Think about it, only 2% of rape and other sex related allegations are false. If 5 people claim to have been raped or sexually assaulted by someone, chances are EXTREMELY low that it's false. So far 84 allegations towards Harvey Weintstein have been made. He definitely did something. Same with other people who have lots of allegations against them
To be clear: I don't think the justice system should prosecute people for sexual harassment without proof.
I do think, however, that the survivors should be believed. 92-98% (I think) of survivors tell the truth -- obviously those studies don't necessarily apply here, given that those studies were conducted by people who reported it to the police and so on, but the stat probably still applies since it's a general demographic.
Given that, I think it's important to recognize that the reason survivors of sexual harassment often face stigma or are afraid of coming out as being sexually harassed is often the fear that they won't be believed -- so I think the small chance (like 2%) of a person being falsely accused (and typically the allegation is targeted at people when those people are rich/famous, so even the social reactions to that won't particularly affect them) is outweighed by the need to protect future survivors of assault and harassment, and to prevent it in general.
Any claim about harassment or rape should only be taken as true if there is evidence to support it. Not doing so would undermine the justice system and weaken the concept that every man (or women) is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.By automatically thinking that someone is guilty we are going down a dangerous road.
Innocent until proved otherwise, you have to be able to back up such a claim that can ruin someone's life if accepted wrongfully. Brian Banks for example was put through 10 years of hell, and imprisoned for 5 years. Being imprisoned for 5 years for something you didn't even do at the age of 16 is the reason you are innocent until proved guilty.
The presumption of guilt and onus of proof on the accused is unfair.
Arguments that a women will not lie are not well founded. Take the case of dowry laws. I have seen many cases where a simple incompatibility matter betwen a couple which should have resulted in a separation ; was projected as dowry harassment and money extracted from the boy to settle the matter.
There are enough women of lose character who will entice men into a honey trap and the join the #metio charade.
The case of Tanushree is hilarious. She says that she was forced to do a lewd scene with Nana Patekar. Look at the video with Emraan and decide if you believe her. Https://youtu. Be/x8OHVLqa-B0
Now she says it was a mistake. What hypocrisy! Triya Charitram 😼
The law must not prejudge. When thousands of these thoughts come together in a mass public verdict, We behave like a mob. Can we say witch trials. Rolling Stones mag. Is a perfect example of many which false accusations have ruined the live of the innocent. False accusations are a disservice to true victims.
Accusation without substance is a very powerful weapon and this clearly has been used multiple times under the banner of the #metoomovement. It has unfortunately resulted in true victims voices being drown out due to sensory overload and male mentors in the work place completely ignoring young female subordinates for fear of repercussions of any comment.
This is what the Royal Australian Navy does when an allegation of sexual harassment is made. They conduct a bias fact finding drawing bias conclusions, without ever interviewing the accused, and then determine based on the balance of probabilities that the allegation occurred and then give the accused a notice to show cause why there service should not be terminated. They then do not even acknowledge that the evidence was hearsay only, there were no witnesses that actually witnessed the alleged event, do not acknowledge that the girl who was allegedly harassed can not even substantiate the allegation, fail to look at the fact the accused was not even present, nor regard that the initial complaint was made by her boyfriend. The result, 21 year veteran service terminated for unacceptable behaviour as their retention is not being in the interest of the Navy. Accused life and career destroyed, health and psych suffers, and then the Navy expects the accused to repay 120 thousand, for early release from contract. The accused then has to spend more taking the military to federal court, where at least there is a burden of proof on proceedings.
What ever happen to innocent until proven guilty. The spanish Inquisition and witch hunters offered more procedural emapthy than the Australian Navy does.
There's no question that some men rape, but false rape culture is all about taking power from men and handing it to women. A false rape accusation is the way for a women to destroy a man by using her emotions and pretending to be a victim so the system will punish the man on her behalf.
Secondly, false rape accusations have always been between 40 and 50%, until pressure from feminist in politics, Hollywood and the media cause police departments to bend to political correctness. Now lawyers who defend rape cases have pointed they're seeing more false rape accusation cases, not less.
One of the most common things feminist say is that women wont come forward to report rape because the have to testify and relive the incident and possibly not be believed. Yet, there has never a lull, rapes being reported to police. So that's a false narrative. In fact, there are many women who point out that rape culture is indeed false.
There are a number of cases to use as examples but I use just these 2: Three young women accused a cab driver of rape because he didn't allow them to smoke in the cab. The whole thing was caught on camera, including the women telling people he tried to sexually assault them (https://www.Youtube.Com/watch?V=qa5kQbUl5_o&t=11s).
Then there's the case of Tyler Kost: This is a compilation of videos following the event (https://www.Youtube.Com/watch?V=HTGmH0zLPOw&t=4s). Key evidence shows 13 girls plotted on Facebook and even got together to plan the rape accusation against Tyler. Yet, probably because of political correctness, the prosecution and the court still put him in jail. And in spite of public disgust and the evidence against the girls, he's still fighting for his freedom, and his reputation.
Then there's Bill Cosby. 50 women accused Bill Cosby of rape, yet only 2 cases were found to be viable enough to go to court. Even then, one of those 2 cases was dropped by the women herself. She simply claimed she “only wanted to knock Cosby off his high horse and she's accomplished that.” That doesn't sound like a rape victim looking for justice. The truth is that she was caught lying on talk shows. In fact most of the accusers were caught lying on talk shows. This person has a video following these women as they were exposed as liars one by one, (https://www.Youtube.Com/watch?V=qiuNbcZHB-c).
I want feminist to explain what prevents women from lying about rape. We can demonstrate that women lie about every thing under the sun, just like men do. There has to be some mechanism or something that stops women from lying about rape. And why is it conveniently the only crime mostly perpetrated by men against women. How come the same isn't said for women who suffer from other forms of traumatic abuse, or PTSD or violent crime.
Just a couple of weeks ago we found out that a lawyer recruiting women to make false rape accusation against President Trump
While the vast majority of allegations are true, this is true of any alleged crime, whether it's rape or shoplifting. However, for any crime there are false allegations at times whether for revenge, monetary gain, or even mental illness. Sometimes it's even a case of false identification where the alleged victim is telling the truth to the best of their knowledge but they misidentified the actual perpetrator.
Strangely we don't see an "I believe him/her" movement for shoplifting allegations and if someone is accused of shoplifting but denies it and the news reports no evidence other than one person's word against the others and the accuser has no reported history of false accusation and the accused no reported history of shoplifting most people will not take sides.
And nobody will equate not taking sides as "calling the victim a liar" as people often do if you say there isn't enough evidence when talking about sexual assault allegations.
Another point, automatically believing accusers creates an environment where people are more likely to get away with false accusations and then more people take that opportunity.
When judging the media or deciding whether to fire someone I don't think we need to hold ourselves to the same standards as a jury judging a criminal case BUT we should at least have to hear about some evidence besides one person's word against another's before taking a side. Otherwise we need to remind ourselves that it's OK to hold an opinion of "I do not know" and that that is NOT tantamount to believing the accuser is a liar, it is just saying that given the evidence you do not know.
It is important to put ourselves in the shoes of victims of crime, but it is also important to put ourselves in the shoes of people wrongly accused of crimes. For the sake of both we should withhold judgment until there is at least some serious evidence for us to fairly judge the case on, and even then we should keep an open mind and be receptive to new evidence which may challenge our previous position.
If an accusers claim is true than it should be proved in a court of law not the court of social media.The argument that the chance of falsehood is low is also wrong because 10% ,not 2%, of rape claims are proved to be false.That means that of the thousands of rape cases reported each year hundreds are false or fake.Because of this we should make certain that a person is a molester or rapist before we start treating him or her like one.
I think it's sad that 40% of people to go against are entire legal system, so if someone is convicted of murder, should they still have a trial, based on the latest statistics only 0.27% of murderes are falsely convicted. So your saying we shouldn't have a trial for anything without a high probability of innocence. I can make a claim that a public figure or any one sexually harassed me and even raped me and there whole life would basically be ruined, there'd be suspended from there job and there relationships would be over, even if it turned out to be false the damage would already be done. I can make a claim against you and you could be thrown in prison without a trial, you want that? People are so sensitive these days I can tap a women on her shoulder at my work to get her attention and she can claim I was harassing her, it's just sad to be honest, you shouldn't give anyone the benefit of the doubt unless there's clear cut evidence.