Rolling Stone "our trust was misplaced." UVA assault article retracted?

[EmseB]

When someone goes to the police and says they were mugged, the presumption is that they are telling the truth as the investigation starts, even though we do know that sometimes people have a reason about lying about various crimes.

 

But the person they accuse is presumed innocent until proven guilty. So, no, the victim is not just taken at their word. And the mugee has to prove their case, and it is very seldom that the mugger is tried and convicted in the court of public opinion like the frat was. Or the Duke lacrosse players, or the kid who just spent a year in jail because some mean girls at his school wanted to teach him a lesson. And those are just publicized cases.

[SKL]

Oh right.  The male organizations.

 

Do you really believe false rape accusations are unimportant, or are you just being argumentative?

[EmseB]

When someone goes to the police and says they were mugged, the presumption is that they are telling the truth as the investigation starts, even though we do know that sometimes people have a reason about lying about various crimes.

 

But the person they accuse is presumed innocent until proven guilty. So, no, the victim is not just taken at their word. And the mugee has to prove their case, and it is very seldom that a mugger is tried and convicted in the court of public opinion like the frat was. Or the Duke lacrosse players, or the kid who just spent a year in jail because some mean girls at his school wanted to teach him a lesson. We don't spout a statistic and say the mugee needs the benefit of the doubt because people really do get mugged.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

But the person they accuse is presumed innocent until proven guilty. So, no, the victim is not just taken at their word. And the mugee has to prove their case, and it is very seldom that the mugger is tried and convicted in the court of public opinion like the frat was. Or the Duke lacrosse players, or the kid who just spent a year in jail because some mean girls at his school wanted to teach him a lesson. And those are just publicized cases.

 

Wrong.  At the start of the investigative process other crime victims are initially taken at their word and the police investigate as if a crime has occurred and look for evidence to substantiate the claims made by the victim.  That is how sexual assault victims *should* be treated, and in fairness, some police departments do this well. 

Mixing how the media handles allegations and how the judicial system should handle allegations is apples and oranges.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

Oh right.  The male organizations.

 

Do you really believe false rape accusations are unimportant, or are you just being argumentative?

 

I believe they are relatively insignificant compared to the number of women who are sexually assaulted and cannot get justice.

[SKL]

I believe they are relatively insignificant compared to the number of women who are sexually assaulted and cannot get justice.

 

Cannot get justice because they go to Rolling Stone instead of the cops?

 

Women who have been raped need to go to the cops immediately.  That is how evidence is preserved.  I remember my mom telling me this when I was still in elementary school.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

Cannot get justice because they go to Rolling Stone instead of the cops?

 

Women who have been raped need to go to the cops immediately.  That is how evidence is preserved.  I remember my mom telling me this when I was still in elementary school.

 

I guess that is true for a sample size of one. (Except according to her story she did go through other avenues long before she was approached by RS for the story.)

 

I do agree that going to the cops immediately would help greatly.  Perhaps that is why I keep bringing up how sexual assault victims are treated by the police?  It would also help if universities and colleges were taken out of the investigative process when investigating campus rapes.

 

 

[Word Nerd]

My first thought when that article came out was -- great, what if this turns out to be unsupported.....  Because the allegation wasn't supported by any facts in the article.

 

Let's keep in mind that as far as we can tell, if there were false allegations they came from the journalist.  Who had the motive of wanting to sell the story.

 

There actually isn't that much good motive for a woman to falsely accuse someone of rape.  They (usually) aren't getting paid to come forward and say slanderous things about some innocent guy.

 

As far as who can tell? That is not what the Columbia University investigation and report concluded:

 

There is no evidence in Erdely’s materials or from interviews with her subjects that she invented facts; the problem was that she relied on what Jackie told her without vetting its accuracy.

[Catwoman]

I believe they are relatively insignificant compared to the number of women who are sexually assaulted and cannot get justice.

I guess "insignificant" is easy to say when your son and dh are not among the falsely accused. Do you have sons or daughters? (I'm not being snarky -- I honestly don't know.)

 

I don't believe a single person here has suggested that women's claims of having been assaulted should not be taken seriously. What has been suggested is that just because a woman makes a claim, it should not automatically be accepted as the gospel truth until the incident has been investigated. Obviously, she should be treated with the utmost courtesy, respect, and kindness, as should the victim of any crime.

 

I think you are being intentionally and unnecessarily contentious when you start accusing people of being lousy parents just because they view this issue differently than you do. Why is it such a terrible thing if parents advise their sons to be aware that false accusations can happen?

[ChocolateReignRemix]

I guess "insignificant" is easy to say when your son and dh are not among the falsely accused. Do you have sons or daughters? (I'm not being snarky -- I honestly don't know.)

 

I don't believe a single person here has suggested that women's claims of having been assaulted should not be taken seriously. What has been suggested is that just because a woman makes a claim, it should not automatically be accepted as the gospel truth until the incident has been investigated. Obviously, she should be treated with the utmost courtesy, respect, and kindness, as should the victim of any crime.

 

I think you are being intentionally and unnecessarily contentious when you start accusing people of being lousy parents just because they view this issue differently than you do. Why is it such a terrible thing if parents advise their sons to be aware that false accusations can happen?

 

Sons.  And I again stand by my statement that I do not worry about the truly insignificant chance of a false allegation.

 

On the first bolded we mostly agree.  I do believe that a sexual assault victim's accusation should be initially treated as true in the investigative process which is the same courtesy shown to other crime victims.  Unfortunately that is not how all departments handle the issue.

 

Regarding the second bolded, nothing like that has been said in this thread and none of my statements addressed anything like that statement.  The reality is that a woman has a much greater chance of being sexually assaulted than a man does of being false accused, and in fact there is a significant difference in likelihood between the two (even though SKL previously stated otherwise).

[EmseB]

Wrong.  At the start of the investigative process other crime victims are initially taken at their word and the police investigate as if a crime has occurred and look for evidence to substantiate the claims made by the victim.  That is how sexual assault victims *should* be treated, and in fairness, some police departments do this well. 

Mixing how the media handles allegations and how the judicial system should handle allegations is apples and oranges.

 

 

I don't know how you have determined this.  Police look for evidence of a crime.  They look for validity from all parties.  If someone says they were mugged, that person gets asked a lot of questions.  The police don't go out presuming the person reporting the crime is telling the whole, accurate story because a) they know people's memories are often innacurate, b) people sometimes make stuff up to hurt others and c) the police aren't about assuming anything. 

 

Instead of a mugging, think of a kidnapping case.  Even the mother and father are investigated in their own child's kidnapping, even if they themselves are the ones who reported it.  Police don't take anyone's word for anything, they investigate all parties.  If I reported a rape, my story would be checked for validity like any other crime.  It's not an offense to my dignity, even though rape is obviously more sensitive.

And in this case we're talking about the media because of Rolling Stone. 

 

It's not apples and oranges if someone is being tried by a jury of their peers, most of whom have regular exposure to the media.  And it's not apples and oranges when so often the media is used as a tool by both the prosecution and defense.  In this case, a frat was shut down and defamed not based on legal reports, but based on one media report.  One.

[EmseB]

Sons.  And I again stand by my statement that I do not worry about the truly insignificant chance of a false allegation.

 

On the first bolded we mostly agree.  I do believe that a sexual assault victim's accusation should be initially treated as true in the investigative process which is the same courtesy shown to other crime victims.  Unfortunately that is not how all departments handle the issue.

 

Regarding the second bolded, nothing like that has been said in this thread and none of my statements addressed anything like that statement.  The reality is that a woman has a much greater chance of being sexually assaulted than a man does of being false accused, and in fact there is a significant difference in likelihood between the two (even though SKL previously stated otherwise).

 

This is seriously baffling to me.  I don't know where you've found police who automatically take the accuser's story as true from the get go.

 

If I go into a police station right now and tell them that so-and-so mugged me, they would not treat that report as true.  They'd question me, look for physical evidence and then go talk to so-and-so and ask them their version of events.  At least I hope they would.  If I called 911 and reported one of my children was kidnapped by a stranger, I'd be investigated.  This is seriously disturbing to me that you think that someone who reports a crime should be, or is, taken at their word by police detectives.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

I don't know how you have determined this.  Police look for evidence of a crime.  They look for validity from all parties.  If someone says they were mugged, that person gets asked a lot of questions.  The police don't go out presuming the person reporting the crime is telling the whole, accurate story because a) they know people's memories are often innacurate, b) people sometimes make stuff up to hurt others and c) the police aren't about assuming anything. 

 

Instead of a mugging, think of a kidnapping case.  Even the mother and father are investigated in their own child's kidnapping, even if they themselves are the ones who reported it.  Police don't take anyone's word for anything, they investigate all parties.  If I reported a rape, my story would be checked for validity like any other crime.  It's not an offense to my dignity, even though rape is obviously more sensitive.

And in this case we're talking about the media because of Rolling Stone. 

 

It's not apples and oranges if someone is being tried by a jury of their peers, most of whom have regular exposure to the media.  And it's not apples and oranges when so often the media is used as a tool by both the prosecution and defense.  In this case, a frat was shut down and defamed not based on legal reports, but based on one media report.  One.

 

 

While the police investigate every angle of a reported kidnapping, do they refuse to put out an Amber Alert until they have completely vetted the parents? No.  They start with the presumption that a crime has occurred and collect facts as part of the investigative process.

 

If a man reports he was mugged do they start the investigative process by asking if he is lying about being mugged because he got drunk and lost his money gambling and doesn't want to tell his wife?  No, although they may discover he has made a false report via the investigative process.

 

And yes, when my posts specifically reference the judicial process and how potential victims are treated differently then yes it is an apples and oranges comparison.

[BrookValley.]

I don't know how you have determined this.  Police look for evidence of a crime.  They look for validity from all parties.  If someone says they were mugged, that person gets asked a lot of questions.  The police don't go out presuming the person reporting the crime is telling the whole, accurate story because a) they know people's memories are often innacurate, b) people sometimes make stuff up to hurt others and c) the police aren't about assuming anything. 

 

Instead of a mugging, think of a kidnapping case.  Even the mother and father are investigated in their own child's kidnapping, even if they themselves are the ones who reported it.  Police don't take anyone's word for anything, they investigate all parties.  If I reported a rape, my story would be checked for validity like any other crime.  It's not an offense to my dignity, even though rape is obviously more sensitive.

And in this case we're talking about the media because of Rolling Stone. 

 

It's not apples and oranges if someone is being tried by a jury of their peers, most of whom have regular exposure to the media.  And it's not apples and oranges when so often the media is used as a tool by both the prosecution and defense.  In this case, a frat was shut down and defamed not based on legal reports, but based on one media report.  One.

 

I think you're missing her point. The point is, if I go to the police and say my wallet was stolen, they assume my wallet was stolen. They investigate from there. Period. Of course that doesn't mean they don't ask me a whole bunch of questions in an attempt to get all the details/facts/etc. Of course that doesn't rule out the possibility of me making the whole story up; however, if I go to the police and say my wallet was stolen, the most likely scenario is my wallet was stolen.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

This is seriously baffling to me.  I don't know where you've found police who automatically take the accuser's story as true from the get go.

 

If I go into a police station right now and tell them that so-and-so mugged me, they would not treat that report as true.  They'd question me, look for physical evidence and then go talk to so-and-so and ask them their version of events.  At least I hope they would.  If I called 911 and reported one of my children was kidnapped by a stranger, I'd be investigated.  This is seriously disturbing to me that you think that someone who reports a crime should be, or is, taken at their word by police detectives.

 

Based on this post I am 100% certain you have no idea how some sexual assault victims are often treated during the initial stages of an investigation.

 

Again, if you called 911 and reported your child was kidnapped would the police first make sure you weren't to blame before treating your claim as true? If you think so a quick Google on numerous high profile child abduction cases will show you are simply wrong.

[EmseB]

I think you're missing her point. The point is, if I go to the police and say my wallet was stolen, they assume my wallet was stolen. They investigate from there. Period. Of course that doesn't mean they don't ask me a whole bunch of questions in an attempt to get all the details/facts/etc. Of course that doesn't rule out the possibility of me making the whole story up; however, if I go to the police and say my wallet was stolen, the most likely scenario is my wallet was stolen.

 

That may be true, but if you go in and say that your wallet was stolen by Joe Schmoe, they do not assume that Joe Schmoe actually stole your wallet.  They do not haul Joe Schmoe off to jail based on your story.  They may ask him some questions, but if he says he didn't do it, they don't necessarily arrest him anyway based on your story.  There's a distinct difference in believing a crime has occurred and believing that a specific person did, in fact, commit that crime.  Police don't do the latter.

[SKL]

Right, it is apples and oranges so I'm not sure why you keep bringing up the judicial process when that is pretty much irrelevant to the RS story.  Though one wonders what legal direction this situation would have taken had the facts not been questioned before the media had a chance to take it as far as they took the Duke LaCrosse case....

 

Was it good or bad that many people maintained a little healthy skepticism about the RS story, until a real investigation was done?

[ChocolateReignRemix]

I think you're missing her point. The point is, if I go to the police and say my wallet was stolen, they assume my wallet was stolen. They investigate from there. Period. Of course that doesn't mean they don't ask me a whole bunch of questions in an attempt to get all the details/facts/etc. Of course that doesn't rule out the possibility of me making the whole story up; however, if I go to the police and say my wallet was stolen, the most likely scenario is my wallet was stolen.

 

Exactly.  For some reason it isn't a difficult concept to grasp until sexual assault enters the picture and suddenly assumptions about the victim become the default.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

Right, it is apples and oranges so I'm not sure why you keep bringing up the judicial process when that is pretty much irrelevant to the RS story.  Though one wonders what legal direction this situation would have taken had the facts not been questioned before the media had a chance to take it as far as they took the Duke LaCrosse case....

 

Was it good or bad that many people maintained a little healthy skepticism about the RS story, until a real investigation was done?

 

It matters because we still have people like you claiming that a man is just as likely to be false accused of rape as a woman is to be sexually assaulted.  It matters because the judicial process still often treats sexual assault victims differently than it treats other victims reporting crimes.

 

[ChocolateReignRemix]

That may be true, but if you go in and say that your wallet was stolen by Joe Schmoe, they do not assume that Joe Schmoe actually stole your wallet.  They do not haul Joe Schmoe off to jail based on your story.  They may ask him some questions, but if he says he didn't do it, they don't necessarily arrest him anyway based on your story.  There's a distinct difference in believing a crime has occurred and believing that a specific person did, in fact, commit that crime.  Police don't do the latter.

 

Which has nothing to do with anything I posted at any point in this thread. Please refer to post #99 where I go into greater detail.

[SKL]

I'm not sure I agree that the cops' job is to assume the truth of the initial allegation.  It seems more accurate to say that the allegation means they need to open an investigation.  The word "alleged" has to be attached to discussions about "crime" until there is a conviction.  Of course people don't necessarily hear the "alleged" part, thanks to various biases we hold.

[BrookValley.]

That may be true, but if you go in and say that your wallet was stolen by Joe Schmoe, they do not assume that Joe Schmoe actually stole your wallet.  They do not haul Joe Schmoe off to jail based on your story.  They may ask him some questions, but if he says he didn't do it, they don't necessarily arrest him anyway based on your story.  There's a distinct difference in believing a crime has occurred and believing that a specific person did, in fact, commit that crime.  Police don't do the latter.

 

I think you are still missing the point. If I report a crime has been committed, they do not question the validity of that crime before they act. They begin an investigation. That investigation will determine if Joe Schmoe is the actual culprit, or if I didn't see Joe clearly and it's really John Doe, or if I made the whole thing up. But if I call 911 and say I was robbed, the police are going to come driving up with the assumption that a crime was committed. As they should.

[unsinkable]

My husband works for the federal government, not at a university. He doesn't consult or crunch numbers to decide what he's going to do to protect himself or our kids. For example, he doesn't look at tables of number when deciding if we shoud do a certain something to keep our kids safe. If it's easy to do, we do it. Simple as that. Keeping a door open is simple, so he does it.

 

ETA: What people do to keep themselves safe isn't always rational. It can't always be reduced to a tidy, formulaic response. In my husband's case, he chooses to keep his door open but will travel alone in an elevator or stairwell with other women.

 

My point, which I'd like to reiterate, is that it's important to have accusations checked. I can't speak for other posters, but that is my point.

There are many statistically rare things that I teach my kids to be aware of. I know they can do the right things and still have something bad happen, through no fault of theirs.

 

It's difficult to raise sons and daughters and heartbreaking at times to teach them of the dangers in the world.

[SKL]

It matters because we still have people like you claiming that a man is just as likely to be false accused of rape as a woman is to be sexually assaulted.  It matters because the judicial process still often treats sexual assault victims differently than it treats other victims reporting crimes.

 

 

I didn't actually say that, and this is the 2nd time you put those words in my mouth.

 

If you don't like the way sexual assault victims are treated by police, go after that.

 

I really don't think there is a pleasant way to have to report a rape.  It's going to be a sucky experience.  The cops should be all kinds of good things, and objective is one of those things.

 

BTW I do not believe cops are of the opinion that rape doesn't actually happen.  They of all people are aware that rape is a real thing.

[EmseB]

I think you are still missing the point. If I report a crime has been committed, they do not question the validity of that crime before they act. They begin an investigation. That investigation will determine if Joe Schmoe is the actual culprit, or if I didn't see Joe clearly and it's really John Doe, or if I made the whole thing up. But if I call 911 and say I was robbed, the police are going to come driving up with the assumption that a crime was committed. As they should.

 

So you're saying if I call 911 and say I was raped, the police will not come driving up with the assumption a crime was committed?

 

ETA:  In the case outlined by RS, you're telling me that in the case outlined in RS, if Jackie had contacted the police and reported her story, you're saying they would assume no crime had been committed?  If a woman came in/called with multiple lacerations from being thrown through a glass table and internal injuries from being raped by a bottle and multiple men, you're saying they would ignore her and not investigate?

[ChocolateReignRemix]

So you're saying if I call 911 and say I was raped, the police will not come driving up with the assumption a crime was committed?

 

It depends. Stranger rape of a mom at home?  You are more likely to be treated as a victim than a college aged woman in a "date" (I loathe that term) rape scenario. If you don't believe there is often a difference I suggest you listen to some women who have been through the experience.

[SKL]

My mom reported an attempted rape.  I remember the cops coming to our house and asking her about it.  They were kind, gentle, and thorough, and they didn't suggest maybe she imagined the attack.  They didn't ask whether her skirt was too short or why she was stupid enough to walk to her car alone after sunset.  They didn't ask about her prior sex partners.

[BrookValley.]

I'm not sure I agree that the cops' job is to assume the truth of the initial allegation.  It seems more accurate to say that the allegation means they need to open an investigation.  The word "alleged" has to be attached to discussions about "crime" until there is a conviction.  Of course people don't necessarily hear the "alleged" part, thanks to various biases we hold.

 

But no one is saying that the cops should or do assume that an allegation is wholly truthful. The point is if you say you were robbed, the police show up assuming a crime happened and, like you said, open an investigation.

 

Unfortunately, there's a widespread double standard where rape is concerned. If I report I was raped, I'm likely to be asked if I was drinking or doing drugs, if I was sure I said no, etc., etc., basically, more of the blame-the-victim type crap that isn't doing women any favors.

[BrookValley.]

My mom reported an attempted rape.  I remember the cops coming to our house and asking her about it.  They were kind, gentle, and thorough, and they didn't suggest maybe she imagined the attack.  They didn't ask whether her skirt was too short or why she was stupid enough to walk to her car alone after sunset.  They didn't ask about her prior sex partners.

 

And that's how it should be handled, it just isn't always that way, especially, like ChocolateReign said, if you're a young college girl out on a date/at a party/etc.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

I didn't actually say that, and this is the 2nd time you put those words in my mouth.

 

Here is what you said: "Why are you so sure that your dd is more likely to be assaulted than your son to be falsely accused?"

 

Now that statement certainly seems to imply that the two events happen at nearly the same frequency, does it not?

[swimmermom3]

Oh right.  The male organizations.

 

Do you really believe false rape accusations are unimportant, or are you just being argumentative?

 

It's not that people believe false rape accusations are unimportant or that the results aren't devastating. Speaking for myself, what I don't want to happen is the fear of false accusations and resulting actions to prevent them take us back to the dark ages (ten years ago) in sweeping actual rapes under the table.

 

Victims of sexual assault have to go through amazing hoops and often damaging hoops to get their rapist convicted. The majority of rape convictions come from stranger rape. There is no evidence that the assailant knew the victim. This makes the physical evidence more reliable. (Carr and Van Deusen, 2004).

 

The problem is that most rapes occur with acquaintances or partners/former partners.

 

If you bait the gentlest dog long enough, poking, prodding, tormenting, teasing, it's likely he is going to snap at some point. As a society, we have long done a very poor job in coping with the aftermath of rape. It's a building storm. You can only pretend for so long that it doesn't happen or that it only happens to "bad girls." Some of what you are seeing on campuses right now as a backlash is a result of neglecting the problem.  I think we need to overhaul the system before the backlash gets out of hand. Wringing our hands, and crying, "Oh those slutty girls are going to falsely ruin my poor boy," will get us nowhere.  Nor does forming some of these men's groups that purportedly are for protecting men against false accusations. The language on some of their sites is beyond misogynistic.

 

We need to change the system and we need to change our attitudes.

[Catwoman]

It matters because we still have people like you claiming that a man is just as likely to be false accused of rape as a woman is to be sexually assaulted. It matters because the judicial process still often treats sexual assault victims differently than it treats other victims reporting crimes.

 

I know you were responding to SKL, but I wanted to point out that I think most people agree with you that it is far more likely for a woman to be assaulted than it is for a man to be falsely accused.

 

That said, I think what some of us are trying to clarify is that because false claims against men do exist, every woman who reports a sexual assault is not automatically telling the truth. It seems that there is a perception among some posters here that women are always telling the truth and would never make up such a story, so we shouldn't bother to warn our sons that false accusations can occur.

 

I don't think anyone is being paranoid and telling their sons that women are evil liars who will accuse them of sexual assault on a whim so they should never be alone with a woman under any circumstances. I think they are simply informing their sons of possibilities, just as they would caution them about any number of other potentially negative situations they may (or may not) encounter as they grow older, not that they are making it into a huge deal on a regular basis.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

It's not that people believe false rape accusations are unimportant or that the results aren't devastating. Speaking for myself, what I don't want to happen is the fear of false accusations and resulting actions to prevent them take us back to the dark ages (ten years ago) in sweeping actual rapes under the table.

 

Victims of sexual assault have to go through amazing hoops and often damaging hoops to get their rapist convicted. The majority of rape convictions come from stranger rape. There is no evidence that the assailant knew the victim. This makes the physical evidence more reliable. (Carr and Van Deusen, 2004).

 

The problem is that most rapes occur with acquaintances or partners/former partners.

 

If you bait the gentlest dog long enough, poking, prodding, tormenting, teasing, it's likely he is going to snap at some point. As a society, we have long done a very poor job in coping with the aftermath of rape. It's a building storm. You can only pretend for so long that it doesn't happen or that it only happens to "bad girls." Some of what you are seeing on campuses right now as a backlash is a result of neglecting the problem.  I think we need to overhaul the system before the backlash gets out of hand. Wringing our hands, and crying, "Oh those slutty girls are going to falsely ruin my poor boy," will get us nowhere.  Nor does forming some of these men's groups that purportedly are for protecting men against false accusations. The language on some of their sites is beyond misogynistic.

 

We need to change the system and we need to change our attitudes.

 

I need to clarify my post earlier about "male organizations" and false allegations.  I was actually directing that at fraternities and similar groups as one would think that if there was an epidemic of innocent frat boys being accused of rape that these groups would be more proactive in protecting their members.

 

 

[swimmermom3]

My mom reported an attempted rape.  I remember the cops coming to our house and asking her about it.  They were kind, gentle, and thorough, and they didn't suggest maybe she imagined the attack.  They didn't ask whether her skirt was too short or why she was stupid enough to walk to her car alone after sunset.  They didn't ask about her prior sex partners.

 

Believe it or not, police officers are human and often change their behavior based on the same stereotypical assumptions we make. Perhaps your mom had an outstanding team of officers, but what is more likely (and I am making an assumption) is that they were meeting with a suburban housewife with children. That probably warranted different behavior than talking to a young college girl on campus.

 

Removing an emotionally distressed 17 yo African American youth from his home in the projects often looks very different from removing an equally emotionally distressed white 17 yo from his 3500 sq ft family home on the river. It shouldn't but it does. 

[ChocolateReignRemix]

I know you were responding to SKL, but I wanted to point out that I think most people agree with you that it is far more likely for a woman to be assaulted than it is for a man to be falsely accused.

 

That said, I think what some of us are trying to clarify is that because false claims against men do exist, every woman who reports a sexual assault is not automatically telling the truth. It seems that there is a perception among some posters here that women are always telling the truth and would never make up such a story, so we shouldn't bother to warn our sons that false accusations can occur.

 

I don't think anyone is being paranoid and telling their sons that women are evil liars who will accuse them of sexual assault on a whim so they should never be alone with a woman under any circumstances. I think they are simply informing their sons of possibilities, just as they would caution them about any number of other potentially negative situations they may (or may not) encounter as they grow older, not that they are making it into a huge deal on a regular basis.

 

My apologies but I have not noticed any discussion like the bolded in this thread.

[EmseB]

It depends. Stranger rape of a mom at home?  You are more likely to be treated as a victim than a college aged woman in a "date" (I loathe that term) rape scenario. If you don't believe there is often a difference I suggest you listen to some women who have been through the experience.

 

I really have a hard time with the "If you don't...then you need to..." 

 

If I don't agree with you to the letter it doesn't mean I necessarily need to do anything.  The assumption about my experience or lack thereof on the topic because I disagree with your conclusions and if only I did what you suggest in order to come around to your perspective is extremely condescending and arrogant.  Please stop making assumptions about me.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

I really have a hard time with the "If you don't...then you need to..." 

 

If I don't agree with you to the letter it doesn't mean I necessarily need to do anything.  The assumption about my experience or lack thereof on the topic because I disagree with your conclusions and if only I did what you suggest in order to come around to your perspective is extremely condescending and arrogant.  Please stop making assumptions about me.

 

They aren't my conclusions.  They are the experiences of numerous women who have been through the system.  If you don't believe them, well so be it.

 

[Catwoman]

My apologies but I have not noticed any discussion like the bolded in this thread.

It seemed to be what you were implying when you said:

 

Anyone who feels the need to actually worry about false rape allegations either cannot comprehend basic statistics or has horribly failed as a parent (or both).

You seem to believe that people are not only worrying about it, but that if they are, they have horribly failed as parents and are apparently too stupid to comprehend basic statistics.

 

It would seem that if you would go so far as to believe people had horribly failed as parents, you must also believe they must be pretty darned paranoid about the whole false accusation thing. Otherwise, why would you have made such a nasty and insulting comment about the parents who warn their sons about possibly being falsely accused?

[EmseB]

They aren't my conclusions.  They are the experiences of numerous women who have been through the system.  If you don't believe them, well so be it.

 

 

Again, please stop making assumptions about my experiences with "the system".  Not everyone who has been through it agrees with what you're saying here.  I'm sure some do.  Just because I don't does not say anything about what I need to do.  This bordering on unkind.

[BrookValley.]

Again, please stop making assumptions about my experiences with "the system".  Not everyone who has been through it agrees with what you're saying here.  I'm sure some do.  Just because I don't does not say anything about what I need to do.  This bordering on unkind.

 

No one made any assumptions about your experiences with the system. You seem to keep finding arguments no one is making. And if your experiences have been different than the many, many women who have been failed by the system, I'm glad; but you discounting others' experiences because they aren't the same as yours is more than bordering on unkind, and it's part of the problem. 

[ChocolateReignRemix]

nm 

 

Edited April 10, 2015 by ChocolateReignRemix
Uncalled for.

[EmseB]

No one made any assumptions about your experiences with the system. You seem to keep finding arguments no one is making. And if your experiences have been different than the many, many women who have been failed by the system, I'm glad; but you discounting others' experiences because they aren't the same as yours is more than bordering on unkind, and it's part of the problem. 

 

 

Is it possible that certain types of rape cases are more complicated to investigate than others?  That two people having drunken sex reported the next morning or a week later might be a more complicated web to untangled than an obvious forcible stranger rape?  That two people who may have had a friendly relationship that turned sour may be more complex than a woman getting assaulted by a stranger?  In certain cases, more questions have to be asked and answered in order to find out what actually happened.  That is the sad truth.  We live in a world where there are rarely black and white answers and even when it appears there are, the accused still gets given the benefit of the doubt.  This kid has spent a year in jail so far because no one wants to believe that 13 girls could possibly make up the same story about one guy they all knew.  No one wanted to ask the right questions or look for the possibility they might be lying at all.  I hate to think he's acceptable collateral damage.

 

I am not discounting others' experiences.  I'm saying that if I don't agree with how certain crimes should be handled (in light of how other crimes are handled - about which we disagree, apparently) does not mean that I need to come around to Chocolate's way of thinking.  It does not mean I'm unenlightened.  It does not mean that I am part of the problem or need to do what she or you suggests.  I would like if it was not made personal at all and if we could stick to discussing the issue and not what I need to do or how I'm part of the problem.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

Is it possible that certain types of rape cases are more complicated to investigate than others?  That two people having drunken sex reported the next morning or a week later might be a more complicated web to untangled than an obvious forcible stranger rape?  That two people who may have had a friendly relationship that turned sour may be more complex than a woman getting assaulted by a stranger?  In certain cases, more questions have to be asked and answered in order to find out what actually happened.  That is the sad truth.  We live in a world where there are rarely black and white answers and even when it appears there are, the accused still gets given the benefit of the doubt.  This kid has spent a year in jail so far because no one wants to believe that 13 girls could possibly make up the same story about one guy they all knew.  No one wanted to ask the right questions or look for the possibility they might be lying at all.  I hate to think he's acceptable collateral damage.

 

I am not discounting others' experiences.  I'm saying that if I don't agree with how certain crimes should be handled (in light of how other crimes are handled - about which we disagree, apparently) does not mean that I need to come around to Chocolate's way of thinking.  It does not mean I'm unenlightened.  It does not mean that I am part of the problem or need to do what she or you suggests.  I would like if it was not made personal at all and if we could stick to discussing the issue and not what I need to do or how I'm part of the problem.

 

Who said anything about acceptable collateral damage?  We frequently have men who have been wrongly executed or who have been released after 30 years in prison for crimes they did not commit.  Yet we only hold certain sex crimes to a different standard.

 

[Susan Wise Bauer]

Guys,

 

Please. I'm begging you. This is such an important topic, and such an important discussion, yet the willingness to take offense is in danger of derailing it.

 

Don't insult. Don't react. Please.

 

SWB

[swimmermom3]

I know you were responding to SKL, but I wanted to point out that I think most people agree with you that it is far more likely for a woman to be assaulted than it is for a man to be falsely accused.

 

That said, I think what some of us are trying to clarify is that because false claims against men do exist, every woman who reports a sexual assault is not automatically telling the truth. It seems that there is a perception among some posters here that women are always telling the truth and would never make up such a story, so we shouldn't bother to warn our sons that false accusations can occur.

 

I don't think anyone is being paranoid and telling their sons that women are evil liars who will accuse them of sexual assault on a whim so they should never be alone with a woman under any circumstances. I think they are simply informing their sons of possibilities, just as they would caution them about any number of other potentially negative situations they may (or may not) encounter as they grow older, not that they are making it into a huge deal on a regular basis.

 

Cat, maybe there is enough fear talking on both sides that we aren't hearing what the other is saying.

 

SKL did seem to think it was just as likely that there be a false report as an actual assault. I responded because I felt like that was an attempt to minimize rape. Perhaps I was wrong and her point was that we don't know the number of false allegations anymore than we can know the actual number of rapes?

 

Slate has a good article on false reports: "Crying Rape: False Allegations Exist and They are a Serious Problem."  There are many aspects of this article that I find disturbing and I would ask that readers not think that everyone on the left side of the political fence believes that we should automatically accept all rape accusations as the truth. I think that line of reasoning belongs to a small, vocal, extreme group at the far end  of the spectrum.

 

I also wanted to bring to the table some numbers that are on University of Michigan's website. The information is for their "Judicial Resolution Officers."

 

"Understanding the Perpetrator"

 

The numbers from this article may make more sense than the 1 in 4 stat because they are more clearly defined and come from several different studies. 

 

Summary of Carr, J.L. and VanDeusen, K.M. (2004) Risk Factors For Male Sexual Aggression on College Campuses. J. Family Violence 19(5): 279-289.

• Surveys have consistently reported that college men acknowledged forced intercourse at a rate of 5-15% and college sexual aggression at a rate of 15-25% (Koss, Gidycz, and Wisniewski, 1987; Malamuth, Sockloskie, Koss, and Tanaka, 1991).

• The national survey of rape conducted by Koss et al. (1987) revealed that 1 in 12 college men committed acts that met the legal definition of rape, and of those men, 84% did not consider their actions to be illegal. 

• In a large study of college men, 8.8% admitted rape or attempted rape (Ouimette & Riggs, 1998).

• Cross-cultural studies of rape and studies of rape-prone versus rape-free campus cultures identify the following factors as contributors to sexual violence:

• sex-role socialization
• rape myths
• lack of sanctions for abuse
• male peer group support
• pornography
• all-male membership groups such as fraternities and sports teams

 

 

[BrookValley.]

Is it possible that certain types of rape cases are more complicated to investigate than others?  That two people having drunken sex reported the next morning or a week later might be a more complicated web to untangled than an obvious forcible stranger rape?  That two people who may have had a friendly relationship that turned sour may be more complex than a woman getting assaulted by a stranger?  In certain cases, more questions have to be asked and answered in order to find out what actually happened.  That is the sad truth.  We live in a world where there are rarely black and white answers and even when it appears there are, the accused still gets given the benefit of the doubt.  This kid has spent a year in jail so far because no one wants to believe that 13 girls could possibly make up the same story about one guy they all knew.  No one wanted to ask the right questions or look for the possibility they might be lying at all.  I hate to think he's acceptable collateral damage.

 

I am not discounting others' experiences.  I'm saying that if I don't agree with how certain crimes should be handled (in light of how other crimes are handled - about which we disagree, apparently) does not mean that I need to come around to Chocolate's way of thinking.  It does not mean I'm unenlightened.  It does not mean that I am part of the problem or need to do what she or you suggests.  I would like if it was not made personal at all and if we could stick to discussing the issue and not what I need to do or how I'm part of the problem.

 

I think you are still missing my point.

 

Of course every case is different, and of course some--nay, many--are not going to be cut-and-dry, black-and-white. Never said that. What I'm saying is the handling of sexual assault cases often creates a blame-the-victim type of atmosphere. This is not okay. This creates a system where not only do many rape perpetrators go unpunished, many rapes are never even reported. I think you and I can both agree this is not okay?

 

I see no one attempting to negate the experiences of those wrongly accused of rape. Of course that is also not okay. But the fact remains that there are many more rapes committed--and we'll never really know how many because, like I said, we know quite a bit aren't even reported--than there are men wrongly accused of rape.

 

When I say this is part of the problem, what I'm talking about is the bias and shaming inherent in the system that causes under-reporting and less convictions of rapists. This comes from the assumption that many women who report rape may be fuzzy on the details, that she couldn't have been raped if she was drunk, that somehow it's not so clear-cut, etc.. With the exception of a few instances, do you really think that there are a lot of women reporting rape who weren't really raped? No. There isn't. But this whole line of thinking--oh, maybe they were a little tipsy, maybe it was a misunderstanding between exes--absolutely contributes to women hesitating to even report a rape in the first place.

[SKL]

Here is what you said: "Why are you so sure that your dd is more likely to be assaulted than your son to be falsely accused?"

 

Now that statement certainly seems to imply that the two events happen at nearly the same frequency, does it not?

 

I also added that not all false accusations are reported.

 

The rape/assault stats are based on confidential surveys with the intention of including people who did not report the incident as well as those who reported it and didn't get a conviction.  As far as I know, there are no comparable stats for false accusations.  "Has anyone ever falsely accused you of touching a woman in a way she didn't intend to be touched by you at that moment?"  I don't think there is data because society generally does not care about that, especially where the stakes are not very high.

 

Historically I don't think a high # of men's lives were ruined by false allegations.  But the trend is toward making men pay dearly for alleged actions regardless of proof.  I don't think we should encourage that trend.  Innocent men will suffer.  I don't accept the view that past statistics (or lack thereof) suggest the young men of the future are not at risk if we encourage this trend.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

 

Slate has a good article on false reports: "Crying Rape: False Allegations Exist and They are a Serious Problem."  There are many aspects of this article that I find disturbing and I would ask that readers not think that everyone on the left side of the political fence believes that we should automatically accept all rape accusations as the truth. I think that line of reasoning belongs to a small, vocal, extreme group at the far end  of the spectrum.

 

 

I just want to throw a few thoughts out there regarding this part of your post as I do think there is *likely* more agreement on how investigations should be handled than is coming through in this thread.

 

--I believe that when a sexual assault is reported, that it should first and foremost be investigated by police department and not by a college/university.  (Obviously referencing campus rapes here for the most part.)

 

--I don't believe the media is the appropriate venue for vetting rape allegations, although the reality is that high profile/dramatic cases will make the news.

 

--Those reporting sexual assaults should be treated respectfully and be treated the same as other alleged victims of crimes.  Investigations should be thorough and fact based.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

I also added that not all false accusations are reported.

 

The rape/assault stats are based on confidential surveys with the intention of including people who did not report the incident as well as those who reported it and didn't get a conviction.  As far as I know, there are no comparable stats for false accusations.  "Has anyone ever falsely accused you of touching a woman in a way she didn't intend to be touched by you at that moment?"  I don't think there is data because society generally does not care about that, especially where the stakes are not very high.

 

Historically I don't think a high # of men's lives were ruined by false allegations.  But the trend is toward making men pay dearly for alleged actions regardless of proof.  I don't think we should encourage that trend.  Innocent men will suffer.  I don't accept the view that past statistics (or lack thereof) suggest the young men of the future are not at risk if we encourage this trend.

 

Can you provide evidence of this trend beyond the anecdotal?

[SKL]

Believe it or not, police officers are human and often change their behavior based on the same stereotypical assumptions we make. Perhaps your mom had an outstanding team of officers, but what is more likely (and I am making an assumption) is that they were meeting with a suburban housewife with children. That probably warranted different behavior than talking to a young college girl on campus.

 

Removing an emotionally distressed 17 yo African American youth from his home in the projects often looks very different from removing an equally emotionally distressed white 17 yo from his 3500 sq ft family home on the river. It shouldn't but it does. 

 

We were not suburban, we lived in a big city and we were poor.  This was almost 40 years ago and my mom was not matronly.

 

Maybe the cops were decent, yeah.  Maybe most cops are decent.  Most cops have mothers, spouses, sisters, daughters.