The SEX ALLEGATIONS Megathread

[Fresco]

Well, for starters, how was my anecdote facetious? Maybe I’m not as educated in vocabulary as you, but that description doesn’t seem to make much sense.

Second, it wasn’t my friend who told us. It was hers. But you know, she had a conscience I guess. And extending this into the courtroom is kind of ridiculous, but I’ll play along. I’m not a legal scholar either, but I would think the testimony of a person who witnessed a confession could be admissible. I’m not whining, I was simply sharing a story that was relevant to the broader discussion.

Also wtf are you talking about I suggested the poster above me was lying? Did you even read my post? I said her story was compelling and I probably would be inclined to believe her. I then went on to say not all stories are like hers. Just because there are times that the accused are guilty don’t mean there aren’t other times when they aren’t.

By the way, I’ve been posting on this forum for going on 6 and a half years. So I’m not a troll. You can look through my posts and see that for yourself if you are so inclined.

And I never said the due process laws needed reformed. I only said maybe we as a society could be a little more patient and reserve judgement until the accused is afforded his constitutional rights. Mass shooters get trials. Bombers get trials. These are principles we need to respect even in cases that are repulsive to us. And if we get our pitchforks out and convict someone in the eyes of the public, we are undermining legal safeguards that we ourselves might need one day.

I’ve been very agreeable and respectful throughout this conversation. I don’t understand why you just went ape shit on me. Learn to have a civil discussion

Well said.

I dont see anything wrong with what you just wrote

 

[mal3volent]

It seems like you don't appreciate it when people doubt your accusations.

No, what it seems like is you can’t counter my argument so you tried to make a joke and that didn’t work either.

 

[SamanthaB]

Well, to answer the original poster, I do not know if you are the only one that thinks the Weinstein accusers are full of it, but probably what Mr. Weinstein did was technically a form of illegal sexual harassment, which is," bullying or coercion of a sexual nature, or the unwelcome or inappropriate promise of rewards in exchange for sexual favors." The women that he harassed did NOT have to be employees, but could just be clients. One could argue that they were clients. I believe he has admitted that he did this to many women. If he raped some of the women then that is another criminal matter entirely, and if that occurred, then the accusers are not full of it. But, those cases need to be tried in a court of law and a decision regarding Mr. Weinstein's guilt or innocence made.

 

[Scrofula]

Mr. Valent, no, testimony that relies on what another person said is hearsay and is not admissible.

You keep mentioning "due process", which is something these honorable men get or got in court. I thought it interesting that you did not apply the same standard to your friend's ex, if that wasn't clear.

Surely you should reserve judgment on her, since you only have his word to go on, and even admitted she had reasons to leave him.

And you responded directly to grsh, describing a very personal story about being disbelieved, calling it compelling, and with no material gain, probably to be believed. That's at best plain rude and dismissive.

Weinstein will probably see a few days in court where any criminal charges will be brought through due process. In the meantime, I'm free to call him a vile rapist.

 

[JessFR]

I think Scrofula is either high or drunk most of the time he posts, I've learned to respond to maybe a bit of his drivel, but generally I just ignore most of it

I gotta admit that would explain a lot. I've noticed a tendency for his posts to make no sense to me at all.

Nothing personal scrofula. I'm certainly not innocent of posting under the influence.

Man some of the posts I've written on meth really take the cake. I'm talking where I've realized I've been writing a post and editing it for 3 hours straight only to throw the whole lot out and start over later cause I've realized there's just no way to salvage it when it's so crazy long.

It's bluelight, it happens .

 

[Scrofula]

You don't have to cover for him jess, he's a big boy. Some people just lack our celerity with words and concepts. Some people can't even follow who's replying to whom. Better they recognize their inadequacies now and spare all of us from future embarrassment.

 

[mal3volent]

Mr. Valent, no, testimony that relies on what another person said is hearsay and is not admissible.

You keep mentioning "due process", which is something these honorable men get or got in court. I thought it interesting that you did not apply the same standard to your friend's ex, if that wasn't clear.

Surely you should reserve judgment on her, since you only have his word to go on, and even admitted she had reasons to leave him.

And you responded directly to grsh, describing a very personal story about being disbelieved, calling it compelling, and with no material gain, probably to be believed. That's at best plain rude and dismissive.

Weinstein will probably see a few days in court where any criminal charges will be brought through due process. In the meantime, I'm free to call him a vile rapist.

This entire post is pretty much incomprehensible. But I’ll try.

I googled the rules about hearsay. It’s not as cut and dry as you seem to think it is. But this whole exercise we’re doing where we are pretending my anecdote has been brought to trial doesn’t serve any purpose. My friends ex was never accused of a crime. Lying and being an asshole is not against the law, so I don’t really know what you’re getting at. Looks like you falling on your face again.

How is calling a persons story compelling and believable “rude and dismissive”? How can you believe something yet dismiss it? Also what the hell are you smoking?

You can call Weinstein a vile rapist all you want. I was never even talking about him and I’ve made that clear over and over again.

 

[Scrofula]

Do you understand that those words you keep using, "due process" refer to legal proceedings? That's where my court refs. come from, you keep bringing in court proceedings to complain about gossip, and then don't apply "due process" yourself.

Hope that's clearer.

And if you don't see how your response to grsh was pretty gross, Idk, ask someone near you, preferably a woman, to go over it with you.

 

[mal3volent]

Do you understand that those words you keep using, "due process" refer to legal proceedings? That's where my court refs. come from, you keep bringing in court proceedings to complain about gossip, and then don't apply "due process" yourself.

Yes, I know due process is basically a legal term. When I brought up the story about my friend and his ex, it was simply to say I know these kinds of accusations are not always true. I said that I knew she was lying from the start because her story did not line up with specific things I knew to be true. When her own friend, not mine, came to us and told us she had admitted to making it all up, it just confirmed what I already knew.

Again, the point was: women can make shit up just like anyone else. So the whole idea “it’s a female, therefore what she’s saying must be true” is not very logical to me.

Hope that's clearer.

It wasn’t.

And if you don't see how your response to grsh was pretty gross, Idk, ask someone near you, preferably a woman, to go over it with you.

Why? Are you throwing in the towel?

 

[Fresco]

I gotta admit that would explain a lot. I've noticed a tendency for his posts to make no sense to me at all.

Nothing personal scrofula. I'm certainly not innocent of posting under the influence.

Man some of the posts I've written on meth really take the cake. I'm talking where I've realized I've been writing a post and editing it for 3 hours straight only to throw the whole lot out and start over later cause I've realized there's just no way to salvage it when it's so crazy long.

It's bluelight, it happens .

Inebriated posts are the best though. Keep em coming!!

 

[Fresco]

Do you understand that those words you keep using, "due process" refer to legal proceedings? That's where my court refs. come from, you keep bringing in court proceedings to complain about gossip, and then don't apply "due process" yourself.

Hope that's clearer.

And if you don't see how your response to grsh was pretty gross, Idk, ask someone near you, preferably a woman, to go over it with you

Scrofula, how high are you right now??

 

[G.R.S.H.]

And if you don't see how your response to grsh was pretty gross, Idk, ask someone near you, preferably a woman, to go over it with you.

Scrofula- I appreciate that you knew that by responding to my post the way Mal2 did, he appeared to be calling into question my very real story. Thank you for pointing it out, as my response was not as... felicitous.

Mal3- Maybe my point was not very clear, so I will clarify what I mean to say. You will not like it as it is directly opposed to what you have experienced. What Scrofula was trying to tell you is that if you do not understand why your response to my post (which I promise is 100% true and based in a very real reality) was offensive and even painful to me you should ask someone (do you have a sister? a daughter? a significant other who is female?) of the female sex to explain to you what your response could be construed as (doubt in my story).

Do we reserve judgement on the Jeffery Dahmers of the world? When they caught a man who consumed other humans, collected their body parts, when they caught this man, did you reserve judgement? Maybe you are to young to remember his case, I do. No one said 'he's innocent until proven guilty' after they pulled body parts out of his refrigerator. Why is it any different when a woman says she is raped, is then sent to have yet another stranger place strange things she never wanted near her in her vagina, all so they can collect evidence against the first stranger that did this to her?

At what point does the rape of a woman become real in your head? I understand that your friend dated a horrible woman, and I know that she is not the only woman to make things up. But for every made up story, there are 10 real ones.

Where would my 8 year old self have gotten the information that I gave my mother and then later the police that day? Can you figure out why my mother's immediate (and most impacting) response was disbelief? Explain to me why my mom didn't believe me the first time I told her. Explain to me why it would take an 8 year old girl making her mom smell the ball sweat stench left on me by my attacker for my mom to believe.

Then I will tell you how i feel about due process. Even though I am not sure that you are asking my opinion on due process itself, but rather on the treatment of the accused. I just want to believe you are aware of the consequences that women face when the attacks are real.

Peace-grsh

 

[mal3volent]

he appeared to be calling into question my very real story

really?

I think it’s sad that a mother would not believe her own daughter...your story is very compelling...I see no reason why you shouldn’t be believed...You had nothing to gain, you were completely innocent, yet that man chose to hurt you in the most disgusting way.

Look at that...Turns out I did the exact opposite of what you said I did.

Where would my 8 year old self have gotten the information that I gave my mother and then later the police that day? Can you figure out why my mother's immediate (and most impacting) response was disbelief? Explain to me why my mom didn't believe me the first time I told her. Explain to me why it would take an 8 year old girl making her mom smell the ball sweat stench left on me by my attacker for my mom to believe.

Cut the shit, seriously. I’m not going to answer questions about ball sweat and Jeffrey Dahmer. As for why your mother didn’t believe you, I would have to assume it was a defense mechanism. I don’t know you or her so I can’t really say. Maybe she’s just a bad person. Again, I am very sorry that you had to go through that. I’m glad you were able to survive that terrible environment and become the person you are today.

————

I will try to expand on my original post.

It’s very simple:

Person A accuses Person B of heinous crime.
Person B is either innocent or guilty.
Is Person B guilty until proven innocent or innocent until proven guilty?

This debate has been settled in the realm of criminal justice. Not so much in the realm of public opinion.

Many people seem to think, “That standard is necessary in a legal context, but due to the nature of certain crimes, it is more important for me to stand in solidarity with the victim.” They realize that this sentiment is not necessarily logical or universally fair, but in the end, it is better than the alternative.

My personal opinion is:

1. It is the duty of the family and the friends of each party to stand by them and support them. That is part of loving someone unconditionally. That is loyalty.

2. It is the duty of a civilized society, far removed from the individuals involved, to publicly withhold judgement. Withholding judgement does not cast doubt on the victim. Of course, they are free to have any opinion they choose. And no, none of us live up to this standard all of the time, but that really should be our goal.

You might think that the number of people convicted of serious crimes they didn’t commit is negligible, but it’s not. Read about the West Memphis Three or Steven Avery or any of the other well documented examples of this. Their lives were completely ruined. And it wasn’t just the criminal justice system that failed them. It was their own communities that spread the baseless rumors and stoked the flames of paranoia.

So even though the judicial system is ultimately responsible for sorting these things out, our government is made up of individual citizens. All of whom are just people. So we, as people, need to embody and reflect the values we want to see in our government.

 

[JessFR]

Mal3volent, you make a very good argument for why people should withhold judgement.

But you gotta keep in mind the reason the criminal justice system works this way. It works that people are innocent until proven guilty because once guilty we deprive them of liberties. It works like this with the cops too. The cops know lots of things in reality that they can't actually prove yet so they don't yet know officially.

It's like that with some kinds of public accusations. The evidence that they are guilty can be enough for us to informally decide they are guilty in our minds without finding them officially guilty because the only consequence there is social ostracism. Lesser consequence, lesser burden of proof.

In this case, enough people have come out that we can assume he's guilty as a society without finding him guilty in law yet. Likewise the consequence we can inflict is also lesser. We can hate them and ostracize them but not deprive them of freedom, and go execute mob justice etc.

The courts indeed work this way too. Serious crimes with serious consequences have serious burdens of proof. Lesser cases with lesser consequences need not be proven beyond reasonable doubt. In a small civil case a judge can determine who's right and wrong by a preponderance of the evidence which as I recall simply requires the judge determine that their determination is more likely than not.

Yes, as a society we have a habit of assuming guilt for stupid reasons where we shouldn't. And we shouldn't do that but neither do we need to hold ourselves to the highest burden of proof in law.

 

[G.R.S.H.]

But are you really offended by the idea of due process?

Where in my story does it refer to anything that gives you the impression that this question is needed?

I mean your story is very compelling and as it was written I see no reason why you shouldn’t be believed. You had nothing to gain, you were completely innocent, yet that man chose to hurt you in the most disgusting way. But not all of these situations are like yours.

This statement shows that you looked for a reason to disbelieve... why would you do that? Am I supposed to be grateful that after deliberation you believe me? I'm insulted that you had to think about it, and then explain to me why my story 'as it was written', this implies that I may have clouded my story, changed my story, or in someway wrote my story so that it would be more believable.

The truth of my point is 2 fold: It is hard for people to believe accusations such as these. It is hard for the person who was damaged by such an attack to come forward, as more often then not, people will look for reasons not to believe. It was my hope, that my story would help someone to understand why these women stayed in those hotel rooms when there was no apparent 'threat to their lives', and why they would stay quiet for so long...

 

[spacejunk]

I'm sorry to hear that happened to you GRSH.
The sad truth is that people who are sexually abused are often doubted or disbelieved.
Your experience is a perfect illustration of that.
Also it often seems that people that are sexually assaulted even doubt and second-guess themselves - especially when the idea of "consent" is blurred by manipulative abusers.

It's a horrible thing, which is why - as i said eariler - i think it is important to both take allegations seriously and presume that the accused is innocent until proven otherwise.
Those things may seem mutually exclusive, but they're really not.

I too have known people who have been traumatised and defamed by false sexual assault allegations, but it's no reason to automatically doubt people that come forward and report sexual abuse.
I also know quite a few people who have been raped and never reported it, out of fear, confusion and trauma. It's really important that we create an environment that is as supportive as possible for people to come out and report when they've been abused, because sexual assault can fuck people up in ways that most people can't even imagine.
I've known plenty of men and women who can attest to that - it's not a gender issue, nor is it about due process IMO. That's a matter for the courts and the press, mainly.
It's just really vital that we don't make it even harder for people to report rape and sexual assault than it already is.

 

[mal3volent]

@jessfr

I’m not sure we are actually disagreeing on all that much.

You’re right that there is a scale of “seriousness”, so to speak, in the criminal justice system. There are capital offenses where you could potentially die, there’s a million different classes of felonies, all the way down to shit you don’t even have to go to court for. But all this falls under the umbrella of due process. That’s why I keep using that term. There is a system we have created with procedures and formalities and categories. All crime gets funneled through a process we have deemed fair. So it doesn’t matter if you shoplifted or went on a killing spree. There is an established routine as to how you are dealt with.

Realize you are talking to a guy with a Crass avatar. I could be making an argument that there shouldn’t even be a system. But if a system exists, the most just thing to do is to make sure it is applied fairly and consistently.

I understand the reaction, “but mal3volent, I’m not a cop or a judge so how the fuck does this apply to me?”. It applies to everyone because you cannot reasonably assign standards to others and call it fair while applying another standard to yourself. We often fall short as individuals and our government sure as hell falls short at times. That doesn’t mean what we aspire to should change. If we lower the bar personally, and say “this is how I conduct myself and that’s okay”, it will spread and eventually permeate everything.

We have witnessed this for decades in all levels of government. November 8 last year was the United States day of reckoning. Trump is vile and impetuous but so are large segments of our society. Trump could never have happened if our country itself wasn’t already sick.

So you say the only consequence for them is social ostracism. What about our consequences?

 

[mal3volent]

Where in my story does it refer to anything that gives you the impression that this question is needed?

I guess I assumed you were aware of the broader conversations that were going on at that particular time. You volunteered your experience and I was simply curious what your take would be, given your perspective. My question wasn’t really needed, but the whole idea of a forum is to engage in conversation.

This statement shows that you looked for a reason to disbelieve... why would you do that? Am I supposed to be grateful that after deliberation you believe me? I'm insulted that you had to think about it, and then explain to me why my story 'as it was written', this implies that I may have clouded my story, changed my story, or in someway wrote my story so that it would be more believable.

Respectfully, I think this is just you projecting your insecurity. If you are insulted that I had to think about something, I don’t apologize. It is my nature to think about things. Thinking is something that should be encouraged. “As it was written” only means I found your description of events to be organic and honest. Again, this was in the context of a larger conversation about believability. I didn’t want to give you the impression that I didn’t believe you. Why would I choose to ask your opinion on something if I thought you were a fraud or a liar?

The truth of my point is 2 fold: It is hard for people to believe accusations such as these. It is hard for the person who was damaged by such an attack to come forward, as more often then not, people will look for reasons not to believe. It was my hope, that my story would help someone to understand why these women stayed in those hotel rooms when there was no apparent 'threat to their lives', and why they would stay quiet for so long...

I don’t think anything I’ve said has impeded you in expressing whatever you wanted to express.

 

[JessFR]

I can appreciate wanting to think everything though and not wanting to jump to rash conclusions. Most of the time it's a good quality.

But if someone here tells you about something horrible that happened to them. I think the right thing to do is to simply believe them. It shouldn't require any additional thought.

I generally consider myself a very rational person, but there are times when people need you to just believe them. No questions, no doubting, no buts. Just straight acceptance that what they said is the truth. This is an example of such a time.

 

[Scrofula]

It took awhile for our friend here to say, "women lie." I'm pretty sure that's his real thesis. He is suspicious of women and their stories, and starts on the presumption they're lying before applying any reason. "Don't believe every single thing they say just because they're a woman."

It's sad, because he might not be able to see it yet--or does and he's trolling--and because it's the sort of reaction of someone who was really hurt at some point.

We've explained why his view is dangerous, but he keeps riding that tone-deaf train. Maybe he'll reflect on what ever damaged him someday, and finally realize what we're talking about.