A comment popped up on Abyss2Hope by an anonymous person who mischaracterizes what we say and believe. This comment was not written by the blogger, but by some reader. Here is the comment:FRS says he doesn't deny rapes and that rapes don't have to be "violent" but he wrote on Jan. 12:
"There's a blog called the "False Rape Society" that is so upsetting, so backward, that it makes you want to pull your hair out. Every single thing you say about what the rape appologists [sic] think about rape is absolutely true. I was so tired of hearing about "real" rapes (must be violent, must be caught on tape, must have witnesses). It is distressing that people think this way. Thank you for what you do."
My, oh, my, oh, my.
Whoever said that rape must be "violent"? What feminist ass did they pull that lie from? If a woman says "no," or if a man unreasonably believes she consented, it's rape, period. Whoever said rape must be caught on tape? Or must have witnesses?
Time after time we read of police practices where the male is arrested and only later do police bother to fully investigate and discover the falsehood. [...]FRS clearly positions this as a wrongful arrest. So in theory rapes don't have to be violent and don't need witnesses and in theory if a woman says no, it's rape, period. But in practice the theory is nowhere to be found.
In less than 24 hours, we have posted no fewer than three stories where this point is well illustrated.
There was the alleged "victim" (that's how the accuser is described in the police blotter) who supposedly stopped resisting her husband's demands for sex because she was fearful. She had him arrested even though he denied forcing her to have sex. "Authorities booked the suspect on suspicion of spousal battery and spousal rape. Bail was set at $100,000." In "he said/she said" disputes, she wins.
The only basis for this positioning is the arrest despite the husband's denial, but a suspect's denial is normal whether the report is true or false so the presence of a denial is meaningless. Those who commit crimes have a strong motivator to lie. By saying she wins, FRS positions the man being booked as if it were the same as a conviction and makes the provably false claim that the police will always arrest a man accused of rape or domestic abuse by a woman.
A report of a man physically assaulting and then raping his wife is not a "he said/she said" dispute as FRS calls it, those are reports of crimes. FRS says he doesn't deny these crimes but here he refuses to refer to them accurately.
People who deny committing crimes are arrested all the time. This is in no way unusual even in cases where it is the alleged victim's word against the alleged criminal's. I followed the link to the crime report FRS found so troubling and noticed another crime report.
Police arrested a 21-year-old woman suspected of mugging a woman in July and stealing her purse. The victim had been at a friend’s house in the 500 block of Bath Street when the suspect grabbed her purse, ripping her dress strap in the process.If this had been a sexual assault case, I'm sure it too would have been featured by FRS as a wrongful arrest. The fact that the report uses the term victim rather than alleged victim or accuser and it is stated that the suspect grabbed the victim's purse would have been highlighted as an injustice. There is no mention of finding the victim's purse in the suspect's possession so apparently all they have is the victim's testimony.
Another suspect pushed the victim’s friend to the ground, and the two subjects fled north. When the victim’s friend attempted to pursue them, an unidentified man confronted her with a knife and told her to back off.
The victim’s friend, well versed in jiu-jitsu, didn’t flinch and yelled after one of the suspects, whom she apparently recognized. Police obtained a description of the suspect and a possible first name.
On October 19, police set up a photo lineup and the victim identified a 21-year-old known Westside gang member as the suspect who stole her purse. The victim’s friend was uncooperative with the investigation.
On January 5, officers took the suspect into custody when she appeared for a probation appointment; authorities noted she had been convicted of grand theft with a gang enhancement. The 21-year-old denied involvement in the mugging, but admitted knowing the victim’s friend from junior high school.
Then there was the fact that the victim's friend became uncooperative and the police continued with the investigation and made an arrest based on the victim's testimony. I can't imagine that FRS wouldn't have made accusatory speculation about this alleged victim if this had been a sexual assault case.
However, FRS lets all that slide and may not have given any of it a second thought. "No injustice here, folks. Move along."
Here's part of the original story which FRS focused on as a "he said/she said dispute." It contains important details omitted from FRS's summary.
So we have a report with lack of consent, overt repeated violence and clear communication from the husband that he knows he doesn't have consent and will take what he wants without consent, but FRS is treating this like a confirmed false allegation.
The victim told police that her husband began arguing with her earlier that day because he wanted sex and she declined. [this would be the "no" FRS says he believes in]
The 41-year-old suspect reportedly hit the victim six times to the back of the head and pushed her onto a couch. When she continued to decline his advances, he responded, “Shut the f— up; you’re my wife, you’ll do what I say.” The victim said she became fearful for her safety and stopped resisting. Authorities issued an emergency protective order against the suspect and took him into custody. The 41-year-old admitted to arguing with his wife, but denied hitting her or forcing her to have sex.
This contradicts his denial to my commenter. FRS continues.
They have transmogrified me into a rape apologist -- by making up things from whole cloth. This is what passes for enlightened feminist thought in 2010: lies and misandry. And, of course, self-righteousness. Don't forget self-righteousness. Anyone who dares to speak up for innocent persons falsely accused of a terrible crime against women must hate women. To the true believers -- the hard core rape feminists -- I know that what we do here must seem to be misogyny because it doesn't advocate castrating or killing anyone who happens to be accused of rape. But fair-minded people recognize that our goals are far more modest: we do nothing more than advocate that the presumed innocent be treated as if we really did presume their innocence.FRS may not view himself as a rape apologist because he doesn't excuse any rape he is willing to acknowledge happened, but his position on how the criminal justice system should work openly favors rapists and openly harms rape victims all in the name of protecting the innocent. That's why he isn't trusted by feminists not because he speaks up for innocent persons falsely accused of a terrible crime against women.
But, hey, if they like me, then I'm not doing my job.
He has no credible supporting evidence in the case where he spoke up for a man he positioned as an innocent person falsely accused and no apparent concern about whether he himself has made a false accusation against an assault and rape victim.
He makes a false accusation against me and other feminists by claiming that we advocate for castrating or killing all boys and men who are accused of rape. Since most of his followers aren't going to bother checking the credibility of his accusations some of them may repeat this false accusation as if it were proven fact based on 1 man's word alone.
Then he closes with a claim which gives the false impression that he advocates for nothing more than the legal presumption of innocence. This lie is most obvious when he writes about women who have not been convicted of any crime with the presumption that they are the true criminals.
He has distorted the meaning of the legal status of innocent until proven guilty into a tenet where nobody is allowed to believe rape and domestic violence victims unless or until those who raped or abused them are convicted.
He writes about wrongful charges but I have seen no acknowledgment from him that women have been falsely accused and wrongfully charged with committing a terrible crime against men. I guess women never classify as presumed innocent in FRS's eyes.
He seems to forget that if rape and domestic violence are prevented effectively and if all reports were investigated competently and thoroughly and no true cases were dismissed based on bigotry then a false allegation would be much harder to make and get away with.
"He said/she said" excuses for allowing rapists and abusers to get away with their crimes benefit all who are guilty including actual false accusers.
Labels: false rape