Source
r/MensRights•
bufedad

Showers thoughts on Feminist worries about prosecuting false accusations

False Accusation

So, this has been rattling around in my head for awhile.

Whenever you talk about prosecuting false accusers, feminists worry about women being convicted erroneously.

Here's a comparison on the feminist position about false accusations and prosecuting false accusers.

False accusation: It's hard to get a conviction without evidence

Prosecuting False Accusers: We can't, we might wrongly convict a woman without evidence

When it's women, they are worried about them being falsely convicted. When it's men, they don't believe false convictions are possible.

Posted Jul 22, 2019, 3:28 PM UTC

547
Wisemanner•

They are notorious for twisting everything their way.

16
martynhare•

Or, make the standard so high that it has to be a deliberate/malicious lie to receive a prosecution. Feminists and women in general have nothing to worry about here and we have good solid proof of why.

In the UK, we’ve had around 200 false allegation prosecutions for rape over a 10 year period, it’s rarer than the number of instances of men being falsely accused (where there wasn’t any malicious or deliberate intent). Likewise, for false claims of domestic violence, it’s a very small percentage of liars who are prosecuted. The Police won’t prosecute people where there’s a case of mistaken identity, misidentification caused through drugs/drunkenness or where extraordinary circumstances create “false memories”. They even have a policy of not going after vulnerable women who are known to have been recently abused by others even if an accusation may be deliberate, Take a look at CPS guidelines (https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/false-allegations-rape-andor-domestic-abuse-see-guidance-charging-perverting-course#) to see just how much leeway women get on this side of things.

Yes, it’s a double standard. If you’re a man and your drink is spiked and you end up raping someone (without being consciously aware of it), it’s still a crime, but if you’re a woman and you drunkenly accuse someone of raping you falsely, the system really does go out of its way to ensure you’re being deliberate/malicious about it. Similarly, if you don’t have any evidence of the woman hitting you because there was never a violent dispute in the first place, you as a man have to go some to get a prosecution. Yet, a woman can hit herself to fake it and you’re still in deep trouble due to bias.

However, despite the unfairness towards men, it does mean feminists don’t have any excuses here and should be supporting a robust approach like this in all countries. That is, unless they want women to lie about rape/violence to the point where people will always dismiss female victims by default.

10
ZimbaZumba•

If the police do not investigate the possibility of a false accusation, then the CPS Guidelines mean nothing. I would argue they commonly do not investigate.

2
Ody_ssey•

Feminists don't think enough. This law doesn't convict a woman without evidence. It only convicts those accusers who are proven to be lied about their accusation such as lying about their location when on CCTV they were seen somewhere else.

Their next excuse to rule against this bill is that "it prevents real victims coming forward". It only prevents those "victims" who lie about their accusation. Real victims are still investigated according to the protocol.

4
chadwickofwv•

This law doesn't convict a woman without evidence. It only convicts those accusers who are proven to be lied about their accusation such as lying about their location when on CCTV they were seen somewhere else.

That's why she is against it. She explicitly wants to make sure that false accusers don't get charged. Almost certainly because she is a false accuser.

4
Mythandros•

And that is why feminism is not an equality movement, but a hate movement.

4
Mackowatosc•

If women are convicted for something they did not do, id say its equality...

2