You are, of course, right about the need for more evidence in a legal process.
The point still stands however that if statistics show that most women in anonymous surveys state that they have witnessed men eating cornflakes …
and most men, when told off for eating cornflakes will say ‘no, no way, dude! How could you even think I’d eat cornflakes! I’m a toast kind of guy. What?! Wait! You don’t believe me? How could you even think I’d eat cornflakes! There is something wrong with cornflakes. They are weird. I’d not touch them with a barge pole. No. Don’t say it! Don’t tell people I eat cornflakes. Life won’t be worth living. I’m going to kill my self if you keep saying it!’
…then it’s most likely, based on the stats, that the man ate cornflakes and the woman is telling the truth.
You can’t convict someone on that but you can share your concerns about the disappearing cornflakes and why it’s problematic. You can stand by the women that are brave enough to say that the man ate the cornflakes - putting themselves at risk of being labelled - ‘you must have bought the cornflakes in the first place, if you put the cornflakes in front of him then what do you expect? You buy cornflakes too much, it’s your own fault. You are unhinged. You are lying. You are mad. You are venegeful.’ Etc.
Because we all want the cornflake eating to stop.
And for years cornflake eating has gone under the radar and been normalised.
We need the cornflake eating eating to be highlighted in the media. Cornflake eating thrives in darkness so a big bright light on it will help to stop it.
Statistically it’s unlikely that men’s lives will be ruined by being falsely accused of eating cornflakes, and they have legal redress if they believe that has happened, but if one or two are harmed by a false cornflake related accusation, that’s nothing in comparison to the 1000s upon 1000s of women who have been harmed over decades.