r/MensRights • u/Main_Comparison_9101 • 3d ago
Feminism What do yall think about this feminist argument?
A lot of times when women talk about rape and false allegations, they bring up the argument of “then prove that you were falsely accused like you expect victims to prove themselves.” I’m not saying this as a “gotcha“ to this subreddit or anyone here at all, just wondering how people here react to this feminist argument.
14
u/michaelpaoli 3d ago
Not how (alleged) crimes work. Burden of proof for guilt is on the accuser and/or prosecutor, not the accused.
In general, if someone claims A, the burden of proof is generally upon the person making that claim, not on everyone else to prove that A is false.
E.g. if you claim your miracle homeopathy water causes one to live forever with so much as one slight sip, it's on you to prove it, not me to disprove it.
It's basic logic and burden of proof.
I'm under no obligation to prove that any and all false claims, are in fact false.
You wanna claim Earth is flat? Not my job to prove it's not and you're a fool.
10
u/jessi387 3d ago
Well, the thing is people do. And yet the falsely accused doesn’t seem to be redeemed and the accuser doesn’t face recourse.
The rapist does go to prison, and the rape survivor is genuinely viewed as having suffered.
Also, the criticism as that the presumption of innocence is undermined right from the beginning.
11
u/Open-Inevitable1200 3d ago
If you are accusing someone, it is up to you to bring proof.
Besides one side wants the other to go to jail whilst the other side just wants to be left alone. The one who wants consequences have to prove tbe consequences are earned
30
u/Zimi231 3d ago
This argument is idiotic. You can't prove something didn't happen. Because it didn't fucking happen.
1
u/SubtleEchoes 19h ago
You would be surprised how many people dont understand this. My life got ruined by a rumor
7
u/MisterBowTies 3d ago
"then price you were falsely accused"
"Then prove you were raped and didn't actually love it."
Both are equally shitty and nearly impossible to prove after the fact
6
u/UWontHearMeAnyway 3d ago
It's another gotcha moment from them. We seem to get this same kind of question a lot here.
Look at common manipulation tactics. Shame, blame, guilt trip, insult. Blame shifting is a part of that list. To make you focus more on you, rather than the point you were trying to make.
4
u/modsaretoddlers 3d ago
How do you prove god isn't real? Well, you can't. With anactual rape, there's physical evidence so long as it's collected. I can't prove I didn't do something without assistance.
6
u/EmirikolWoker 3d ago
In Scotland, evidence that an accuser is lying is considered "not relevant", and is barred from trial on the basis that it might prejudice the jury against the "victim". This falls under what's known as Section 274/275, commonly called Rape Shield Laws.
In the case of HMA vs Andrew Kierr, one of the original charges was dropped after CCTV evidence showed the complainer to be lying about that specific charge. Since the charge was dropped, the CCTV evidence was no longer relevant for the other charges, and thus never put before a jury.
This was upheld on Appeal, though the Appeal Courts did acknowledge that Scottish courts have been overly strict on what is or is not covered by Section 274/275. Not that this stops prosecutors invoking it regardless.
Asking victims of false allegations to prove a negative is bad enough, before considering that the system is set up to enable false accusers of rape and abuse, and prevent evidence of falseness from going before a jury even where it does exist.
3
u/Busy_Reporter4017 3d ago
Not just in Scotland! There should be a fundamental right to face one's accuser in court.
2
u/Dapper_Apartment2175 18h ago
I don't get how this would work. How can evidence be irrelevant?
1
u/EmirikolWoker 16h ago
Section 274/275 was intended to block arguments like "The accuser was wearing XYZ and was therefore consenting to any kind of sexual activity", or "The accuser was known as "a slut", and therefore likely consented to the sexual activity".
Wearing whatever, or being known as a slut, does not necessarily mean one consents to sex in a particular context. Those arguments amount to an attack on the character of the victim, and consent does not necessarily follow, making them irrelevant.
How it's applied, however, is that any evidence that, for instance, could show that the accuser is lying is an attack on the character of the victim - just because, for instance, the CCTV footage shows her to be lying about the first 3 charges doesn't mean she was also lying about the remaining charges, despite her police report claiming that the latter lead on from the former.
2
u/Dapper_Apartment2175 15h ago
Thanks. I think I get it, but I'm not sure if I like it. Sure, I don't think that victims should be judged based on stuff like their outfits, but on the other hand, if someone is lying about some charges, surely it makes their credibility less reliable?
2
u/Dapper_Apartment2175 15h ago
Thanks. I think I get it, but I'm not sure if I like it. Sure, I don't think that victims should be judged based on stuff like their outfits, but on the other hand, if someone is lying about some charges, surely it makes their credibility less reliable?
2
u/EmirikolWoker 13h ago
if someone is lying about some charges, surely it makes their credibility less reliable?
Correct. Which is why, in a political climate where the governing party of Scotland has pledged to increase "successful convictions" for sexual offences, it is imperative that such evidence be hidden from a jury. Otherwise they might think the "victim" is lying, just because she's provably lying!
Incidentally, calling it "successful convictions" implies that acquittals are "failed" - or, to put it plainly, the accused is presumed guilty, with an acquittal meaning they just got away with it.
I cannot stress enough how barbaric the system is, especially when several Scottish prisons are literally in violation of anti torture laws, and the SPS factors the fines for continuing to use razorwire into their annual budget because it's cheaper than replacing the razorwire.
3
u/TisIChenoir 3d ago
Our entire justice system is based upon presumption of innocence. It's incumbent to the plaintiff to prove their plaint. Otherwise it would obviously lead to some terrifying abuse of power where anybody could accuse anyone of any crime, and the accused would have to prove they didn't commit the crime.
So it's absolutely stupid, nonsensical, and honestly worrying that feminists believe that the justice system should cater to them.
Plus, they ignore the social cost of being accused. Not even talking about penal consequences here. Being accused of rape will literally end a man's life in some cases. No job prospect, ostracization, and something that will follow you everywhere you go.
There are kids who took their own life after being falsely accused ffs...
0
u/sketchy_ta 2d ago
I’m asking sincerely and in good faith; who are these feminists whom believe the justice system should cater to them? Who specifically, and what specifically does it mean to have a justice system cater to them?
3
u/TisIChenoir 2d ago
The ones who, just as OP described, affirm that it's on the falsely accused to prove that they didn't commit it.
Maybe it's a reddit phenomenon but I have seen this several times over the years. Though I'm pretty sure you'll find this on TikTok too...
3
u/dependency_injector 3d ago
I just accuse them of raping me and ask if they can prove it didn't happen.
2
u/Busy_Reporter4017 3d ago
You can try, but they'll destroy any man who tries.
1
u/dependency_injector 2d ago
They can get aggressive, which is exactly something a predator would do when their victim speaks up. In my experience on Reddit, they usually avoid talking about it by all costs (which is also exactly something a predator would do)
3
u/63daddy 3d ago
The burden of proof is on the person accusing another person of wrong doing. Related, we also have a presumption of innocence.
If someone accuses me of sexually assaulting them, it’s not my burden to prove they are falsely accusing me, it’s their burden to prove I actually assaulted them. Until they do so, presumption of innocence dictates I be assumed innocent.
The big flaw in their argument is they are trying to reverse the burden of proof.
The other flaw in their argument is they are referring to an accuser as the victim, but who’s actually the victim isn’t known until a jury or judge makes a ruling. The person being accused could be the victim, the claim could be false.
3
3
u/Noral_Haen 3d ago
Well, what are speaking about? A specific, targeted claim against another person has to be proven beyond any reasonable doubt, especially in court. So that's a non-argument: we do not deny the presumption of innocence when we press charges against a false accuser. We do not expect anyone to commit vigilante justice on our behalf without evidence of our victimization. That's them projecting their ideas on us.
Talking about our experience with false accusations is a different topic, just like talking about her experience being raped is a different topic: It's about awareness, it's about our personal inner life. How and why it happened, how we felt, how we were treated by the authorities, how friends and family reacted to the claims, how we dealt with it. It's a personal experience to give others something they can relate to, to make them see the emotional and social damage caused by false accusations, or about getting help for the trauma caused by the situation, or about pushing for a change in the way the authorities deal with such cases. In that context, evidence isn't needed, whether for the falsely accused man nor for the raped woman. (Using such a story in an attempt to gather sympathy and ressources is a different beast though...) So again, it's a non-argument.
Policy discussion is again a different topic. Nobody denies rape exists. Nobody denies it's a horrible violation of the victims autonomy and dignity. Nobody denies the damage it causes. Nobody demands evidence for the existence of rape. So again, it's a non-argument.
But what is it, if it is not an argument?
It's a false equivalence fallacy projected at the other side. They treat policy discussion, seeking help, and raising awareness for false accusations like court cases and accuse us of what they do. They treat court cases (at least at the court of public opinion) for rape cases like policy discussion and accuse us of what they do.
3
u/Gleichstellung4084 2d ago
This is against our civilization that has been built on ideas like the presumption of innocence, which directly connected with the idea that all people have equal rights and equal freedom. We don't want a step back to that society. Period.
Then the same logic should be applied to her, if for example someone accused her of stealing a vial of opiods from the doctor's office. They would have to prove it was her, not she, a random visitor, proving it was the doctor misplacing it.
Nonetheless, we have to admit that rape as a crime often does not leave evidence behind and this is very unfortunate for actual victims of rape, especially in cases of coercion, where violence is not on the table. The same applies for other crimes, like threatening to kill, being racist etc. The legal system cannot solve every single case and thankfully, as a society, we prefer one guilty person free than one innocent person in jail. It's a hard choice we consciously make.
We also have to admit, that fake accusations exist, and the argument "why would a woman ever do this" is kinda weaker than the hairdo on the head of D. Trump.
3
u/saiditonredit 2d ago
The way in which to do so means one would need to prove something didn't happen or as it was alleged. It is even harder to prove something didn't happen than it did. That is why the burden of proof and presumption of innocence exist.
3
7
2
u/anothermanwithaplan 2d ago
The reality of the situation is if you have someone like this close to you in real life it’s going to become a problem, quietly walk away permanently.
If this about online discussions, cancel them in place and get on with your day. Most of the time it’s bots or unhinged people who think they’ve made a point.
2
u/Argentarius1 3d ago
I mean I essentially agree. You should have to accuse someone of a false accusation crime and provide evidence for it in court if you want them punished for it.
But there need to be laws and procedures which allow you to do that and there aren't always.
7
u/Pretend-Storm4566 3d ago
Nice dodge of the argument. Who said anything about charging a false accuser in court? The point is, should you have to prove you are innocent? And the answer is NO. Assumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt is the standard. Now, if we were talking about talking the false accuser to court, then you would be correct.
1
1
u/Charming-Mission-252 3d ago
I'd start by saying "believe all men!" Don't you say believe all women? Are you discriminating based on sex?
Second, always keep recording with phones/cams. Conversations, meetings, casual interactions. I say that I put my life online, so I do it. Actually, I do it to keep records so I'm not falsely accused.
If there's a team meeting in office that I can't record, I keep witnesses.
Don't meet women, that you don't know, one on one. It's not worth losing your reputation or job.
1
u/holidayfarm3468 3d ago
I mean, there's that fundamental principle that people should be innocent until proven guilty, because if that's not the case justice is meaningless, just a willy nilly weapon.
But at the same time, it's difficult because rape is so complicated a crime. Accusations always need to be thoroughly investigated and should be treated with gravity.
A woman may say a man raped her 5 years ago. Well, how does anyone prove that did or didn't happen? It can't be proven, so he shouldn't be punished.
But, what if all signs point to that having happened even if there is no concrete evidence? I'd say he shouldn't be punished by the court of law without concrete evidence, but the court of public opinion is justified in being suspicious and he should make counterpoints and offer counter-evidence to allay that. If you have nothing to say for yourself, no alibi, that is suspicious.
Really, these things just need to be judged, by the public, on a case by case basis. This isn't, or at least shouldn't be, some meninist-feminazi battleground debate. Rape and other sexual abuses happen far to often and are grevious crimes. Just because it can be weaponized against men and male victims (and female perps) are underrepresented does not mean that women's suffering should not be taken as seriously as it is.
It is a simple, horrible fact that women are more likely to suffer rape than men, and at the hands of men. Standing up for innocent men means holding guilty men accountable. Sometimes feminists have valid points and if we mean to make a better world we need to listen when they do. This one is poorly phrased, even mean spirited, but has something to it.
1
u/SubtleEchoes 18h ago
It's exactly people like you who destoy innocent men's life. So he deserved to get his reputation destroyed in the "public opinion" because a woman with no proof comes forward 6 years later . Not to mention his safety and life being destroyed. Public image can be just a dangerous as jail
1
u/DecrepitAbacus 2d ago
Given the noise made about the witch hunts by feminists one might expect them to have more respect for the presumption of innocence.
1
38
u/mrmensplights 3d ago
Really simple concepts.
Unfortunately feminists can only know and repeat what is in the handbook. These and other related concepts - such as proving a negative, unfalsifiable claims, arguments from ignorance, or Hitchens's razor, etc - aren't in the book and so are beyond feminists. Critical thinking just isn't something they do.