Double standards on mn.

[thatwasme22]

This week so far:

1. I have seen various posters defend Caroline Flack for having issues. Maybe she did but then the same argument would not be made on Chris Browne.

1. A thread on the physical attractiveness on male politicians. Imagine a male forum did this on females.

1. A thread with a woman hiding her inheritance from her husband and encouraged to do so by many posters and him being called financially abusive for being sensible over money. When men do this on mn it's all ltb.

Am I missing something? I call myself a feminist so am pro equality and that's how I raised my kids but why is this not being called out on mn?

Mumsnet is not a collective consciousness. One poster might advise an OP to hide her inheritance. Another might claim a husband doing likewise is financial abuse. They’re not the same poster and women don’t have exactly the same opinion as every other woman in the world.

I think it’s utter idiocy to accuse a site or a group of people to have double standards. People are individual. If someone is unable to grasp that they need to go back to primary school.

@CatsHairEverywhere2

Mumsnet is not a collective consciousness. One poster might advise an OP to hide her inheritance. Another might claim a husband doing likewise is financial abuse. They’re not the same poster and women don’t have exactly the same opinion as every other woman in the world.

I think it’s utter idiocy to accuse a site or a group of people to have double standards. People are individual. If someone is unable to grasp that they need to go back to primary school.

The digs about comprehension and school are tiresome.

The point is, if you are a longer term MN user, you will notice that some voices on some threads are louder than others, and this sets a narrative.

female supremicists

wow

@User133847

It's deliberate double standards by female supremicists.

That's a bit of an oxymoron love!

LOL comparing Caroline Flack to Chris Brown hospitalizing Rihanna and nearly killing her.

@CatsHairEverywhere2

Mumsnet is not a collective consciousness. One poster might advise an OP to hide her inheritance. Another might claim a husband doing likewise is financial abuse. They’re not the same poster and women don’t have exactly the same opinion as every other woman in the world.

I think it’s utter idiocy to accuse a site or a group of people to have double standards. People are individual. If someone is unable to grasp that they need to go back to primary school.

Exactly.

Il believe anyone when they're found guilty

Right, but Amber Heard wasn't found guilty?

And if you truly believe that, look at the careers of men in the public eye ruined by false accusations. Andrew Lancel, for a start.

Why do you think the accusations against Andrew Lancel were false? His victim was never convicted of making a false allegation and a "not guilty" verdict is NOT a declaration of innocence.

And FYI he's had a steady TV and theatre career since his trial...hardly a shining example of a ruined career. I believe his victim.

Oh and BTW, his accuser is a man. Who was a child when he claims the abuse took place

Try harder

@User133847

It's deliberate double standards by female supremicists.

😂😂😂😂😂

@JamesMiddletonsMarshmallows

Il believe anyone when they're found guilty

Right, but Amber Heard wasn't found guilty?

And if you truly believe that, look at the careers of men in the public eye ruined by false accusations. Andrew Lancel, for a start.

Why do you think the accusations against Andrew Lancel were false? His victim was never convicted of making a false allegation and a "not guilty" verdict is NOT a declaration of innocence.

And FYI he's had a steady TV and theatre career since his trial...hardly a shining example of a ruined career. I believe his victim.

Oh and BTW, his accuser is a man. Who was a child when he claims the abuse took place

Try harder

I don't need to try harder, you're not my teacher.

No, amber Heard wasn't found guilty. What is your point?

And what is your point about Lancel? I mean apart from the stream of TV not being true, and that it was a man, my point remains.

You can believe who you like. Jurors found him not guilty in less than half an hour on six counts.

So unless you believe you know better than the judge in this case....

Under your logic by the way, anyone accused ever is guilty. What sort of world would that be?

@Butwasitherdriveway for any case to get in front of a jury, there must be sufficient evidence to bring a case. It's not done on a whim.

False accusation charges are actually very rare. Cases where evidence doesn't prove, beyond reasonable doubt, that the defendant is guilty, does NOT mean that the accusations are unfounded. It just means that the threshold pf proof wasn't sufficient.

[quote CandyLeBonBon]@Butwasitherdriveway for any case to get in front of a jury, there must be sufficient evidence to bring a case. It's not done on a whim.

False accusation charges are actually very rare. Cases where evidence doesn't prove, beyond reasonable doubt, that the defendant is guilty, does NOT mean that the accusations are unfounded. It just means that the threshold pf proof wasn't sufficient. [/quote]
Out of interest though, how do we know the difference between a false accusation and a lack of evidence etc?

Well the cps won't bring a case to trial if there is a lack of evidence will they? And all evidence produced has to reach the required threshold. So if there are false allegations, it's most likely that the case will be abandoned before court because the evidence just doesn't stack up!

@georgarina

LOL comparing Caroline Flack to Chris Brown hospitalizing Rihanna and nearly killing her.

Belting someone with a lamp while they're asleep is just childs play.

@Butwasitherdriveway

From CPS.gov.U.K.

False allegations
If a case is not charged by the CPS or is stopped before a trial this does not mean the complainant made a false allegation.
A decision to stop a case on evidential grounds does not mean that an allegation is false. It means that the case does not meet the evidential test required to put an allegation before a jury under the Code for Crown Prosecutors.
Research has shown that false allegations of rape are rare. A CPS report published in 2013 showed that over a 17 month period, there were 5,651 prosecutions for rape, and during the same period there were 35 prosecutions for making false allegations of rape.
The CPS prosecutes false allegations of rape when the evidential test is met.
False allegations of rape or sexual assault can have a very damaging impact on the person falsely accused. Such cases are dealt with robustly and those falsely accused should feel confident that the CPS will prosecute these cases wherever there is sufficient evidence and it is in the public interest to do so.
The Director’s Legal Advisor advises on all charging decisions for perverting the course of justice offences where there has been an alleged false allegation of rape.
An acquittal does not automatically mean there was a false allegation.
4

When a jury returns a not guilty verdict it means that they were not satisfied ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ that the offence was committed

And actually, from a juror's perspective, you are often given very specific elements of the case to decide on, so it's not even 'did they/didn't they?' Often the judge will tell you that you 'must take into account x, in which case, was y a reasonable reaction. If yes, then you must find them not guilty'

So it really isn't as clear cut as you might think.

Oh we're into false rape accusations now are we?

Great.

Good news is that rape convictions in the UK are at an all time low.

Clearly this is because more and more women and girls are lying and not because of any of the other issues raised in the press, parliament etc etc

How many men who are reported to the police about rape lie when they are questioned?

I mean we don't know but I'd guess... A fair few?

So how does that fit in with all this.

@NiceGerbil

Oh we're into false rape accusations now are we?

Great.

Good news is that rape convictions in the UK are at an all time low.

Clearly this is because more and more women and girls are lying and not because of any of the other issues raised in the press, parliament etc etc

That's not even remote what I suggested.

As we all know, a man is more likely to BE raped than to be falsely accused of rape.

I was answering a pp who mentioned it in relation to the Andrew Lancel case.

@Butwasitherdriveway

The QC made this comment after the jury delivered their verdict:

"The defendant was acquitted on the evidence, and rightly so, but it is important that the complainant who is clearly scarred by an experience, should understand that the jury verdicts does not necessarily involve rejection of his account of a sexual encounter or encounters with the defendant. ``It is a statement that the prosecution have failed to make the jury sure that abuse of the type alleged occurred during the period covered by the indictment and in particular before the complainant's 16th birthday, now more than 18 years ago.''

No suggestion of false accusations of anything.

Sorry candy- I think maybe I got confused about who had said what!

I must admit I've not caught up. Why are we talking about rape? What's the double standard? Maybe I need to catch up!

@NiceGerbil

Sorry candy- I think maybe I got confused about who had said what!

I must admit I've not caught up. Why are we talking about rape? What's the double standard? Maybe I need to catch up!

Because @Butwasitherdriveway was bringing the case of Andrew Lancel into the equation and saying how awful it was that 'false accusations' had ruined a man's career. I was pointing out some facts surrounding 'false accusations' and their rarity, using rape cases as an example.

I hadn't heard of that case. Just googled.

The comments of the judge are pertinent surely.

@NiceGerbil

I hadn't heard of that case. Just googled.

The comments of the judge are pertinent surely.

Exactly. I was just trying to factually correct that poster's handwringing about false accusations and poor men losing their careers. Because their assertions were incorrect

I didn't really say they , though.

My point is that many people in the public eye have their careers tarnished.

The mantra is to believe all victims.

Why?