, but if there are claims against something they're sympathetic to, suddenly they're completely sceptical.
I have a relative who loves conspiracies. There is almost nothing he can't see some shadowy agenda behind. Apparently electric cars are a plot to limit movement because they can't go as far. But when the Trump-Russia thing is brought up, suddenly he's all "we don't know what happened there, it's probably nothing".
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 7 years ago, 10 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #920,573
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC double-posted this 7 years ago, 51 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #920,574
@920,570 (L)
I believe that a lot of people are rapists and child molesters and that this guy is as well because he's a politician
I believe that a lot of people are rapists and child molesters and that this guy is as well because he's a politician
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 7 years ago, 1 minute later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #920,575
@920,572 (J)Does your relative think the left is not doing itself any favors over a political hit job, and is actually bolstering support for the right?
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 7 years ago, 12 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #920,576
@920,569 (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
Are the accusations recent or the incidents?
I don't think that all of those women are lying
Are the accusations recent or the incidents?
I don't think that all of those women are lying
Anonymous J replied with this 7 years ago, 31 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #920,578
@920,575 (A)
Putting aside the claim that these women are agents of the Democrats or something, I suppose the irony of you saying political mudslinging is unwise would be lost on you?
Putting aside the claim that these women are agents of the Democrats or something, I suppose the irony of you saying political mudslinging is unwise would be lost on you?
Sheila LaBoof replied with this 7 years ago, 8 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #920,579
@920,575 (A)
> Does your relative think the left is not doing itself any favors over a political hit job, and is actually bolstering support for the right?
is this from Bizarro Earth
> Does your relative think the left is not doing itself any favors over a political hit job, and is actually bolstering support for the right?
is this from Bizarro Earth
Anonymous L replied with this 7 years ago, 18 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #920,580
@920,572 (J)
> But when the Trump-Russia thing is brought up, suddenly he's all "we don't know what happened there, it's probably nothing".
Trump certainly brings that out in people. People who bought into Obama being a secret Muslim who wasn't born in the US and Podesta running a pedophile ring suddenly require mountains of incontrovertible proof before an investigation involving Trump goes forward. People who attended rallies chanting "Lock her up!" are now complaining that the court of public opinion doesn't automatically assume Kavanaugh's innocence. Even if we assume all the accusations against Kavanaugh are just political stunts, that kind of outraged screaming populism and grievance politics is the low bar the Trump campaign set for political discourse.
It's a shame that those ladies' claims have to compete with a concerted effort in the press to discredit them by any means possible. I understand being skeptical because of the timing and the politics surrounding it, but I also understand those women wanting to step in on the discussion. I've known plenty of people who are pretty horrible in one way or another. Most days I'm happy those people are off living their life and being horrible somewhere else, but I would probably feel compelled to at least try to warn anybody who would listen if those people suddenly were suddenly entrusted with something important.
> But when the Trump-Russia thing is brought up, suddenly he's all "we don't know what happened there, it's probably nothing".
Trump certainly brings that out in people. People who bought into Obama being a secret Muslim who wasn't born in the US and Podesta running a pedophile ring suddenly require mountains of incontrovertible proof before an investigation involving Trump goes forward. People who attended rallies chanting "Lock her up!" are now complaining that the court of public opinion doesn't automatically assume Kavanaugh's innocence. Even if we assume all the accusations against Kavanaugh are just political stunts, that kind of outraged screaming populism and grievance politics is the low bar the Trump campaign set for political discourse.
It's a shame that those ladies' claims have to compete with a concerted effort in the press to discredit them by any means possible. I understand being skeptical because of the timing and the politics surrounding it, but I also understand those women wanting to step in on the discussion. I've known plenty of people who are pretty horrible in one way or another. Most days I'm happy those people are off living their life and being horrible somewhere else, but I would probably feel compelled to at least try to warn anybody who would listen if those people suddenly were suddenly entrusted with something important.
MRS DEBORAH JAMES joined in and replied with this 7 years ago, 12 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #920,583
> no poll