James Goddard:
I feel that they are both horrible crimes and it's silly to try to prioritze them.
Yet you seem to withhold compassion in favor of prioritizing the poor man?
James Goddard:
And yes, I do believe that ruining a persons marriage, carreer, reputation, and life ranks right up there with instilling fear by exercising physical power.
Actually not just instilling fear, but using that to force the victim to comply to a sexual assault. Plus, I'm talking about lending emotional support on a message board, which is the point you seem to be missing. The victim brought the thread here, you seem to conveniently ignore the response of PADI and the local law because it doesn't fit into your picture, or you dismiss them as insignificant, and I see it important to support her rather than interrogate her. You seem to think it better to go with the assumption she is lying and ignore support even once the accused has a representative post his side of it. You also haven't posted your impression of his letter, which makes it *appear* as if you are going to great lengths to portray the accused as the innocent victim in this without any particular reason to do so.
I do not feel that recriminations from a false accusation ON A MESSAGE BOARD are as traumatic as what the victim is describing, having been the target of them myself. I find it less damaging to lend support with the assumption the victim is not lying, since most of them don't then to respond to her with "Well... IF you're telling the truth, that's a shame, but a lot of women..." Ick.
James Goddard:
When you prove that the victim is not the one being censored I'll accept that arugment. Until then you are personally helping to harm a person on mere hearsay.
Actually, SB took greater lengths than most places in confirming the accuracy of the story, which they did BEFORE allowing the man's name to be posted.
... of course some people wouldn't let a little thing like that get in the way of the "vindictive female" plot. Sadly, those who abuse the legal system by making false accusations tend to bend people towards totally insensitivity to actual sufferers. For the censorship issue, due to the confirmation of the story, it seems like trying to keep people from further causing emotional harm to the victim hardly constitutes acting inappropriately, though it you get right down to it, SB has the legal right to 'censor' anything they like. I believe it constitutes private property.
James Goddard:
It is pretty much the same thing. It's about exercising power, either way. Are you actually impying that people lie about seuxal harassment but don't lie about sexual assault?
Nope. I'm stating directly that more people misuse sexual harassment, sexual harrassment makes it easier to misinterpret a situation, AND it is far harder to prove. Additionally, sexual harrassment as it has been described on this thread, usually describes a civil matter in which the accused party is not run through law enforcement at all, but must comply to a deal in the office of the employer. Though certain forms of sexual harrassment are illegal, saying "hey baby" to a coworker does not initiate a police response, nor does it cause lasting emotional damage to anyone but the borderline insane. Even genuine cases of sexual harrassment where an employee should be terminated (continuous unwanted sexual advances, grabbing the butt, which is illegal) doesn't tend to generate the same depth of emotional stress in the victim as being raped or assaulted. The victim is not generally in danger and the stress can always be ended by leaving the workplace.
One of the reasons sexual harrassment is such a popular fake case is that it does not have to run through the criminal system and often, settlements can be easily obtained or scores can be settled incredibly easily.
This stands in contrast to faking an assault in a foreign country while underwater, wouldn't you say?
James Goddard:
To sum up your agruments. You think it is better to ruin a mans life than to potentially inflict emotional pain on someone who might be a victim. That's so sad that you are so willing to ruin peoples lives and so sexist that you think its better to assume the woman is always right.
How remarkably disingenuous. To sum up your arguments, you think it is better to treat female rape/assault victims like self serving liars rather than risk offending the sensititivies, on an internet message board, of a man who is not present, who has been arrested, and booted by his representative organization unless of course, one of the people offering sympathy to the assumed victim can sufficiently prove to YOU that the attack took place, though proof would likely consist of video footage of the incident providing I could prove the tape was unedited. That's so sad that you are so willing to ruin people's emotional healing and so sexist that you think it's better to assume the man, even if he's been arrested and his defense is weak at best, is always right.
Anyhoo, to address my ACTUAL argument. I think when someone is seeking group support, it is important not to treat them like a liar, particularly in rape/sexual assault cases, because it adds to the trauma and guilt of the entire incident which is disempowering, frightening, and humilating. This also isn't gender specific. Male rape/assault victims face this as well, and sadly, the bias is often more pronounced against male victims AND frequently causes insensitive commentators to question the victim's 'maleness'. You can see this in the male/male cases and the female perp/male vic cases, though they are FAR fewer in number than male/female and male/male.
Were this message board actively destroying the perpetrator's (excuse me, alleged) home, family, and freedom, I would not be participating in such a manner. I do not feel that IN A COURT OF LAW, the emotions of the victim should override the rights of the accused, though courts do make allowances to minimize stress to the victim providing those rights are not violated. I am not suggesting that in deference to fonfon's feelings, the courts jail the guy based on a suspicious defense and PADI's actions. Like I said before, I am not sure of the Mexican legal process, or if she may have to face him in court, detail exactly what happened, etc, and this is a necessary, but very traumatic part of legal procedure specifically to ensure the alleged perp ISN'T railroaded without evidence.
Given this, it seems like since as we have both pointed out, this is not a court of law, it is not our business to demand that fonfon PROVE her case, though SB has confirmed the validity of it being a case serious enough for PADI's actions and an arrest, when she is seeking to warn others and gain support from the dive community. I have to say this is a rare response. I have been on other boards where women have come seeking friends and support after sexual assaults/rapes and have rarely witnessed this "prove it, homewrecker!" attitude? It also seems to stem more out of an anger at SB for perceived injustices, which, if the case, would REALLY be morally inexcusable, you know, using the victim's trauma to attempt to score off at the presumably unpaid moderators?
.
