Quote:
Originally Posted by Toyman at Jewel Lake
Not from a legal standpoint-I expect that the legal system has reasonably well defined standards. But from a social or societal one. Doesn't matter if the accused is a Democrat or Republican, celebrity or CEO. What is a reasonable standard of proof or evidence to condemn one, to ruin their life and reputation, and their career?
This is not to provide an excuse to abusers or harassers. True perpetrators deserve nothing but contempt and scorn, to be ostracised and fired. Thing is-anyone can make a claim of sexual harassment or abuse at any time. The vast majority of the cases take place behind closed doors and are "he said, she said".
In far too many of these cases it sounds as if these actions were known to co-workers for years, if not decades. Women were warned not to be alone with Mr. X. Why didn't anyone, any of those co-workers go after him? In those cases it seems pretty clearcut-especially with victims coming forward as events happen.
Other cases, not so much. Cases where not a single word is spoken, a single accusation made. Where the alleged perp is respected by co-workers and no rumors exist. Yet....2 weeks before an election a victim (that far too often happens to be working on the campaign of the opposition) pops up and makes a claim. And of course far too often the media runs with those rumors with no efforts to verify the reports.
So, again-what is a reasonable standard? When should alternative motives be questioned-rather for political gain or a fat court settlement? What is a reasonable amount of proof before we accept it and destroy someone's life?
|
Portals of social justice tell us there is zero tolerance and perception of the victim is reality.
In other words guys are screwed.
Get this, one NJ legislator from south J proposed a law that would make lying to a woman to gain her favors, rape!.
Time for a woman's village, no men allowed except by temporary permit.