Abuse--on the other foot (and why I hate being male)

[_asbestosman]

There are more or less tangential musings to Zoidberg's abuse thread.

Is it abusive to lie about being abused? Remember the lacross players who were falsely accused? I think it was abusive, not because f how they suffered (which was wrong in itself), but because of the way these lies take power away from people who really are abused or raped. It casts greater suspicion on accusations which can make it harder to take those accusations seriously, or to believe them.

Speaking of blaming the victim, I wonder what the First Presidency would say about a man who was falsely accused of raping a woman. Say this woman clearly consented to was done (as with the Lacross players). Would they then still state that they share some blame for putting themselves in that situation?

Also, I often feel unfairly targeted for being male. The recent changes about primary teachers seemed to be targeting males If I recall correctly. Now I'll grant that statistically it makes sense. However, I often feel like I'm being judged as guilty until proven innocent. There are some things I don't think I'd want to do even if it paid well. Being a teacher is now one of them. If I'm accused, I basically wouldn't be able to defend myself very well. On the other hand, I don't like the idea of abusive teachers going free. How many unjust punishments should we allow just to make sure we don't miss any (or many) real perpetraitors? It's a tough question and one I don't want to stake my own reputation on. I do all I can to avoid kids, etc. at least in part for that reason.

[_Ray A]

Also, I often feel unfairly targeted for being male. The recent changes about primary teachers seemed to be targeting males If I recall correctly. Now I'll grant that statistically it makes sense. However, I often feel like I'm being judged as guilty until proven innocent. There are some things I don't think I'd want to do even if it paid well. Being a teacher is now one of them. If I'm accused, I basically wouldn't be able to defend myself very well. On the other hand, I don't like the idea of abusive teachers going free. How many unjust punishments should we allow just to make sure we don't miss any (or many) real perpetraitors? It's a tough question and one I don't want to stake my own reputation on. I do all I can to avoid kids, etc. at least in part for that reason.

I think this is called "group judgment". I have a close relative who has been assaulted by his female companion, many times. The last attack left him with a black eye, but not before warding her off with some of his own "strong resistance". Now if the police were called, which they weren't, who would they believe?

[_Zoidberg]

There are more or less tangential musings to Zoidberg's abuse thread.

Is it abusive to lie about being abused? Remember the lacross players who were falsely accused? I think it was abusive, not because f how they suffered (which was wrong in itself), but because of the way these lies take power away from people who really are abused or raped. It casts greater suspicion on accusations which can make it harder to take those accusations seriously, or to believe them.

Speaking of blaming the victim, I wonder what the First Presidency would say about a man who was falsely accused of raping a woman. Say this woman clearly consented to was done (as with the Lacross players). Would they then still state that they share some blame for putting themselves in that situation?

Also, I often feel unfairly targeted for being male. The recent changes about primary teachers seemed to be targeting males If I recall correctly. Now I'll grant that statistically it makes sense. However, I often feel like I'm being judged as guilty until proven innocent. There are some things I don't think I'd want to do even if it paid well. Being a teacher is now one of them. If I'm accused, I basically wouldn't be able to defend myself very well. On the other hand, I don't like the idea of abusive teachers going free. How many unjust punishments should we allow just to make sure we don't miss any (or many) real perpetraitors? It's a tough question and one I don't want to stake my own reputation on. I do all I can to avoid kids, etc. at least in part for that reason.

I certainly hope I have not given you the idea that I'm some kind of a misandrist. Because I'm not.

I think it's definitely unfair that men are being treated this way. However, I can't help but think that it's the flip side of patriarchy. Men are strong, women are weak. Hence, the idea of a woman attacking or abusing a man is seen as laughable. I know a married couple who got in a fight and she called the cops; the husband almost got a criminal record, even though she was the one who physically assaulted him. The cops just wouldn't believe him. I think it's most unfair.

There are child molesters who are women and rapists who are women, even. And I suspect that the abuse of men/boys committed by them is significantly underreported for the same reasons; it's a shame to admit you were taken advantage of by a woman, were weaker than a woman, or it's not seen as abuse for the mere reason that a woman was the perpetrator. You know, the whole having sex with your hot teacher fantasy.

I don't know what the First Presidency would say to the lacrosse players. I think they are poorly qualified to judge any such cases, given the attitudes they exhibit. But I honestly think that no one should be held accountable for "putting themselves in that situation". Where do you draw the line on that? When you step out of your house, you put yourself in some kind of a situation that may end badly. Should they have videotaped having sex with that woman as a precaution? Or not had sex with her at all? But why not, if all parties are consenting, and if they don't subscribe to notions like sin? I think it's sad that girls are often taught to be suspicious and not trust men as a default. Now, it seems, vice versa is also true.

As for false allegations of sexual abuse, this is the only case where I have heard such rhetoric used. What about false allegations of theft? Or some other crime? Do they take away the power from real victims? I'm just curious why I haven't heard this line of reasoning applied to other crimes.

[_Scottie]

It does seem that in this one area, an allegation is every bit as damning as actually doing it.

How does this work in a court of law? Can they convict a man simply by the word of the woman, or does there have to be some additional evidence? And if he is acquitted, does it clear his name completely, or is he still registered as a sex offender?

[_asbestosman]

I certainly hope I have not given you the idea that I'm some kind of a misandrist. Because I'm not.

That's good, and no you hadn't.

As for false allegations of sexual abuse, this is the only case where I have heard such rhetoric used. What about false allegations of theft? Or some other crime? Do they take away the power from real victims? I'm just curious why I haven't heard this line of reasoning applied to other crimes.

Well, it was just some musings I had. With theft there is generally more evidence that something was stolen rather than a he said / she said deal. Maybe it really doesn't take anything away from real victims. I suppose the price paid in reputation is terrible and true enough. Even if charges are dropped, just having accusations of abuse or sexual asault brought against you can be devastating.

[_Sethbag]

I kind of feel bad for Catholic Priests who has a guy show up and claim that, 40 years before, Father Ted touched his weewee. The problem is, this may or may not have actually happened, but Father Ted has a 0% chance of clearing his name. With the megamillions of dollars being paid out in Catholic sex abuse cases, it's hard to imagine that some of the claims aren't just made up to cash in on it.

On the other hand, if Father Ted really did molest young parishioners, then he deserves to be punished. The problem is, 40 years later there's no way to tell if it really happened or not. That's part of the reason why Statutes of Limitations exist - to prevent people from being confronted with charges long past the time when circumstances, the state of evidence, or whatever will allow for a realistic defense.

[_Zoidberg]

It does seem that in this one area, an allegation is every bit as damning as actually doing it.

How does this work in a court of law? Can they convict a man simply by the word of the woman, or does there have to be some additional evidence? And if he is acquitted, does it clear his name completely, or is he still registered as a sex offender?

He only has to register as a sex offender if he is convicted or pleads guilty.

[_barrelomonkeys]

There are more or less tangential musings to Zoidberg's abuse thread.

Is it abusive to lie about being abused? Remember the lacross players who were falsely accused? I think it was abusive, not because f how they suffered (which was wrong in itself), but because of the way these lies take power away from people who really are abused or raped. It casts greater suspicion on accusations which can make it harder to take those accusations seriously, or to believe them.

Speaking of blaming the victim, I wonder what the First Presidency would say about a man who was falsely accused of raping a woman. Say this woman clearly consented to was done (as with the Lacross players). Would they then still state that they share some blame for putting themselves in that situation?

Also, I often feel unfairly targeted for being male. The recent changes about primary teachers seemed to be targeting males If I recall correctly. Now I'll grant that statistically it makes sense. However, I often feel like I'm being judged as guilty until proven innocent. There are some things I don't think I'd want to do even if it paid well. Being a teacher is now one of them. If I'm accused, I basically wouldn't be able to defend myself very well. On the other hand, I don't like the idea of abusive teachers going free. How many unjust punishments should we allow just to make sure we don't miss any (or many) real perpetraitors? It's a tough question and one I don't want to stake my own reputation on. I do all I can to avoid kids, etc. at least in part for that reason.

I don't hate men. I don't blame men for societies ills. I was just pissy yesterday. Sorry. :) I agree with you asbestosman that with the climate we live in today it is better to be safe and take precautions from unjust accusations. The lacrosse team is not really a good case of sensible precautions. How would those young men know that the stripper they hired would do something as outlandish as making false accusations? Although, in that case, I think as much blame fell upon the prosecutor as it did with the woman making the accusations. He seemed hell bent on making a case even when it was flimsy and was evident that he had no case.

Teaching is a tricky thing as well. I have teenage boys that have asked me to the prom. Eep! I have a few that come and skateboard in front of my house hoping that I'll come outside. It's hard to know how to deal with young people that are looking for validation or worth from a teacher and how that looks to outsiders. I must be very, very, very careful in how I interact. I know when I was in school I had girlfriends that enjoyed getting the male teachers flushed by flirting with them. Trying out their sexual wiles on a male teacher. It is a difficult profession to be in, no doubt, with all the actual predators that then make everyone suspicious of those that are just doing a good job of being concerned, involved adults with their students.

With abusive situations often times the men are scooped up in domestic assualt cases where the woman was just as culpable for the behavior. Zoid is correct, women are viewed as weak and the male is always assumed to be the aggressor when this is just a stereotype that is not based in fact. Not too long ago I did research on this because of a MAD thread where I found that abuse in the home was almost even when it came to men and women. Women, also more often than not are the ones that abuse their children.

[_MishMagnet]

We had a local case here last year where the high school music teacher was arrested after being accused of sexual impropriety with several students. His mug shot was on the front page, he was put on leave, they interviewed nearly every student he had.

In the end they dropped the case after several people came forward against his accusers. They finally admitted to fabricating their stories. I've seen this man in public several times since then. I wouldn't even know who he was otherwise. I feel so bad for him. It's practically impossible to untarnish a reputation.

On the other hand more female children are abused than not. Over 50%. It's a fine balance.

[_barrelomonkeys]

We had a local case here last year where the high school music teacher was arrested after being accused of sexual impropriety with several students. His mug shot was on the front page, he was put on leave, they interviewed nearly every student he had.

In the end they dropped the case after several people came forward against his accusers. They finally admitted to fabricating their stories. I've seen this man in public several times since then. I wouldn't even know who he was otherwise. I feel so bad for him. It's practically impossible to untarnish a reputation.

On the other hand more female children are abused than not. Over 50%. It's a fine balance.

I always think of The Crucible when I hear of cases like that. Hysteria! Recall the hysteria with satanism and daycare workers performing Satanic rituals on children in the 80's? What a nut house our society becomes when we can string someone up and try them in the court of public opinion before the facts are known. Very disappointing.