Even if we take into consideration that 90% (out of 25) could be lying (they aren’t), that’s still ~3 women he assaulted.
Do women trust women? If all women had voted for Kamala she would have won.
We wouldn’t need the Epstein files to prove DJT’s guilt if society just trusted women in the first place.
Submitted 8 months ago by Rooskie91@discuss.online to showerthoughts@lemmy.world
Comments
plyth@feddit.org 8 months ago
Showroom7561@lemmy.ca 8 months ago
Except the women who are forced to vote for whoever their gun-loving, abusive, MAGA husband wants.
Why do you think so many women voted against their best interests?
0x0@lemmy.zip 8 months ago
Why do you think so many women voted against their best interests?
Fun fact: dumb women exist.
plyth@feddit.org 8 months ago
Aren’t votes cast in secret?
_thisdot@infosec.pub 8 months ago
They voted for what they believed to be in their best interest.
amino@lemmy.blahaj.zone 8 months ago
Kamala doesn’t trust women so that’s a garbage argument. judging by the way she treats incarcerated trans women
YarrMatey@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 months ago
Lemmy is mostly men, it is hard to share any other perspective. SA is hard to get a conviction in. If there isn’t physical evidence like semen, then the victim is called a liar. If there is semen evidence, then the victim is called someone who regretted their choice and is now getting back at the person. (And this is assuming the perpetrator was male, there can be female perpetrators too). A lot of victims do not come forward about what happened because they don’t want to be called a liar and labeled a pariah publicly. The absolute shame and rejection when someone doesn’t believe you. This subject is pretty sensitive to me and lemmy just really, really disappoints sometimes.
Kalcifer@sh.itjust.works 8 months ago
Lemmy is mostly men […]
Has there been a recent survey?
GaMEChld@lemmy.world 8 months ago
Questions:
-
Would you be ok with you or someone you love more than yourself being sent to prison on a false accusation as long as a larger number of guilty people also get imprisoned?
-
Do you think false accusations don’t happen?
I generally take people at their word in my day to day interactions. I’d believe you if you told me something. But I wouldn’t enforce laws on people with only eyewitness testimony. Eyewitness testimony has been proven unreliable.
YarrMatey@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 months ago
I get that men are terrified about false rape accusations, even though there is an extremely low chance of it happening, they are afraid. When someone talks about sexual assault, in their mind they feel they need to defend themselves by bringing up false accusations because in their mind it will discourage this crime, bring light to real victims, and thus protect themselves. I’m not a man but this is what I’ve been told. Then you have victims, who simply want their rapist and other rapists to face justice. They often know others around them who have also been sexually assaulted. When they talk about sexual assault and someone else brings up false accusations, it feels like they don’t actually care about the victims and just want to soapbox about false accusations, stealing the spotlight. They might even be a toxic part of the manosphere.
The nature of the crime means it is usually the victim and the perpetrator alone and not in public, and the victim is more likely to know who the assaulter is. It can be a family member, friend, partner, etc. There usually isn’t much evidence to prove sexual assault. So we have a problem. As you said, you don’t believe a hefty amount of these sexual assaults should have laws enforced on them. I don’t have a solution, other than a suggestion that people should be more empathetic towards victims. And not ask questions like yours to victims.
questions like these are unproductive
1. How many rapists are you ok with letting go free so that you or someone you know doesn’t have to go to prison for something they didn’t do? 1,000? 10,000? Every single rapist? Is it better to let every single criminal go free so that you do not have to go to prison? 2. Do you think rape/sexual assault don’t happen?
-
Aeri@lemmy.world 8 months ago
I identify as a woman and the “The internet is literally all men anyone who says they’re a woman is a liar” thing is really demoralizing.
YarrMatey@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 months ago
My first experiences on the internet were riddled with misogyny. As a child, I was told I am lying about being a girl and didn’t sound like one. I had many guys tell me “tits or gtfo” when learning I’m a girl, usually after they asked me if I was a girl. I tried playing some multiplayer team games online and was hazed once they found out I was a girl, multiple times. I refuse to play those games now. Even as an adult, I’ve had gamer guys think I’m great until they learn I’m a feminist, then the hate comes back. I’ve dated an adult man who belittled me for playing Sims because people with real lives play games like Overwatch. At least mainstream media felt like there were more women around, lemmy just feels more centered for men :/
Schadrach@lemmy.sdf.org 8 months ago
SA is hard to get a conviction in.
Yeah. It turns out that something that usually has no witnesses beyond the accused and accuser, often has little or no evidence other than the accusation itself and the sole difference between it and an otherwise common and legal act exists solely in the mind of the accuser is difficult to prove beyond a reasonable doubt.
0x0@lemmy.zip 8 months ago
solely in the mind of the accuser
Wait what? Ever heard of consent? No is no? Coercion? The most common definition of rape?
There’s a huge grey area between people having consensual sex and rape, but rape is not in said gray area.YarrMatey@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 months ago
Not sure if you were just reiterating, but yes it is depressing. It takes bravery to step forward knowing that it can cause further damage to oneself. Not just socially but mentally. I don’t have a perfect solution to this. But when the perpetrator is Trump, I doubt justice is going to happen.
spankmonkey@lemmy.world 8 months ago
If there isn’t physical evidence like semen, then the victim is called a liar.
They are called liars when there is physical evidence. Not to mention the massive backlog of processing rape kits.
YarrMatey@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 months ago
I absolutely agree. If rape kits are made, they can be backlogged and then degrade, which is extremely depressing to think about.
Threads like this need to be followed up with eyebleach (a community full of cute animals and such).
Zomg@lemmy.world 8 months ago
God, I remember stories of some women who falsely claim sexual assault. When there are consequences, just ruling on vibes and a 1 sided account of a story is so incredibly bad.
spankmonkey@lemmy.world 8 months ago
Name one time.
Ever think that women’s lives are often ruined by being raped and not being believed when they do report it?
_thisdot@infosec.pub 8 months ago
Here’s one against Joe Biden: en.wikipedia.org/…/Joe_Biden_sexual_misconduct_al…
Zomg@lemmy.world 8 months ago
Took me 5 seconds bro. Please do better.
Alaik@lemmy.zip 8 months ago
theguardian.com/…/duke-lacrosse-rape-falsely-accu…
…crimewatchpa.com/…/woman-pleads-guilty-lying-abo…
www.bbc.com/news/av/uk-67992342
Are we really saying any group of people are infallible and incapable of lying?
Don’t get me wrong, I believe the majority of rape accusations aren’t false accusations with a sinister motive. I believe Trump is a rapist.
We should never act like any group of people will never lie, and we absolutely should never compromise on due process.
Schadrach@lemmy.sdf.org 8 months ago
How bad does the damage from the false accusation need to be?
One I’m fond of pointing to as evidence that they happen is Tracy West accusing her ex Louis Gonzales. He spent three months in jail while it was being investigated, and only got out because he happened to have a very heavily corroborated alibi for the day that left only a 6 minute window during which he would have had to travel a total of 2 miles, obtain a duffel bag full of forensic countermeasures, subdue and rape the victim, dispose of said duffel bag in a manner it would never be recovered and return. And that 6 minute window was not when she originally said it happened, until they allowed her to revise her statement which became much fuzzier about when it happened. Also there was evidence that she was researching the way she was tied up in the days leading up to her being tied up exactly that way. By all appearances this case was about a custody dispute over their kid, and despite the case being dropped because it was physically impossible for him to have done it she still got to use it against him because fucking family courts. He eventually got a finding of factual innocence from CA courts and had the entire thing expunged from his record - to be clear, this essentially requires proving beyond a reasonable doubt that you could not have committed the crime. When he was interviewed by an LA paper about the case, he’d developed an obsession with being as publicly visible with as much paper trail as possible at all time, just in case because of how lucky he was with his alibi from this case (if he’d eaten before he left to get the kid, his alibi wouldn’t exist and that alibi is the reason he only spent 3 months in jail).
How about Brian Banks? Kid with a real chance of going into professional football, Falsely accused, threatened with 41 years, plead to 5 years + 5 probation + registering as a sex offender on advice of his lawyer. The accuser sues the school and wins $1.5M. 9 years later, his accuser contacts him on Facebook and they speak. He secretly records the conversation, in which she admits to having lied but refuses to tell authorities that because she was afraid that they might make her pay back the money. The video gets released publicly and the Innocence Project gets involved. He goes on to briefly join the UFL and then NFL after not having meaningfully played for 11 years (time that would have been the prime of his career if not for the accusation).
Speaking of the Innocence Project, what’s your opinion of them? It tends to vary for left leaning folks - either they like it because a lot of the people exonerated are POC or they hate it because a significant majority of people exonerated by it were imprisoned for some flavor of sexual assault. Go look at their list of cases: innocenceproject.org/all-cases/ According to the site when filtered for sex crimes 184 of the “more than 250” people were imprisoned wrongly for a sex crime. 124/184 of those exonerated by the Innocence Project that were imprisoned for a sex crime were misidentified by an eyewitness. For sex crimes, that eyewitness is very often the alleged victim.
MajorasMaskForever@lemmy.world 8 months ago
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottsboro_Boys
Somewhat famous case, thought partially to have been a source of inspiration for a book called “To Kill a Mockingbird”, somewhat famous in its own right.
Highly recommend you read it
DandomRude@lemmy.world 8 months ago
One thing is certain: someone who has been declared a rapist by a court of law and has been convicted of many serious crimes should never be president of a country — especially not if he is also doing everything in his power to withhold incriminating material relating to the investigation of a pedophile ring.
Kalcifer@sh.itjust.works 8 months ago
[…] someone who has been declared a rapist by a court of law and has been convicted of many serious crimes should never be president of a country […]
IMO, I don’t think this is a good idea. My concern is that it may give one’s opposition an incentive to find a way to falsely convict them of a crime (or maybe create a new criminal offense) in order to remove them from the running for office.
DandomRude@lemmy.world 8 months ago
I don’t mean legal regulations, but rather a minimum level of common sense: I cannot imagine a more unsuitable candidate as the incumbent US president - who he is was widely known. Now organized crime is in power - that was completely predictable, because that is what he has always stood for.
MITM0@lemmy.world 8 months ago
So fuck due process then, huh. Also Perjury is a thing.
You are a textbook fascist
LadyButterfly@piefed.blahaj.zone 8 months ago
Yep. It's highly unlikely so many women are lying about one of the most powerful men in the world who has many followers and the power to totally destroy them. Look at the abuse Christine Ford got ffs. Sorry you're getting so much shit here
474D@lemmy.world 8 months ago
OP said that we don’t need proof if we believe women. You say “it’s unlikely” in support. So do you wanna jail those that are “unlikely” to be innocent? You have any idea how insane that is to say? Ffs…
LadyButterfly@piefed.blahaj.zone 8 months ago
Where did I say about jailing?
Texas_Hangover@sh.itjust.works 8 months ago
Fuck off Amber Heard.
Bristlecone@lemmy.world 8 months ago
Maybe not a court provable thing, but the takeaway here is that conservatives specifically are willing to give this man infinite benefit of the doubt, to a level never seen before. Even if we can’t throw his disgusting rapist ass in jail, he should 100% not be allowed to be president, much less actually succeed in that effort. It’s sick and fuckin weird. If you look over all the actual criminal and civil convictions, along with general aggregate proof, additionally the proof of just being a small, bigoted, racist, narcissistic POS, and stack on top of alllll that these other general allegations, the man is clearly an unforgivablly worthless sack of shit that no reasonable person could possibly look up to. That’s why true chump supporters are all either completely fooled by disinformation they CHOOSE to believe over all else, or “ends justify means” types who are lying to not look like pieces of shit themselves and live in a state of irrational fear, or straight up supportive of hate directly i.e. Nazis.
admin@lemmy.today 8 months ago
Get out with your bullshit, OP. People here are leftist and liberal; that doesn’t mean you can exploit their empathy to further your own bias.
Edit: Damn y’all, thanks for that old internet feeling I keep coming back to Lemmy for. Not a girl in sight in these comments.
Thanks for this edit. As expected, you’re resorting to patronizing behavior if people don’t agree with you. What does gender of people commenting on this thread or lemmy have to do with anything and why would someone reveal their gender here, and you are using a classic case of “if you don’t Y you are not X”
Perspectivist@feddit.uk 8 months ago
“If we just trusted women”
We don’t trust people based on their gender. We trust them based on credibility and evidence. If there’s even the tiniest amount of doubt then it better to let the guilty walk free rather than put an innocent person in jail. And I’m speaking broadly here - not about Trump specifically.
Smoogs@lemmy.world 8 months ago
If victims are capable of lying, rapists are capable of lying when accused of raping too.
Kalcifer@sh.itjust.works 8 months ago
[…] We trust [people] based on credibility and evidence. […]
I don’t think this is necessarily the case. For example, one could give someone a chance despite past wrongs.
h3rmit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 months ago
Yeah, and inoccent until proven guilty. We should not believe absolutely anyone, regardless of gender, making any accusation.
Every accusation should be thoroughly investigated, though.
It happened with Neil Gaiman recently. Many accusations, no sentence for him (at least as of yet), he denies the claims.
Yet, massive lost to reputation, projects cancelled, etc.
If he’s found guilty, all the shame and consecuences to him, but society should stop acting like people talking or a “hyper graphical article” makes things true.
We live in the age of quick opinions, echo chambers, and the like.
Amir@lemmy.ml 8 months ago
Another example is Luigi Mangione, everyone already thinks he did it, when there’s no evidence and only “evidence” it was him
Kalcifer@sh.itjust.works 8 months ago
[…] We should not believe absolutely anyone, regardless of gender, making any accusation. […]
Do you make a distinction between “accusation” and “testimony”?
breecher@sh.itjust.works 8 months ago
That is not OP’s point. Their point is the opposite, namely that a lot of people automatically distrust people (women) based on their gender. Lots of women have provided credible evidence under oath:
GreenKnight23@lemmy.world 8 months ago
evidence needs to be present to determine guilt.
nice try though. release the files.
Rooskie91@discuss.online 8 months ago
Whitness testimony under oath isn’t just evidence, it’s admissable evidence in a court of law.
Nice try tho.
LadyButterfly@piefed.blahaj.zone 8 months ago
Yep, it's a huge part of the court system. There'd be far less convictions if we decided not to accept witness testimonial about things
Zozano@aussie.zone 8 months ago
Not true.
Not all witness testimony under oath is admissible.
Just because someone is under oath doesn’t mean their testimony is automatically allowed in court. There are rules of evidence (like hearsay, relevance, competence, etc.) that still apply.
Testimony under oath can be evidence, but it’s not automatically admissible. Courts have strict filters for what testimony gets presented to a jury. Being under oath isn’t a magic pass.
MBech@feddit.dk 8 months ago
And people never lie under oath…
474D@lemmy.world 8 months ago
This is almost dehumanizing to women, like they don’t possess the basic traits of people. People lie, people take advantage, people are fucking people. And not all people are good. Are you really acting like as about 50% of the human population, there are no malicious women? Imagine if you were on the other side of a legitimate accusation, but we’re confused for someone else? Due process is there for a reason
hddsx@lemmy.ca 8 months ago
Testifying under oath as an expert may sway a case. In doing so, you are examined on what your expertise is, how it relates to the matter at hand, and why you believe it matters.
As a victim, you are not a reliable witness because the prosecution is trying to convince the jury that the facts match the charge while the defense is trying to present reasonable doubt. (If you couldn’t remember the curtain was blue, are you sure you didn’t just dream up the act?)
It’s also good to be able to establish multiple witnesses for the same event as it establishes mutual credibility. A, B, and C all established their presence and all corroborated that A was brought into the room with D. B and C heard sounds that were consistent with act X but inconsistent with defendant D’s claim of act Y.
It’s not a game of probability or trust. It’s storytelling
carotte@lemmy.blahaj.zone 8 months ago
that’s why i don’t think anything’s gonna change for powerful men on the epstein list if it gets released. many of these men already have allegations of sexual abuse against them and they still live their life just fine
(also, holy shit those comments??? that post about how lemmy is worse for women than reddit was wasn’t lying, jesus)
ricdeh@lemmy.world 8 months ago
If I call you a terrorist I guess I can expect you to be picked up tomorrow morning? You people just have an utterly deranged sense of logic. You cannot convict someone without proof, regardless of the alleged crime and how strong your personal feelings on the matter are.
carotte@lemmy.blahaj.zone 8 months ago
If I call you a terrorist I guess I can expect you to be picked up tomorrow morning?
i mean isn’t that exactly what’s happening in the US right now
in a world that’s as hostile to survivors of SA as ours, yea i believe them when they make accusations. does this hold up in court? no of course not, of course you need proof*, but it’s worth mentioning that many times accusations can’t even make it to court because police doesn’t believe survivors either!
* well except if you’re white and the person you’re accusing isn’t. there “justice” is waaaay more lenient about what proof is, and the police has a much easier time believing you too. but that’s more telling of the racism of the justice system than of how SA survivors just always get what they want
OsrsNeedsF2P@lemmy.ml 8 months ago
That’s not how evidence works but I appreciate the thought
Rooskie91@discuss.online 8 months ago
It is tho, whiteness testimony is admissable evidence in a court of law.
Kalcifer@sh.itjust.works 8 months ago
Hm, while a witness’s testimony may be evidence, iiuc, it would only be one piece of evidence. I think what’s important is whether the evidence in question can be considered sufficient.
LadyButterfly@piefed.blahaj.zone 8 months ago
Yes but they're WOMEN so their words don't count and/or they're lying /whores/gold diggers
tisktisk@piefed.social 8 months ago
Is this a showerthought or just wrong?
Someone just learned that anecdotal evidence < material evidence by a lotthann@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 months ago
We just had to believe him when he bragged about it!
starlinguk@lemmy.world 8 months ago
So you’ll believe the guy, but not the women.
And that’s exactly what’s wrong with most of these comments.
thann@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 months ago
Im pointing out that its not a matter of “believing men over women”, but rather believing whatever we want to believe.
When youre a hammer everything looks like a nail
3abas@lemmy.world 8 months ago
They said you don’t need victim testimony because the rapist is bragging about it, and your interpretation is that said don’t believe women.
You’re the sexest one, even if you don’t realize it.
TJDetweiler@lemmy.ca 8 months ago
Trial by socia media? Fuck outta here.
All these scummy shitbags are certainly guilt, but this needs to be proven.
The motto I get behind is “trust, but verify”.
spankmonkey@lemmy.world 8 months ago
That is what ‘believe women’ means, because women’s claims of sexual violence are frequently not believed to the point that the police come up with excuses to not even look into the claims. Then if they do, the prosecutors come up with reasons why they shouldn’t ‘waste time’ prosecuting when there is as much evidence in a rape case as there is in a murder case.
cyberpunk007@lemmy.ca 8 months ago
Right, and we wouldn’t need judges if everyone just believes a suspected murderer is a murderer.
Fleur_@aussie.zone 8 months ago
I don’t think you understand how proof works
TommySoda@lemmy.world 8 months ago
It would help if there weren’t millions of dollars, entire organizations, and even the government that is trying to silence them and cover this up. This isn’t an issue of people not believing the women as I’m sure the average person has been sceptical with this from the beginning. The problem is that the guilty are rich and powerful enough that they can make their problems disappear. The problem isn’t that the people want to know who’s guilty (I’m sure most of the names won’t even be that surprising) it’s that they want to know why the guilty are getting away with it and why the government is actively protecting these monsters. Its the fact that they can get away with whatever the fuck they want, even raping children, and still get to live their lives like nothing ever happened. It’s why everyone on both sides of politics don’t really care who’s on the list, they just want some actual fucking consequences.
The rich and the elites already get away with so much bullshit, and if we let them get away with something as awful as this we might as well give up on calling ourselves civilized.
artifex@piefed.social 8 months ago
Or it’s children in this case.
Laereht@lemmy.world 8 months ago
If you were to listen to the majority of commenters on this post, we shouldn’t believe any women unless the acts were recorded and verified as to be untampered with.
Or in other words, don’t believe women of any age. 🤢
TheButter_ItSeeps@lemmy.world 8 months ago
The point of most of the comments here is that you shouldn’t believe anyone on vibes alone. The problem isn’t sexism, people are pointing out that believing victims without evidence is no basis for a legal system.
Onomatopoeia@lemmy.cafe 8 months ago
Ah, yes, ye Olde “just believe them” attitude.
No one would ever lie for personal gain, right?
I don’t “believe” claims that have significant impact - that requires evidence. Which is the basis of our legal system.
Just wait till you’ve been wrongfully accused about something and have to stand before a judge. It’s no fun, and you’ll be grateful then that evidence is required.
Smoogs@lemmy.world 8 months ago
Rapists lie too. Can’t just assume it’s the victim all the time lying.
spankmonkey@lemmy.world 8 months ago
“Just believe them” is shorthand for “Believe them long enough to actually press charges and hold a trial instead of dismissing them by default”.
Furbag@lemmy.world 8 months ago
Yeah, I think a lot of people are completely missing the point. Very similar to how saying “black lives matter” doesn’t imply that non-black lives do not matter, or that black lives must somehow be considered more important than any other life, the phrase “believe women” doesn’t imply that we should start doubting men, or that a woman’s testimony should be held as a higher form of evidence than anything else. It’s pointing out the clear systemic bias against women in a system controlled and dominated mostly by men who do not want to cede their power and authority.
One of the many flaws of the English language is how difficult it is to condense a very complex sociopolitical message down into a catchy one-liner without losing a ton of the context that got people there in the first place.
wewbull@feddit.uk 8 months ago
Between charges and a trial is a criminal investigation. If that doesn’t give enough reason to proceed to trial, charges are dropped.
A better stat would be %age of accusations that result in an investigation. That should be a lot higher, but police shouldn’t be trying to prosecute cases that have nothing but an accusation to court.
themeatbridge@lemmy.world 8 months ago
Wait, which do you think happens more often: a false accusation, or an uninvestigated sex crime? Because false allegations happen, but statistically it’s like saying you shouldn’t go to restaurants because occasionally chefs murder people with knives. It’ll probably make the news, but only because it’s so fucking rare.
Onomatopoeia@lemmy.cafe 8 months ago
I said neither of the above. Don’t out words in my mouth.
People are falsely accused of crimes all the time, which is why the legal system requires evidence.
SomethingBlack@lemmy.world 8 months ago
This is exactly right. The “believe women” stance is so childish and naive. “Take women seriously” would be just as effective, less dangerous and fit into every just legal system on the planet
LePoisson@lemmy.world 8 months ago
I mean I don’t think 25 women would lie about stuff that would be slander or libel when it comes to someone as litigious and thin skinned as Trump.
Not much evidence you can provide when it’s one person’s word over another. Only thing I can say is he never won a libel suit against his accusers as far as I know.
JoShmoe@ani.social 8 months ago
Unironically, nobody believes PB.
Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world 8 months ago
Peanut Butter?
ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works 8 months ago
The truth status of accusations is going to be correlated. If 90% of accusations against someone are definitely false, the remaining 10% are likely to be false too.
Squirrelsdrivemenuts@lemmy.world 8 months ago
None of the accusations have been proven false though. (As far as I know)
pelespirit@sh.itjust.works 8 months ago
So, by that logic, if you lose 3 major cases, there are 27 more to look for cuz he guilty:
ChickenAndRice@sh.itjust.works 8 months ago
I also saw this Reddit thread
can@sh.itjust.works 8 months ago
I didn’t 😎
masterspace@lemmy.ca 8 months ago
You haven’t actually proven anything, you’ve just modelled a possible scenario.
Auli@lemmy.ca 8 months ago
Why should we trust them? Not all accusations are true women are just as screwed up as men.
Darleys_Brew@lemmy.ml 8 months ago
Because there 25 women that have come forward, out of god knows how many women, and the guys pretty much admitted it himself.
LadyButterfly@lemmy.world 8 months ago
Yep, plus he’s openly misogynistic. He’s not a man that treats women with respect, and objectifies many. Then there’s his red flag relationship with his daughter…
RedditRefugee69@lemmynsfw.com 8 months ago
At least a couple of them are telling the truth, statistically, but I’m still on team Evidence rather than team Rumor.
That is, assuming evidence against the President still means anything. Once that cat’s out of the bag, play ball.