User Controls
False Rape Claims
-
2017-11-10 at 7:49 AM UTCI have no idea if this is the right forum.
Anyway, with the sudden surge in public rape accusations lately, I'm calling BS. To clarify, rape is a terrible thing, and true rapists should be hanged.
BUT...
The recent throngs of women coming forward years and years later claiming men raped them seems bogus. Real rape is violent, typically unexpected, and traumatic. You go to the police. You tell someone. You do not keep it a secret until your assailant suddenly comes to power.
Also, aside from career assassination, the most common type of fake rape appears to happen when a woman gets drunk, goes to a guy's place, and wakes up the next day to decide he isn't as cute as he was the night before. Regretting being an easy whore is not rape.
I guess my main problem with all of this is the ease at which women are able to spout out unproven allegations that ruin lives. Press charges and settle the matter in court if there has really been a crime committed. Until the conviction is handed down based on solid evidence, I say assume the men are innocent. Reestablishing this sort of thinking would deter fake bitches who detract from genuine victims, so it's a win for women too.
Thoughts? -
2017-11-10 at 8 AM UTC
Originally posted by Dargo Real rape is violent, typically unexpected, and traumatic. You go to the police. You tell someone.
Where exactly did you get this idea? If we take rape to mean sex without consent (this seem uncontroversial) then there's nothing about it that necessitates physical violence or reporting. Systematic attempts at quantifying the rates of reporting rape suggests the opposite: it's very frequently not reported. Now if you want to argue there might be methodological issues there then fine, but that counts as exactly zero evidence for the thesis "real rape is reported". -
2017-11-10 at 9:03 AM UTC
Originally posted by Lanny Where exactly did you get this idea? If we take rape to mean sex without consent (this seem uncontroversial) then there's nothing about it that necessitates physical violence or reporting. Systematic attempts at quantifying the rates of reporting rape suggests the opposite: it's very frequently not reported. Now if you want to argue there might be methodological issues there then fine, but that counts as exactly zero evidence for the thesis "real rape is reported".
Regarding physical violence, when a man tries to rape a woman, she struggles. Women resist a man shoving his dick inside them against their will. If there is no evidence of struggle, then it seems pretty damn consensual and makes me skeptical as to how it could be rape*.
But what if he has a weapon?
If they're in private, say, she willingly went back to his place after meeting, then she made a poor fucking choice. Women shouldn't be alone with strange men; that's like leaving your daughter with Sophie. I'm not saying that justifies it, but women are exceedingly careless nowadays, and rape in private with a knife to the throat isn't all that common.
If they're in public, which is a lot harder to pull off, then yeah it's safe to say she's a genuine victim. Dragged into a back alley at gunpoint to be raped is an open and shut case against the offender.
Regarding reporting rates, we can't really know how many rapes go unreported since they aren't reported... I'm not sure how you could go about collecting accurate data data for that, especially since unreported rapes certainly were never questioned or brought to court to be proven true.
*Aside from cases of incest, in which you're probably right. -
2017-11-10 at 9:50 AM UTC
Originally posted by Dargo Regarding physical violence, when a man tries to rape a woman, she struggles. Women resist a man shoving his dick inside them against their will.
Again, exactly on what are you basing this declaration of fact? I don't consent to taxation but that doesn't mean I have a black eye every tax season.If they're in private, say, she willingly went back to his place after meeting, then she made a poor fucking choice. Women shouldn't be alone with strange men;
lolI'm not saying that justifies it
Then what is the point of brining it up? You agree: raping women is bad, even if they have the audacity to be alone with a stranger (btw most cases of rape are perpetrated by someone the victim knows)! This doesn't imply physical violence or "struggle". Ergo the assertion that rape is always physically violent is simply untrue.Regarding reporting rates, we can't really know how many rapes go unreported since they aren't reported…
I literally addressed this exact point in the post you quoted. Playing skeptic is fine, but it does nothing to establish the claim you made that rape is reported to the police.I'm not sure how you could go about collecting accurate data data for that, especially since unreported rapes certainly were never questioned or brought to court to be proven true.
Do you know what percentage of things we do research and gather compelling evidence for are proven in court? -
2017-11-10 at 10:11 AM UTCIdeally (maybe), our innocent until proven guilty premise should provide more anonymity/less info until an individual charged with a crime, any crime, pleads guilty or is found guilty, thus protecting their right to a presumed innocence and a certain degree of dignity as it relates to public judgement and association to criminal activity.
At the very least, the notorious criminal charges which carry the most potential for personal damage to the falsely accused need to offer these protections. Your rape, sexual assault, murder, child molestation, and the like.
That would really change things and I don't honestly know how,but it would be interesting. The one big thing that comes to mind is how those protections would weigh against the public's right to information. Instances where charged offenders make bail and are released to the public, who do we decide to favor? I guess it makes sense on both sides to a point.
Now this anonymity wouldn't have to be an issue at all if the court of public opinion wasn't often so pessimistic as the district and state attorneys who so often presume guilt before innocence. That shits always perplexed me, prosecutors losing trials to fair and honest evidence and testimony and they are UPSET that they didn't get a conviction-- on a person just found not guilty! They should be happy they didn't just further ruin an innocent man's life!
Last thing I'll say is of course the statistics are noteworthy as it relates to all of this, in terms of our conviction rates and the idea of blanket protection to those charged with crimes that have extremely high conviction rates.
Its pretty fucky really. Like you say, false rape psycho broads are definitely out there and can singlehandedly ruin a man's life, and we need protections for them. On the other hand, a bunch of actual rapey rapers are out there, and though the guilty may make up 90% of those accused, our innocence protections would have to be extended to them as well. So, fucky.The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2017-11-10 at 10:15 AM UTCOh also I have a running theory that all unreported rapes are actually enjoyed by the rapee and they just choose to harbor it as their little morbidly satisfying secret.
-
2017-11-10 at 5:47 PM UTC
-
2017-11-10 at 6:09 PM UTC
Originally posted by Dargo Regarding physical violence, when a man tries to rape a woman, she struggles. Women resist a man shoving his dick inside them against their will. If there is no evidence of struggle, then it seems pretty damn consensual and makes me skeptical as to how it could be rape*.
But what if he has a weapon?
If they're in private, say, she willingly went back to his place after meeting, then she made a poor fucking choice. Women shouldn't be alone with strange men; that's like leaving your daughter with Sophie. I'm not saying that justifies it, but women are exceedingly careless nowadays, and rape in private with a knife to the throat isn't all that common.
If they're in public, which is a lot harder to pull off, then yeah it's safe to say she's a genuine victim. Dragged into a back alley at gunpoint to be raped is an open and shut case against the offender.
Regarding reporting rates, we can't really know how many rapes go unreported since they aren't reported… I'm not sure how you could go about collecting accurate data data for that, especially since unreported rapes certainly were never questioned or brought to court to be proven true.
*Aside from cases of incest, in which you're probably right.
This is a perfect example of "I don't have any evidence or logical reasoning BUT THIS IS THE WAY IT WORKS BECAUSE I CAN'T HANDLE IT ANY OTHER WAY" despite reality -
2017-11-10 at 6:12 PM UTCwhat these dumb bitches don't think about is if they get caught out making a false rape accusation, they have then just made themselves a target for real rapists who now know that nobody is ever going to take any future rape claim they make seriously. this shit should be pointed out more often.
. -
2017-11-10 at 6:22 PM UTC
Originally posted by Dargo I guess my main problem with all of this is the ease at which women are able to spout out unproven allegations that ruin lives. Press charges and settle the matter in court if there has really been a crime committed. Until the conviction is handed down based on solid evidence, I say assume the men are innocent. Reestablishing this sort of thinking would deter fake bitches who detract from genuine victims, so it's a win for women too.
This I agree with, and should by all rights be as uncontroversial as saying "rape is sex without consent". -
2017-11-10 at 6:24 PM UTC
Originally posted by NARCassist what these dumb bitches don't think about is if they get caught out making a false rape accusation, they have then just made themselves a target for real rapists who now know that nobody is ever going to take any future rape claim they make seriously. this shit should be pointed out more often.
.
There should be a public list of names and locations of all false accusers, printed DAILY in every newspaper and online at rapethesebitchesinstead.comThe following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2017-11-11 at 1:35 AM UTCI think that if a woman is found to have falsely accused a man of rape they should have to be added to a registry and be required to tell any potential suitor that they falsely accused someone of rape, just like the sex offender registry
-
2017-11-11 at 2:11 AM UTC
Originally posted by Kolokol-1 I think that if a woman is found to have falsely accused a man of rape they should have to be added to a registry and be required to tell any potential suitor that they falsely accused someone of rape, just like the sex offender registry
Rapists aren't actually required to tell "potential suitors" about their conviction, are they? -
2017-11-11 at 2:18 AM UTCNo, they aren't. I should know. I was a rapist for 10 years. Now I'm not. Call 888-520-CURE and end your rape now.
-
2017-11-11 at 2:20 AM UTC8=====================================D
Post last edited by 霍比特人说中文不好 at 2017-11-11T02:34:18.738623+00:00 -
2017-11-11 at 2:34 AM UTC^the dick is better
-
2017-11-11 at 7:33 AM UTC
Originally posted by Lanny Again, exactly on what are you basing this declaration of fact? I don't consent to taxation but that doesn't mean I have a black eye every tax season.
Would you resist someone trying to rip off your pants and cram their dick up your ass? If not, that's called consensual gay sex and you're a faggot.
Originally posted by Lanny lol
I don't see what's funny about suggesting women take measures to avoid being assaulted.
Originally posted by Lanny Then what is the point of brining it up? You agree: raping women is bad, even if they have the audacity to be alone with a stranger (btw most cases of rape are perpetrated by someone the victim knows)! This doesn't imply physical violence or "struggle". Ergo the assertion that rape is always physically violent is simply untrue.
Again, how is it rape if there is no struggle? There are many times during sex when 'no' means 'yes'. How are you supposed to tell she doesn't consent to sex if she doesn't turn down your advances and lets you fuck her without any resistance?
Originally posted by Lanny I literally addressed this exact point in the post you quoted. Playing skeptic is fine, but it does nothing to establish the claim you made that rape is reported to the police.
There's no reason to question rape reporting rates unless you have evidence indicating their unreliability. And no, the 1 in 4 feminist statistic does not count.
Originally posted by Lanny Do you know what percentage of things we do research and gather compelling evidence for are proven in court?
My point was, because unreported rapes are not held up to any measure of scrutiny, there's no way to tell how accurate they are. Saying "100 rapes went unreported this year" gives the impression that 100 rapes happened, when we have no idea if that's true. That's all. -
2017-11-11 at 7:41 AM UTC
Originally posted by mmQ Ideally (maybe), our innocent until proven guilty premise should provide more anonymity/less info until an individual charged with a crime, any crime, pleads guilty or is found guilty, thus protecting their right to a presumed innocence and a certain degree of dignity as it relates to public judgement and association to criminal activity.
This is an interesting idea. I suppose that if an innocent person is charged the idea is that they will eventually be cleared by the court, thus resulting in minimal damage.
It doesn't solve the case though, of bitches randomly saying "He raped me 20 years ago even though I don't have proof. I never made a report or anything, just take my word for it now." While such things may or may not happen from time to time, giving women the power to utter such devastating accusations without offering a shred of proof is too much. -
2017-11-11 at 8:29 AM UTC
Originally posted by Dargo This is an interesting idea. I suppose that if an innocent person is charged the idea is that they will eventually be cleared by the court, thus resulting in minimal damage.
It doesn't solve the case though, of bitches randomly saying "He raped me 20 years ago even though I don't have proof. I never made a report or anything, just take my word for it now." While such things may or may not happen from time to time, giving women the power to utter such devastating accusations without offering a shred of proof is too much.
Yeah I think a lot of it boils down to simply hoping the majority of people are humane and decent enough to refrain from lying about such things, and for the most part I think we are. Like for example, framing people is not a common crime, even though it's relatively easy and extremely effective as a form of vengeance. Guy pissing you off at school? Plant drugs in his locker and tell the authorities. That shit seems EASY. What are they gonna do- same thing anyone else does in that position, say they don't know how it got there and it isn't there's, then the cops laugh and take you away.
As inhumane as we can be, there still lies a massive level of decency as it relates to fucking people over like that, which honestly surprises me.
As far as people claiming rapes or sexual abuse many years after the supposed act/s, it's a bit convoluted in terms of what counts as evidence, and I think in many cases it boils down to witness testimony and corroborating stories, both of which can be easily fabricated. That brings in a whole other dynamic to how we treat 'evidence.'
Witness testimony is usually treated as factual basis, which is interesting in and of itself since a witness's claims are no more founded than anyone else's. Then again I'm sort of guessing and I don't know exactly how witness testimony is treated.
What the fuck am I going on about here? Lol
Now I want to know if witness testimony alone can be used as evidence to convict someone of a crime. I also want to know how often these years-later accusations happen without public knowledge, like it's always a celebrity or something that you hear about, but basic statistics would then indicate that it happens that much more often for those who aren't celebrities, but we just don't hear about it. The celebrity ones it's easier to chalk up as women trying to cash in but in private cases there wouldn't be much incentive for people to make false rape claims many years after the fact.
Come to think of it, I don't think I know of a single person other than someone famous that has dealt with such allegations. Is that coincidence or a reflection of the TRUTH? Just like most of us don't frame our enemies, perhaps the false rape accusations are also just as rare and it's not nearly as big of an issue as we're lead to believe.
Also, turtles and things and stuff.The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2017-11-11 at 8:37 AM UTC
Originally posted by Dargo Would you resist someone trying to rip off your pants and cram their dick up your ass? If not, that's called consensual gay sex and you're a faggot.
lol, ok, so if I knocked you out and fucked you it would be 100% consensual because hey, you didn't resist. God damn, you're so gay, just taking my cock like that. Total fag alert over here.I don't see what's funny about suggesting women take measures to avoid being assaulted.
The categorical denial of non-consensual actions where physical resistance isn't present is what's comic here. See (again) the "tax season" analogy.Again, how is it rape if there is no struggle?
Maybe it's rape because consent isn't given? Protip: consent doesn't mean struggling after a rape attempt is started.There's no reason to question rape reporting rates unless you have evidence indicating their unreliability.
wut? Illuminate me, if the fact that in fairly rigorously conducted surveys women report rates of rape wildly above the rate of rape reported to police departments doesn't constitute a reason to question if the rate of rape being reported corresponds to the rate of actual rape, what on earth does? Please tell me, what on earth would qualify as evidence that rape is underreported if not that?And no, the 1 in 4 feminist statistic does not count.
Statistics don't count if they don't agree with my opinion!
