Butthurt white guys, an Asian virgin and an angry lesbian walk into a bar...

Himeo_sl said:

You live in a country - maybe the ONLY country - in the world where more men are raped every year than women. This is never discussed by the media because it happens in prison and who gives a fuck about prisoners?

According to the FBI 8% of rape accusations are "unfounded". In 2005 the British Home Office Study found a similar 8% rate for what they called "False" allegations. That's statistically significant. Regardless of whether or not a claim is out and out false, over half of rape allegations result in no conviction due to insufficient evidence.

Also, this is hilarious to me:

Click to expand...

Lithose_sl said:

Let me break it down for you Mist, so you can drop the act that everyone is misunderstanding you and we are all sociopaths or sociopath apologists. You will propose some thought experiment like "a sex contract". People talk about all the problems that entails; and, even ignoring those for a moment, note that even now there are cases where people have texts proving the sex was consensual and it doesn't matter, many feminist organizations still attribute this to victim blaming. These same organizations are the ones pushing this whole "predatory theory of college rape"--which is precisely what you seem to subscribe to. Which was put forth by a PsychologistDavid Lisak, if I'm not mistaken. The problem is? The studies we have of colleges using preponderance investigations, which have a far lower standard of proof, still show a dismissal of a majority of cases. (One study said 45% of all rape cases are just not pursued, and an additional 7% of them OUTRIGHT fraudulent, like provably so. Over a ten year period, I'll try to dig up the link.)

This illustrates that a HUGE amount rape accusations, which you say are typically always accurate due to how predators work and the "shame" in reporting? Are not accurate at all. This, for me, really calls into question the theory that 95% of rape charges (Or 98% as most feminists peg it, which I don't even know where they source that one from); are completely accurate, and all the charges were due to predation of violent sociopaths. It seems like quite a few accusations might be due tootherforces, and might, in fact, NOT involve sociopaths, but rather forces such emotional trauma from break ups, and people being assholes exacerbating that trauma (Which makes them assholes, and you are right on that count, women have a right to tell everyone they are--but it does NOT make them rapists. But this presents a huge problem if we change the standard of innocence, and you ARE asking for that to change.)

But when we try to explore how these things can hurt Good Guy Greg (Which also would explain why the base assumption of innocence/reasonable doubt is changing)? You revert back to the predation theory (That Greg does not exist. IE Your base belief is already established, making this entire argument suggestive by nature because itassumes for fact what is actually a variable), and how by not giving women more power, we are protecting sociopaths.The "women more power" is the attack on reasonable doubt/presumption of innocence, by the way, Mist. Whether it's byincreasing bureaucracythrough sex contracts so that it becomes quite easy for any woman to find an error in the "red tape" of sex (And thus the onus of proof defaults to the man, because your system de facto assumeshe is always the perpetratorand must maintain/deal with the red tape. ) OR bylowering the standard of proofso victims are more readily believed.They are BOTH lowering protections granted by the assumption of innocence.They are both giving the assumption of being victimized, and protections of that assumption to women. (But if you don't believe this Mist. Assume a woman AND man cry rape at the same time, neither has sex contracts. Who is guilty? Yeah, don't even bullshit me; it's the man. And by there we see the assumption of guilt.)

You don't see that said assumption would make things unequal because your bias automatically views things as naturally unequal--women are victims, men are predators and the state needs to suspect men to balance that out (IE just like that one feminist tard who said men NEED to be scared in order to end rape). Your thought experiments? Defaults men into the position of guiltyunless they have PROOF they are innocent. Rather than the current system, where an ACCUSATION is made and BOTH parties are considered innocent while a third party investigates wrong doing. How you do not see this? Is beyond me. But seriously? Accusing people of being rape apologists because they can grasp this VERY simple concept, and then acting depressed because evewyone is so mean and ebil! Is bullshit. Grow up.

Click to expand...