As a new visitor, I agree with almost all of your posts. I was very disappointed to see that you have already convicted the Duke lacrosse players of "horrific . . . rapes." Rape, when it does occur, is horrific. However, my brand of feminism does not require that every woman be believed and every man be disbelieved about an alleged rape.

This post wasn't about the Duke rape case; you can read our coverage on it here.
But this rally does bring light to the number of complex issues that the Duke case has brought national attention to, including class, race, and violence against women.

We need to have a rally to protest false accusations of rape.

People focus on the absence of DNA to link the players to the crime, but the total absence of any DNA suggests that no crime had ever occurred!

Stripper claims: three men raped her on the bathroom rug,
Fact:
• No vaginal or seminal fluid, no skin, blood, or hair were found anywhere in the bathroom, bath towels, bath rug, door handle, bathroom floor, basin, water faucet handle, etc.
• A man cannot take off a condom and not get DNA from himself or the female on his hands and not transfer it to everything he touches?
• Accuser claims she was vaginally penetrated; accuser claims she was panicked and thought she was going to die; Where is her vaginal fluid, urine, or blood anywhere in the bathroom? Does her body defy basic physiology capable of keeping any ejaculate from spilling out?
• Accuser claims she was anally penetrated; Where’s her fecal material or scat smears in the bathroom? Does the accuser have inhuman anal sphinter control that prevented any of the ejaculate from dripping out?
• Accuser claims she was orally sodomized; where is DNA from her saliva and tears? Did she lick up every drop and swallowed any evidence?

Stripper claim bruises were result of an attack from three boys:
Fact: Time-stamped photos prove stripper arrived bruised and cut while drunk.

Nifong stated that a condom was used, if this is true than where is the spermicidal lubricant evidence? Where are the condoms? Where are the condom wrappers? Where is the empty condom box?

We need to protest women who falsely claim rape. It's these women who hurt real victims of rape, nt to mention severely hurting innocent boys.

Now feminist are claiming that 70% of rapes get convictions without DNA, but these stats come from statutory, incest, stranger, and "companion" rape. the possiblity that there would be no DNA evidence in a gang rape by three men and a struggling woman in an enclosed closet size room is highly unlikely.

Nice Guy, I am curious to know where you got such specific information about what evidence was or was not found? I did a search for corroborating information and could not find any. I honestly would like to know.

No Shit Breck.

It might also be noted that we live in a culture which assumes ALL rape accusations are false. That said, a mere "accusation" can hardly be said to "serverely hurt innocent boys". I expect it's something to brag about in some circles.

Yes, Feminists tend to believe women who say they are raped. This is a direct response to the general disbelief of a large segment of society.

You notice no one assumes that someone who claims they were robbed might be lying. Or better yet, asking for it.

Don’t mean any disrespect, rape victims of every gender and age deserves the most support and justice they can get.

An average of 1,700 rapes are reported in New York City every year. But we know that reported cases only make up about 16% of rapes that occur.

How does one determine the amount of unreported rapes? How can a figure be derived if they were not reported or investigated?

I have been searching for the studies, surveys and methods used to determine the amount of unreported rapes for men and women, Or even just women or men.I have been unsuccessful in finding anything citing studies or surveys or methods.

Anything you have would be appreciated.

Breck said:

"Nice Guy, I am curious to know where you got such specific information about what evidence was or was not found? I did a search for corroborating information and could not find any. I honestly would like to know."

Come now. Just simply remove the rose colored glassed that filter out truth & justice, open your eyes and ears. The facts are there, most anyhow. MSM just chooses to print what tastes best.

REAL journalists report the facts and allow the reader to formulate a conclusion. MSM formulates the conclusion and them reports what will support that conclusion.

Just look at all of the young men (the rest of the team) that have been dragged through this mess and identified, researched & printed about, photographs and lives published, all with malice by MSM in my opinion. Even if these two (or is it three?) did in fact do something, even the alleged rape. The remaining teammates have been WRONGFULLY CRUSIFIED in MSM. Oh but wait, they allowed it. They enabled it. They are part of the great white patriarch. They watched. They thought about watching it. Allegedly, one of the accused wasn’t even there! Well, he was probably thinking about doing it while he was at the ATM.

Shoot, I Can tell you HER name, the “supposed witness'� name, what they both look like, where they work, their addresses... I can even give you their freaking birthdates as well as the police records of these two felonious women. Their information is public record and anyone with half a brain can get it. But of course, “rape shield laws� prohibit legitimate and ACURATE reporting of said information.

I wont even bring up the fact that her “witness� actually contacted spin doctors requesting how “she could spin this to her advantage�. WOW! What a pal! With friends like that… Never mind the questions of legitimacy of her testimonies, which change almost as frequently as New England weather does. Oops. I just did. This is FACT. But no one even dares to call her character into question. Only the men... er accused.

They both have very shady pasts. Their pasts consist of assault, drugs, theft, lies, and extortion and even an attempted assault on a police officer with a vehicle! But of course MSM and the feminist don’t want to hear about that. No-sir-ee! Persons past should never be used to determine the legitimacy of ones accusations or to prove ones character.

That is of course, unless you are a card-carrying member of the patriarchy’s privileged white male. Then, if you were accused of ANYTHING, then your past is very relevant and is made public and gobbled up with milk and cookies. And if it is an accusation that supports the present accusation, well then damn! “He has a history�. He was charged with acts of violence against gays! That says it all!

Simply put, if these young men did this crime, they belong in jail doing the time. Plaster the faces of these boys all over the world if you’d like. Justifiably. BUT, if they did not, then these young ladies deserve to do the time instead. And their faces, information and details should equally be plastered as well. All in the name of eee-qual---et---ee!

But that will never happen. Readership is more important than justice, for her OR for him (them).

As for me, I am late for a patriarchy meeting where we are discussing new and innovated ways to victimize women.

TMOTS

Jane said:

"It might also be noted that we live in a culture which assumes ALL rape accusations are false. That said, a mere "accusation" can hardly be said to "serverely hurt innocent boys". I expect it's something to brag about in some circles."

"Yes, Feminists tend to believe women who say they are raped. This is a direct response to the general disbelief of a large segment of society."
________________________

I must say, the above comment is the biggest load of poop I have ever heard. There are so many statistics out there PROVING the opposite that I'd probably crash the server with it all.

For the record, Rape is an issue and a problem. And so is the character rape of those falsely accused.

TMOTS

"Yes, Feminists tend to believe women who say they are raped. This is a direct response to the general disbelief of a large segment of society."

Ever heard of innocent until proven guilty?

Unfortunately we (I) do live in a society where when a woman cries rape, she is believed and it becomes a case of "guilty until proven innocent".

Currently we have Goverment sponsored ads that assert if a woman says "no" during the act and if the man continues ... he is a felon. It is portrayed in such a way that "the male" is just some ingnorant yobbo. This does nothing to reduce rape by rapists, regardless of gender, who are quite simply, sociopaths. Even when it occurs en masse, those indiviuals may previously have masqueraded as "your average Joe" they are not. I do not know a single "normal" human being who would take part in such an act without mutal desire (mind you I limit my associations).

Does this sound familiar, oh, he's too nice ... I like a man who's "whatever". We'll be careful what you wish for!

I have known of many instances where women, in order to mete out vengence ... cry rape (sexual assault) trumped-up with a couple of other charges for good measure.

So if women really care about other women (rape really is heinous), the education should start with women and every single lousy game our gender plays ... especially against young teenage boys, which then become so embittered women wonder why at age 2o-28 they don't give a "rats".

Does her body defy basic physiology capable of keeping any ejaculate from spilling out?

Does the accuser have inhuman anal sphinter control that prevented any of the ejaculate from dripping out?

*Sigh* Another example of "I learned about vaginas by watching porn." Women aren't generally leaky vessels that squirt semen back out the second the penis is removed from the vagina or anus. Especially the anus - I mean, on the TMI note, the anus is made to keep stuff inside of it unless the anus-owner pushes it out.

I wouldn't make a big deal over this if the poster hadn't showed such a lack of information about the human body, especially the female one.

I find that overall post SCARY AS HELL because it not only relies either on fabricated data or on information not available to the general public, but is also full of really graphic misogynistic imagery. That line about oral rape made me wince.

Anyway, yeah, the person in question obviously knows nothing about (for starters) what rape kits are and why they're necessary.

Innocent until proven guilty is for the courts and hs nothing to do with what the media, or blogs, have to say about it. Regular citizens are permitted to have opinions about whether people are guilty or innocent, but they are not allowed to put anybody in jail.

It might also be noted that the people who are sooo angry about this are doing the EXACT same thing about the women.

Innocent until proven guilty is for the courts, not regular citizens.

I notice that the side which isn't assuming the men are guilty, are assuming the women are. How is that different?

Oh yeah.

Did I mention that I appreciate that there are police and courts to actually investigate to try and find out what did happened.

Like they say "Opinions are like assholes, everybody has one".

Possibly because the mens are defendants and because of the "innocent until proven guilty" ideal that should hold to more than courts. Right now, it's trial by media.

This rape case does bring up the fact that false accusations are prevalent in the news and rarely do the women responsible get much in the way of punishment.Even though the men typically lose their reputation, family, work, and a lot of money on legal fee's, that is if they don't end up in jail getting their "just desserts" from “bubba�.

I have often been called a rapist myself, on other feminist sites, for even bringing up the subject of false accusations. The fact is the women that do this are belittling real women victims of rape. They should be exposed and punished harshly to guaranty the credibility of women making real accusations, as well as to protect men from our knee jerk court system that has bought into the demonizing of men.

This is regarding the subject in general, I have not said a peep about this duke case and I am not going to till it's over. It has received so much hype it is just another poisonous American media circus of the moment. I want to wait till that blows over and we can look at the facts.

BTW;Does anyone know how a figure for unreported rapes is derived?

I'd just like to reiterate a previously posed question, attempt to answer another one, and make a general comment.

The question: (for Nice Guy et al)

Where does one find the information you've cited detailing what evidence was found and/or missing from the crime scene? Please provide specific sources or URLs. Thank you.

The answer: (for Hujo, regarding unreported rape statistics)

I don't know if this is always the case, but from the specific article cited above, it seemed to me to be saying that they arrived at the figure for reported vs. unreported rapes by comparing the number of police reports of rape to the number of calls received by rape crisis hotlines, and found a large gap between the two. In other words, more people were calling anonymously for help than were going to the police and giving names and details and pressing charges. It's not a true answer to the question, since I have no idea if all statistics for reported vs. unreported rapes are derived this way, but it may give you a new angle from which to approach your research.

Finally, a comment: Has anyone else noticed how often the phrase "This isn't going to go away, is it?" or variations of same is uttered on Fox News regarding this case? What exactly does that mean, anyway? It suggests the subtext, "Gee, wouldn't it be nice if women just shut up and spread instead of complaining all the time?" Is it intended as some sort of apology for reporting on a story where sex is involved to their conservative viewers, who probably don't like salacious details or words like "penetration"? Or is it supposed to sound vaguely sympathetic without specifically siding with either the alleged victim or the alleged perpetrators? Certainly it would be nice for either side if "all this went away." It's also pretty damn unlikely, which makes it an incredibly stupid thing to say. I'm probably reading too much into it, but for some reason that phrase triggers a lot of irritated eyerolling from me. Has anyone else had noticed this and had a similar reaction?

Jane said:
"Like they say "Opinions are like assholes, everybody has one"."

True. But some are bigger than others.

Jane also said:
"It might also be noted that the people who are sooo angry about this are doing the EXACT same thing about the women."

Yep. Ever hear of "what's good for the goose, is good for the gander"?

If these boys can be crucified and plastered all over the media, internet, and such... why shouldn't these women? Especially since it would appear that there are a few too many discrepencies in both sides of the story.

If the fact that one of the boys was accused of a hate crime, against gays... is a permissable discussion point; Then why... is the fact that the accuser has a rap sheet the size of freakin NY, which includes attempting to run down an officer of the law via vehicle... why is this piece of FACT and public record not a legitimate discussion point? A felon is a felon. Male or female. Both or none.

If these boys are guilty, fry em. If these two women are guilty, fry them as well.

TMOTS

Hujo writes:
This rape case does bring up the fact that false accusations are prevalent in the news and rarely do the women responsible get much in the way of punishment.

Filing a false police report is already a crime, Hujo, but I fail to see why women who report rape--which is already underreported and underprosecuted--should be further punished if their claims can't be proven in court. That works out real well for rapists who want to get away with their crimes, since they can throw "You want to have your name smeared all over the place? Get thrown in prison?" in the same batch with the more mundane physical threats.

I am amazed and a little ashamed, frankly, at the sheer misogyny in this thread. I'm not talking masculism. I'm talking this attitude that women should be punished for reporting rape, and discouraged from doing so by the government and the media. I think that's horrible, and I don't want to even begin to wonder what the motives behind that kind of attitude might be.

Cheers,

TH

And I really should say "further discouraged," because as the blog post above makes clear, they're already being discouraged--to the point where only a tiny fraction of rapes are being reported.

Is 16% too high a number for you folks? How low would you like it to be? 8%? 4%?

Cheers,

TH

So Tom, You're saying it's better for women to falsely accuse rape than not report it at all?

Yes, Zaij, that's pretty much what I'm saying.

Cheers,

TH

I can see that you don't subscribe to the idea of better 10 guilty men go free than one innocent one goes to jail. I guess you must also be a supporter of guantanamo bay.

Sorry for the ad hominem, but you're an asshole.

No, sweetheart, it's just that I also subscribe to the idea that it's better for one woman to falsely claim rape with impunity than for 10,000 rape victims to keep silent.

If that makes me an asshole, then I'm comfortable with the label.

Cheers,

TH

And your blog is called "Civil liberties"...

And your blog is called "Civil liberties"...

Yes, it does make you an asshole.

Zaij writes:
And your blog is called "Civil liberties"...

...which includes the right of a woman to accuse a man of rape without having to face dire consequences if the case results in acquittal. Immunity to rape claims is not a civil liberty.

Cheers,

TH

Sorry? Dire consequences? Since when have I mentioned anything about consequences if the case results in an acquittal?

I'm not sure you did, Zaij, and if so I apologize for confusing you with one of the many other antifeminist hecklers on this site.

Cheers,

TH

For the record s/he who contains no gray matter.. I am neither anti-women nor anti-choice.

Just in case, For the record.

TMOTS

Tom writes:
Filing a false police report is already a crime, Hujo, but I fail to see why women who report rape--which is already underreported and underprosecuted--should be further punished if their claims can't be proven in court. That works out real well for rapists who want to get away with their crimes, since they can throw "You want to have your name smeared all over the place? Get thrown in prison?" in the same batch with the more mundane physical threats.
I am amazed and a little ashamed, frankly, at the sheer misogyny in this thread. I'm not talking masculism. I'm talking this attitude that women should be punished for reporting rape, and discouraged from doing so by the government and the media. I think that's horrible, and I don't want to even begin to wonder what the motives behind that kind of attitude might be.
Is it a crime? One that is often punished by light sentences or community service.

Motivation; The protection of a real rape victim’s credibility and the protection of falsely accused men.

The misogynistic horrors!!!!

"I'm not sure you did, Zaij, and if so I apologize for confusing you with one of the many other antifeminist hecklers on this site."

Other antifeminist? I'm not an antifeminist. I've posted atleast 3 comments on this site saying I want it to expand it's horizons. Just because I ask for a little bit of critical thinking in posts and sometimes play devils advocate, doesn't mean I'm antifeminist.

You seem to assume that anyone who criticizes one of the articles on this site is antifeminist... Maybe you should calm down a little bit.

Zaij - you called him an asshole, so WHO should calm down?

Man on the Street - I nobody gets to talk about the history of the victims, how do you know so much about her?

What the courts will allow has nothing to do with what is discussed in the media. This is why it can be so hard to find an inparial jury who hasn't heard things in the media which won't be allowed in court.

Zaij - you called him an asshole, so WHO should calm down?

Man on the Street - I nobody gets to talk about the history of the victims, how do you know so much about her?

What the courts will allow has nothing to do with what is discussed in the media. This is why it can be so hard to find an inparial jury who hasn't heard things in the media which won't be allowed in court.

Jane,

Lets just say that if I were to post specifics of this woman, it would never be allowed to stand. True or not? Her name should be printed just as much as the guys that ALLEGEDLY raped her.

Her mental stability, alchohol and drug use (or abuse), past brushes with the law, previous false accusations of rape (1996)... These are all facts and public record. Why is this not published in MAIN STREAM MEDIA?

As for how do I know so much.... I ignore MSM and rely on good old fashioned research and NON main stream media to get my FACTS straight.

Once again though, I am NOT saying it didn't happen. I am merely stating that her past tends to lend creadence that she may not be telling the truth. And her truthfulness, in general, should be a factor in whether or not to trust her words with such impunity.

TMOTS