‘Believe the Victim’? The Biological Reason Why Accusers Aren’t Always Telling the Truth

Article here. Excerpt:

'In recent years there have been hundreds of cases across the country of men having allegedly sexually assaulted women where there was insufficient objective evidence to determine whether a crime had occurred, and in some cases, whether any kind of sex or even encounter had occurred.  Examples include the “Mattress Girl” case in NY, the Corey Mock case in TN, the Jordy Johnson case in MT, the Owen Labrie case in NH, dozens of “John Doe” cases in nearly all states, and most infamous of all, the Rolling Stone hoax about events that never happened in VA or anywhere else.

In all of these cases, some have asserted that the criminal justice system should always award women the benefit of the doubt on grounds that they always tell the truth.  Although seldom stated, the implication is often present that women cannot lie under such circumstances, but men can and do.  This claim (hereafter the claim) has been cited in many proceedings as if it were evidence that the female complainant is telling the truth, it may have affected jury decisions, it certainly has affected the outcomes of institutional proceedings (e.g., colleges and universities, most of which offer only kangaroo courts as their form of “justice”), and it has also affected the sentences of some of the convicted men.

This claim of unwavering female honesty in what are “he-said/she-said” cases cannot be treated as self-evident because it fails several common sense tests.  For example, in cases where objective evidence tells whether a particular version is true or false, do women always say what the evidence proves?  Which party is telling the truth in “she-said/she-said” cases?  Both?  Which party is telling the truth in “he-said/he-said” cases?  Neither?

On what grounds would a rational person decide that in cases of alleged sexual assault involving a man and a woman that the woman would always tell the truth, but in cases involving members of the same sex that only one was telling the truth, neither were telling the truth, or both were telling the truth?  Are we to conclude that all white women claiming to have been raped by black men in the Jim Crow era were telling the truth?'

Like0 Dislike0



I think the editors created this article title. It's not a "male backlash" so much as it is a response to #MeToo. Just bc it's a response women aren't happy with doesn't mean it isn't 1) justified and 2) happening.

It's happening whether a bunch of nutty harpy whackjobs like it or not. Live with it. We after all have to live with you... or actually, no. We don't have to live with you.

I feel better already. :)

Like0 Dislike0