Do you really think a woman is going to confront a rapist like that?
Usually woman sort of care about this thing called self-preservation and if they hear about a dangerous rapist they aren't going to go and poke the goddamn bear.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Shaming Rapists in private Facebook groups
- Thread starter Machina
- Start date
- Status
Do you really think a woman is going to confront a rapist like that?
Usually woman sort of care about this thing called self-preservation and if they hear about a dangerous rapist they aren't going to go and poke the goddamn bear.
Westbahnhof
Banned
Snarky❤;245279635 said:
I think you mean 2.
Three's a
Edit: thanks for explaining how to edit this
That's the underlying thrust of this thread. If the legal system fails you, you're shit outta luck. Just better pray your rapist doesn't get another girl in a vulnerable position.
Dude Abides
Banned
I would say "No I didn't." Same as if someone accused me of ripping them off or beating my wife. Depending on the circumstances I might consider a defamation suit.
What I wouldn't do is start ranting and raving and pretending that people talking is "mob justice."
Sho_Nuff82
Member
How many of us actually live in fear of being called rapists by all of our exes or hookups? Truth be told, if she hated your ass, she already told 10 of her gfs in person that you were a POS, even if it wasn't true.
Clockwork
Member
I can't support this. Too much room for false accusations and hearsay.
This kind of shit can ruin lives.
And if the person isn't a rapist?
This kind of shit can ruin lives.
And if the person isn't a rapist?
So does being raped.
Rape ruins lives too.
A Link to the Past
Banned
So can a Justice System that consistently protects rapists.
This will go on until the problem is fixed.
Are you of the opinion that false claims are common?
Tinfoilhatsron
Banned
You use the "
H.Protagonist
[-_-]/
1) Police approach to rape victims needs to continue being improved (female detectives, non-judgmental environment, follow-up response, etc.)
2) Funding and care of rape kits - so many of these languish untested because of lack of funding and/or get contaminated/destroyed because they're not handled properly
3) Legal representation for rape victims - this is already a thing in Germany and Denmark
Will have to dig into some of the more courtroom-oriented reforms, but these wouldn't be bad steps to start with.
Rape is the dark end of the spectrum of sex. Talking about who to have sex with purpose is to weed out undesirable partners. Again, men slut shame women all the time. What about their reputation?
Rape isn't all dark alleys and family incest.
Like it was said 5 million times in the last GAF rape thread, fake rape accusations are exceedingly rare.
And like bencilin said in THIS thread, rapists' lives aren't always and immediately ruined forever when they are convicted.
Clockwork
Member
No shit, really? I would have never guessed. /s
If this don't work out through proper legal channels that is unfortunate, but it is the best avenue we have.
You can't just toss around accusations.
So what, we've reached an impasse or innocent people being defamed by some rando brooding in their pajamas is somehow not important?
A Link to the Past
Banned
On the subject of improvements, that's a bit of a silly question. The story in the first post discusses a woman who was lied to by police about medical records being destroyed. Police not lying to rape victims and choosing to ignore their plight would be cool too.
Compared to rape? Since it happens significantly less often, yes, relatively speaking, it's not important.
Compared to rape? Since it happens significantly less often, yes, relatively speaking, it's not important.
I was going to comment on that, it frames the conversation and might be the reason some people think "mob justice" right away instead of reading "women tell each other who to avoid".
Subpar Scrub
Banned
Not sure about NSW, but QLD will assign female officers or detectives to sexual assaults if they're available.
I totally agree, that being said, the statements she made of her own volition would make this a very difficult case to prosecute. Often, when sex is initially consensual and then becomes unconsensual or otherwise, it's very tricky to hit that "beyond reasonable doubt".
It'd ultimately become a big game of "he said she said".
I need both hands to count the number of lives ruined in my circles by a single serial rapist/abuser in the last year, and he got off scot-free. Some of the people who had the job of collecting reports about his activities and had to deal with his apologetic friends in positions of power and warn people he held power over are now either:
a) Suffering from serious PTSD
b) Getting sued
So fuck off with that shit that false accusations could ruin lives. Because people I care about and the people they care about's lives are already ruined by people protecting abusive arseholes. Maybe if victims had some sort of legal recourse, ANY fucking legal recourse, then this sort of thing would stop. But as it is there's no other way for people to protect each other.
Clockwork
Member
So you believe legal systems are wrong then?
This particular case isn't even a he said she said. She was lied to by the hospital and police and according to her testimony, the rape was violent and rape kits/medical examinations would provide evidence of that.
That's how it works for every other type of crime.
Snarky❤;245278078 said:
Because no one else has any way of verifying what's posted on a forum, it is all rumors.
Let's pose it like this. People are saying the online shaming is acceptable because of the failures of the justice system.
So what if all those problems were fixed? What if the police were always good about being credulous, prompt, and sensitive. What if rape kits and evidence were almost always handled well? What if there wasn't any slut-shaming or questioning? And then you go to try and it's still one person's word against another, and that's not enough evidence to convict. The system performed well. Does the woman still have the "right" to say "X raped me"?
Legal systems are in place to prevent exactly this. "Until proven guilty".
Social media has a nasty habit of not giving a shit about that.
Feels like I'm missing something. Where is the vigilantism? What mob justice? What have they done against this accused person?
This should be seen simply as a freedom of speech issue. Her speech should be protected. It is up to whoever else to decide if they believe her or not. Any action they then take as a result is their own and a separate matter, and if they take action that breaks the law they should be prosecuted. But as far as I can see all the article has people doing is avoiding men other people tell them are bad news.
This should be seen simply as a freedom of speech issue. Her speech should be protected. It is up to whoever else to decide if they believe her or not. Any action they then take as a result is their own and a separate matter, and if they take action that breaks the law they should be prosecuted. But as far as I can see all the article has people doing is avoiding men other people tell them are bad news.
You can, and if the accused knows about it, they can sue.
If it 'ruins' the accused' life, they can sue. If it leads in some women avoiding the accused, it's still a much preferable alternative if it leads to rapists being able to rape less.
A Link to the Past
Banned
As someone mentioned, any society with a prison system will, without any variance, harm innocent people who are wrongfully convicted of a crime.
Can you elaborate for me exactly why it's okay for prisons to exist when it harms people, but not support groups?
And those other crimes are completely different in nearly every aspect, most notably the treatment of the victims by defense attorneys, police, prosecutors, judges, the public, the media, etc. Few victim categories are treated with as much disrespect as rape victims.
We see so much "vigilante justice" because the alternative is typically "no justice at all."
I had already come to terms with rape being pretty much legal in practice, but now we shouldn't even talk about the actual perpetrators? It feels like a lot of men are okay with the concept of rape victims but the second we acknowledge that rape isn't something done to you by an abstract entity but rather something that a specific person does to you, it's a problem.
Agent Gibbs
Member
I feel for the victims of rape who do not get justice, but I feel a private facebook group you can join on facebook/twitter, where accounts can be set up with ease under false names opens such a system up to abuse by people who want to hurt people by spreading lies.
My ex told people I hit here after we split up and nobody could understand why we had when I was "such a nice guy". The reality of the situation was she didn't want to admit to family that we split up because she had started sleeping with too other guys and thought the grass was greener! thankfully this was before facebook was as popular as it is today (MSN messenger was the thing to communicate on.....man I'm old) and she got called out publically (at a party) by here best friend and cousin who were sick of her lies! I only found out she'd been telling people that when I bumped into her cousin after the fact.
This girl had issues, when we were together she (made up) told me and her best friend she was molested by her cousin, but we couldn't tell anyone! She told us this about a month after two of her cousins came out as being molested by a babysitter, and she (as the youngest and previously doted upon member of the family) was no longer centre of attention.
I believed her, her friend did not and swore me to keep my word not to say anything. She was confronted about this about 6 months later and claimed to have no idea what we were talking about, before eventually admitting she made it up as she felt left out! She was 20!
People like that exist and are exactly the type of person who probably already make shit like that up about people, giving them a dedicated public forum could cause all sorts of problems.
And that's just one scenario.
People are innocent until proven guilty and providing a vigilante way to without evidence state someone is violent/a rapist etc is defamation and utterly wrong.
My ex told people I hit here after we split up and nobody could understand why we had when I was "such a nice guy". The reality of the situation was she didn't want to admit to family that we split up because she had started sleeping with too other guys and thought the grass was greener! thankfully this was before facebook was as popular as it is today (MSN messenger was the thing to communicate on.....man I'm old) and she got called out publically (at a party) by here best friend and cousin who were sick of her lies! I only found out she'd been telling people that when I bumped into her cousin after the fact.
This girl had issues, when we were together she (made up) told me and her best friend she was molested by her cousin, but we couldn't tell anyone! She told us this about a month after two of her cousins came out as being molested by a babysitter, and she (as the youngest and previously doted upon member of the family) was no longer centre of attention.
I believed her, her friend did not and swore me to keep my word not to say anything. She was confronted about this about 6 months later and claimed to have no idea what we were talking about, before eventually admitting she made it up as she felt left out! She was 20!
People like that exist and are exactly the type of person who probably already make shit like that up about people, giving them a dedicated public forum could cause all sorts of problems.
And that's just one scenario.
People are innocent until proven guilty and providing a vigilante way to without evidence state someone is violent/a rapist etc is defamation and utterly wrong.
People do vastly overestimate how many false accusations there are, they're about 2-8%, it's rare, but I don't think it's rare enough to making it a concern worth sweeping under the rug. That said, her rapist seems guilty as fuck, and don't blame her for taking measures into her own hands
It's about priorities. Should we focus on the few people who are affected by false claims, or maybe the many more people that the justice system doesn't help with real claims?
Do you think welfare and food stamps should be abolished because there's a few people gaming the system, when more people legitimately need it?
PRIORITIES.
Missed your quote by a few seconds by the above answers your post as well.
Alright, then the prison system shouldn't exist at all since there is innocent people in prison.
This is a very reductive argument
the_prime_mover
Member
I am willing to bet there are more women who have been violated and then received no justice from the established system then there are women who would use this as a platform to name and shame innocent men. I do wonder though if some of the 'slippery slope' hesitation I am reading stems from a belief that women are petty and conniving gossips who, once slighted, will go to any lengths to hurt the man who slighted them. I haven't met any women like that, but I know that it seems to be a myth that gets perpetuated.
Personally, even if I were to believe that this would inevitably lead down a slippery slope and every woman would become a malicious villain seeking to do harm to innocent men - I would still think that in the interim there would be a net benefit as we seem to have already accepted the opposite of that situation - where a woman can get little to no justice even when there is a mountain of evidence to support her stance. History is replete with examples of men getting away with the most heineous of crimes against women while building systems that legitimize those actions. It is from a position of privelage that men suggest women should stick to the established legal channels and espouse caution about turning to 'mob justice'.
If a community can be formed to help protect those who may be vulnerable then that is a social good and as with most information sources it should always be stressed to approach any second hand information with caution. But we should not encourage deafness as a substitute to that caution.
Personally, even if I were to believe that this would inevitably lead down a slippery slope and every woman would become a malicious villain seeking to do harm to innocent men - I would still think that in the interim there would be a net benefit as we seem to have already accepted the opposite of that situation - where a woman can get little to no justice even when there is a mountain of evidence to support her stance. History is replete with examples of men getting away with the most heineous of crimes against women while building systems that legitimize those actions. It is from a position of privelage that men suggest women should stick to the established legal channels and espouse caution about turning to 'mob justice'.
If a community can be formed to help protect those who may be vulnerable then that is a social good and as with most information sources it should always be stressed to approach any second hand information with caution. But we should not encourage deafness as a substitute to that caution.
Not even remotely. If the person I quoted really stands by their principles, that is exactly what they should think.
Stone Ocean
Member
Public figures are complicated - and not in a good way, if we're to talk about the system favoring someone they're the ones that will take the most advantage of it.
As for the rest of your post, thinking through it some more, I guess I'm not really concerned about what the victim in the OP is doing and more about what others can escalate it into. Turning a private group into a headline is bad news.
Clockwork
Member
1)They were convicted through proper legal channels. We have a time tested process that isn't perfect, but it is the best we have.
2)They have the right to appeal and in some cases have their conviction overturned and/or they are releases. They may even receive reparations.
To be quite honest I am utterly confused by this analogy. "Hurr durr innocent people can be convicted and go to prison, does that mean we shouldn't have prisons?". What in all heaven's f*ck does that have to do with mob justice and peoplw taking things into their own hands regarding things like rap accusations?
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1414230
It's on page 2 of OT right now.
Justice in the western world doesn't care about principles. It cares about evidence, facts and the judgement of a legally binding jury, not a Facebook club.
A Link to the Past
Banned
Not really. The only difference between these two things is that one is mandated, and the other is not. Prisons are incredibly dangerous things for the safety of the innocent.
1. If our system was the worst on the planet, it'd still be "the best we have." So that's not comforting, especially when the subject of this thread is "look at why our justice system is a tire fire." Our time-tested system is one that decided that the murderers of Emmett Till were not guilty, and one that consistently favors certain groups over others.
2. They have the right to a lengthy appeal process in a system where there is documented evidence of prosecutors arguing that a case should not be overturned for provably innocent people because it damages the integrity of the system to have a convict's conviction overturned. The system is designed in part to ensure that innocent prison inmates serve their sentence regardless.
And of course, the financial repercussions of being an innocent person in prison is very similar to that of a guilty person in prison. It doesn't matter if your conviction was overturned: as far as a future employer is concerned, you were a convict. Our Justice System hurts more people than a Facebook group without breaking a sweat. How about we fix the real problem, and not a reaction to a problem by people with no other options?
Subpar Scrub
Banned
Oh right, I missed the part where they said medical information was destroyed (which is a ludicrous concept).
His life has been ruined?
It's a complicated matter. Should the notion of innocent until proven guilty only be true when it comes to legal repercussion ?
If not how publicly should you be able to share about the person you accuse, the press ? on twitter ? only in private forum/group ( but does it's size matter ) ? only in person ( but then would you be allowed to do it in a conference with lots of people ) ?
excelsiorlef
Member
That's a case getting dropped due to lack of evidence, not a proven false allegation and we have no long term evidence yet that his life is ruined.
If only the legal system actually worked and didn't ignore and lie to people
How the fuck can you believe in the justice system when minorities are being shot in the streets for no reason?
Where does it say his life is ruined?
No it actually doesn't. People know others who break laws and aren't prosecuted (again, I know an illegal junker and will happily call him that despite his lack of prosecution. I also know people who smoke weed in a state where it's illegal; would never turn them in for that but by people's arguments I literally can't say they smoke weed at all!), or they're willing to believe certain people are guilty of crimes for which they haven't been tried or were found innocent of, (Trump, Cosby, OJ, etc.) and yet it doesn't bother people when these things are brought up.
The fact of the matter is, the sudden concern with legal veracity when describing someone's character is only ever brought up on the subject of rape to this degree because men care more about their reputation than women's safety. Let's be honest with ourselves.
This sounds remarkably like an Anarchist perspective. Also the original source of the article is Australia, where minorities are not being massacred in the streets. You Americans can own that shit but don't put yourselves on the same shelf as the rest of us.
It's not even about their reputation. I know of at least one case where an organisation sided with an abuser over multiple complainants because they didn't want him to feel sad he couldn't attend events any more. Conveniently ignoring the fact that with him there the women he traumatised wouldn't be able to attend events anymore.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked