The Patriarchy’s Perfect Weapon: ‘But What If She’s Lying?’

Submitted by Mastodon on Fri, 2015-02-06 05:13

Article here. Excerpt:

'Stop me if you’ve heard this one before: But what if she’s lying?

That’s the gist of yet another take on yet another high-profile rape case, this time in the Daily Beast, whose writer Cathy Young trotted it out as the least counterintuitive of all possible premises when it comes to sexual violence.
...
But there is patriarchy. A perfect, many-armed monster, which lives and thrives in this perfect universe of its own design. And it wields the perfect weapon: rape culture.
...
The monster is smart, and it knows where and when to hide and when to strike. Of course it does. The world is its playground, its lair, a welcoming cavern outfitted with comforting amenities like the phrase, But what if she’s lying.'

Like0 Dislike0

Comments

Rape. Every other criminal accusation needs some level of evidence, it seems, except rape/sexual assault on a female by a male. In that one specific case, never presume to question the accuser's account or seek evidence either way or do any kind of investigation.

The feminist version of justice.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by Matt on Fri, 2015-02-06 17:31

Whose date suffered buyers remorse; for the legal system will not.

Nearly found this out the hard way, and was only spared because I heard of her spreading this story from a few female friends. I confronted her publicly with around 50 mutual associates around "So ..... Long time no rape!" ... She never made the accusation again. Whether she would have gone to the legal system or had simply spread the rumor to harm my reputation because I didn't decide to make her a regular item is beyond me to know. However, she did accuse someone else of the same thing a few years later later and he ended up in Potosi Correctional Center -- possibly the single worst prison to be in the state of Missouri.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by Timber on Sat, 2015-02-07 09:16

Last week I read an article in the local newspaper about a man who had been convicted of sexual assault. I read about halfway through the article when I came across an interesting statement: there was no direct physical evidence that he had committed the act. The prosecution knew this, but appealed to "common sense."

What that means is up to interpretation. Common sense tells us that people who commit crimes often leave physical evidence at the scene: fingerprints, DNA, what have you. But there was none found in this case and the man was still convicted.

In short, no evidence is needed to convict a man of sexual assault or rape.

Here's a link.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by el cid on Sat, 2015-02-07 15:30