How does “We wouldn’t need [evidence] if society just trusted women” fit your argument?
We wouldn’t need [evidence]
Being in the Epstein log books isn’t evidence of sexual assault comparable to simply listening to Virginia Giuffre.
And, ffs, Testimony Is Evidence. If a woman says “I’ve been raped, that’s the guy who did it”, that’s evidence of the accused committing a rape.
UnderpantsWeevil raped me.
You do know what a testimony is right? 😂
Would you be willing to say that in court, under threat of perjury?
If I knew you personally and I was in a desperate situation and thought I could extract life changing amounts from you, yes, I might be willing to say that in court, under threat of perjury.
You’re implying this doesn’t happen, which is clearly false. False accusations of rape have been made in court. At least OP is asking people to believe women without evidence, but you’re asking us to believe no one ever files frivolous lawsuits, contrary to much available evidence.
In fact, in a legal system like the US that often favors persecution over defense, once an accusation is made to a cop, it can take on momentum toward court.
Blindly believing accusers because they are women isn’t egalitarian, it’s sexist.
…wikipedia.org/…/Brian_Banks_(American_football)
november@lemmy.vg 1 day ago
The Epstein list isn’t the only evidence they would find.
Also, if women’s testimony isn’t good enough, why is a list written by a man good enough?
ech@lemmy.ca 1 day ago
Evidence directly from the suspect(s) is basically a confession. Gender has nothing to do with it.
Onomatopoeia@lemmy.cafe 1 day ago
Then use that evidence.
november@lemmy.vg 1 day ago
That would require an investigation. Which never happened because nobody listened to the women who spoke up.
wewbull@feddit.uk 1 day ago
You think Epstein hasn’t been investigated?