AIBU in thinking a drunken 18 year old boy should not be called to account for behaviour 35 years later?

[longwayoff]

I'm conflicted. Brett Kavanaugh, nominated by Trump as a Supreme Court judge, has been accused of locking Dr Christine Blasey Ford in a bedroom and sexually assaulting her. This happened in the early 1980s when they were teens at a party and he was very drunk, she hadnt been drinking. She says she is 100 percent certain he did this. He says wasn't me guv.
Her televised evidence was upsetting and convincing. I believe what she says and feel she should have whatever she needs to help her. BUT. Drunken 18 year old boy/man. All these years later? Is that fair? To wreck his career now? Personally, I loathe Trump and all his works, so politically I'm glad to see a fail. But this is not sitting well with me. I feel I should feel better about this. Convince me please.

(This is also why so many female Republicans back BK. If their husbands’ and fathers’ ships go down, so do they. In fact the whole house of cards tumbles around them).

Wow I never thought about it like this! Excellent point.

I hope the whole lot of them go down with this. The whole sexually predatory frat boy fraternity - of whatever political persuasion.

So @longwayoff never came back.

I wonder where this is all going to end.

America can barely be described as a democratic country any longer, and appears to be on the verge of civil war.

BK will be confirmed (as I say, democracy is as good as dead - I have no doubt he will be confirmed), and Trump's tenure will eventually end.

But Americans appear to loathe each other, and that isn't about to change.

@RedneckStumpy *"It’s not really right it happened. But it shouldn’t have come up now.

It seems that bringing it up now is a deliberate attempt to screw up his career, and nothing else."*

I know, right. If only there had been another way. Maybe, like, I don't know... imagine what might have happened had he not assaulted her? His career would be okay now, hey? Maybe he should have tried that.

Oh, I'm sorry, I'm blaming someone here and deliberately trying to.... wait... no I'm blaming the guy who SEXUALLY ASSAULTED someone.

Maybe, just maybe, Dr. Ford cares enough about America, about justice and the rule of law to try and ensure that a brutish liar with an alcohol problem does not become a Supreme Court judge.
It just astonishes me how many people will always assume that the woman in these situations has petty revenge motives. Who would volunteer for scrutiny and abuse on this scale just for that?

I spent large chunks of my teens in the company of wasted 18 yr old boys and none of them tried to rape me.

Surely you cannot be saying this is normal behaviour and boys need to grow up a bit before they can learn how not to rape their friends?

It's beyond comprehension.

What does a credible, educated, stable, comfortably-off woman have to gain from making this up?

And on the flip side, what does she have to lose? Everything.

And why - when women do feel brave enough to come out - are these allegations always against the sort of men they're made against?

Trump made fun of Dr Ford at one of his recent pathetic rallies. He said he'd been on the receiving end of the same sorts of allegations, but he expected it, and could handle it (whatever, you giant baby).

Why, then, has there never been an allegation against, say, Obama?

Or any other obviously decent man?

Trump believes Ford. That’s one thing I’m sure about.

Trump believes Ford. That’s one thing I’m sure about

I’d go further, I think he fears her because if Kavanaugh can be taken down, so can he.

Not necessarily by her, but let’s not forget he’s got his own past treatment of women to consider. I very much feel he hears a clock ticking.

He is desperate to show the world (ie other men) that women like Ford don’t matter and to dissuade women from speaking out.

ADarkandStormyKnight absolutely.

I'm so so so fucking angry and disappointed with Susan Collins.

He is desperate to show the world (ie other men) that women like Ford don’t matter

And in the US, they don't, really.

I’m going to put forward a different viewpoint.

I personally found Ford to be compelling and I agree with all the points made about why on earth she she would do this unless it’s true.

That said there has been no criminal investigation and absent the Cosby or Weinstein type scenario with mass accusations I don’t believe any realistic prospect of conviction for events so long ago.

So I am conflicted in that whilst I personally believe he did it I am also uncomfortable with the situation where unproven and probably unprovable allegations by someone can ruin someone’s career and reputation. Which is what it would be if he wasn’t appointed (because of this).

To the original OP - yes of course someone should be accountable however long ago

If you put yourself up there for close scrutiny, then close scrutiny is what you are gonna get. You have to be squeaky clean to carry this post and not hiding behind alcohol or age.
The man would do better to have used this as an example to others about turning their lives around instead of denying, belittling, bad mouthing and undermining. Anyone knowing anything about micro body language could see what was going on in his head, and it wasn't sweet.
I do feel sorry for his family as they probably had no idea of his past behaviour and cannot believe that of the man he is now.
One of our MPs had a conviction for curb crawling 30 years ago. I cannot bear to see him bleating on about how disgusting it is that areas of the city are no go areas due to prostitution. It is as if he honestly believes that he wasn't part of the problem!

I remember the boys I knew when I was 18. Not ONE of them would have done this, drunk or not.

He has no morals and isn't fit for any job of trust.

I am also uncomfortable with the situation where unproven and probably unprovable allegations by someone can ruin someone’s career and reputation.

Rape and sexual assault is probably the only crime where it is often virtually unprovable.

This is why very few women even bother to report. It's why they stay silent.

And, most insidiously, it's why the type of men who do it, have no compunction about doing it. They know it's unlikely anything will ever be pinned on them. Trump knows this. Kavanaugh knows this.

With murder, there's a dead or missing body. With theft there's a missing item. Etc.

With rape and sexual assault, it's just one person's word against another. No evidence. Unprovable. Lucky rapists.

And anyway, you don't have to worry about Kavanaugh's career being ruined. He's about to be confirmed. He's untouchable - he's absolutely fine.

I was raped at a party in 1985. It has shaped my entire life. I lost friends because of it as they decided that I had asked for it because I was drunk. We were all drunk that night. I said no. I said no. I said no.
But I was drunk and I asked for it.
I remember scrubbing myself raw in the bath the next day.
I remember trying to slit my wrists a year later.
I remembered having my stomach pumped after yet another suicide attempt.
I fill my prescription for antidepressants every month.
I'm nearly 50.
Boys will be boys

I’m saddened that women can feel this way

darkside - I'm so sorry

Dowager - I am not ‘worried’ about Kavanaugh and his career personally. Don’t be snide.

Difficult to prove yes - in particular 35 years later. I think she was incredibly brave. But none of this has been tested in a court of law. I don’t think the fact that there is broader question here about presumption of innocence should be ignored. And in particular if it’s because people don’t like his politics.

I question a process which allows the appointment of someone with this type of allegation hanging over them. I find the idea of the President proffering his opinions on the validity of the allegation totally inappropriate and abhorrent. I personally believed her.

However, not all people who acknowledge the difficulty here or hesitate over this appointment are rape apologists or think ‘boys will be boys’ as seems to be implied.

But the so called 'difficulty' rides on the fact that, as I say, rape and sexual assault are unique.

They are virtually unprovable, unless there are witnesses, and this almost never happens. Hell, even when there are witnesses, rapists get little more than a slap on the wrist (Brock Turner).

So rapists pretty much get a free pass - 1. to rape

1. to be the one who's believed (as opposed to their victim), and
2. to carry on in life - career and all unscathed.

Agree that it is very difficult for all the reasons you mention and it’s a challenge for the judicial process and dreadful for victims. There are also significant cultural issues around how rape victims are treated as per the slap on the wrist case you mention which was gross.

I just don’t think the answer is to set aside judicial process altogether. I don’t have the right answer. I do dislike the fact that it can’t be acknowledged that there may be a point there to consider without being labelled an apologist.

The answer absolutely isn't to set aside the judicial process - but we do need to acknowledge that the current judicial process means successful rape convictions are virtually impossible. And that something has to be done about that, if things are to improve.

It will take greater minds than mine to come up with the solution.

Not sure anyone is disagreeing with that.

But the point at issue was whether that means this man should not be appointed to the Supreme Court as a result of allegations which are (IMO) credible but have not been tested in any judicial process.

That said it’s all very well to be virtuous about due process but query whether if there had been credible but untested/unproven allegation of a different nature the response may have been different. I guess that links into your point about cultural attitudes to sexual assault.

Ultimately the fact that the vote was more or less along party lines says it all really.