Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Who is being burned at the stake besides Harvey Weinstein and Kevin Stacey. And do you know how hard it is for women to admit the abuse they endured. It's embarrassing, humiliating, shameful, hurtful. You feel worthless. I don't know the statistics but I think most women have gone through something like this.
What does how women feel who have been actual real victims have to do with men who have been falsely accused?
Does the way women feel negate the need for some type of actual evidence before destroying a man's life and career?
All the accusations coming out seem to be fostering a dangerous attitude.
Are accusations alone now sufficient cause to call for people to resign, step down or recommending investigations and charges?
What is the end goal behind this lower standard and why do we as a society overwhemingly give the accusers the benefit of the doubt when false accusations are not at all uncommon?
It seems due process is being replaced by trial by accusation and trial by media and this is very dangerous when coupled with the right to Significant compensation for anyone who makes such allegations, as well as the ability to further sell their stories to the media.
I wonder how many of these often historical accusations would stand up in a Criminal Court where there is a threshold of 'Beyond Reasonable Doubt' or over 99% certainty.
A significant number of allegations made in the UK were made by fantasists, see cases such as Cliff Richard, Jim Davidson, Freddie Starr, Jimmy Tarbuck, Field Marshal Lord Bramall, Paul Gambaccini, Harvey Proctor, Lord Brittan etc.
Another recent case in point was the recent over turning of one of the cases regarding Rolf Harris which relied on a witness who was a 'Walter Mitty-type' fantasist who lied about serving in the Korean War, and an accuser who had complained of sexual assault on almost 50 occasions without naming Harris as her abuser. However this didn't stop the police from believing their stories, nor did the fact Harris had proof he was elsewhere at the time.
Similarly Operation Midland in the UK which saw a host of high profile people accused of disgusting acts, was instgated on the word of one man named Nick who was later proved to be a fantasist and now faces charges in relation to perverting the Course of Justice, as well as suspicion of making a fraudulent claim to the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority.
So if I accused you of raping me or sexually assaulting me, despite the fact that I’ve never met you and don’t even know who you are, should I be believed? I mean, you could deny it but your denial carries as much weight as my accusation.
All the accusations coming out seem to be fostering a dangerous attitude.
Are accusations alone now sufficient cause to call for people to resign, step down or recommending investigations and charges?
What is the end goal behind this lower standard and why do we as a society overwhemingly give the accusers the benefit of the doubt when false accusations are not at all uncommon?
Right. I guess the men are getting paranoid. If a man has 8 women, or more, coming forward to accuse him of harassment (or more) then there's a problem. They have to investigate. They haven't been put in jail (even Cosby whose a predator and tons of women have come out--like 50!). He's free as a bird.
Most of these men accused have many accusers. If you haven't done anything wrong, nothing to find. I seriously wonder what the statistical probability or likelihood of women in all different parts of the country saying the same thing about someone is. Like 00000% Lol.
These women have places, dates, times. It's not like a non specific thing. The men's behaviors are of a certain MO--not random acts. The women will all say the same things. Many of their alleged "histories" of harassment have been discussed in whispers and behind closed doors for YEARS. The have a lot of corroborating stories and a long timeline.
So if I accused you of raping me or sexually assaulting me, despite the fact that I’ve never met you and don’t even know who you are, should I be believed? I mean, you could deny it but your denial carries as much weight as my accusation.
Not sure how I'd feel about that accusation coming from some random guy.
This is definitely true today, its guilty until proven innocent. Ive never see a time when so many people will trust the word of law enforcement or the one who makes the official allegation, I see this everyday, whenever there is a news article where someone is alleged of a crime (any crime), majority of people will automatically consider them guilty right there on the spot...just from hearing the allegation from law enforcement or the media outlet!!!
This is a dangerous time when so many people side with authority or Govt instead of their fellow citizen, however I suspect this was engineered and planned, its about the only way they could have created the extreme police state we have today without the public shutting it down.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
