Why are people so defensive towards alleged rapists?

[PinkyofPie]

If you're charged with a crime that goes to court, unless there's a reason to retain anonymity (such as it involves your child therefore naming you effectively names them) the press can name you if they wish to do so. Be it burglary, assault, theft or rape.

So why, every time a rapist is on trial, do people hop about saying "innocent until proven guilty" "they shouldn't be named they're tarred for life now" etc. But literally NO other crime.

A few days ago my local paper posted a picture on their FB newsfeed of 2 men on trial accused of raping a 18yo in the park. The above comments were there and even calls to "name and shame" the victim and also "will she get sentenced if they're found not guilty". Perhaps because "not guilty" does not mean innocent and if the law worked that way even fewer women would report rape than there is now

One of the men accused also posted mocking both the trial and people who actually had sensible comments. I looked at his profile, which is public, and there's lots of people saying "good luck mate" for today (verdict) and memes about liars getting their comeuppance.

Today both men were unanimously found guilty by the jury in just 7 hours.

No comments so far on the post about their guilt.

Can anyone offer an explanation as to why people take this attitude with rape, and only rape? The poor survivor has had to read all that sympathy for them

And why are you assuming that an accusation of rape is more likely to be false than an accusation of any other crime? What evidence is there that there are more false accusations of rape than false accusations of other crime?

What we need is a social scientist - there are probably studies into the impact of being accused of rape as opposed to other crimes. I'm not invested enough to search but google scholar might have something if you're genuinely interested in finding evidence, toad.

toad

Where did I say that I am assuming accusations of rape to be false more often than other crimes? You made that up.

Toad is asking you to back up your thoughts. Not because she's interested but because otherwise it's just your opinion and not fact.

She's not your evidence monkey. Find it yourself!

I have no interest in finding evidence. My thoughts - shared, I am sure, by many, many people - are that rape carries a stigma. If toad would like to challenge that she can be her own evidence monkey and show that it doesn't carry stigma.

Evidence might be a good thing for her - she seems to be defensive to the point of Making Things Up.

And lilac, what about giving toad a hand by actually responding to the points made, rather than bickering?

Whereas your facts are backed up by...?

I have no evidence

So if there is no evidence then how can you possibly say that being falsely accused of rape is worse than being falsely accused of any other crime? How can you say that it is more damaging if there is no evidence to back it up?

Why do you need evidence?

Because you can't make claims such as being accused of rape is worse than being accused of other crimes/more damaging/carries a bigger stigma/more likely to ruin lives without evidence to those claims up.

I would include child abuse in this too, actually.

Yet people aren't stamping their feet and whining about how unfair it is that people accused of child abuse aren't granted anonymity.

People don't cry out that "but this accusation might not be true" or "this person could be innocent and might be being falsely accused!" even though people have been wrongly accused of child abuse and a few have went on to suffer serious repercussions for it.

Funny how it's only rape that people suddenly become so concerned about these things and demanding anonymity for the accused

My response?

I agree with the OP. And every post of Toad's so far.

People are so fucking stupid when it comes to rape, and so fucking desperate to blame the woman

^back those claims up.

I'm not invested enough to search but google scholar might have something if you're genuinely interested in finding evidence, toad.

In the past I actually have tried to find evidence that being accused of rape is somehow worse/more damaging/carries a bigger stigma than being accused of other crimes and I have always come back with nothing. Nada. Zip.

That's why I'm asking you Gone (and anyone else who claims that it is somehow worse) because you might have some evidence that I might have missed. But I guess not. You're just speculating with no evidence to back up your claims.

Gone, it's good to see you on yet another thread on this topic, jumping to the defence of those accused of rape. I'm getting a nice warm familiar feeling.

But no, you're not invested at all.

Thank you for reporting my post, Tiggy. If you RTFT, you'll see I clarify later on that I was NOT alleging that all these men were convicted rapists, because it's pretty clear to anyone reading in good faith that that is the opposite of what I was posting about. The point of the post was that it was a mix of accused, aquitted, never charged and convicted.

How about the kid that hung himself myself after being falsely accused? There are plenty of instances of it. Women who falsely accuse should be charged - it's hard enough for women to come forward as it is without all the story tellers.

And yes, rape allegations stick no matter what, and the digital age we live in its in the Internet forever. So name and shame once there is a conviction - not before

Try reading the thread NewStart, that's already been discussed.

And what about the victims being named and shamed? Are you running around the Internet demanding justice for Ched Evan's victims being outed and having to change her name again and again?

Doubt it.

Poor men. If only the rapists could try not raping, but it'a obviously beyond their control. Poor, helpless little lambs.

Why on earth does wishing to protect an accused rapist's anonymity mean I would be less concerned about seeing justice done? Or more interested in finding a reason to victim blame?

The legal process is about reaching a place where justice can be done. The whole point is that until the verdict is reached, justice hasn't been done. No one has been found guilty and no one has been made to pay. That's why the legal process is so important. Therefore, why would anyone want someone to be punished for any crime beforehand? Why not just throw the book at them after the guilty verdict?

It's difficult for me to see why feminists are invested in this. It doesn't affect rape victims getting a fair trial. It doesn't affect reporting because that can be done effectively without giving names. It doesn't affect the rights of women in any way that I can see.

I don't think protecting anonymity means that anyone is thinking the accusation is false, simply that it is a life-changing accusation that would be better publicised (with a name attached) when we know who is guilty.

I do think the question is raised because rape does carry a particularly heavy stigma and if feminists do not believe this and wish to prevent anonymity for the accused, the onus will eventually be on you to prove that it doesn't. Which will probably be very difficult; it is certainly intuitive to think that a rape accusation is a particularly difficult thing to live down, regardless of being found innocent.

Something that concerns me in threads like these is feminist attempt to chip away at any aspect of the legal process which acknowledges that an accused rapist is not yet a rapist - is still, in fact, an innocent man. That undermines your credibility and will only incite a 'pushing back' effect. It is difficult to see why feminists would care whether a potentially innocent person's name is given out or not. If he's a rapist, the world will know at that point.

lilac

If only rapists could try not raping
That illustrates my point perfectly. You're not being logical. We are talking about someone who may not be a rapist; they are powerless to protect themselves from being slaughtered by the media. I certainly would like to see anonymity for the person making the accusation and yes, would feel that is more important. If there was a thread on the subject I would have posted on that too.

ayeamock What an unpleasant post. I like to see people punished for what they have actually done and not punished for things they haven't done. And mindless sarcasm annoys me. That's pretty much it.

I was being sarcastic. Sorry you can't tell the difference.

Hard to converse with someone who cares more about a tiny minority of men than a large number of women being raped.

How about the kid that hung himself myself after being falsely accused?

Which kid are you referring to? The one that was linked up thread and has already been discussed?

Because if so it has already been pointed out that it was never actually proven to be a false accusation.

She withdrew her complaint after a few weeks however that doesn't mean she was lying. There are lots of reasons why a woman might withdraw a genuine rape complaint.

Him killing himself is not proof of a false accusation either. Plenty of people who commit crimes go on to kill themselves.

Once again I am not saying that he is a rapist. I am saying we don't know what happened.

However you can't start accusing her of a serious crime (falsely accusing people of crimes is a crime in itself remember) without proof either.

There are only two people who know for sure what happened and one of them is dead. So we will probably never know the truth.

Women who falsely accuse should be charged

Um, women who have been proven to have made false accusations are charged and convicted. They always have done and always will be.

Just Google "woman jailed for false rape claim" and you will get pages of hits about women being convicted for making false rape accusations.

However here's the thing - in order to convict someone for making a false accusation you have to prove that the accusation was a false one.

You can't just start throwing women in jail just because you think she might be lying or she withdrew her complaint or the man she accused wasn't convicted or some other flimsy reason. You have to prove that the accusation was false.

That's why the girl in the article hasn't been charged. Because there was no proof the accusation was false.

A lot of so called false accusations are actually just cases where there was no conviction.

This is an impossible subject to debate objectively, because it is tied up with so much emotion and feelings of injustice.

I will now be lambasted for 'telling feminists what to do', but sometimes I see threads on here where feminists make it eminently clear that they only want a subject to be discussed between like-minded people. Mamaka's 'Safe place for budding feminists' is one. I think this thread might be another.

False allegations ruin lives end of and far too often nothing is done about them

Give over newstart and read the thread and Toad's last post.

You have no argument, especially not with 'end of'. Unless you can provide evidence to back up your claims it's just your opinion.

PinkyofPie Sat 30-Jul-16 08:40:28
I'm sure you'll come back telling me how disgusting I am because poor menz did nothing wrong etc. But anyone who thinks we should not place importance on the way in which women consent or the way men gain sexual relations respectfully, is frankly a misogynistic apologist who I have no time for

I would like to highlight this point from what you said, as I agree very strongly: Men need to gain sexual relations respectfully

This would change everything, and why would a good man ever not want to do this?

I think young boys and young men need to be taught this as they grow up by older men around them. So the current proclivity for over-persuasion, coercion and what constitutes rape legally, must mean this is not happening.