dav_man

joined 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

That’s absurd.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

This is a brilliant response. I definitely understand the point. But my point isn't about protecting men. It's the fact that you are automatically guilty by extension if you disappear from sight the second an allegation comes in.

I appeciate it looks my point is being black and white: rape or malicious accusation. But I definitely accept there is a middle ground whereby someone may not know if they have been assaulted or not, and should be encouraged to report something, but again, in my mind, if we are to be widening the debate around assault and encouraging people to (correctly) come forward even if not sure, this strengthens the need to allow the law to handle it, not the public kangaroo court of social justice. The second someone is taken out of the limelight for this they are guilty, irrespective of the legal side of it. People stand to lose a lot when completely innocent.

I know what you mean in teams of the statistics and don't refute the facts at all and agree with regarding the point about it being more likely that a woman isn't lying than is, but for me, that's still not grounds to essentially make anyone alleged against guilty by extension. It's just not OK.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago (3 children)

OK, so when you get investigated for something, that you are then not guilty for, do you get all of the losses back? Reputational damage back? You have to draw the line somewhere and I think the law is a sensible place. If you are sidelined you are by extension assumed guilty and that is extraordinarily damaging. It's not right for those who are not guilty.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago (10 children)

I mean we can’t have it both ways. Footballers can be absolute wankers and treat people badly. 100%. But they are also easy targets. Do we want to live in a world whereby at best your career is halted and worst destroyed by unproven allegations?

I know there are blurred lines. The Greenwood situation for example. Whereby you have some pretty damning things that are made public, and then it’s a bit of a moral/PR conundrum.

For me though, innocent until proven guilty. Or we decent into chaos.