Sunday, September 30, 2007

What Anonymous Men Don't Say Tells Us Everything

Yet another anonymous submits an unintentionally revealing comment.

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Help Document The Silence":

Me, personally, I DO NOT say that rapists should not be convicted. I say that men FALSELY ACCUSED of rape should not be convicted and that women such as [redacted] who falsely accuse men of rape should be treated as liars and sociopaths, not victims.

The wording of this comment is responding to my writing: "We need to be as vocal as those who say most rapists shouldn't be convicted." about efforts to raise awareness of sexual violence against women of color. He obviously takes this statement and this effort as a personal affront and decides he must bring a specific case to the forefront.

He doesn't need a conviction or due process to pass out his preferred sentence to not only one woman, but to multiple women who reported being raped. The impression he leaves is that he associates women of color who report being raped with liar and sociopath. No due process is needed for them.

Notice that while this anonymous does not say that rapists shouldn't be convicted, he doesn't in fact say that they should be convicted and he shows zero emotion over women of color who are raped and who see their rapists get away with their crime for whatever reason. Same goes for women of color who are falsely accused of making a false police report. In his comment they might as well not exist.

This pattern of focus is something I see repeatedly. To far too many others like him, women of color who were raped, and who can't have their report declared a lie, are little more than the contents of a pathetic disclaimer.

Technorati tags:


Bookmark and Share
posted by Marcella Chester @ 5:20 PM   6 comments links to this post


At September 30, 2007 6:15 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Marcella, while you are soaring in this La La fantasy land you live in, have you considered what happens when an innocent man is wrongly convicted of rape. By the time he is exonerated, if ever, the trail of the real rapist has grown cold. If there is a statute of limitations, it has probably expired. The filth who has actually committed the rape HAS GOTTEN AWAY WITH THE CRIME AND HAS PROBABLY RAPED AGAIN! All because you and people like you will not believe that false convictions for rape do occur. How does this attitude of yours prevent violence against women?

At September 30, 2007 9:44 PM, Blogger Aerik said...

I got an anonymous commenter on my blog last night blaming women for being raped in their sleep if they were at all intoxicated the day before. Sick shit.

A pattern I notice for comments like what you received, men seem to think that just because a man accused of rape was not convicted, it means the woman is a lying liar telling lies. When it comes to rape, suddenly they live in a world where women and their lawyers do not make mistakes outside of getting caught in the one big lie.

At September 30, 2007 11:31 PM, Blogger Marcella Chester said...

Anonymous, if you are the same one I quoted, again you are only bringing up real rape in relation to the impact rape investigations have on men.

Blaming me and those like me (based on a false claim no less) for rapists getting away with rape just makes you look like you want to stop all reports of rape from being fully, competently and ethically investigated.

I'll turn your own question back on you. How does this attitude of yours prevent violence against women? Give me more than the stock answer included in your comment.

At October 01, 2007 2:22 PM, Blogger Marcella Chester said...

Aerik, you are so right that blaming rape victims is sick shit since these people come right out and align themselves with rapists.

I'm no longer shocked by the number of people who confuse a verdict of not guilty with proof that the defendant is not guilty of committing the crime if that crime is undeniable or is otherwise proof that no crime was committed except by the woman who reported being raped.

For anyone who shows that they know the difference between true guilt and a guilty verdict, their confusion about innocence is a willful confusion and therefore inexcusable.

At September 01, 2009 6:58 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Better a thousand rapists go free than to condemn an innocent man.

For those rapists that go to trial and are given a verdict of not guilty; don't be too disappointed. While not enough evidence is available to convict without a resonable doubt; still enough circumstantial evidence will arise to permanently haunt this person for the rest of his life.


At September 01, 2009 7:30 AM, Blogger Marcella Chester said...

Dr. Zinj,

Your comment expresses an absolute lack of concern for the victims of rape including those who don't survive.

The "thousand rapists" comment advocates for sloppiness in our criminal justice system as long as one of the charges is a sex crime. It positions mass injustice as fine as long as the people who suffer from that injustice are not men.

If a thousand rapists go free those harmed are not just past victims but the victims who would have been spared if justice had been done. Some of those victims may be killed, but that is better in your eyes than even the possibility of one innocent man going to jail.

Sloppiness in our criminal justice system benefits nobody including the "one innocent man" who is acquitted among your thousand guilty rapists who went free. His claims of innocence will be drowned out by the thousand lying men who sing the same song.

Do you also say, "Better a thousand murderers go free," with such lack of concern?


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home