Quote:
Originally Posted by GrantDawg
I appreciate that you are not accusing me of this, because it is far from my motivation. Actually, I just wanted a discussion. I wanted to broach a subject that recently seems to be carefully avoided, because it can easily sound like you are defending the accused and attacking the accuser. I hope that what I wrote made it clear that I am in no way trying to silence victims. I am just openly wondering if there is a way that we can protect both sides from have their life destroyed unfairly.
As for "we don't care about the falsely accused in other crimes," you are talking to the wrong person about that. I do care. It is just that these kind of crimes tend to get way more attention (sex sells copy). People can be accused in other crimes and survive with their lives mostly intact if found innocent. But any high-press coverage type crimes makes that much harder. On top of that, what we have going right now is "trial by mob." Keep in mind, no one has been convicted of anything in this yet by an actual court.
|
My use of "we" is done in a royal sense as opposed to anything personal. I appreciate the discussion as I think that there are several different ones to be had within this realm.
Maybe it would be better to define what the sides should be and what they are IMO. I think that people who suffer misconduct/assault and those who are false accused of perpetuating misconduct/assault are both victims. To me, those two groups should be aligned on one side (Side A) against those who actually abuse and those who falsely accuse (Side B). If the members of Side A are pitted against one another, it sets up more of what we have now. Legitimate victims of misconduct/assault loosely aligning with those that falsely accuse on one side. Legitimate victims of false accusations loosely aligning with the perpetrators of abuse on the other. Not to dump any more volatility into this but it reminds me of people joining prison gangs based on race in order to feel protected despite having no issues whatsoever with the other races. That was part of the reason for my question about women abusing men. The current setup makes this it a men vs women issue. My setup does not. Here is the problem. There is much more risk for the individual groups in Side A to align compared to the groups in Side B. Who takes the first step? I have no answers.
Regarding the "caring", first again Royal "we" is at play here. Second, I present to you...history. Moving forward "we" may do better. However, I feel like history has provided enough evidence that society has done a better job protecting the accused (including those that are falsely accused) than protecting the accuser (including those that false accuse) when it comes to sexual misconduct and sexual crimes. That is not to discount the very real effects of false accusations on the falsely accused.
One question about about the "protect yourself" discussion. What are the other options besides avoidance does a potential victim get to use to protect themselves. Why don't we suggest all potential victims avoid all potential situations where they can be violated? This is what I mean by being more concerned with the accused than we are with the accuser. The push in our country is that potential victims should not HAVE to avoid their potential attackers. They have a right to be protect themselves not just from an attack. They have the right to protect themselves from a potential attack. The push has been for the laws to protect the potential victims' right to self defense. Why is society still telling victims and potential victims in this area to avoid a potential attacker at all costs?