Amanda Marcotte’s still not too hot on the logic, is she?

Myth #1: Rape is a “he said/she said” situation. You hear the phrase “he said/she said” a lot, which falsely suggests that the odds are even that either party is lying when a woman says she was raped. But that’s simply not true. Most reputable research shows that the vast majority of women who report rape are telling the truth.

He said, she said, does not refer particularly to whether people are lying about a rape. Either way. It’s a comment about the fact that it’s something that can be difficult to prove either way. For there’s often only the two witnesses, the activity itself, sex, is both extremely common and entirely legal and whether it’s rape or not turns purely on the issue of consent. To which we’ve only got what he said, she said, as a guide.

25 thoughts on “Amanda Marcotte’s still not too hot on the logic, is she?”

  1. A more disturbing interpretation is that Ms Marcotte is aware of this, but is suggesting that the balance of probabilities in similar case should be enough to convict any individual accused. Most accusations are true – so we will begin by assuming you are guilty, until you prove you are innocent.

    Something along the lines of: “The last 10 defendants in your position were lying. Therefore it is likely that you are lying also. We will proceed on this assumption”

  2. ‘ Most reputable research shows that the vast majority of women who report rape are telling the truth.’

    How? How can any research determine if anyone is telling the truth or not?

  3. Her point 4 – “Feminists want to deprive accused rapists of due process.” – is equally disingenuous.

    They seem perfectly happy for there to be a process. As long as that process doesn’t grant the man the right to actually challenge the accuser or the accusation.

  4. It is a masterpiece of disingenuity:

    Over the weekend, there was a huge media kerfuffle over the discovery that Rolling Stone’s devastating expose of campus rape at the University of Virginia has some discrepancies in it.

    Kerfuffle – suggesting that this is all a big silly fuss over nothing.

    Devastating expose of campus rape – that turned out to be complete and utter fabrication.

    Discrepancies – Jackie’s story is now less plausible than the life and opinions of Tristam Shandy, as told to Billy Liar, as reported in Fantasy Bullshit Monthly. Just discrepancies, you guys!

    In other news, the war situation has developed not necessarily to Japan’s advantage.

    While the discrepancies are very likely to be the result of Jackie misremembering key details of the night she told reporter Sabrina Rubin Erdley

    Specifically, she forgot to mention the bit where Dracula, Bigfoot and Colonel Sanders also took turns raping her, before riding off inti the sunset on the Loch Ness Monster’s back.

    This has, in turn, set off a frenzy of hysteria over the belief that false rape accusations are common

    False allegations are common. For example, the cock and bull story about a premeditated 3 hour 7-on-1 gang rape on broken glass at the University of Virginia…

    a hysteria that has no real basis in reality.

    You see what she did there? It’s not the rapists-under-the-beds crowd who are hysterical. Not the ladies screaming that American universities are more rapey than downtown Soweto.

    No, no, it’s the people pointing out that Jackie is a liar and so are a significant percentage of other young women who cry rape yet refuse to speak to the police or otherwise provide any evidence whatsoever who are the hysterical ones.

    False rape reports are about vindictive women trying to hurt men

    Amanda Marcotte is living proof that women are never vindictive.

    Myth #3: Inconsistencies in the story show the alleged victim is lying. The people who believe Jackie lied about her rape have no real evidence for that claim

    We have no real evidence to claim that David Icke is wrong either. Apart from the fact that it’s preposterous bollocks, the story keeps changing, and there is no corroborating evidence whatsoever.

    Scientists have known for a long time that human memory is a shoddy thing, though the last time you wandered around your house looking for a wallet should be reason enough to believe it.

    Yes, I know how it is. Often I find myself forgetting where I put my glasses, or my keys, or basic details about the epic 3 hour gang rape I suffered two years ago. You know, little ephemeral factoids such as where it happened. Could happen to anyone.

    Myth #4: Feminists want to deprive accused rapists of due process.

    SE nailed it. The process feminists want is:

    * Don’t go to the police while there is still physical evidence
    * Take your rape claims to a university kangaroo court comprised of feminist professors
    * We must automatically believe the alleged victim, which means presuming the accused is guilty

    Stalin’s show trials worked along similar lines.

  5. How? How can any research determine if anyone is telling the truth or not?

    Utterly? It can’t.

    Most of the way? If the specific testimony is consistent with other evidence (even including an attacker’s confession) then you are a good way there.

    However, pace Ms Marcott’s point 3 – even a victim describing a genuine rape will not provide completely accurate testimony (no witness does and one who has suffered significant trauma in addition will be even more unreliable.) None of that means that the rape didn’t happen.

  6. SE-Can’t have it both ways. If a woman claims to have suffered life-ruining trauma that still hurts as much as fifty years later–as in the old man trials–it is not unreasonable to expect the woman to be able to remember correctly when and where the horrific events occurred. Small details maybe lost or modified by time and memory but the old men had accusers who got wrong beyond question both the year and location of the supposed crimes.

  7. ‘Myth’ – when you see this used by the alert you know you can relax – what they are describing as a ‘myth’ is 100% observable, if inconvenient, reality.

  8. John Fembup – Amanda Marcotte believes that Tom Robinson from “To Kill A Mockingbird” should’ve been lynched for rape.

  9. “Discrepancies”, “misrembered”.

    She says she was gang – raped over 3 hours on broken glass. Either she was or she is lying.

    And do note the downgrading to “date rape”. Really! It would help then if she could remember who her “date” was.

  10. And “devastating expose”. Perhaps if a class action was brought by the members of the fraternity she and others have called a hotbed of rape she might find the exposè isn’t that devastating after all.

  11. So Much for Subtlety

    Myth #1: Rape is a “he said/she said” situation. You hear the phrase “he said/she said” a lot, which falsely suggests that the odds are even that either party is lying when a woman says she was raped. But that’s simply not true. Most reputable research shows that the vast majority of women who report rape are telling the truth.

    Why does that suggest the odds are even? It would not even occur to me that the odds are even. They don’t need to be even. They just need a situation where there is no other evidence except his word and her word.

    Notice she glides into most rapes. A lot of rapes are not “he said she said”. They are “what she said is irrelevant because she is only 12 years old”. Sexual assaults are disproportionately aimed at children. When they are not, a reasonable number are “he leapt from the bush and beat her to a pulp” providing lots of evidence so the police do not have to rely on her word.

    Mandy is of course a standing argument that Aristotle was right and for rescinding votes for women. But this is lame but her low standards.

  12. So Much for Subtlety

    Steve – “Amanda Marcotte believes that Tom Robinson from “To Kill A Mockingbird” should’ve been lynched for rape.”

    That is not fair. Amanda Marcotte thinks that Tom Robinson should have been executed for rape.

  13. Ironman – She says she was gang – raped over 3 hours on broken glass. Either she was or she is lying.

    Misogynist bastard.

    Hanna Rosin, feminist talking head and the authoress of “Mein Kampf”“The End Of Men”, tells us what’s what:

    http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2014/12/12/justice-and-fairness-in-campus-rape-cases/support-and-judgement-have-different-requirements-in-rape-cases

    Police often say their stories “make no sense,” according to Rebecca Campbell, a psychologist who has done much work to illuminate how memory gets distorted after trauma. The only way through it, attorneys and researchers say, is patience: give space to let the victim’s memory gel into a coherent narrative, and then check that narrative against outside facts.

    Jackie’s only had two years to get her story straight. Two years during which she studiously avoided the police or anybody else who might ask searching questions, but was apparently happy to tell various versions of her sob story around campus.

    Give her more time and I’ve no doubt she’ll remember her rapist was none other than Bill Cosby. Who will then turn out to be an old pal of Jimmy Savile.

    Women use the term “rape” but many of them seem to have no interest in going through any kind of official proceeding or process that would give the term a legal heft. Naming the distress they’ve lived with, among fellow survivors, is what helps them heal.

    Like the satanic panic or what happened at Salem, it’s cathartic hysteria. How dare we judge based on such oppressive Patriarchal concepts as “facts” or “evidence”?

    Check your privilege. You know it to be true.

    SMFS – Mibbe. So long as the sentence was handed out by one of those feminist not-court courts they’re setting up at US colleges for the purpose of destroying the lives of “rapists” without such pesky distractions as due process or the criminal standard of proof or presumption of innocence.

    It didn’t take long for the 80’s satanic panic to reach these shores so I’m wondering how long it will take the Junior Anti-Sex League to cross the Atlantic.

    The NUS is already laying the groundwork, they recently held an entire “summit” – breathlessly and unintentionally hilariously reported in the Guardian – on what to do about those feckin’ lads :

    http://www.theguardian.com/education/2014/feb/21/nus-summit–lad-culture-live-blog

    Course, it’s all fun and games till these creepy little dweebs and fuckwits get a bit of power to do what they’ve been threatening to do.

  14. So Much for Subtlety

    Steve – “So long as the sentence was handed out by one of those feminist not-court courts they’re setting up at US colleges for the purpose of destroying the lives of “rapists” without such pesky distractions as due process or the criminal standard of proof or presumption of innocence.”

    I think they will only be happy once the normal courts behave in a similar manner. They have won a lot of battles to that end – women do not have to confront their alleged rapist. They can testify by video feed. Men are more restricted in what sort of defence they can offer.

    But this is the sort of justice they want:

    http://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2014/11/03/sexual-harassment-policy-that-nearly-ruined-life/hY3XrZrOdXjvX2SSvuciPN/story.html

    They will get it too.

    “The NUS is already laying the groundwork, they recently held an entire “summit” – breathlessly and unintentionally hilariously reported in the Guardian – on what to do about those feckin’ lads :”

    No sane parent should send their son to university.

  15. SMFS: “They have won a lot of battles to that end – women do not have to confront their alleged rapist. They can testify by video feed.”

    Like children. Gee, thanks, ‘feminists’, way to go…

  16. So Much for Subtlety

    JuliaM – “Like children. Gee, thanks, ‘feminists’, way to go…”

    Actually I am not sure I am right about that. They certainly tried. Did they succeed? Let me check.

  17. That story in the Boston Globe. What a sadistic, malignant bitch. Then again, I see no way the University could get away with shit like that, they must be wide open to a legal battering.

  18. So Much for Subtlety

    Rob – “That story in the Boston Globe. What a sadistic, malignant bitch. Then again, I see no way the University could get away with shit like that, they must be wide open to a legal battering.”

    Is the implication that it was her? Or someone in the bureaucracy? Hard to know. I hope he sues. I hope he sues and wins.

    Sending your son to such a college is child abuse.

  19. @Steve – I don’t think Amanda Marcotte gives a shit about Tom Robinson. Or anyone like Tom Robinson.

    Her issue is that Atticus Finch has the gall to defend anyone accused of rape. The bad guy here is Gregory Peck.

    And that is how profoundly, completely, corrupt Amanda Marcotte is.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *