25
   

Hey, Can A Woman "Ask To Get Raped"?

 
 
nononono
 
  0  
Reply Fri 18 Jul, 2014 06:46 pm
@Intrepid,
Quote:
I see that this thread is still going on.


As you'll notice, firefly only ever adds to this thread after others do, so that she can always get the last word in. Because she always has to get the last word in...

And it's pretty telling that she only cares about sexual assault when it serves her agenda and her purpose to be "right".

(Watch, now she'll post some rape article, even though she hasn't posted here for a solid week prior...)
nononono
 
  1  
Reply Fri 18 Jul, 2014 07:14 pm
The Sad, Strange Aftermath of the Conor Oberst Rape Accusations

Cometh the news, cometh the thinkpieces. The news that Joanie Faircloth — the woman who, in January, accused Conor Oberst of having raped her a decade ago — has withdrawn her accusations has thrown the spotlight back on the whole sorry case. And despite the fact that he’s essentially had his name cleared, the commentary has, again, not been kind to the singer. Take, for instance, this piece that ran yesterday in the Daily Dot, wherein author Chris Osternhorf makes the point that Oberst being cleared of a false rape accusation is likely to make him a de facto hero to MRA types. This is probably true; what’s less defensible is the continuing speculation about Oberst’s guilt, and the idea that he was somehow morally obliged to have handled things differently.


There’s an unpleasant undercurrent that runs through Osternhorf’s piece, and indeed through a lot of the commentary on this case: the idea that the undeniable power disparity between Oberst and his accuser somehow means that Oberst was under some sort of obligation to just take one for the team here, to show restraint because of the fact that, in the grand scheme of things, the vast majority of rape accusations are true, and because false accusations tend to get disproportionate attention. That’s a nice idea, so long as it’s not you who’s being falsely accused of pretty much the worst thing a man can do short of murdering someone.

For instance, Osternhorf’s piece starts by analyzing Oberst’s choice to file a lawsuit, suggesting that “it could still have unfortunate results.” He qualifies this by saying that “a lawsuit wasn’t entirely an inappropriate move… if Oberst’s career did in fact suffer” — which, come on, dude, of course his career suffered. Osternhorf cites “a very visible campaign to discredit Faircloth and prove [Oberst's] innocence” — but there have also been a lot of very visible assumptions of guilt. And they don’t go away. The Frisky published a hugely irresponsible piece in January titled, “Why I Believe Conor Oberst’s Anonymous Rape Accuser” (which has now been quite casually updated with the news that she recanted). There are a bazillion more posts on Tumblr and Twitter and Facebook where fans have said that after this, they can’t listen to Bright Eyes anymore. Even now, with his name allegedly cleared, there are people writing pieces like… well, like the one we’re discussing.

So yes, his career was damaged. And so was his reputation. Accusations like this are the sort of **** that sticks. For a lot of people out there, there will always be a question mark next to Oberst’s name, a mark that nothing will be able to erase. “To be sure,” opines Osternhort, “you can’t help but feel at least somewhat bad for Oberst here.” Yeah, no ****. I feel at least somewhat bad for anyone who’s publicly accused of a violent crime they didn’t commit. God only knows what the man and his family went through.

Osternhorf is careful and smart enough not to perpetuate the accusations, but then, he doesn’t exactly seem at pains to dispel any doubts the reader might have, either. “Awkward and sensitive is all well and good,” he writes, “but as anyone who’s paying attention knows, all men are capable of rape — even the awkward and sensitive ones.”

Yes, all men are indeed capable of rape (and plenty of other horrible crimes and injustices against women). Sure. All humans are capable of murder, and all sorts of other terrible things. But the point is that that fact has no bearing on the outcome of any particular case, and it certainly doesn’t mean that the precepts of natural justice get thrown out the window. People are innocent until proven guilty for a reason.

This, this right here, what’s happening right now, is the reason. It’s because the presumption of guilt makes it all too easy to toss around false accusations and place the onus on the accused to prove their innocence — and for the stench of presumed guilt to linger long after, even if the initial charges are resolved. This is more relevant than ever in 2014: the Internet is the world’s epicenter of confirmation bias, and it’s notable that many people who believed Faircloth a priori the first time around are now refusing to believe her the second time around.

And no, the lawsuit doesn’t “protect Oberst’s image,” as Osternhorf suggests. It looks bad. It still looks bad, and at this point it’s unclear whether he’ll withdraw it, even given Faircloth’s retraction and apology. I hope he does. Plenty of people have pointed out, correctly, that there is a clear power disparity here, and that the threat of a multimillion-dollar lawsuit from a well-funded rock star might well be enough to make the woman in question decide that even if what she had alleged really did take place, the consequences of persisting with the case would be intolerable. She would hardly be the first — rape trials are long, protracted, traumatic, and, in this case, potentially financially ruinous. Our judicial system is a minefield for rape victims. But we don’t fix it by continuing to write hitpieces gaslighting men who have been falsely accused, or by brushing aside legitimate doubts about guilt on the basis that, statistically, an accusation is most likely true.

The point of acknowledging that false rape accusations are rare — the oft-cited figure is that only 2-8% of accusations are false — isn’t to instate some sort of latter-day Napoleonic law in regard to rape cases. It’s to ensure that any accusation is evaluated fairly and the institutional bias against rape victims is erased — not to be replaced with a different bias, but to be replaced with impartiality and fairness. Our justice system is broken as far as rape accusations go. This is undeniable. But it needs to be fixed, not just weighted differently.

This is utopian, sure. But the alternative is… what? It’s important to understand that statistics have no bearing on the outcome of any specific case, and citing the 2-8% figure in this case or any other is no more relevant than the citing the result of your past 20 coin tosses in determining whether the next one is going to be heads or tails. It’s a logical fallacy. And in any case, those 2-8% are still people who have been falsely accused. We wouldn’t accept the government arguing that, say, only 2-8% of people accused of murder are eventually found to be innocent, so convicting anyone who’s been charged is justified because there’s an overwhelming chance that he or she is guilty.

Rape is certainly a far more destructive and prevalent problem, and a far more pressing concern for society, than false rape accusations. That doesn’t mean that individual men who are falsely accused have some sort of social obligation to suck it up for the greater good. I wonder what Osterndorf et al really think Oberst should have done here. We’re talking about someone who was falsely accused and wanted to clear his name. Of course he did. So would you, if you were falsely accused of… anything, really, let alone a felony crime like rape.

If he’d refused to defend himself against the accusations, his career (and his life, most likely) would have been ruined. You can argue that he shouldn’t have sued, but then, people would be asking, well, why not? Does he not want the facts to come out in a court of law? Or perhaps he shouldn’t have made the lawsuit public – but then he leaves himself open to Faircloth publicizing it, and shouting loudly that she’s being secretly bullied into silence by the man she says raped her.

There were no good options here. And there can, unfortunately, be no good outcomes. I think Osterndorf is correct that MRA types will gleefully cite this case as justification for their overt misogyny. That’s depressing as hell. But it’s not Oberst’s fault. If we’re going to point fingers here, we might as well argue that it’s Faircloth’s fault — false accusations only make life harder for actual rape victims, whose struggle to be taken seriously and to have their cases prosecuted effectively is plenty hard enough already.

But I think that’s unfair, too. As Osterndorf suggests toward the end of his piece, Faircloth “comes off like a person with some mental health issues… to hold her accountable for the actions of anyone but herself would be abhorrent.” Indeed. But neither should Oberst have to suffer the consequences of others’ actions. As I wrote back in January, no one comes out of this well. It’s a sorry business from start to finish — for Oberst, for Faircloth, and for women (and men) in general.


http://flavorwire.com/467845/the-sad-strange-aftermath-of-the-conor-oberst-rape-accusations
Intrepid
 
  3  
Reply Fri 18 Jul, 2014 07:55 pm
@nononono,
So, um, are you trying to "get the last word"?
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  0  
Reply Fri 18 Jul, 2014 08:31 pm
@nononono,
First there been studies link to more then once on this thread that false rapes charges are in fact far far from being uncommon.

It is also specially harmful when it happen to a famous man,

David Copperfield was falsely charge with rape by a con-woman and the charges become international news with him supposedly flying her to his private island of all things to do the deed. The FBI was call in to investigate and she had file a civil suit.

The charges fell apart when the woman was arrested for trying to blackmail another man with threatening to cry rape.

But the story of Copperfield being clear did not get the news coverage of the charge that he flown a woman to a private island to rape her and god know how many people remember the charges when they hear his name but not the outcome.

Next as far as not charging women who bring false charges that occur in the Duke gang rape charges and those there was in the end no question that she placed false charges again three innocent men and turn their live upside down she was still allow to walk away with no charges of any kind.

The result she was free to go on to murder her boyfriend. At least with murder she did end up in prison.
0 Replies
 
nononono
 
  -2  
Reply Mon 11 Aug, 2014 09:30 pm
http://cdn.lolzbook.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Effect-of-Feminism-109.jpg

...just too perfect to NOT post here. Laughing
0 Replies
 
lfc
 
  1  
Reply Fri 22 Aug, 2014 04:02 am
Why would a woman want to get herself raped? That made no sense.
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Fri 22 Aug, 2014 06:53 am
@lfc,
Quote:
Why would a woman want to get herself raped? That made no sense.


It depend on how you define rape and the idea of invalid consent as in if a couple go out drinking and while feeling no pain and horny she have intercourse with her date and in the light of the next day find she regard doing so.

By some of the logical on this thread that mean that she can declared any intercourse rape at her whim as long as she was under the influence of drugs or alcohol.

An interesting case to point is of a young woman who while at a party who jumped into the bed of a West Pointer and waking him up have sex with him and due to her latter regrets he found himself facing a court marshal for rape.
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  2  
Reply Mon 25 Aug, 2014 02:19 am
I hate to beat a dead horse, but I fond this on the"60 Minutes" web site, and found it interesting...

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/blindsided-the-exoneration-of-brian-banks/

A promising athlete lost 10 years of his life, and a possible NFL career due to a false rape charge.
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Reply Mon 25 Aug, 2014 02:32 am
@mysteryman,
I am pretty sure we talked about that, but it is a good reminder of why the standard is supposed to be "beyond a reasonable doubt". Punishing guys for alleged sexual transgressions by way of kangaroo courts who only need to decide to believe the alleged victim with a complete absence of facts in order to hang men is going to lead to a lot of injustice.

As you might recall I long ago said that these disputes should not even be in the criminal justice system, they should be in the public health system, with the primary remedy being education to both the aggressor and the victim, not jail.
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Mon 25 Aug, 2014 07:08 am
@hawkeye10,
I can not see how in the hell a college board with no real training and being force to used a very low standard of proof by the federal government and granting little or no rights for the accuse is doing in investigating serous criminal misdeeds in the first place!!!!!!!!

Charge of criminal level sexual misdeeds should just be handed over to the criminal justice system and there should not be a back door to punish men with charges that can not meet the normal standards of proof by taking away their college careers by using kangaroos "courts".
0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  1  
Reply Mon 25 Aug, 2014 08:37 am
@hawkeye10,
Did you even read the article mysteryman posted?

What did it have to do with "kangaroo courts?"

Your comprehension skills are getting worse and worse.

Brian Banks' case was in criminal court--where the standard of proof is "beyond a reasonable doubt".

And he was convicted because he pled "nolo contendere"--no contest to the charges--on the advice of his lawyer--as part of a plea bargain deal. Although such a plea means he neither admitted nor disputed the charges, a plea of no contest has the effect of a guilty plea. His lawyer had felt he faced too high a chance of conviction if he went to trial on charges that also included kidnapping.

So his criminal conviction was based on the plea he entered and his acceptance of a plea bargain, and his exoneration was based on the fact he had not committed the crimes he was convicted of because his accuser later recanted her allegations. In the end, justice did prevail.

Although he seems not to have animosity toward his accuser, it sounds as though he'd have a pretty strong case for a civil suit against her, if he wanted to bring one, and she does have some money he could go after.

Try actually reading the article so you can see just how inappropriate your comments about it are.

0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  1  
Reply Mon 25 Aug, 2014 09:01 am
@mysteryman,
That is an interesting case, mysteryman.

Here are two interesting follow-up articles about it.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/06/16/brian-banks-accuser-ordered-to-pay-back-lawsuit-settlement/

http://www.eurweb.com/2012/05/brian-banks-plans-lawsuit-against-state-following-false-rape-conviction/

Hopefully, that woman will get what she has coming to her.
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Mon 25 Aug, 2014 10:38 am
@firefly,
We cant give this guy his ten years back, which is why the state must go the extra mile to make sure it does not lock up innocent people. Humans lie, the state knows this, the state should not be making law that makes it easy for one lieing person to rob another citizen of their freedom.

Sex laws are poorly conceived because they tend to lock up people on the say so of one single person who can produce zero evidence to back up their claim. the fact that we end up here is a good indication that these disputes should not be in the criminal justice system to begin with.
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Mon 25 Aug, 2014 11:03 am
@hawkeye10,
I will add that going after the liar after the fact does not absolve the state of its original wrong which promoted the injustice which was done.......the bad law. The state can only make itself right by eliminating the bad law. The state can not be allowed to turn a blind eye towards its own part in the carrying out of injustice.
0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  1  
Reply Mon 25 Aug, 2014 11:44 am
@hawkeye10,
Brian Banks conviction had nothing to do with how "sex laws" are "conceived" or "bad law".

He was convicted because he agreed to a plea deal and entered a plea of "no contest" to forcible rape. On the advice of his lawyer, he didn't contest the charges, which also included kidnapping, by going to trial. He was incarcerated for 5 years, not ten. He was on parole for an additional 5 years.

Do you have any idea of the evidence the state had against Banks, beside the "say so of one single person"? How do you know the state didn't evaluate her credibility? This person also fraudulently won a civil suit settlement against the school district, relating to the alleged rape. so she must have superficially appeared to have some credulity.

It's not at all easy for the state to get a conviction on rape, particularly on non-stranger rape, which is why the majority of cases aren't even taken to trial by the state. Rape remains a crime which can be committed with relatively impunity.

The primary place to discredit a lying accuser is at trial, during the defense cross examination--but Banks lawyer didn't want to take the case to trial.

If someone holds you up at gun point, and takes money and property from you, with no other witnesses present, do you want the police or DA to disregard your complaint, and not make an arrest "on the say so of one single person"?

The Banks case is interesting, for a number of reasons, but it doesn't reveal particular problems with the sexual assault laws--people can, and do, make false allegations in many other types of crimes as well.

I'm glad this woman finally recanted her allegations so that Banks could be exonerated. In the end, justice was done.
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Mon 25 Aug, 2014 02:02 pm
@firefly,
Quote:
In the end, justice was done.

you clearly have no understanding of the concept of justice.
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Mon 25 Aug, 2014 02:20 pm
@firefly,
Quote:
Do you have any idea of the evidence the state had against Banks, beside the "say so of one single person"


that would be evidence of an alleged crime that never happened....hopefully none, but given that Banks was advised by counsel to take five years in prison rather than face the evidence the state had I think we know that the state had a case that could win. The problem is that all the state needs is a woman willing to take the stand and cry as she tells her lie for the state to win. That we let these kinds of unjust laws stand, that we allow our criminal justice system to be this broken with nary a word of protest from us, is a tragedy.
firefly
 
  1  
Reply Mon 25 Aug, 2014 03:49 pm
@hawkeye10,
Quote:
The problem is that all the state needs is a woman willing to take the stand and cry as she tells her lie for the state to win.

If that were true, the probability of getting a rape conviction would be high, when, in reality, the opposite is true.
Quote:
given that Banks was advised by counsel to take five years in prison rather than face the evidence the state had I think we know that the state had a case that could win.

No, it more likely means, in this particular case, that his defense lawyer did not do due diligence and gave Banks bad legal advice. In addition, the lawyer told him that, with the plea deal, he would receive jail time of only 18 months on top of the time he already served awaiting trial, and the sentence he received after entering his no contest plea was much harsher than that.

There is no question this man was the victim of a terrible miscarriage of justice, but none of it was due to the actual laws for kidnapping or rape--other factors, including possible racism, and an insufficiently vigorous defense, and a lack of any supporting physical evidence for the charges, were clearly involved in his case. And, the exoneration wasn't based just on the accuser's recantation, these other factors were also presented to a judge by a lawyer from the California Innocence Project to illustrate other problems with this conviction . And the prosecutor agreed with that lawyer that Banks conviction should be overturned.

And the problem with dealing with a lying accuser is you never know when they're not lying. The woman in this case claimed she recanted her allegations to help Banks out, and the recantation did help to exonerate him and get his conviction overturned. But she then turned around and claimed she lied when she recanted, and that Banks offered her a $10,000 bribe to recant, making it difficult, if not impossible, for the prosecutor to bring charges against her without her cooperation, and she has not been cooperative.

It's an interesting, and somewhat unusual case, and I'm glad mysteryman brought it to my attention. But it really doesn't illustrate problems with the laws themselves.

It does show, once again, how important the work of the Innocence Project is. I think they did help to finally secure justice for Brian Banks.



mysteryman
 
  0  
Reply Tue 26 Aug, 2014 02:56 am
@firefly,
I don't know if his suit against the state as any merit, because he did plea no contest to the charges.
However, I do think a civil suit against the person that accused him is in order.

I find it interesting that his original lawyer refused to comment, and I would like to know what, if anything, will happen to that lawyer for giving poor legal advice.

Also, in the article I posted, it seemed the girls mother was heavily involved in getting the rape charge filed in the first place.
What did she stand to gain from all of this?
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Tue 26 Aug, 2014 10:24 am
@mysteryman,
Quote:
Also, in the article I posted, it seemed the girls mother was heavily involved in getting the rape charge filed in the first place.
What did she stand to gain from all of this?
usually they need to believe that their daughters would not choose to have sex with a particular male, or sometimes any male. Not sure about this case but it happens all the time. When it comes to making a choice between saying what mom wants to hear and saying the truth the truth does not always win.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.07 seconds on 04/19/2024 at 04:45:55