[ SECRET POST #3007 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #3007 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.


__________________________________________________



11.


__________________________________________________



12.


__________________________________________________



13.


__________________________________________________



14.


__________________________________________________



15.


__________________________________________________



16.


__________________________________________________



17.


__________________________________________________



18.


__________________________________________________



19.


__________________________________________________



20.
[Amanda Palmer]


__________________________________________________



21.


__________________________________________________



22.












Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 05 pages, 118 secrets from Secret Submission Post #430.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[sapphireblack]

No one is disagreeing with innocent until proven guilty.

Fact is that with anonymity for accused rapists, huge numbers of sex crimes would never be prosecuted - and the prosecution (let alone conviction) rates are shamefully low as it is.

But if you don't have a problem with that, then it's obviously no reason for you to think less of Fry.

[(Anonymous)]

Yes, they're low and more needs to be done.

However, I do think that are other ways that the rates could be improved without risking a witch hunt for a possibly innocent person.

For one, giving police more training in the handling of these cases (since their treatment of victims is often spectacularly awful), making rape kits free, etc. would do a lot to help that along.

I don't think it's a one or the other scenario.

[sapphireblack]

I find fears of witch hunts largely spurious. Being prosecuted (and acquitted) of rape hasn't done any long term harm to Craig Charles' career, for instance.

Context of Fry's comments was that various "historic" sex offenses have recently been prosecuted in UK, by people who were protected by their fame, and no one believing victims (Rolf Harris, etc). If the fact that others had reported them hadn't been made public, the cases would have collapsed, because it's only the evidence of multiple victims which overcomes the problem of his word vs. hers.

Also given that Jimmy Savile got away with a staggering 300 sex attacks, against the most vulnerable people in society, Fry's comments were extremely ill-timed.

[(Anonymous)]

The problem with sex-based crimes, though, is that the mere accusation can ruin someone's life. And while I agree that the rich and powerful too often avoid repercussions, the less powerful and oppressed can be hit really hard. There was a young black athlete recently exonerated of a false rape accusation. It ruined his life.

But, yes, I agree that Fry's remarks are spectacularly ill-timed.

But I think the issue here is less about anonymity than it is about the powerful using their connections/influence to protect themselves.

[sapphireblack]

False accusation rates are extremely low, especially compared with rates of reports which don't even get referred to prosecution. Fair point about it affecting the less powerful and oppressed more than the famous. I believe Fry was specifically defending a friend of his, rather than making a more social-justice kind of point.

In Savile's case I certainly agree it was about him using his connections and influence. The number of people who knew what was happening but didn't say anything (and those who tried but were quashed by the higher-ups) is truly horrifying.

[(Anonymous)]

Your first sentence gives away the problem here: the low-rates statistics are based on accusations that are actually made to the police, but just as many rapes are never reported to police, the (multiple) false accusations I've seen weren't either. You don't need to go to the cops to ruin someone's life, or get sympathy and attention, or any of the other reasons that really fucked-up people will accuse someone.

[sapphireblack]

The "sympathy and attention" received by victims of CONVICTED rapists in the UK includes posting their name and address online and forcing them to change their identity and move five times (see: Ched Evans).

And if the false accusations you're talking about weren't reported to the police, they're not remotely relevant to Fry's comments.

[(Anonymous)]

People like you are the reason I never came forward after my own rape. He was well-liked, and I immediately would have been painted as a false accuser. Immediately. Even if someone believed me, they never would have spoken out against him because it would "ruin his life."

Goddamnit. Fuck this, fuck you. False accusations are infinitesimal.

[(Anonymous)]

Factually, no they are not. Even going by the 3% statistic, that's many thousands of false accusations a year. (Because, appallingly, there's many times that many rapes.)

I'm so sorry you didn't feel safe coming forward, but that doesn't change math.

[(Anonymous)]

da

Which also doesn't change that most rape victims are met with disbelief, blaming, or both. So well done you for helping perpetuate the idea that people do it for "attention."

[(Anonymous)]

People will mutilate themselves and poison their own kids for attention. Let's not act like making up something about someone you dislike is somehow out of the range of possibility.

[(Anonymous)]

It's not out of the range of possibility. the point is that disbelieving rape victims is more damaging than the alternative. Of course false accusations are bad, but when you weigh the number of false accusations against the number of rapes that go unreported, clearly one of those things is far, far greater in number, and thus for the greatest reduction in harm it's best to take each accusation very seriously.

[(Anonymous)]

What is your damage? Of course that happens, it even has a name: Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy. But people understand that it is the work of an extremely small sliver of people. Imagine if because of those people, people assumed that every single time a child got sick, the parent was lying and they've actually harmed their child. Imagine taking a sick child to a doctor and the doctor accusing you of poisoning them, then when no proof is found of it, all they do is wave it off by saying "well, you know, the things people do for attention." That's what rape victims deal with because of the extremely small number of false accusers.

[(Anonymous)]

Way to miss the entire point. It's because of that, yes, statistically and ~factually infinitesimal number of false accusations that the other 97% is treated like they're liars or, in your own words, doing it "for sympathy or attention."

Please don't say you're "sorry," I don't want to hear that from someone like you. It's fucking garbage.

[(Anonymous)]

Do you mind hearing that the word "infinitesimal" doesn't mean what you apparently think it does?

[(Anonymous)]

If this is what I think it refers to, I think his comments were more along the lines of "we shouldn't falsely accuse people of rape because false accusations can harm them for life", refering to a friend of his who'd been accused and was being investigated as part of Operation Yewtree and the Jimmy Saville scandal.

And while, yes, false accusations are terrible and can affect the falsely accused for the rest of their life, the false accusations are in the minority and women are far less likely to be believed when they *do* speak out about rape and sexual abuse and harrassment, or be mocked, or be told they wanted it or deserved it, and the women who have been abused, harrassed and raped are also affected for life, and then have to have the burden of not being believed or mocked for the rest of their lives as well.

And the first response to any of your friends being accused of rape or sexual harassment should never be "he's being falsely accused! think of his future!!!!" Once the investigation has been conducted and he's been cleared, sure, make a comment about how awful it is that Jimmy Saville's case has resulted in false accusations being thrown about, but this case has also brought out a lot of actual historical cases (Rolf Harris for example). I think the numbers that were thrown around for Saville were in the 200s. That's a lot of women who weren't listened to, or felt they couldn't come out at the time. And then there's Bing Crosby, who had, what, 30 women speak out against him and people were still dismissing their claims?

[sapphireblack]

All of that.

Plus it bugs me somewhat that as a mental health advocate, Fry didn't stop to consider how many people (especially but not only women) with severe mental illness have been victims of sexual violence - which also results in crimes against them having a much lower prosecution rate (40% less likely to be referred to CPS). This ties in with Saville, as he specifically preyed on women in high security psychiatric hospital (who are overwhelmingly victims of abuse, and never going to be believed). Not that Fry was commenting on Saville specifically, but it's all linked.

I don't think Fry is intentionally, maliciously sexist. He's just oblivious to many aspects of life which affect other people. Which is exactly what privilege is, so the OP's feelings are entirely understandable to me.

[elephantinegrace]

Very well put. -applauds-

[(Anonymous)]

I don't think Fry is intentionally, maliciously sexist. He's just oblivious to many aspects of life which affect other people. Which is exactly what privilege is, so the OP's feelings are entirely understandable to me.

Exactly! (new anon, just chiming in)

[(Anonymous)]

IA with all of this. And for a man lauded for his intelligence, it's a pity he's not more willing to examine his privilege. Then again he's nowhere near as bad as Richard Dawkins!

[(Anonymous)]

"Bing Crosby"...Did you mean Bill Cosby?

Not that Bing Crosby wasn't an unpleasant guy behind the scenes, he did physically and emotionally abuse his children after all but Cosby's the one with the rape charges.

[(Anonymous)]

Yes, I did. I knew it didn't sound right in my head, but Google seemed to agree with me. Oops