False allegations, feminism, blindness and women’s reputation.

Remember- the research on how women show aggression most commonly? Yes character assassination through rumor and accusation and derision. Remove the consequences for this – and we should expect it to explode, and remove consequences we have. The means of bullying and aggression are not confined to other women https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fx4DJ21B-3M (see starting around 50 seconds – would not let me clip)

We need to understand that as the understanding of frequency grows, so do the impacts on the behavior of those at risk. We have seen the derision aimed at men, around being more concerned about false allegation, than being sexually assaulted. We need to stop and ask though, the same group that denies the risk of false allegation, and now acknowledges a risk of sexual assault for men, by women, very recently asserted that men and boys were never sexually assaulted by women. Note they rely on “proven false” but when are false allegation actually investigated? The case against him collapsing is not seen to prove her allegation false, no matter how devastating the issues with evidence. Have Liam Allen’s or Mark Pearson’s accusers been named? Or do they still collect the victims of violent crime reward- for their highly flawed allegations.

So consider Allen’s accuser had repeatedly threatened him with the accusation – in order to coerce him into sex, does not count as “proven false”

That the surveillance footage that was used to identify Pearson – also makes painfully clear that he could not possibly have done what he is accused of, and the prosecution proceeded, and the defense, needed only to say – please play at actual speed, to destroy the prosecution case- matters. That – we do not investigate, and yet still – 2 to 8 percent of cases “are proven false” where the Pearson’s case does not meet that test – screams, that the rarity of these accusations is a massive distortion.

Also consider the harm of a false allegation… where men find they have lost their jobs, can’t find employment and are sometimes subject to random assaults… by people who believed the accuser – even where the story was ridiculous… and this has resulted in many suicides, even after the girl who made the accusation acknowledged it was made up. The reality that the abuse continued – even after it was beyond clear the accusations was false- has resulted in suicide after because the accused knew the destruction of their lives would continue. There is a high profile British case the suicide of the mother as well—as her life was destroyed by her sons suicide – that was the result of a false allegation – admitted as such by the accuser.

It matters not just because of the lives it directly destroys, but further because of the broader signals to young men -that are in turn defining their view of whether care for them exists, or is even possible. This effect has been dangerously added to – by the re-emergence of an old gem “false allegations hurt real victims” which would not be an issue – if it did not so clearly exclude the falsely accused as the first and primary actual victim.

The feminists in so loudly pushing this – either utterly ignore the basis of their numbers and hence actual facts, or are aware and seek to undermine trust. Consider – that the denial of the possibility of male victims of domestic and sexual violence by women, is increasingly understood to be the root cause of the utter inability to create services still for those victims. The loud attacks on those who raised the points – as being rape apologists , and/or misogynists, has made it beyond awkward to have actual discussions of the services required.

That these were the loudest voices of women, especially that when this was at its loudest, most women still believed in feminism, and had not yet understood these distortions, and of course their inclusion in the movement already created an impression of endorsement for something most women – when they have actually considered it- found horrific.

Unfortunately these have been mostly private realizations – so the impressions left on young men continue to grow – as they share their past experiences with this. Consider the feminist arguments around not all men, and consider the very much larger pool of women who had been so ready to believe, while you understand, she has been more likely to hit him than he her, and about as likely it seems to deceive or coerce around sex – and the argument around sufficient reason to withdraw trust – was already made… by feminists, in a time where most women believed. Thus her wanting him to trust, or shaming him for not doing so create an even worse impression of hypocrisy.

The reality of having feminism having managed to create a broad endorsement by women of the idea of “no woman would” in so many contexts, is very damaging. This especially because in so many of these areas it was so patently false in a way that should always have been transparent. This especially given the circumstances of the day (like actual payments in the case of the UK) women of my grandmothers generation would have laughed at the assertion of “no woman would”. My grandmother would have corrected it with “no lady would” until she had been shouted down too many times. My grandmother still said that quietly – to me as a child… in terms of things like – women hitting. The notion that it was not a choice to ignore female initiation is hard to support, when the research was specifically designed to ignore the possibility. Very much like it is hard to believe you seek an honest discussion of sexual violence, when only rape can be discussed in a space where it is defined as –  “the carnal knowledge of a female forcibly and against her will. ” or even by “penetration” where only the party penetrated – can be a victim.