#MeToo and why its become useless

[Mormolyce]

That is so much bullshit. It's closer to 60%.

That article is muddling the terms though:

Persistent claims that only six per cent of rapes end in conviction

...

Once a rape case reaches the courts, almost 60 per cent of defendants are convicted – a rate higher than some other violent attacks.

Those are not incompatible statements. It's actually more misleading to state the conviction rate than to state the percent of actual rapes that end with a convicted offender, considering how many drop off before they enter court.

P.S. Males are not the majority of rape victims.

[Deleted]

Mad ramblings.

Look boy, if you want innocent people punished then you should make a club and advocate for it. Meanwhile in the real world we need evidence to support claims of wrongdoing, that is the very basis of our society. Any and all change to our justice system in that regard is simply not happening for obvious reasons.

[Deleted]

Look boy, if you want innocent people punished then you should make a club and advocate for it. Meanwhile in the real world we need evidence to support claims of wrongdoing, that is the very basis of our society. Any and all change to our justice system in that regard is simply not happening for obvious reasons.

No reason argueing with him. As another poster says he is gonna start out making a claim with no arguments to back it up. Then he attacks people's persona and tries to make them look like evil persons :P

As soon as you make arguments back at him he either stops responding or just ignores it.

- - - Updated - - -

P.S. Males are not the majority of rape victims.

Yeah that seems far fetched to me aswell.

I could definitely see tham having a higher % of not coming forward with it tho

[Polyxo]

Your average hashtag like what?

#LegDay?

Yeah..... but i mean,,,

Do not downplay the goodness of #Legday

#OhMyQuadBecky

[Deleted]

That is so much bullshit. It's closer to 60%.

The reason people don't report rape is because of shame. For women, they get shamed predominately by other women, and -- not surprisingly -- women are the majority shamers of male victims as well. Let me put that more succinctly for you: The women rapes don't get reported as often as they should is because of women. The fact that males are the majority of rape victims as well, but make up the vast minority of reported rapes, says a ton, too.

Another problem adds to that, until 2015, USA law defined rape as forceful or coercive penetration of the body of the victim by foreign object or bodypart. So any statistics collected before that is moot. (and with the lag between data collecting and research, there is virtually no data using the new definition).

In a nutshell, until 2015, woman-to-man rape was not classified as rape in most cases. Data is in a very swampy place right now regarding sexual assault, harassement and rape because a lot of activism forces are challenging the definitions in both directions, to both expand and restrict definitions, which does not translate well in the public dialogue.

This situation produces :
"2 teenagers drink alcohol and have sex, the girl wakes up and regrets the event." - This is classified in statistics as : Man raped woman. Because technically the rape statute and classification fits the description, a man had penetrative sex with a woman while she was unable to consent because of heavy intoxication.

and

"A woman threatens a man with a knife, takes his penis and forces herself on him." - This was until 2015 not classified as rape because she didnt penetrate the man's body. If a prosecutor was to try to charge her with rape it would have been dismissed and only a charge of sexual assault could have been examined as the statute about rape did not cover "forceful envelopment".

The whole conversation about #metoo is messed up, it is a complicated topic because sexuality and romantic interactions are not simple. Feminists sadly have decided to cast the movie before the scripted was finished, with men as a the villain and women as the fragile damsel.

The scientific litterature is quite clear, there are deep evolutionnary reasons why women use their sexual value to buy ressources (like carreer advancement in the case of hollywood) or reputation shredding to shame males into disposable-provider role, and why males who climb in hierarchies use their status to obtain sexual favors. Those are (were?) both advantageous reproductive strategies for the respective genders.

This is probably going to end badly. Our genetic legacy and inherited behaviours are now in severe opposition to our interest, for both males and females.
Quick examples would be

- For the women, make-up and cosmetics enhance youth characteristics, they are attractive to males because they send the signal of prime age for reproduction. In a world where women want to be recognized for their skills and personnality, sending the signal "I am young" also sends the signal "I am inexperienced", which instantly devalues the very thing that women want to be recognized for in the workplace for example - Competence.

- For men, the reproductive cost of a sub-par female partner in our ancestors were minimal to non existent, a viable strategy for our male ancestors was to "copy their genes" in as much females as possible, therefore increasing the presence of their genes in the population. While female have a "cap" in terms of chances viable offspring because they carry the heavy burden of lactation and pregnancy, males can move on and try again as much time as he finds willing females. This imbalance in the cost of reproduction and male desertion was "addressed" by the pair-bonding mechanism of most cultures, like mariage, which seeked to secure the providing role of the male through the binding of males to the females they have intimacy with. Today, the risks of pregnancy have been virtually neutralized while the ressources needed for the development of the child are assigned to the male (Child support, higher tax participation, higher risk in carreer etc). So the instinct of the males today to use their status to reach multiple partners is in radical opposition to his economic interest.


I wish we stopped being ideological, the proper way for metoo to mutate productively is to understand the mechanisms responsible for these behaviours and produce intelligent rational laws and societal attitudes to address the actual dynamic of the situation, not look for who to blame. Last time humanity wanted to "fix mankind" by seeking who to blame, 6 million jews died. Godwin achievement completed !

[spanishninja]

Anything that encourages people to report sexual assault or rape to the police is a good thing as far as I am concerned. Some (not all however) of the backlash against MeToo seems more concerned with the outcome for the perpetrator than the victim. It comes pretty close to victim blaming at times.

your use of the term "victim" in this situation implies that you assumed the accused was guilty already, otherwise you would have used the term "accuser". an accuser is not actually a victim until there is proof that a crime has been committed.

[Kraenen]

Started out as a noble cause, but turned into "Cashier told me to have a good day. Literally raped. #MeToo". Feminists ruined a movement for victims of sexuals assault.

Do you have evidence someone actually said this?

[Doctor Funkenstein]

Another problem adds to that, until 2015, USA law defined rape as forceful or coercive penetration of the body of the victim by foreign object or bodypart. So any statistics collected before that is moot. (and with the lag between data collecting and research, there is virtually no data using the new definition).

Oh right, I keep forgetting you people decided to change the term to include anything and everything under the sun. "Like, six days after I fucked him I decided I didn't want to. RAPE!!!!"

I just can't figure out WHY those types of cases don't have a high conviction rate. It's a real fucking mystery.

[Machismo]

Speaking up about something and defamation isnt the same thing. If you call out sa specific person and say they raped you without going to court or providing evidence thats defamation.

People who dont get this keep saying "nurr people have a right to speak up, and people have free speech". Yes you do. But when you are accusing someone of something you also have to provide evidence or take it to court where you then have to provide evidence.

I wish people like you would read some of the posts through before writing this so its not nessecary to respond to the exact same thing every 2-3 pages

- - - Updated - - -



This is not true. What you are speaking about is called defamation.

No, you don't have to do those things. Hell, talk radio gets away without doing it. The entire birther movement was based on it. Let me know when you want to arrest all the birthers.

[Huulo]

Speaking up about something and defamation isnt the same thing. If you call out sa specific person and say they raped you without going to court or providing evidence thats defamation.

People who dont get this keep saying "nurr people have a right to speak up, and people have free speech". Yes you do. But when you are accusing someone of something you also have to provide evidence or take it to court where you then have to provide evidence.

You're wrong on the law. Speaking about a personal experience generally is the evidence. If you're not taking someone to court, then you don't need to prove your account true beyond reasonable doubt. And btw, if this was true, then we would still have no knowledge of the sexual assaults committed by Kevin Spacey, Harvey Weinstein, or George Takei.

What you're thinking of, defamation, is if someone intentionally spreads falsehoods that cause you material damage, and then you take them to court and prove it. This is very different from what I'm talking about.

[Deleted]

What the fuck!?

[Raelbo]

Look boy, if you want innocent people punished then you should make a club and advocate for it.

Yup, once again, you childishly take what I have written and replace it with "mad ramblings". You are, simply put, ridiculous.

I never advocated for what you're saying I am advocating. This entire debate you've continuously distorted, twisted and grossly misrepresented what I have been saying so that you tell me I am wrong. Which simply demonstrates that you lack a counter my actual argument.

So stop being dishonest in your debating style, sod off with the string of strawmen and work on your reading comprehension.

[Deleted]

Yup, once again, you childishly take what I have written and replace it with "mad ramblings". You are, simply put, ridiculous.

I never advocated for what you're saying I am advocating. This entire debate you've continuously distorted, twisted and grossly misrepresented what I have been saying so that you tell me I am wrong. Which simply demonstrates that you lack a counter my actual argument.

So stop being dishonest in your debating style, sod off with the string of strawmen and work on your reading comprehension.

But they are mad ramblings, this is a thread about why #metoo is shit, then you try to make a point by presenting some obviously flawed data set.

As long as you keep advocating for #metoo then all you are doing is trying to make something that is wrong "better" (its not better) by doing wrong to other people. You are advocating exactly what i say i you are, you are just not smart enough to understand what you are actually saying.

[Raelbo]

But they are mad ramblings

Why? Because you said so? Oh sod off. You're the one with the "mad ramblings". Your argument is totally consistent with the views of a typical sociopath (no I am not calling you a sociopath, it's a criticism of your argument. For all I know this is all just an act by you). Just because you can't or won't seem to be able to understand my arguments (due to either a genuine or feigned lack of capacity for empathy on your part) doesn't make me the mad one

this is a thread about why #metoo is shit, then you try to make a point by presenting some obviously flawed data set.

Are you trying to say that one can't debate unless one agrees with the proposition? The whole point of a debate is to discuss opposing views. So arguing both the pros and cons of #MeToo in the context of the status (what I am doing) is totally on point.

As long as you keep advocating for #metoo then all you are doing is trying to make something that is wrong "better" (its not better) by doing wrong to other people. You are advocating exactly what i say i you are, you are just not smart enough to understand what you are actually saying.

As long as you keep advocating for a broken system of justice, then all you're doing is trying to perpetuate injustice by trying to keep the status quo.

Also, you're still being utterly dishonest in your insistence of grossly distorting my argument. I am not advocating trying to fix a problem by doing wrong to other people.

Firstly, just because someone is doxxed without evidence does not mean they are wronged. It is only wrong if the person being doxxed is actually innocent. A lack of evidence is not proof of innocence.

Secondly I have, on multiple ocassions acknoweldged the harm that is being done by #MeToo. My stance has never been that such is acceptable. It is that it is probably the lesser evil. Just because it is not an ideal solution to a problem, doesn't preclude the possibility that it is better than the status quo. Sorry, but the status quo is not ok, and your insistence that it is demonstrates an absolute lack of empathy for those who experience the harm.


What is actually quite amusing about this whole thing is how the first thing a genuinely guilty person who has been named on Twitter will do is whine about how wrong it is to slander someone on social media. They take extreme umbrage with the fact that public accusations have the potential to cause massive reputational harm while being very hard to defend against. Oh, it's so unfair on the "victims" who are named and shamed. They can't do anything, because proving slander means proving that was said is false, which is almost impossible in a he-said/she-said scenario.

And yet, what is the biggest reason why 99.4% of rapes are never successfully prosecuted? Yup, because the victim has to prove a lack of consent in a he-said/she-said scenario.

It's funny how you'll defend the requirement of proof in the case of a rape accusation but you're quite happy to forego that requirement when you accuse someone of slander. I mean your whole "witch hunt" tirade is premised on the unproven assertion that pretty much everything presented on #MeToo is slander

Why is it that you're happy to defend 99.4% of actual rapists on the premise of "innocent until proven guilty", and yet you'll happily shit all over that principle when it comes to the far less egregious offence of slander?

you're just not smart enough to understand what you are actually saying.

Yet more evidence of your own delusions of grandeur.

[Deleted]

More mad ramblings.

Ooh look more ramblings Just make a club for people who want to make sure that people get convicted without any form of evidence. The only thing you have been doing is trying to excuse bad behavior because of other bad behavior, and that my boy is called being stupid.

[tyrlaan]

Your argument is totally consistent with the views of a typical sociopath (no I am not calling you a sociopath, it's a criticism of your argument. For all I know this is all just an act by you).

I always wonder this kind of thing - how much of what someone writes is based on their actual world views vs. an act or mask they put on for the internet to sound, well, typically, edgy.

Also, you are wasting your time with MehMeH because he refuses to acknowledge that women are not treated the same as men (or maybe he actually thinks men are being oppressed?), so its not like you'll get anywhere with him on anything.

[Raelbo]

I always wonder this kind of thing - how much of what someone writes is based on their actual world views vs. an act or mask they put on for the internet to sound, well, typically, edgy.

An interesting thing about sociopaths in the real world is that they expend a significant amount of effort putting on a mask to hide their true nature. On a forum like this where they are anonymous, they have no need of a mask.

Also, you are wasting your time with MehMeH because he refuses to acknowledge that women are not treated the same as men (or maybe he actually thinks men are being oppressed?), so its not like you'll get anywhere with him on anything.

I still find it engaging to outthink him. When he resorts to quoting me as saying "more mindless drivel" or similar, I know I have him beaten. It's always fun to watch how he'll desperately try to evade, deflect, misdirect, strawman, or twist what is said in order to avoid engaging on the actual points made in the debate. If he is a sociopath he's probably seething with the only emotion he knows: rage.

PS: It's also fun pointing out his obvious lack of EQ.

[Deleted]

Oh lol, yea im such a baddy. Maybe you just want to, you know, not convict people without evidence. All you two have been doing is trying to whitewash one bad behavior because other bad things happen too.

And writing walls of text isn't "out thinking" someone..

[cparle87]

Not sure why I'm bothering to reply to one of the dumbest SJWs on mmo-c, but hey.

Not sure if you really don't grasp his point, or just pretending, but he's not pissed that people are judging. Judge away, everyone does, to some extent. He's pissed that in the current climate, all it takes to ruin a man's ENTIRE FUCKING LIFE, is "X Amadeus X raped me. #metoo". And that's it. You're done, especially if you're famous. No proof, no trial, nothing, just a witchhunt. Set him on fire, see if he burns.

Look at Gary Oldman for example. He was granted custody of his kids, his wife admitted to making shit up to destroy him, and yet yesterday THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE lost their shit when "KNOWN WIFE ABUSER" won an oscar. Luckily SOME people still bother to read past the headlines, and actually know the truth, but still vast majority of society is so fucking brainwashed by the media, that they will believe ANYTHING at this point. Even when some random, completely unknown person accuses someone of rape that "happened" 30 fucking years ago. Right.

Another great example lately was Azis Ansari. Chicks are so dumb nowadays, that despite the fact that she went home with him, got naked, both performed and received oral, all of the above voluntarily, later on she still decides she's a VICTIM and #metoo. And guy who did nothing "wrong" (altough, admittedly, he did behave like a moron) is still all over the internet in the company of Weinsteins of the world. You honestly want to tell me you see nothing wrong with it?

Rape used to mean forced sexual intercourse. Nowadays, it means whatever the chick thinks it means. Consensual sex, and regret the next day? Rape. Fucking some random dude in the club, afraid the boyfriend will find out? Rape. Getting it on with a below-average dude, afraid of being judged by friends? Rape. Getting drunk, blowing a guy, sobering up and regretting it? Rape. Hell, nowadays even straight up rejecting some chick may be rape in her eyes, since with their inflated egos they handle rejection REALLY badly...

Gotta agree, sadly, with everything you've put. I remember a character from the anime One Piece who would kick any man who spoke to her, claiming he'd committed sexual harassment. Used to be funny watching the guys with big anime bruises all over their faces. Now it's not, cause I know there's actual women like that and frighteningly they have that kind of power now.

- - - Updated - - -

A lack of evidence is not proof of innocence.

In a civilized nation with a court system, actually yes it is.

[Speaknoevil]

Gotta agree, sadly, with everything you've put. I remember a character from the anime One Piece who would kick any man who spoke to her, claiming he'd committed sexual harassment. Used to be funny watching the guys with big anime bruises all over their faces. Now it's not, cause I know there's actual women like that and frighteningly they have that kind of power now.

- - - Updated - - -



In a civilized nation with a court system, actually yes it is.

You people are fucking retarded.

Just because you can't prove something happened doesn't mean it didn't happen. Or are unsolved murders not actually murders at all?

I know someone who was raped at knifepoint by a random guy but there's not much else to go on other than physical description, I guess because she doesn't know who it was and they never found him, no rape occurred.