Agnostic.com

6 6

Somewhere in America a teenage girl is listening to her parents defend Brett Kavanaugh and she is thinking to herself, "If something like that ever happens to me, I have nowhere to go"
Todd Holloman

By kmdskit38
Actions Follow Post Like

Post a comment Add Source Add Photo

Enjoy being online again!

Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.

Create your free account

6 comments

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

1

That is a tragedy.

1

It is so important that parents have this talk with their children both girls and boys but it is often left to school programs which does not give them the courage to speak to their parents.

Marine Level 8 Oct 3, 2018
2

I agree that "innocent until proven guilty" is appropriate if criminal charges are filed and it goes to court. Unfortunately, for many women and girls, it never even makes it to court. There are many reasons why ... shame, feelings of helplessness, law enforcement steering girls away from pressing charges, etc.

Perhaps instead, we should create a climate where women and men are believed and then taught how to report, document, and get the support they need to take their cases to court.

Victims of sexual misconduct and assault are the only ones who have the burden to prove they are victims...teach them how to do this and empower them...from a very early age, both men and women.

Unfortunately, in this case, there are multiple people affected but, still, the only victims are the ones assaulted. Instead of defending Kavanaugh or others, the parents should discuss the dangers with their daughters and provide a dose of reality for the world we live in now and should discuss acceptable behavior and treatment of women with their sons.

Kavanaugh might be criminally innocent, and his purported behavior is mimicked by men and boys in every high school and college in the country...I can accept that...what I can't accept is that he felt a need to lie about the behavior and the terminology used to describe these sexual "games" and blame them on everyone else other than owning up to it. Most people are fair to those who recognize that the things they did in their youth can be embarrassing and shameful now that we are adults. We all probably have those skeletons in our closet.

Not someone I want to see grace the halls of the Supreme Court for lying, partisanship, evasive behavior, and of course, his stance on certain constitutional rulings. There are men and women of more noble character, and we deserve to have them no matter what party is in power.

2

Excellent point, and truly sad.

0

If she has to hear "that your innocent until proven guilty" so be it

How many women have to come forward before you start believing them?

@orange_girl the quantity of peoples gossip is irrelevant to facts. Innocent until proven guilty (not just when people don't like you).

@Renickulous I tend to think that accusations of sexual misconduct are more than "people's gossip."

@orange_girl I agree. Attitudes like the above are so discouraging. We need to change.

I doubt the message most women are getting from this is "that your innocent until proven guilty."

@Paracosm because that doesnt sell like" possible loss of candidacy due to rape allegations". And if you have kids you should explain what innocent till proven guilty means and how its fair.

@Renickulous It applies in a court of law when someone is on trial. That's all. Not in this instance. This is a glorified job interview. Would you hire someone who was accused multiple times of sexual assault whether it was tried in court or not? I wouldn't.

@Paracosm your saying its perfectly fair for him to loose his chance at a job because someone made an accusation without evidence?

@Renickulous Not necessarily because of an accusation but when all things are considered, yes. It has been more than one accusation, he lied several times that we know of, he refuses an investigation, and his demeanor was very telling for anyone who knows anything about sexual assault.

@Paracosm you think its fair to punish someone armed with only gossip and your "gut feelings about his demeanor"? Arguments made with emotional biases are all you have, provide evidence(of rape) that can be used in court or its just "how much you like him contest".

@Renickulous I didn't say "gut feelings about his demeanor." I said it was telling for anyone who knows about sexual assault. Like psychologists, etc. Gossip is a lovely word used to demean victims. Also, I believe I mentioned more than your so-called gossip but you appear to dismiss anything that doesn't fit your narrative.

@Paracosm reading his body language to decipher the past is not scientific. So has no value as far as proof or evidence in court. Just lying doesnt get punished by lossing office, unless it was to cover an actual crime. Just because you say "ive considered all things and he must be guilty" based on no evidence is unethical

@Renickulous not just gossip, not ‘no evidence’

A woman has very reluctantly stepped forward to tell her story. Subsequently others have told theirs to validate the kind of man he is.

He’s an utter sleaze too: why bring his 10 year old daughter into it?

@OwlInASack thats exactly right, she told her story and now its time to see if its substantial. Theres nothing wrong with investigating the accusation, its def wrong to disqualify him without actual evidence(fair trial). Others telling a story also doesnt validate anything(because without evidence it is just that, their word against his). Who mentioned whos daughter?

@Renickulous I’m keen to know what evidence you think might exist for an attempted rape where two guys closed a door (so there’d be no witnesses) 30 years ago. Presumably rapists and those who attempt it are fairly careful in most cases not to leave any evidence.

That bar you’re setting means that most victims won’t get justice. Are you ok with that? What should we do about it?

And there’s plenty of circumstantial evidence against him: he has clearly lied on oath. Others have stepped forward now to say so.

Further his big shouty approach doesn’t tell us anything and we need to ensure we discount that from our analysis.

@OwlInASack rapist get caught all the time, when they get reported to police. Cant not report it and expect justice, and 30 yrs later during her campaign and she accuses her opponent? It also just looks like a cheap ploy to disqualify and ruin her opponents life. There is no evidence that can be used in court to prove his guilt, its all her word against his. Lying doesnt equal rape, and shes also lied under oath. Punishment before proof of crime is unethical

@Renickulous " It also just looks like a cheap ploy to disqualify and ruin her opponents life. "

Only to someone unfamiliar with how sexual assault worked. I find that statement to be utterly disgusting to be honest.

I was abused as a child. I've said nothing. I would say something if I saw that person running to be Supreme Ct judge.

The passing of time has never been a disqualifier from seeking justice. There are many reasons why people do not come forward - many of them exhibited in the charade last week where a man who is clearly and demonstrably a liar, shouted and stormed about his innocence. He impressed his political supporters. Not so much anyone else.

I see you didn't answer my question - or address my points about rapists deliberately avoiding leaving evidence.

@OwlInASack sorry my point disgusts you but it is still a possibility and just as likely as your pov. Time doesnt make it less of a crime but it does make investigations much harder to prove. And without proof (atheists fav word) it cant(or shouldnt) be punished. Yeah criminals try not to get caught, i understand. Does that mean we have no qay of discerning rape allegations? No we have ways of finding rapist, and its best chance is coming forward. She may have let a rapist go free because she said nothing, we won't know until theres proof of crimes. Can all women disqualify their opponents by claiming rape with no evidence?

@Renickulous you keep saying no evidence. There’s circumstantial evidence in plenty. Given we have a he says / she said we have to look at that. It seems overwhelming to me - against him.

He’s not going to prison here. He’s just not becoming a Supreme Ct judge based on some strong circumstantial evidence. Works for me.

@Renickulous and yes your evident and well explained lack of understanding or or empathy for sexual assault victims disgusts me.

As was the statement cheapening her testimony. It didn’t look like a ‘ploy’ to me. To see a ‘ploy’ I think you need to be somewhat sociopathic and dead set in your privileged ways

@OwlInASack theres no "substantial" evidence (not even witness) which means nothing proves his guilt. Witness testimony is hardly proof in any fashion. Circumstancuial evidence is useless because is PROVES nothing. Without proof you cannot punish someone for a crime (loosing election based on gossip is a form of punishment). I can't keep explaining how essential evidence is before you punish people. We learned this stuff as kids. All your arguments are emotionally based and i won't argue that way "seems overwhelming " translates into "feels right so it must be"

@Renickulous we disagree on the term substantial.

Witness testimony as to character is used every day in every court - but this wasn’t supposed to be a court

“I can't keep explaining how essential evidence is before you punish people”

And I can’t keep explaining why there is loads of evidence. You just dismiss it and try to define it away, presumably because your politics are to the right?

You repeat the term ‘Gossip’: if applied to the brave women who have spoken out - knowing that folks like you would deride them for it - that remains as uttterly disgusting as the first time you did it.

You call it punishment. The guy is being put forward for a job. Character witnesses are saying he isn’t fit for it. It’s a standard process. You can choose not to believe them and slander their motives so you feel better about it. That process of not believing victims of sexual assault is played out by (mostly) men pretty routinely which is a large part of why people don’t speak out.

Congratulations.

@OwlInASack ok lets say youre up for a promotion at work, youve worked hard for a very long time. Now as your waiting for your interview an old acquaintance tells your boss you sexually assaulted her. Is it fair for you to not get the promotion? Even if she wasnt gunning for your future position?

Ps its sexist to take the word of a woman over a man just because she claims to be a victim. This behavior leads yo crying wolf and ruining innocent lives

@Renickulous I’d expect the circumstantial evidence to count against me.

It’s not sexist to notice and address the huge gender gap on this issue. And in the reverse situation I would expect exactly equal treatment

There is no evidence at all that trying to deal with sexual abuse of women leads to crying wolf though o note that the Mens Rights Activists routinely claim - without evidence - to the contrary.

I note you still show zero empathy for sexual abuse
Victims and the trauma of addressing their abusers.

@OwlInASack there is not even circumstantial evidence, google the definition of "circumstantial evidence" a fingerprint is circumstantial because it doesn "prove" anything just gives "evidence" for a case. Just because some people think you would be a rapist should you loose the job? Were not talking about this imaginary gender gap, but is it justice to punish someone with only witness testimony? you only see the victim card not the facts. When she can prove it in court i will always defend a rape victim (not everyone JUST claiming). I have sympathy for a man who is being accused of something without any evidence or proof.

@Renickulous we aren’t really having a discussion are we? You think I’m not acknowledging the points you make. Likewise for me.

This is pointless, right?

6

Indeed and this explains why so many women don't come forward. And, it's also not just "they're not going to believe me," but "they believe women, but they just don't care." smile003.gif

Write Comment
You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text 'q:192425'.
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content read full disclaimer.
  • Agnostic.com is a non-profit community for atheists, agnostics, humanists, freethinkers, skeptics and others!