• renard_roux@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    There is a non-zero chance of virtually everything. I don’t think anyone is suggesting that the amount of accusations against him is proof, and I’m sure he will not be indicted without proof.

    You must see that "in many cases of false accusation, there were two or more women against a man, [and they were lying]¹“ is also not proof of anything.

    What is your metric for “cases of false accusations”? Are we talking rape cases only? There is already a heavy bias towards women in that category, as more women are raped than men². Just because cases exist where women have made false accusations does not mean that every single accusation should not be taken seriously. If the accusation can’t be proved, or is proved to be false, then that’s the way it is, and the appropriate consequences, or lack of them, follow.

    There are likely to be more cases of false accusations by women against men than vice versa, both because social norms and machismo make it less likely than a man will falsely accuse a woman of rape, and because raped women outweigh raped men at a ratio of around 6:1 (in the US, at least). What constitutes a “false accusation”? Exclusively that it was proven that the accusations were false? Or does that group also contain cases where rape couldn’t be proved?

    You prefaced your statement with “I would not like many of the women he frequents³”. Is your personal opinion of “the women her frequents” an indicator of whether or not he was capable of raping or trafficking them? Is it in any way relevant at all?

    ¹ - If the accusations were false, they were implicitly lying. ² - https://www.rainn.org/statistics/victims-sexual-violence ³ - “Frequents”. Yuck.