Oxford Union president rape allegations - alumni open letter

I believe men are humane enough to stand up for rape survivors.

I believe the majority of men are capable of understanding and condemning rape myths.

I trust my own husband and the men in my life to act with respect towards women, and I would be gutted if I found this not to be the case.

I must be a feminist.

please - I don't follow the situation you describe? You mean, should the boss make someone stand aside if the accuser isn't willing to go to the police? I think in that situation, it'd be a matter for HR to follow procedures for sexual harrassment but I'd be very unsure of the right way to proceed.

In this situation (on this thread), so far as we understand, someone did go to the police, but either did not bring charges or was told charges could not be brought. That situation would be out of the boss's or HR's hands, I believe.

larry - yes - in fact I said so in my post!

Plebgate - totally innocent man, resigned his post

Gross misconduct at work - you'd be suspended pending investigation

Trojan horse school governors all resigned following allegations.

It is the mature, sensible, and normal thing to do (even for non-criminal things like misconduct at work)!

Buffy said it best - rather than standing down, as someone respectful of the post would do, he took option 2.

larry - no, they are very similar. Neither should be compared to a witch hunt. That is incredibly offensive.

I think I've covered some of it on this thread, larry, but I think that until the culture changes to accepting that false allegations are very uncommon, and that many rapists are never convicted, the law will struggle. The law can only be as good as the people who are involved in upholding it, and while there are many who are excellent, we all know there are also huge hurdles in the way of bringing a rape charge, let alone, going forward to court.

What worries me most isn't corruption (though that has been an issue). It's that even with conscietious police and dedicated lawyers, some women will feel unable to go through with a rape charge or trial, because the weight of public opinion is against them. They feel the experience will simply be too traumatic.

Until we can change this, I don't think things will get better.

I do believe there is hope, though. In history, law has often been in advance of public opinion, and gradually, public opinion comes around.

Buffy,

For starters I think the culture now is 'we don't know', not to disbelieve the woman and feel sorry for the man.

However, again, I will ask you the same as lrd, in your opinion what should both the cultural and legal standard be in the case of a rape allegation?

Lrd,

I was comparing the culture on this thread to a witch hunt, not the culture of rape cases. They are very different.

Lrd,

So, what do you think the cultural and legal presumptions should be in allegations of rape?

What if a person accuses a person at work and tells the boss, but that person does not end up going to the police, should the employee still stand aside?

What I struggle with is the truly pitiful record of successful convictions. Keir Starmer agreed that the culture should change, and he's an expert in this area.

The culture must change to a presumption that we do not know whether or not someone is innocent or guilty.

At the moment, the presumption is that the woman is lying. It is appalling, but it is the case. Your posts comparing rape cases to witch hunts make this quite clear, I feel. As do the many outpourings of pity for men whose 'lives are ruined by false allegations', which function as survivor-shaming.

Dervel,

I do think there is a degree of disingenuity about stating that no one wants to alter the burden of truth hurdle but 'the culture must change'. If we change the culture to believe an accusation, the corollary is that we believe that the accused is a rapist unless he can prove otherwise. There is no half way house.

And, if you then try to say that we should have a legal standard of proof entirely separate to the cultural presumption, I don't think that will work either. Law follows culture, not vice versa (or at least on the whole).

With rape, the perpetrator's identity is rarely the issue. Most cases turn in whether the crime took place. You could, on that basis, argue that a different presumption was uniquely appropriate. Personally, I wouldn't but I can see a case for it. What I struggle with is someone arguing for a different presumption culturally but the same presumption in law.

Jane, this has been covered upthread.

There are many posts explaining in very simple terms why this is not about guilt or innocence. If you let us know what you don't understand, we'll explain, but there's little point repeating the same points if you won't read them or acknowledge them?

If my husband, or others of the men in my life had been accused, I hope and trust they'd have stepped aside - as many men who commented on this story say that they would have done.

This is not something most men cannot understand, you know.

Why should someone ever step aside if they are innocent? It's a ridiculous idea particularly as he wasn't charged.
I hope all feminists stand up for innocent until proven guilty whatever your gender.
That could have been your son or husband wrongly accused.

just - YY, you are right. I had been thinking of him putting the statement out, in which case it would have been entirely fair for him to state his innocence. But yes, of course, it'd have been the Union. They could certainly have said something about waiting for the police to finish.

He could also have put out the statement about innocence as a private person.

I doubt, if that had all happened, that it would have attracted so much media attention, however.

I do not think he should have been made to step down, no. And he wasn't.

I do think he should have offered. There is a big difference there. Being made to step down feels, as you say, like punishment, and sends a wrong signal.

I'm a little fuzzy on all this. Should he have been made to step down? My gut says no, because it does feel that the result is that someone should be punished for an accusation, and again my feelings are that isn't right.

Should he have chosen to step down? Unreservedly yes, I was reading about this and one comment was he should have stepped down for the organisation he leads benefit. If he leads the organisation that should be at the forefront of his mind. Everything LRD has said stacks as good enough reason on its own.

If anyone disagrees with anything above please don't take offence as they are just opinion. I'm not conversant enough with all the dimensions of this debate to offer more than that tentative opinion. However I do think that there is opportunity to salvage something positive from this sorry state of affairs by examining it properly.

Larry nobody is saying we should shift the burden of proof. It's easy to plant your flag on that concept stick your finger in your ears and ignore everything else. However if we do that we ignore one mountain of victims for the sake of a small hill of others. Obviously the goal here is to protect everybody, but you can't hide a mountain with a hill and we have to change things as the status quo is untenable as it stands.

Oh, yes. We all hate men. Gotcha.

You'll be surprised to note that there were plenty of men who thought he should step down, too. Members of his own Union were not very happy with him.

Is it so hard to imagine how things could have worked?

He might have said to the president-elect: 'This is awful. I've just heard someone has gone to the police and accused me of rape. I feel sick - I didn't do it, but you'd best take over while I sort this out.' They could have put out a statement to the effect that he was innocent and trusted that he would not be charged, and wanted everyone in the Union and beyond to know that, given the upsetting nature of the situation for himself and for others, he felt the Union would be better served by the president-elect taking his place.

If he'd done that, it would have sent a clear message that he could separate, in his mind, his knowledge of his own innocence and his awareness that rape is an upsetting thought to many.

"Feminists hate men" - bingo!

Buffy's post of 11.37 is spot on. Though apparently beyond the grasp of some.

He was on this morning a few mins ago.

He wants anonymity now.

His lawyer was spouting figures of 11% of rape allegations are false- rubbish! It's more like 5% ie the same as other crimes.

If his lawyer is lying about that...