Quote:
Originally Posted by miami_fan
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.
|
No doubt. Really it may be that it is time that we just admit there always will be an injustice one or another. In the end it may be better that we protect the much larger group (victims of assault) versus the much smaller subset (the falsely accused). In the end, yes they are both victims. The falsely accused have to be a fraction of the number of actual victims. In the ideal, we would protect both, but there never will be an ideal. Protecting the accused may save the falsely accused, but at the price of a large number of victims.
And as aside, I have been trying to be somewhat PC in the way I way I have been referring to this, but the fact is this is a men vs. women issue. The number of women guilty of this is probably such a small number that it could literally be a rounding error. Men victimize women by huge factor more than women to men. Heck, men victimize men probably by a higher rate than women victimize men. Of course, power has a large influence on this, and women are gaining more power to allow an increase of women predators, but is doubtful that their numbers will ever be anywhere close to the number of male predators.
Quote:
Originally Posted by miami_fan
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?
|
Extremes are the problem here. No one is going to protect themselves from all potential situations. The idea, though, that we will ever get to a situation that people (and here women, but really this could be said of a lot of potential crimes) will not need to protect themselves from possible crimes is pretty pie-in-the-sky. There are riskier actions than others. I travel for work into a huge number of high crime areas. It would be silly for me not to try to be aware of my surroundings. Should I have to? No. Should I? Hell yes. If I am a victim of a crime, I could look back and say "I should have...". That still doesn't make me at fault some how. The criminal is always the guilty party, even if I leave my car unlocked, or go into a sketchy alley. Some kind of common sense is needed.