Justice For Some -- As Long As They're Women
I thought this was a pretty disgusting tweet:
My reply (to her "I never wanna hear again how sexual allegations ruins a man's career"):
Not even when they do ruin a man's career? Allegations are not same as fact. & the famous are not a model for how it works for regular guys. https://t.co/00FWbTEiMq
— Amy Alkon (@amyalkon) July 23, 2017
And a thought about what justice is:
If you are for justice, that means justice for all - not just justice for people of your same sex, same beliefs, etc, & "justice" for others https://t.co/CCB3vA767Q
— Amy Alkon (@amyalkon) July 23, 2017
Along the lines of Lerner's comment, there's Zerlina Maxwell's thinking.
Ashe Schow writes at The Wash Ex that activists like Zerlina Maxwell contend that being falsely accused has only a minor impact on a person's life.
Meanwhile, Maxwell thinks being "suspended" from one's job is "minor." (I'm guessing she'd see things differently if she were suspended -- and on a mere accusation.)
Of course, an accused person is likely to be fired from their job and suffer all sorts of mental health and practical consequences -- including doing jail time, and possibly prison time, racking up legal fees (if they can even afford a lawyer), and losing friends and possibly even custody of children.
Schow offers a living example that Maxwell is way wrong on this "minor" business:
Even relatively quick investigations that eventually clear an accused person can have devastating consequences.In August I presented the story of Kevin Parisi, who was accused of nonconsensual sex with a fellow student at Drew University. As soon as he was accused, Parisi was banned from his dorm and other places on campus. The accusation compounded Parisi's pre-existing medical conditions (anxiety and digestive) and the stress interfered with his studies. By the time he was found not guilty -- three months after being accused -- he was on academic probation.
Even after he was acquitted, Parisi said he couldn't return to Drew. He didn't know how he would finish his education.
"What happened at that school could happen at another school," Parisi said. "I don't see any way that this -- I don't see how these -- the laws at hand don't protect me from this happening again."
Parisi now suffers frequent debilitating panic attacks.
"Minor"! Right?
Back to Maxwell, she writes this at the WaPo link above:
The cost of disbelieving women, on the other hand, is far steeper. It signals that that women don't matter and that they are disposable...
It isn't that we should "disbelieve" women; it's that we need to require evidence before we tear apart the life of someone they're accusing.
Sometimes, this will mean that someone guilty goes free. What's worse? That someone innocent is convicted and ruined.
Any woman who feels otherwise should put herself in the accused's shoes. Say there's a murderer out there, and somebody points the finger at you. Let's be clear: You haven't done it.
However, shouldn't we just believe the person who accuses you, because otherwise, well, "it signals that murder victims don't matter and that they are disposable..."?
Sounds like the public opinion of the "adult" candidate in our last election: women who report sexual assault should always be believed. Hmm?
Radwaste at July 23, 2017 4:01 AM
Sounds like the public opinion of the "adult" candidate in our last election
Conveniently, the "adult" made an exception for women who accused her "husband".
dee nile at July 23, 2017 4:30 AM
Zerlina Maxwell is generally fucked in the head anyway. She refuses to assume responsibility for even her own safety.
Patrick at July 23, 2017 5:34 AM
The only solution is apply their own standards. If they believe an accusation is all that is necessary to destroy lives, then they will need to face an accusation in order to truly understand the problem.
Presenting the matter as a thought experiment is insufficient as merely entertaining such a ludicrous position already demonstrates that thinking isn't their strong suit.
Steven J Williamson at July 23, 2017 6:25 AM
Forget his "career" - how about his life?
I guess she never heard of guys who after being falsely accused lose their jobs, family, friends, and get so despondent all because of a liar that they commit suicide?
No sympathy for those guys who did nothing wrong?
Wow, would she also consider them "disposable" for the sake of letting women know that women are not disposable?
charles at July 23, 2017 7:14 AM
The entire foundational basis of our criminal justice system is "innocent until proven guilty." Proven guilty.
The "innocent until proven guilty" basis dates back to the Roman Empire, where Emperor Justinian held that "Ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat" or "Proof lies on him who asserts, not on him who denies". Logically, him who denies is not going to have proof, but him who asserts should be able to gather some evidence to prove an allegation.
In Islamic law, the fourth caliph, Ali, one of the "rightly guided," advised the faithful to "avert the prescribed punishment by rejecting doubtful evidence."
The "innocent until proven guilty" basis is not just an American standard. It has been adopted by many countries and is even included in the UN Declaration of Human Rights, "Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defense."
The evidential burden of proof in the United States (and other countries) is "beyond a reasonable doubt." That means just because you don't like someone, you cannot accuse them of a crime and have the government put them in jail without first proving that they did it.
The reasonable doubt standard came about because jurors in Merrye Olde England worried about their immortal souls if they wrongly convicted a defendant. So, a reasonable doubt standard was devised to enable the jurors to convict someone without imperiling their immortal souls. The standard was carried over to the colonies and into American (and Canadian) jurisprudence.
Conan the Grammarian at July 23, 2017 8:08 AM
No one is "disbelieving" women or signaling that they are "disposable" by not punishing the accused immediately.
And what is the cost of a system that punishes the accused immediately without a trial; especially if the accused is of a non-protected (out-of-favor) political group?
How long until that system turns neighbor against neighbor? Just call the secret police and accuse the neighbor or coworker you don't like.
Conan the Grammarian at July 23, 2017 8:32 AM
I read a blog comment from someone who spent some time in Nigeria I believe. On several occasions he saw someone yelling that they had been robbed and the crowd in the market caught the alleged thief and immediately beat them, sometimes to death. Is this what Maxwell has in mind? Because how do we know that the person crying thief was really robbed or that the crowd grabbed the right person? That was the whole basis for the Salem witch trials--simply accusations, because of course there is no actual witchcraft. Most accusations were by women against other women, in some cases where property was at stake. We should always believe the victim?
cc at July 23, 2017 1:22 PM
These are people of the opinion that it is better to punish 99 innocents than to let 1 guilty to go free.
And even there, they're not really punishing the guilty party property. No jail, no sex offender status, no nothing. Just let that one go on to victimize more women. Somewhere NOT here.
Sounds swell.
I R A Darth Aggie at July 23, 2017 1:43 PM
And even there, they're not really punishing the guilty party property. No jail, no sex offender status, no nothing.
I'm sure if the "adult" had won last fall the kampus kangaroo kourt model would eventually have been adopted for "real" rape trials.
dee nile at July 23, 2017 2:36 PM
With prison populations at 93% male, no woman has a real fear of being sent there. With anti-male biases in every stage of the criminal/judicial process, it wouldn't surprise me if your odds of being an innocent man in prison are better than a guilty woman. All it would take is 9% of the men to actually be innnocent.
Joe j at July 23, 2017 3:06 PM
The kangaroo kourt aspects of this, and things like affirmative consent are independent of Felonia Von Pantsuit's political aspirations.
Having her in a position of power to ease adaptation of these ideas would have been helpful, but they will plod forward. Heroically.
I R A Darth Aggie at July 23, 2017 3:10 PM
they will plod forward. Heroically.
Of course you are right. At best we've delayed adoption of the Single Investigator Model with no attorneys and appeals only for accusers in criminal rape trials by a year or two.
dee nile at July 23, 2017 4:57 PM
This is an incredibly odd attitude for a WOMAN to actually have.
How many women have had their reputations shredded by some rather nasty gossip shared by a bitter man or woman? Have seen a girl try living down things for YEARS?
THIS WOMAN shows a really grievous lack of self awareness, empathy, far sightedness, fairness and just common sense.
But THIS woman, while singular and not 'ALL' women at all, has a very LOUD and publicized voice.
So what message should men take that this voice is given so much publicity by the media?
FIDO at July 23, 2017 6:57 PM
"And what is the cost of a system that punishes the accused immediately without a trial; especially if the accused is of a non-protected (out-of-favor) political group?"
So yeah. Not so very long ago, in the region where I live, a black man could be lynched on an accusation of rape from a white woman. Do we really want to go back to that?
Cousin Dave at July 24, 2017 6:54 AM
Cousin Dave,
It's a great system...as long as you are on top.
Morally, legally, fairly, it sucks.
This is Feminism as revenge porn
FIDO at July 24, 2017 7:47 AM
Leave a comment