NationStates Jolt Archive

The other rape thread brought a question to my attention. What causes more harm, rape or wrongfull accusation of rape?

They are not seriously comparable.

Rape is serious, inherently violent crime invasive of another person's very body and will.

Wrongfully accusing someone of rape is wrong. It can also be criminal -- depending on the circumstances. But it pales in comparison.

And, for the record, rape is a serious problem in the US. False accusations of rape are not.

According to the DOJ Bureau of Justice Statistics, in 2003 for every 1,000 persons age 12 or older, there occurred 1 rape or sexual assault. There were, by the BJS definition of rape, about 90,390 rapes in 2002.

Studies of false rape reports, including those by the FBI, indicate that about 2-6% of rape reports are false -- which is a similar rate of false reports to that for other crimes.

Both are horrible, i say Rape, because its more than words. Rape is an action of the lowest kind.

Both are horrible, i say Rape, because its more than words. Rape is an action of the lowest kind.

Agreed. While not quite as bad, wrongfully accusing somebody of rape just to get revenge (or something else of the sort) is still one of the lowest acts any person could commit.

People are going to shout at me for this, but meh.

Rape is bad. Very bad. But, as bad as it's affects are, the victim will earn people's sympathy, hell, they'd get mine.

Someone falsely accused of rape, however, would be shunned by society, hated by lots ofpeople, and their life would be ultimately ruined.

People are going to shout at me for this, but meh.

Rape is bad. Very bad. But, as bad as it's affects are, the victim will earn people's sympathy, hell, they'd get mine.

Someone falsely accused of rape, however, would be shunned by society, hated by lots ofpeople, and their life would be ultimately ruined.

Yeah, that didn't occur to me at the time. 'Tis a difficult choice, but seeing as something like this would totally ruin somebody's life (it's happened before. Even when the people are found to be completely innocent, people still shun them as if they've done something), I'd have to say that wrongful accusation is worse.

It depends on the kind of wrongful accusation, though.

People are going to shout at me for this, but meh.

Rape is bad. Very bad. But, as bad as it's affects are, the victim will earn people's sympathy, hell, they'd get mine.

Someone falsely accused of rape, however, would be shunned by society, hated by lots ofpeople, and their life would be ultimately ruined.

I'd agree with that. Many rape victims get badly traumatized [some don't for one reason or another], but I don't know if that quite beats being locked away in jail [probably getting raped yourself] for 2 decades for a crime you didnt commit.

I have long beleaved that for any crime X, a wrongful accusation of X made with the clear knowlege that X had not been commited by the accused should have a penalty equal to X.

People are going to shout at me for this, but meh.

Rape is bad. Very bad. But, as bad as it's affects are, the victim will earn people's sympathy, hell, they'd get mine.

Someone falsely accused of rape, however, would be shunned by society, hated by lots ofpeople, and their life would be ultimately ruined.

Yes because it's the amount of sympathy they're getting that matters. :rolleyes:

Yes because it's the amount of sympathy they're getting that matters. :rolleyes:

That's not exactly what he meant. He's saying that real rape victims will get sympathy from virtually everybody, whereas people wrongfully accused of rape will get sympathy from next to nobody, and will be shunned, even if evidence shows that they had never even seen the "victim" before.

they are equally WRONG but the more harm is caued when someone is ACCUSED of rape, it causes fear of them and emotional damage, as in one case in britian when a vigilante group beat a man to death who they claimed was a paedophile.

Yes because it's the amount of sympathy they're getting that matters. :rolleyes:

You seem to have successfully missed the point I was making.

Yes, it's a terrible thing, and I wouldn't wish it on anyone, even the people I hate. But knowingly falsely accusing someone of such a terrible, heinous crime is an abomination. To knowingly inflict upon an innocent man years of imprisonment, beatings, assaults, shame, hatred, and social shunning is, in my humble opinion, worse than the crime itself.

A victim may, with the help of supportive friends and family, slowly begin to recover from their ordeal.

Who is going to help someone wrongly accused? Would you? Would any of you? Would I? Only if it was proved the accusations were false.


That's not exactly what he meant. He's saying that real rape victims will get sympathy from virtually everybody, whereas people wrongfully accused of rape will get sympathy from next to nobody, and will be shunned, even if evidence shows that they had never even seen the "victim" before.

Indeed.

People are going to shout at me for this, but meh.

Rape is bad. Very bad. But, as bad as it's affects are, the victim will earn people's sympathy, hell, they'd get mine.

Someone falsely accused of rape, however, would be shunned by society, hated by lots ofpeople, and their life would be ultimately ruined.

Empirically untrue.

It is quite common in the US for rape victims to be villified.

Many will question the honesty of a rape victim and/or blame her (or him) for being raped.

Rape victims are often treated as damaged goods.

This is all in addition to the physical and emotional trauma of the rape itself.

Severe psychological after-affects are very common.

It is also quite common in the US for individuals accused of rape to have people rally around them.

I know of no evidence of post-traumatic stress disorder, etc., resulting from false rape accusations.

Anyway, think Kobe Bryant.

Even assuming those allegations were false, who has gotten death threats and been more publicly villified? Kobe or his accuser?

(And please, please don't use this as an opportunity to villify her further.)

That's not exactly what he meant. He's saying that real rape victims will get sympathy from virtually everybody, whereas people wrongfully accused of rape will get sympathy from next to nobody, and will be shunned, even if evidence shows that they had never even seen the "victim" before.

My point exactly. It doesn't matter who gets sympathy. It matters if they deserve it. I could be wrong but I'm thinking rape does more trauma to a person than being accused of it.

-snip-

Different situation and terms. Kobe is a very famous person, and as we all know, different rules apply for people of fame.

Remember when Matthew Broderick was driving drunk in Ireland and killed two people? Did anything happen to him? Nope.

I would have to say rape is a worse crime.
Wrongful accusation damages a person more, but it is not as 'wrong'.

My point exactly. It doesn't matter who gets sympathy. It matters if they deserve it. I could be wrong but I'm thinking rape does more trauma to a person than being accused of it.

Yeah, but it all depends. The victims usually do have the worst cases of trauma. But, what about the wrongfully accused who spend 20+ years in prison, being subject to rape and beatings, among other things? As I said, it all depends on the situation.

My point exactly. It doesn't matter who gets sympathy. It matters if they deserve it. I could be wrong but I'm thinking rape does more trauma to a person than being accused of it.

I agree with you. I dont think any amount of sympathy matters. A rape victim has been violated and assaulted physically. Mental scars do hurt if one is falsly accused, however, a rape victim has both mental and physical trauma.

I'd agree with that. Many rape victims get badly traumatized [some don't for one reason or another], but I don't know if that quite beats being locked away in jail [probably getting raped yourself] for 2 decades for a crime you didnt commit.

This assumes that someone is convicted -- after a fair trial in which a jury found them guilty beyond a reasonable doubt -- and serves 2 decades based on a knowingly false accusation.

1. Let's be clear this is a fiction.

2. Someone who is raped must live with that horror for the rest of their lives.

3. You are pitting an extreme (and extremely unlikely) severe case on one end against an extremely light (and relatively rare) case on the other. Not a fair comparison.

Yeah, but it all depends. The victims usually do have the worst cases of trauma. But, what about the wrongfully accused who spend 20+ years in prison, being subject to rape and beatings, among other things? As I said, it all depends on the situation.

Beatings are physical trauma not mental trauma. They don't usually cause as much emotional truama as mental trauma does.

Empirically untrue.
....
(And please, please don't use this as an opportunity to villify her further.)

Don't get me wrong, I know how much rape affects its victims, and by no means would I ever attempt to belittle those effects.

Whilst victims may be treated as damaged goods, rapists, or supposed rapists, are going to be treated like scum. Villified, shunned, abused, beaten. To ruin someones honour, knowing that they are innocent, is surely the worse crime?

I hope you realise that I am only talking about people making claims whilst KNOWING the accusee is innocent.

Beatings are physical trauma not mental trauma. They don't usually cause as much emotional truama as mental trauma does.

Yeah. Depending on the situation, the wrongfully accused can get it much worse than actual rape victims. But, this doesn't happen very often.

Rape victims usually do get the worst. It's all about probability, though.

You seem to have successfully missed the point I was making.

Yes, it's a terrible thing, and I wouldn't wish it on anyone, even the people I hate. But knowingly falsely accusing someone of such a terrible, heinous crime is an abomination. To knowingly inflict upon an innocent man years of imprisonment, beatings, assaults, shame, hatred, and social shunning is, in my humble opinion, worse than the crime itself.

A victim may, with the help of supportive friends and family, slowly begin to recover from their ordeal.

Who is going to help someone wrongly accused? Would you? Would any of you? Would I? Only if it was proved the accusations were false.

Indeed.

I'm trying very hard to avoid flaming or having an aneursym.

Beyond trivializing the devastating horror of rape, you are creating a false dichotomy.

You are taking the worse possible outcome for someone accused of rape and comparing it to a rosy scenario for a rape victim.

That is deceptive, whether intentionally or not.

I probably cannot post within the rules of this forum accurate descriptions of actual rapes that have occurred that would chill your bones.

You would be hard pressed to match the horror of an "average" rape with a true "horror story" of false accusation.

In my opinion, both are as bad as each other in the perspective of emotional damage. Someone raped, especially a child would undoubtably be traumertised for many years if not the rest of their lives. A physical violation of one's body in a sexual way has got to be more mentally painful than any other kind of assault.

As with false accusations of rape, I agree with what has already been stated; that the falsely accused will be shunned and generally treated differently even after proven innocent. If an individual was falsely accused of rape or worse, paedophilia, then the emotional traumer of having the rest of society spite or ignoring you would surely be intolerable. Once you're accused then you're labled for life. It seems that a lot of people don't easily forget the really bad things that happen and that can overshadow any kind of exoneration.

I'm trying very hard to avoid flaming or having an aneursym.

Beyond trivializing the devastating horror of rape, you are creating a false dichotomy.

You are taking the worse possible outcome for someone accused of rape and comparing it to a rosy scenario for a rape victim.

That is deceptive, whether intentionally or not.

I probably cannot post within the rules of this forum accurate descriptions of actual rapes that have occurred that would chill your bones.

You would be hard pressed to match the horror of an "average" rape with a true "horror story" of false accusation.
I'd have to agree. Being accused of rape is awful, but it can't possibly be as bad as being raped, the emotional and psychological, as well as physical suffering.

I mean, you'd be living in fear, maybe even guilt and shame for years, if not your entire life...

I'm trying very hard to avoid flaming or having an aneursym.

Beyond trivializing the devastating horror of rape, you are creating a false dichotomy.

You are taking the worse possible outcome for someone accused of rape and comparing it to a rosy scenario for a rape victim.

That is deceptive, whether intentionally or not.

I probably cannot post within the rules of this forum accurate descriptions of actual rapes that have occurred that would chill your bones.

You would be hard pressed to match the horror of an "average" rape with a true "horror story" of false accusation.

As I have previously stated, I know, not first hand, but near enough, how terrible rape is as a crime. But even with that knowledge, I still believe that to condemn someone to a lifetime of hatred, imprisonment, beatings usw. is a worse breach of justice. It is the worst crime, short of treason or terrorism, anyone can commit.

But to falsely accuse someone of such a crime, impeding their honour in such a way, deliberately, is the worse act. IN MY OPINION.

Don't get me wrong, I know how much rape affects its victims, and by no means would I ever attempt to belittle those effects.

Whilst victims may be treated as damaged goods, rapists, or supposed rapists, are going to be treated like scum. Villified, shunned, abused, beaten. To ruin someones honour, knowing that they are innocent, is surely the worse crime?

I hope you realise that I am only talking about people making claims whilst KNOWING the accusee is innocent.

You are belittling the effects of rape -- whether you mean to or not.

Rape victims can -- and have -- been treated as scum, villified, shunned, abused, and beaten for reporting rapes that did happen. Their rapist is often uncaught or unpunished.

They may be forced to live with their rapist. They may be raped repeatedly -- day after day -- if their rapist is a family member. They may have their entire family be the one's villifying, shunning, abusing, and even beating them for accusing their rapist. All the while, the same family may rally around the rapist. I have personally seen it happen.

No. Surely, the worse crime is rape.

That is how the law treats the matter.

That is how it should be.

Again, I am trying very hard to be civil.

Somehow everything seems to be out of step. I'll let you read my last post, just above yours, before I answer that.

In the mean time, this thought:

Should knowingly falsely accusing someone of rape carry the same sentence as rape itself? Providing, of course, that it can be proved the accuser is in possession of knowledge that the defendant is innocent.


Just to quantify, I am by no means aiming to provoke anger or uncivil comments, merely arguing the flip side of the discussion.

As I have previously stated, I know, not first hand, but near enough, how terrible rape is as a crime. But even with that knowledge, I still believe that to condemn someone to a lifetime of hatred, imprisonment, beatings usw. is a worse breach of justice. It is the worst crime, short of treason or terrorism, anyone can commit.

But to falsely accuse someone of such a crime, impeding their honour in such a way, deliberately, is the worse act. IN MY OPINION.

Again, you are assume the worst possible scenario for one accused of rape and not giving equal consideration to the victim of rape.

"Impeding [someone's] honour]" is hardly comparable to forcibly penetrating someone while they kick and scream and you beat them or hold a gun to their head. Again, the rules of the forum prevent me from decscribing common rape cases.

For the third, and hopefully final time, I know. You do not have to tell me the details of rapes. I know them.

I will cede that rape, at it's worst, is easily the worst act. But all the while people make false accusations, then real victims will be treated with disdain. If the scum who intend to make money from book deals, stories, and publicity brought to them through false accusations continue to make such accusations, how can they be discerned from the real victims?

You say victims are distrusted, dishonoured, not believed. That is because of, on the most part, those who seek personal gain from false claims. Surely, those who bring such distrust upon real victims are the worst criminals?

Let me try this:

Which would you prefer:

A. A man forces his way into your home. He beats you severely. Breaking a few ribs and your jaw. He forces you to give him oral sex at knife point. You are forced to beg for it. To tell him how much you like it. He rapes you anally. Several times. Again, you are forced to say how much you like it and want more. Begging for mercy only gets you beaten more.

You call the police. You have to describe what happened numerous times to numerous individuals. You have to have your body examined -- very intimately. You cannot clean yourself up for several hours. You cannot clean him off for several hours.

Your significant other cannot deal with what happened. Can't beat to touch you anymore. Your relationship is over.

(I could go on and on).

B. You are falsely accused of a rape.

This assumes that someone is convicted -- after a fair trial in which a jury found them guilty beyond a reasonable doubt -- and serves 2 decades based on a knowingly false accusation.

1. Let's be clear this is a fiction.

2. Someone who is raped must live with that horror for the rest of their lives.

3. You are pitting an extreme (and extremely unlikely) severe case on one end against an extremely light (and relatively rare) case on the other. Not a fair comparison.

Ridiculous. If both suppositions here are played out to their logical conclusion, we realize:

--The rape victim stands a healthy chance of being traumatized as a result of the incident, especially if it occurs at an early age, or especially if it's a family member. There's also the possibility of physical injury, usually this is transient but again if it happens early enough or if the guy is particularly rough, it can be permanent.

--The man wrongfully accused of rape stands trial, and given the typical lack of corraborating evidence when dealing with a crime like this, it's generally the woman's word against the man's. The law [i]tends to side with women especially in matters like this. This can be seen in child custody hearings, child support laws, and so on. He will probably go to prison for some time.

It's purely circumstantial. Given that the amount of actual rapes far outweighs the amounts of falsely accused rapes, I will agree that yes, the rape itself is generally the worse act on virtue of volume alone. But you have to realize when you pit two situations like this for our debate, you have to deal with a much smaller population of damaged individuals in option 2; but conversely the per capita suckage factor for those people is probably much much higher than the per capita suckage factor for the raped women. I can't dig up statistics but common sense tells me that a random man stands a better chance of going to prison and being raped in the ass himself than a random rape victim stands chance of suffering lasting trauma as damaging as losing twenty years of your life and [possibly] getting raped a dozen times in the process.

People are going to shout at me for this, but meh.

Rape is bad. Very bad. But, as bad as it's affects are, the victim will earn people's sympathy, hell, they'd get mine.

Someone falsely accused of rape, however, would be shunned by society, hated by lots ofpeople, and their life would be ultimately ruined.
One thing that has puzzled me for a long time is if you're a "normal" (not David Beckham or George Clooney), how on earth would no one know about the accusation? Maybe the legislature is very different in other countries, but in my country only the police (+court personel), accused and the so called victim would know about it. Of course the "victim" could tell her/his stories to everyone but would that really affect so much? The press wouldn't be interested and they are not allowed to publish any names.

Famous people get a lot of accusations all the time. Does it ruin their reputation?

For the third, and hopefully final time, I know. You do not have to tell me the details of rapes. I know them.

I am having a very hard time believing that.

And you continue to persist in the false dichotomy I have pointed out repeatedly.

I will cede that rape, at it's worst, is easily the worst act. But all the while people make false accusations, then real victims will be treated with disdain. If the scum who intend to make money from book deals, stories, and publicity brought to them through false accusations continue to make such accusations, how can they be discerned from the real victims?

You say victims are distrusted, dishonoured, not believed. That is because of, on the most part, those who seek personal gain from false claims. Surely, those who bring such distrust upon real victims are the worst criminals?

This is simply untrue.

False rape claims are very, very rare.

There are even fewer cases where people have benefitted from making false claims.

But rape victims have not been believed since the dawn of time.

In the US, it was long the law that you could not even be accused of rape unless their was a witness to the rape other than the victim.

That law persisted in many states into the 20th century.

You cannot prove any correlation -- let alone causation -- between false rape claims and the poor treatment of rape victims. There is a mountain of evidence to the contrary. I probably cannot discuss this much longer, but I could dig up such evidence if necessary.

Let me try this:

Which would you prefer:

A. A man forces his way into your home. He beats you severely. Breaking a few ribs and your jaw. He forces you to give him oral sex at knife point. You are forced to beg for it. To tell him how much you like it. He rapes you anally. Several times. Again, you are forced to say how much you like it and want more. Begging for mercy only gets you beaten more.

You call the police. You have to describe what happened numerous times to numerous individuals. You have to have your body examined -- very intimately. You cannot clean yourself up for several hours. You cannot clean him off for several hours.

Your significant other cannot deal with what happened. Can't beat to touch you anymore. Your relationship is over.


Over my dead body. He'd have to kill me in order to do that. If he kills me, fine, then I can't do much, but as long as I have one living cell inside me every inch of me WILL resist him.

As for the false accusation, once your reputation is ruined because of something like this it usually stays ruined. Innocent or not doesn't matter much there, since people usually expect the worst. Even after you're proven innocent they'd still talk behind your back, you'd still suffer from it.

Allow to play your game for a second:

Which would you prefer?

A) Being raped by someone

B) Having a woman you have hardly interacted with in your life accuse you of a most heinous crime. Having to listen to her lie, decieve, and trick her way through the 'justice' system, before the terrible moment the judge passes sentence upon you. Watching as your family, your partner, your children, friends, neighbours, and the national press all condemn you, stare at you with hatred in their eyes, and in their hearts.

Having to suffer two decades of being locked away with real rapists, drug dealers, paedophiles, murderers, and the scum of prisons everywhere. Being beaten, spat on, villified, and shunned by your fellow inmates. Living in fear of being killed as you walk around the corner, or stand in the shower. Being anally raped by tens of inmates, and being forced, by threat of violence, to submit yourself to people in prison.

Finally, it's all over, and you are released from prison. You attempt to find employment, but you are, in the eyes of the public, a felon. A rapist. You can never work with children again, your own family have grown up, moved on, and abandoned you. Your parents are probably dead, or old, and different to how you remember. You can't live in your old house, because your family live there, and they don't want you back. Not you, a raping scumbag. You have to find a job with someone that will take you, earning a little over minimum wage, scraping a living, living in some run down apartment, struggling to make it from one day to the next.

And all the time, you know that the woman who raped you sold her 'terrible' story to the press, probably made a book deal about her 'ordeal'. She's currently living with her family in some detached house out in the suburbs, treated with a certain respect by those around her. She is, after all, as proven by the courts, the victim of a terrible ideal, wrought on her by you. But only you and she know that's false. No one will believe you, and she isn't coming clean.

Your life, good as it may once have been, is ruined.


Your choice?

Ridiculous.

No.

If both suppositions here are played out to their logical conclusion, we realize:

--The rape victim stands a healthy chance of being traumatized as a result of the incident, especially if it occurs at an early age, or especially if it's a family member. There's also the possibility of physical injury, usually this is transient but again if it happens early enough or if the guy is particularly rough, it can be permanent.

I'll dig up the statistics. But rape victims -- not just young rape victims or those raped by a family member -- usually do suffer both physical injuries and psychological trauma. Those are the norm.

--The man wrongfully accused of rape stands trial, and given the typical lack of corraborating evidence when dealing with a crime like this, it's generally the woman's word against the man's. The law [i]tends to side with women especially in matters like this. This can be seen in child custody hearings, child support laws, and so on. He will probably go to prison for some time.

No. I'll see if I can dig up statistics, but being accused of rape doesn't not usually result in being convicted -- even when their is evidence beyond the word of the victim.

Cases where it is simply "the woman's word against the man's" are popular in fiction, but less common in reality. Convictions are very rare. Very easy to cast reasonable doubt on such accusations.

It's purely circumstantial. Given that the amount of actual rapes far outweighs the amounts of falsely accused rapes, I will agree that yes, the rape itself is generally the worse act on virtue of volume alone. But you have to realize when you pit two situations like this for our debate, you have to deal with a much smaller population of damaged individuals in option 2; but conversely the per capita suckage factor for those people is probably much much higher than the per capita suckage factor for the raped women. I can't dig up statistics but common sense tells me that a random man stands a better chance of going to prison and being raped in the ass himself than a random rape victim stands chance of suffering lasting trauma as damaging as losing twenty years of your life and [possibly] getting raped a dozen times in the process.

I presume you mean the chance of a random man accused of rape, not just of a random man.

Anyway, I think your common sense is leading you astray.

....Watching as your family, your partner, your children, friends, neighbours, and the national press all condemn you, stare at you with hatred in their eyes, and in their hearts...


Again national press? Who are you? Jeb Bush?
Why on earth your neighbours would know about the accusation?
Why on earth your friends would know about the accusation?

...

Having to suffer two decades of being locked away with real rapists, drug dealers, paedophiles, murderers, and the scum of prisons everywhere. Being beaten, spat on, villified, and shunned by your fellow inmates. Living in fear of being killed as you walk around the corner, or stand in the shower. Being anally raped by tens of inmates, and being forced, by threat of violence, to submit yourself to people in prison.


Word against word, without any other proof, no one would be sentenced. (again, maybe in US)

Over my dead body. He'd have to kill me in order to do that. If he kills me, fine, then I can't do much, but as long as I have one living cell inside me every inch of me WILL resist him.

Easy to say. More difficult to do.

You can be overcome. You can be beaten until you cannot resist.

Perhaps you cannot be forced to cooperate. That only makes the likelihood of physical trauma more likely.

As for the false accusation, once your reputation is ruined because of something like this it usually stays ruined. Innocent or not doesn't matter much there, since people usually expect the worst. Even after you're proven innocent they'd still talk behind your back, you'd still suffer from it.

Bad, yes. But cry me a river. Does not remotely compare to being raped.

You said you would rather die than be raped.

Would you kill yourself if you were falsely accused of rape?

Hmm?

As should have been evident, but I will explain, I was putting a worst case example forwards in that post. That would, in my opinion, include media coverage.

No.



I'll dig up the statistics. But rape victims -- not just young rape victims or those raped by a family member -- usually do suffer both physical injuries and psychological trauma. Those are the norm.


I'll repeat myself: "The rape victim [in the case where it actually happens] stands a healthy chance of being traumatized as a result of the incident..." You'll note that the "especially" opening the next sentance is a quantifier that proceeds to point out that this damage is much more marked in the population of rape victims that I proceed to identify.


No. I'll see if I can dig up statistics, but being accused of rape doesn't not usually result in being convicted -- even when their is evidence beyond the word of the victim.

Let's see em.

Cases where it is simply "the woman's word against the man's" are popular in fiction, but less common in reality. Convictions are very rare. Very easy to cast reasonable doubt on such accusations.

You're giving juries too much credit. You're forgetting that the defense is the side that weeds out the ones they don't want. Would you trust 12 of the dumbest guys your lawyer could find with twenty years of your life?

I presume you mean the chance of a random man accused of rape, not just of a random man.

Yes, thanks for pointing this out.

Anyway, I think your common sense is leading you astray.

Only away from yours. :p

Allow to play your game for a second:

Which would you prefer?

A) Being raped by someone

B) Having a woman you have hardly interacted with in your life accuse you of a most heinous crime. Having to listen to her lie, decieve, and trick her way through the 'justice' system, before the terrible moment the judge passes sentence upon you. Watching as your family, your partner, your children, friends, neighbours, and the national press all condemn you, stare at you with hatred in their eyes, and in their hearts.

Having to suffer two decades of being locked away with real rapists, drug dealers, paedophiles, murderers, and the scum of prisons everywhere. Being beaten, spat on, villified, and shunned by your fellow inmates. Living in fear of being killed as you walk around the corner, or stand in the shower. Being anally raped by tens of inmates, and being forced, by threat of violence, to submit yourself to people in prison.

Finally, it's all over, and you are released from prison. You attempt to find employment, but you are, in the eyes of the public, a felon. A rapist. You can never work with children again, your own family have grown up, moved on, and abandoned you. Your parents are probably dead, or old, and different to how you remember. You can't live in your old house, because your family live there, and they don't want you back. Not you, a raping scumbag. You have to find a job with someone that will take you, earning a little over minimum wage, scraping a living, living in some run down apartment, struggling to make it from one day to the next.

And all the time, you know that the woman who raped you sold her 'terrible' story to the press, probably made a book deal about her 'ordeal'. She's currently living with her family in some detached house out in the suburbs, treated with a certain respect by those around her. She is, after all, as proven by the courts, the victim of a terrible ideal, wrought on her by you. But only you and she know that's false. No one will believe you, and she isn't coming clean.

Your life, good as it may once have been, is ruined.


Your choice?

I note that among the parade of horribles in your B scenario is being raped.

Kind of defeats the dichotomy, doesn't it?

If I am 100% certain to be raped either way, probably A (although you didn't describe the scenario).

But again -- THE DICHOTOMY IS FALSE. My A was not an uncommon scenario. It happens everyday -- many times everyday.

Your B is very, very unlikely to happen at all.

Cat-Tribe, you're missing the real point here. Of course it's not likely to happen, but the very presence of that question in the thread title right above you assumes that it happens.

That was indeed deliberate. It was to imply that the act of falsely accusing someone of rape could lead to that person themselves being raped. Thankyou for re-inforcing that point.

Indeed, you seem to be missing the point of this thread. We are not discussing which is the most prevalent, or common. We are discussing which, at its worst, is the worse action. That, I fear, is why so much conflict seems to be brewing here.

Also, Cat-Tribe, it just occured to me that statistics aren't really going to tell us the whole story here anyway: you can post stats showing the percentage of false rape accusations, but the corner you have to think around here is that if someone is falsely accused and in prison, we obviously don't know about it now do we? Even if it's only one guy it sucks worse for him than it does for your average rape victim.

Obviously, the number of falsely accused inmates erving time right now is more or less unknown. Every once in a while I'm sure they find some evidence to release a few of them I suppose, which is probably where the only data we have comes from.

Would you kill yourself if you were falsely accused of rape?

Hmm?

After exhausting all options of killing the accuser, absolutely. I'd never spend a minute in prison for a crime I hadn't committed. Whether rape or false accusation of rape is worse will always depend on the circumstances. Whoever claimed it was "empirically" one or the other is full of it.

Being accused, by its defenition and subconcious implications, i shall explain:

Being raped-
The rapist is usually anyone, anywhere, anytime, can be an job, any lifestyle, literally anybody...
now, the rapist is a person that completely forsakes the wellbeing of others for self gain, in this case, forcing a female to participate in sexual acts against her will. The rapist is going to extreme lengths for very-short-term personal gain, at the expense of someone else's physical and mental wellbeing. they have to live with it forever, but they have a fair chance to rebuild thier life.

Being falsely accused:
Accuser is usually a confident person, sometimes wealthy, and immaoralistic.
The accuser, similarly, forsakes the wellbeing of the accusee, in order to produce money, revenge, or any number of other different outcomes. the accuser does not care about the outcome of the accusee, as long as they have thier way.
The kicker is that it is unlikely that, if the accuser is found to be lying, that they will be exacted the same punishment than to the falsely accused.
best case scenario, you get stamped with 'accused rapist' for the rest of your life. everyonje will know, your employers, your friends, girlfriends.
Who does the rape victim have to tell? no-one unless absolutely nessecary...

Now, make your choice, who is the more perverted? the person that forces short-term gain, taking advantage of at most, 3 people, and is punished accordingly? or the person that takes advantage of the system (And another human(s)) designed to defend against them, for personal gain?

Would you kill yourself if you were falsely accused of rape?

Hmm?


Thanks to the guy above, whos name I can't be bothered to scroll down to find out, for pointing this out to me.

Yes, yes I would.

Cat-Tribe, you're missing the real point here. Of course it's not likely to happen, but the very presence of that question in the thread title right above you assumes that it happens.

No. I am quite aware of that.

The thread question assumes a rape vs. a false accusation.

It does not assume a false accusation leading to a false conviction leading to the parade of horribles that have been described.

A false accusation simply does not result in such things in the normal scheme of things. I'm not sure you can show it happens at all.

A rape does normally involve physical trauma and severe emotional trauma.

Thus, you (meaning you and others) are not comparing a normal false accusation against a normal rape.

Nor are you comparing the worst possible rape against the worst possible false accusation.

You are comparing the worst theoretically possible false accusation against a normal (or less traumatic than normal) rape.

That is putting your finger on the scales.

Instead, you

Why on earth your neighbours would know about the accusation?
Why on earth your friends would know about the accusation?
Most states have manditory registries, which are public knowledge, for people convicted of sex crimes.

Most states have manditory registries, which are public knowledge, for people convicted of sex crimes.

I figured they might, but didn't say so, because I honestly have o knowledge of the American legal system

Also, Cat-Tribe, it just occured to me that statistics aren't really going to tell us the whole story here anyway: you can post stats showing the percentage of false rape accusations, but the corner you have to think around here is that if someone is falsely accused and in prison, we obviously don't know about it now do we? Even if it's only one guy it sucks worse for him than it does for your average rape victim.

Obviously, the number of falsely accused inmates erving time right now is more or less unknown. Every once in a while I'm sure they find some evidence to release a few of them I suppose, which is probably where the only data we have comes from.

I think you are right it won't matter what statistics I turn up.

But I will note that the statistics you challenged me to find had nothing to do with false accusations.

What I was going to present were statistics on the chances of someone being convicted if they are accused of rape.

So far, it appears there are arrests in only about 28% of reported rapes. Haven't determined in how many of those the police can find the alleged rapist but don't arrest -- I assume that is a small percentage.

But of those rapes that are prosecuted, I have found figures that indicate about 30% result in conviction. Now, only a portion of accusations result in prosecution.

I am sure that if I find actual figures of accusations to convictions the numbers are a relatively low percentage -- and that still won't take into account most cases will involve more than a woman's accusation standing alone.

And the cases in which people are released after it is determined they were wrongly convicted almost never involve a knowing false accusation.

I wonder what the opinions would be if we changed the crime from rape to murder.

Does anyone remember the quote by Stalin after Soviet conscripts had raped about 2 million East German women? Something like "What's wrong with soldiers having a bit of fun?" I don't remember exactly what it was.

Most states have manditory registries, which are public knowledge, for people convicted of sex crimes.
Who said convicted? Word against word will not get anyone convicted (again, maybe it's possible in US, not around here)

Finland's stats about rapes. Less than 10% of the rapes are reported. In 40% of the reported cases someone gets convicted. (and usually it's few months in prison, sometimes even less)
96% of the rapist never have to face the concequences.

It is rather difficult to be falesly accused of rape and convicted. Afterall, everyone's, or almost everyone's (twins, triplets, etc... being the exception) dna is different.
The only problem for my above statement though is a case like Kobe Bryant's where the accused says it was consensual sex in which case DNA evidence is almost useless.

Does anyone remember the quote by Stalin after Soviet conscripts had raped about 2 million East German women? Something like "What's wrong with soldiers having a bit of fun?" I don't remember exactly what it was.
Yes, in fact, I was there. Actually, rape was against Russian military policy, the only problem is those who tried to crack down on it were often killed by the soldiers and cracking down on rape would have destroyed moral.

After seeing what the Germans did to the Russians in WWII, one British major said, "I would forgive the Russians for anything." Well, there you have it, rape. What's worse, getting raped or getting starved to death?

I wonder what the opinions would be if we changed the crime from rape to murder.

I don't know. With the death penalty still in place in the US, being falsely accused of murdering someone in combination with having a crappy state-appointed attorney could easily land you on death row.

As far as rape goes, for a black man in Mississippi to even be accused of raping a white women is pretty much a death sentence. 50 years ago the Klan would regularly lynch black men throughout the South and even as far north as Indiana for the crime of 'glancing provocatively' at a white woman.

Most people aren't black though and don't live in the South. And accusing a frat boy of rape isn't even a slap on the wrist. I knew plenty of frat guys in college who would simply spread rumors of the girl being loose and get off the hook. I doubt many of them even understood what rape was.

Different situation and terms. Kobe is a very famous person, and as we all know, different rules apply for people of fame.

Remember when Matthew Broderick was driving drunk in Ireland and killed two people? Did anything happen to him? Nope.

Fine. I picked Kobe because people have heard of him.

But the situation of the rape victim being treated worse than the accused rapist is not isolated to cases against famous people. It is not particularly rare.

And the scenarios about the "national press" reporting the rape accusation and the accuser making money off the accusation imply some notoriety on the part of the accused.

Everyone keeps jumping to the worst possible consequences of a false accusation.

The same is not being done when it comes to rape.

After exhausting all options of killing the accuser, absolutely. I'd never spend a minute in prison for a crime I hadn't committed. Whether rape or false accusation of rape is worse will always depend on the circumstances. Whoever claimed it was "empirically" one or the other is full of it.

Easy to say. I seriously doubt it.

And you are assume an accusation equals prison, which is silly.

How many people accused of rape actually commit suicide? I doubt many.

This is only even a serious question because people trivialize rape.

After seeing what the Germans did to the Russians in WWII, one British major said, "I would forgive the Russians for anything." Well, there you have it, rape. What's worse, getting raped or getting starved to death?

Yeah Russia got screwed :(.
I heard one of the worst things to happen to a city in those days was to be 'liberated'. One little Russian town was reportedly liberated several times in one day, and by the next day there was nothing left to liberate.

Easy to say. I seriously doubt it.

And you are assume an accusation equals prison, which is silly.

How many people accused of rape actually commit suicide? I doubt many.

This is only even a serious question because people trivialize rape.

Yes, common sense would have to apply. If I were accused by a woman I'd never met or been anyplace near, I'd laugh sooner than take it seriously. Howevever, some people can always lie better than you can tell the truth.. we all know some of these people, I'm sure. I'd post bail and if the trial were going strongly against me, that'd be the end of things.

Why aren't we all take into account that a false accuser is trying to get the accussed arrested, sent to prison, beaten and likely raped themselves. That's a lot of pain to try to inflict on a person, over a long period of time.

Over my dead body. He'd have to kill me in order to do that. If he kills me, fine, then I can't do much, but as long as I have one living cell inside me every inch of me WILL resist him.


easier said than done.

rape isnt about the sex or anythin like that. its about power. i won't go in2 details but speakin from experience of bein raped, it is hard to resist it you are outnumbered and held a knifepoint. i could ave come out of there at lot lot worse than what i did. if i had tried to get out of there or had tried to resist then i would ave been killed but when you ave 3 grown men against a small-built 15 year old like i was then you cant do anythin.

it does depend on the situation but if you were in my shoes would you resist?

Why doesn't anyone take into account that a false accuser is trying to get the accussed arrested, sent to prison, beaten and likely raped themselves. That's a lot of pain to try to inflict on a person, over a long period of time.

And are you taking into account what the rapist is trying to do to his victim?

Moreover, that is assuming a lot about the false accuser.

And, again, it is ironic that so many accounts of why it is worse to be falsely accused assume that it results in the ultimate horror of ...... being raped.

Doesn't that indicate that an actual rape is worse than a mere accusation which carries a slim possibility of resulting in prison and rape?

Who said convicted? Word against word will not get anyone convicted (again, maybe it's possible in US, not around here)
You were responding to a scenerio that included a conviction, questioning how people would know in that scenerio. Since the scenerio was of a conviction, it was reasonable to assume that there was a conviction, and thus the registry comes into play.

I didn't think I was being particularly obtuse...

1. My answer might be different if the question was: which is worse raping someone or wrongfully accusing someone of rape so they get sent to prison for 20 years?

But that isn't the question. Why do so many assume it is?

2. For those who have focused on the "insult to the accused's honor," what about the insult to the dignity and honor of the rape victim?

Is an insult to your honor worse than an invasion of your body and will? Really?

3. It has been repeatedly said a rape victim will recover and get on with life. Not necessarily. Many never "get over it." Most suffer some permanent harm.

4. It has been assumed that a false accusation results in imprisonment. It has been stated that the false accuser will benefit from the accusation. It seems few, if any, have considered a false accuser may be sued, may be prosecuted, may be convicted, may go to prison, etc. Again, rather imbalanced thinking.

People are going to shout at me for this, but meh.

Rape is bad. Very bad. But, as bad as it's affects are, the victim will earn people's sympathy, hell, they'd get mine.

Someone falsely accused of rape, however, would be shunned by society, hated by lots ofpeople, and their life would be ultimately ruined.also (in the US) any man arrested on sexual assault charges is usually sodomized...and gets multiple STDs...

all the cons in Jail are waiting for a good excuse to gang rape you...they dont care if you have waiting to see the Judge.

its like a US tradition...

I wonder if its like that in other countries...and what about female prisons?

for the record i say Rapist should get the death penalty

Cat-Tribe...
Why is it that think people are trivializing rape? I haven't read one post that claimed that rape isn't so bad. What am I missing? As near as I can tell it goes without saying that it's a horrible crime. Possibly second only to murder.
If you must know I know what a rapist does to his victim. I really and truely know. But that doesn't stop me or any survivers I know from thinking rationally. We'll we have moments.

And the reason it maybe worse is that for the accused who happens to convicted they suffer rape as well as loss of freedom.

Cat-Tribe...
Why is it that think people are trivializing rape? I haven't read one post that claimed that rape isn't so bad. What am I missing? As near as I can tell it goes without saying that it's a horrible crime. Possibly second only to murder.
If you must know I know what a rapist does to his victim. I really and truely know. But that doesn't me or any survivers I know from thinking rationally. We'll we have moments.

You are right that most have said "rape is bad, but ...."

That is pretty meaningless.

I am saying it is being trivialized because almost no one is describing how bad it actually is. Some are saying it is bad, but not as bad as a stain on "one's honor." Others are going to great lengths to imagine implausible scenarios about how bad an accusation of rape could turn out to be.

Rape is truly, truly evil. It is unfortunate that I cannot describe actual rapes without violating forum rules. But an average rape is a horrible event causing physical and emotional trauma -- often permanent.

An accusation of rape could conceivable result in real harm, but that is very, very unlikely. And not assumed in the question.

Rape is being trivialized by not being considered seriously and by being compared as less than a mere accusation.

And it doesn't actually go without saying it's a horrible crime. In another thread several have voted rape isn't wrong at all or is only sometimes wrong. And I have participated in other similar threads were people argued rape was simply a form of minor theft and no big deal.

My last post was poorly worded in some areas. What I should say...
I think it is irrational to claim that rape is being trivialized here.

Also I agree with you Cat-tribe that to compare one's reputation to one's body and mind is misguided.

An accusation of rape could conceivable result in real harm, but that is very, very unlikely. And not assumed in the question.
.

Of course it's assumed in the question. The poll isn't asking "what's worse, rape, or an accusation of rape which doesn't do any real damage?" No one would bother voting in that case. An accusation of rape, 100% of the time, results in harm.

Ok, I understand better.

And it doesn't actually go without saying it's a horrible crime. In another thread several have voted rape isn't wrong at all or is only sometimes wrong. And I have participated in other similar threads were people argued rape was simply a form of minor theft and no big deal.

I hope they are a small portion of the population and that bad thing happen to them.

I agree with you. I dont think any amount of sympathy matters. A rape victim has been violated and assaulted physically. Mental scars do hurt if one is falsly accused, however, a rape victim has both mental and physical trauma.I don't think you are seeing this from the falsely accused's point of view. Indeed a rape victim has a huge trauma to cope with, maybe years of counseling and support to go through.
However, the falsely accused has to spend a lifetime with an accusation that's false, enduring on a daily basis; hatred, violence, abuse, possibly attacks. if they are sent to prison, they will receive all of the above, maybe with many experiences of being raped themselves.

Now on that basis, how can you say that the act of rape is worse than the (false) accusation of rape.

For every time that a false accusation of rape occurs, it is an offensive and degrading contempt for the real pain and suffering of those who have been actually raped.

The false accuser should be required to undergo a similar experience to the falsely accused. It's easy to falsely accuse, it should be just as easy to take the consequence of such a choice.

Of course it's assumed in the question. The poll isn't asking "what's worse, rape, or an accusation of rape which doesn't do any real damage?" No one would bother voting in that case. An accusation of rape, 100% of the time, results in harm.

Really?

100% of the time?

It definitely doesn't result in arrest 100% of the time -- let alone prosecution or conviction.

My last post was poorly worded in some areas. What I should say...
I think it is irrational to claim that rape is being trivialized here.

Also I agree with you Cat-tribe that to compare one's reputation to one's body and mind is misguided.

Fine.

I am being irrational.

I am also thoroughly disgusted.

I'm done on this topic -- and with NS for a while.

Really?

100% of the time?

It definitely doesn't result in arrest 100% of the time -- let alone prosecution or conviction.

Gradations of harm. Certainly not never.

Fine.

I am being irrational.

I am also thoroughly disgusted.

I'm done on this topic -- and with NS for a while.

It's never good to post angry. Making irrational claims doesoften result. E.g., that false accusation never causes harm, or that we're all diminishing the trauma of rape,etc.

The question depends on what happens. Obviously if someone accuses you of rape falsely and you have an alibi and DNA evidence to disprove it, it's not so bad. Getting beaten to death in jail by your cellmate because he, as a convicted felon, is disgusted with your actions, sucks hard. A person who is raped is innocent. Eventually, you can make them believe that. A person falsely accused of rape is innocent. But you can make them disbelieve that. I believe it is worse to live each day knowing your family and friends abandoned you after trusting a stranger more than they trusted you, to always have to explain the "convicted felon" box on your employment applications, to be ostracized and avoided in your neighborhood. A woman who gets raped can move away and start over. You can never escape felony rape.

They are not seriously comparable.

Rape is serious, inherently violent crime invasive of another person's very body and will.

Wrongfully accusing someone of rape is wrong. It can also be criminal -- depending on the circumstances. But it pales in comparison.

And, for the record, rape is a serious problem in the US. False accusations of rape are not.

According to the DOJ Bureau of Justice Statistics, in 2003 for every 1,000 persons age 12 or older, there occurred 1 rape or sexual assault. There were, by the BJS definition of rape, about 90,390 rapes in 2002.

Studies of false rape reports, including those by the FBI, indicate that about 2-6% of rape reports are false -- which is a similar rate of false reports to that for other crimes.not arguing with the Stats... but falsly accusing someone of rape, even going to trial and being proven innocent, labels the person. worse is if he was proven guilty and released later. the stigma of being accused when you are innocent is just as devistating.

However, Spider Robinson put forth an interesting theory... what would happen if the woman put her attacker on trial not for rape, but indecent exposure.

according to his theory,
1) the accuser's past/intensions are not brought into the fore.
2) while sometimes the sentence is lighter, while in Jail, he will be tagged as a Wiennie Wagger and thus will become everyone's Bitch
3) when he get's out, he will still be a sexual Preditor, but a rapist can be viewed as Cool while a streaker is just... perverted.
4) what's he gonna say... "No way your honor, I raped that bitch!"

Agreed. While not quite as bad, wrongfully accusing somebody of rape just to get revenge (or something else of the sort) is still one of the lowest acts any person could commit.

i can think of about a million lower acts

I voted other. You can't tell without the specifics. I saw a show on A&E where this black guy was falsely accused of rape by a white woman in arkansas. He was given this massive prison sentence, and while inside kept on getting raped himself. Because of a bunch of racist corrections officer (black man raping white women) no-one gave a shit. So it kept on happening to him because it was tacitly approved by the authorities. Eventually he contracted HIV.

Anyway, DNA evidence eight years later, proved it wasn't him, and the woman eventually admitted that she made the whole thing up to cover an adulterous relationship. The state discharged him. He has no decent health care, can't get a job, and was only entitled to a pittence in compensation. (I forget how much, but it was, I think, less that $50,000). He's going to die of aids, and his whole life is ruined, and he suffered years of torture, all because some lying bitch fingered him to cover her own shit up.

Now, that is arguably far worse some individual cases of rape. (Like the boderline ones, where the woman gets drunk and has sex with some guy while passed out).

On the other hand, if a guy gets falsely accused of rape and straight away it is dismissed because it is obviously bullshit, well that's not as bad as a five day gang rape by a biker gang.

You just can't make sweeping generalizations about these things.

I don't think anything happened to the woman that accused him either. (He probably should have gone and hunted her down and raped her to even things up a bit).

They are both horrible acts. I say they are tied. I have a friend who is wrongfully accused of rape, and she's going through trial right now. And this is the SECOND time. Her ex is a revengeful person. But this is ruining most aspects of her life. Other than her wonderful new partner, she's lost everything. It's a horrible horrible thing to do to a person, because she can't prove either way what happened. People who put other people through that shit should be locked up themselves.

I think you are right it won't matter what statistics I turn up.

But I will note that the statistics you challenged me to find had nothing to do with false accusations.

What I was going to present were statistics on the chances of someone being convicted if they are accused of rape.

So far, it appears there are arrests in only about 28% of reported rapes. Haven't determined in how many of those the police can find the alleged rapist but don't arrest -- I assume that is a small percentage.

But of those rapes that are prosecuted, I have found figures that indicate about 30% result in conviction. Now, only a portion of accusations result in prosecution.

I am sure that if I find actual figures of accusations to convictions the numbers are a relatively low percentage -- and that still won't take into account most cases will involve more than a woman's accusation standing alone.

And the cases in which people are released after it is determined they were wrongly convicted almost never involve a knowing false accusation.

I don't beleive a word of that for a fraction of a second. I'd like to see a source please.

My god. People have lost it

People are going to shout at me for this, but meh.

Rape is bad. Very bad. But, as bad as it's affects are, the victim will earn people's sympathy, hell, they'd get mine.

Someone falsely accused of rape, however, would be shunned by society, hated by lots ofpeople, and their life would be ultimately ruined.

Yeah, look at kobe bryant. he averaged about 28 points, 6 rebounds and 6 assists per game this year... yet all anyone wanted to talk about was his rape trial. It has tarnished his reputation considerably.

What exacerbates this is my belief that his accuser's main intention was to become rich. That really pisses me off: she wrongly accuses him, he pays her to avoid a possible punitive amount in civl court (right?)... she is lost in history, and he becomes infamous for being on trial. She got what she wanted by lying.

People are going to shout at me for this, but meh.

Rape is bad. Very bad. But, as bad as it's affects are, the victim will earn people's sympathy, hell, they'd get mine.

Someone falsely accused of rape, however, would be shunned by society, hated by lots ofpeople, and their life would be ultimately ruined.

Yeah, look at kobe bryant. he averaged about 28 points, 6 rebounds and 6 assists per game this year... awesome numbers... yet all anyone wanted to talk about was his rape trial. It has tarnished his reputation considerably.

What exacerbates this is my belief that his accuser's main intention was to become rich. That really pisses me off: she wrongly accuses him, he pays her to avoid a possible punitive amount in civl court (right?)... she is lost in history, and he becomes infamous for being on trial. She got what she wanted by lying.

I've closely experienced both. A friend of mine was wrongly accused of rape, but it wasn't made public because there was no evidence or anything (because it wasn't true). Anyone who knew stuck by him and supported him, and anyone who didn't didn't need to. It hurt him, but there was no other consequence. I know it's not always this simple, but you have to have a degree of faith in the justice system. The police and courts don't want to lock people up and make their lives miserable for no reason, and there are ALOT of false accusations of rape around. I have not actually seen any of them come ot anything serious.
On the other hand... rape... it stays with you forever. It doesn't ever go away. It makes the victim feel ashamed and dirty - saying "they get sympathy" is all fine and good, but most of the time the victims are too ashamed to actually tell anyone. It puts a big stain on any relationship they try to have, and brings in all kinds of psychological issues - depression, post traumatic stress disorder, self harming often result. It's far more than just the actual act of rape.
So, I don't mean to belittle accusations of rape because that is awful, but I agree with the majority that rape itself is worse.

I chose other.

I think Genocide is worse, hahahaha.

I've closely experienced both. A friend of mine was wrongly accused of rape, but it wasn't made public because there was no evidence or anything (because it wasn't true). Anyone who knew stuck by him and supported him, and anyone who didn't didn't need to. It hurt him, but there was no other consequence. I know it's not always this simple, but you have to have a degree of faith in the justice system. The police and courts don't want to lock people up and make their lives miserable for no reason, and there are ALOT of false accusations of rape around. I have not actually seen any of them come ot anything serious.
On the other hand... rape... it stays with you forever. It doesn't ever go away. It makes the victim feel ashamed and dirty - saying "they get sympathy" is all fine and good, but most of the time the victims are too ashamed to actually tell anyone. It puts a big stain on any relationship they try to have, and brings in all kinds of psychological issues - depression, post traumatic stress disorder, self harming often result. It's far more than just the actual act of rape.
So, I don't mean to belittle accusations of rape because that is awful, but I agree with the majority that rape itself is worse.

Yeah, this is one of those points where I don't think Cat-Tribe is paying any attention to what I've been saying. I mentioned a couple of pages ago that rape is the worse act on virtue of volume alone, but s/he doesn't realize that I'm only pointing out that false accusations hurt far more in the most extreme of circumstances.

I voted other. The whole idea of trying to decide which is worse is wrong headed.

We do not have a scale of crimes, whereby this crime trumps that one. Both are wrong, both are heinous acts that deserve to be punished.

To compare these two acts is like asking which is better: running the 100m in 9.8 seconds or discovering a new planet? They are not comparable. Nor are these two crimes.

Yeah, this is one of those points where I don't think Cat-Tribe is paying any attention to what I've been saying. I mentioned a couple of pages ago that rape is the worse act on virtue of volume alone, but s/he doesn't realize that I'm only pointing out that false accusations hurt far more in the most extreme of circumstances.

so what if there can be a circumstance so extreme that it is worse than rape? is that really the point? that there may even exist a circumstance that when compared to a relatively non-violent rape comes out as worse means very little.

if you look at rape and at the false accusation of rape in the aggregate
there is no comparison. rape is much worse.

if you look at the worst rape and the worst false accusation rape is still worse.

it ONLY works out your way if you take the "best case" scenario for rape and the "worst case" scenario for false accusation and compare them. sure you can do that but it doesnt prove your point honestly.

i know you want to win, but really, this is just sophistry.

I voted other. The whole idea of trying to decide which is worse is wrong headed.

We do not have a scale of crimes, whereby this crime trumps that one. Both are wrong, both are heinous acts that deserve to be punished.

To compare these two acts is like asking which is better: running the 100m in 9.8 seconds or discovering a new planet? They are not comparable. Nor are these two crimes.
yes we do have a scale of crimes. thats why murder gets the death penalty/life in prison but stealing a pack of gum gets community service.

so what if there can be a circumstance so extreme that it is worse than rape? is that really the point? that there may even exist a circumstance that when compared to a relatively non-violent rape comes out as worse means very little.

If there's one thing I've found myself doing in this forum a lot, it's repeating myself:

Given that the amount of actual rapes far outweighs the amounts of falsely accused rapes, I will agree that yes, the rape itself is generally the worse act on virtue of volume alone.

if you look at rape and at the false accusation of rape in the aggregate there is no comparison. rape is much worse.

See above.

if you look at the worst rape and the worst false accusation rape is still worse.

I vehemently disagree with that statement, being that the worst case scenario you invoke here [for the guy] involves being raped in the ass a lot more than just once, unless you just so happen to be an ass kicking machine. You can't honestly expect me to believe that having forced sex once is worse than being locked away for 20 years, losing 20 years of your life outright because of some vindictive bitch.

it ONLY works out your way if you take the "best case" scenario for rape and the "worst case" scenario for false accusation and compare them. sure you can do that but it doesnt prove your point honestly.

i know you want to win, but really, this is just sophistry.

Yes, I'm using extremes here, thank you for pointing that out. But given the relative rarity of falsely accused rape in the first place, we're already dealing with an extreme. Given that [like I said earlier] we don't actually know how many guys are in prison for rapes they didn't commit, we can't really point to numbers here either.

And yes, I'll reiterate in case you missed it the first two times: Rape is worse simply on virtue of the fact that it's more prevalent and does more damage to more people.

I vehemently disagree with that statement, being that the worst case scenario you invoke here [for the guy] involves being raped in the ass a lot more than just once, unless you just so happen to be an ass kicking machine. You can't honestly expect me to believe that having forced sex once is worse than being locked away for 20 years, losing 20 years of your life outright because of some vindictive bitch.

this is what i take as the crux of your argument.

if you think that "having forced sex once" is the worst case scenario of rape, you are not qualified to be in this discussion.

if you know better, and i think you do, you are engaging in sophistry.

this is what i take as the crux of your argument.

if you think that "having forced sex once" is the worst case scenario of rape, you are not qualified to be in this discussion.

if you know better, and i think you do, you are engaging in sophistry.

You're getting pretty close to baiting me here, which isn't very wise. The opposition in this argument has been doing the same thing [pitting an extreme vs a light case], if you care to look at the context of the thread. I don't have a problem with saying rape is worse, but if you want to discuss something rationally you can't dismiss someone outright if someone says "Well... this would suck too."

Given that the thread title does not specify "Rape and killing" I have to assume that we're dealing with a singular act of forced fornication. Thus its the worst case scenario in the context as it's described in the title of the discussion. If you wanted to ask me "What's worse, being raped and murdered or going to jail for 20 years for something you didn't do," I'd say yeah sure getting raped and killed would be a lot worse. That's the extreme of rape, but it's not stipulated in the thread topic.

They are tied... Either one does drastic harm to the wellbeing of another.

In this day and age, someone wrongfully accused still faces total stigma, thanks to the media coverage, even if found innocent of the act. And the perpetrator of the false witness is still viewed as the "poor victim"... In some ways, it's far worse than rape, as it has a continuous on-going stigma attached to the person, even if innocent.

False Accusation is a horrible crime, and the more horrid the accusation, being false, the more horrid is the crime commited by the person bearing such laying accusatory words on the innocent.

Anyone who voted for rape, is as perverted as a rapist, IMHO...

You're getting pretty close to baiting me here, which isn't very wise. *gives melkor the look*

Given that the thread title does not specify "Rape and killing" I have to assume that we're dealing with a singular act of forced fornication. Thus its the worst case scenario in the context as it's described in the title of the discussion. If you wanted to ask me "What's worse, being raped and murdered or going to jail for 20 years for something you didn't do," I'd say yeah sure getting raped and killed would be a lot worse. That's the extreme of rape, but it's not stipulated in the thread topic.
you are the one who decided that it must be worst case scenario rather than typical case scenario. *I* am the one who is saying that if you are going for worst case in one, you have to go with worst case for the other.

and if you think "rape and killing" is the worst case, you are still off the mark.

I voted raping someone. I've seen the effects of both and the rape victim definately came off worse out of the two.

*gives melkor the look*

you are the one who decided that it must be worst case scenario rather than typical case scenario. *I* am the one who is saying that if you are going for worst case in one, you have to go with worst case for the other.

and if you think "rape and killing" is the worst case, you are still off the mark.

No, I'm comparing the worst possible outcome of falsely accused rape vs the worst possible outcome of "raping someone" as described in the thread title. Any qualifications beyond that need to be explained in the body of the first post. Since rape is pretty much defined as forced sex, I'd have to say I'm still on the money here.

And just what, out of curiousity, is worse in this context than being raped and killed?

This is stupid. All crimes happen in a context. One cannot be said to worse than another unless one knows the circumstances and the effects on the victims and those around them. As someone pointed out earlier one crime can be associated with another eg: rape and murder, or false accusation and lynching. This either or mentality is that of the tabloid press and breeds the kind of authoritarian hang 'em and beat 'em mentality so popular in democracies at election time.

No, I'm comparing the worst possible outcome of falsely accused rape vs the worst possible outcome of "raping someone" as described in the thread title. Any qualifications beyond that need to be explained in the body of the first post. Since rape is pretty much defined as forced sex, I'd have to say I'm still on the money here.

And just what, out of curiousity, is worse in this context than being raped and killed?
oh go back over the hints given by cat-tribe, if that doesnt let you know what we're talking about, you are better off not knowing.

This is stupid. All crimes happen in a context. One cannot be said to worse than another unless one knows the circumstances and the effects on the victims and those around them. As someone pointed out earlier one crime can be associated with another eg: rape and murder, or false accusation and lynching. This either or mentality is that of the tabloid press and breeds the kind of authoritarian hang 'em and beat 'em mentality so popular in democracies at election time.

Absolutely. The circumstances of one rape might be much worse than any false accusation, and the circumstances of another rape might be much less severe than any false accusation. There's no cookie cutter situation for either that can be used to compare to one another; all rapes and all false accusations have different contexts that change the nature of each one.

The other rape thread brought a question to my attention. What causes more harm, rape or wrongfull accusation of rape?
this is the original post; the poll you can still see; anything more you (all) have redefined.

you make the outcome of one more and more extreme while downgrading the possibilties of the outcomes of the other until you are right.

its hardly an honest debate.

both are wrong

Absolutely. The circumstances of one rape might be much worse than any false accusation, and the circumstances of another rape might be much less severe than any false accusation. There's no cookie cutter situation for either that can be used to compare to one another; all rapes and all false accusations have different contexts that change the nature of each
one.

Yes, I tried to point this out, but apparently there is only one sort of rape, and one outcome from false accusation.

Fine.

I am being irrational.

I am also thoroughly disgusted.

I'm done on this topic -- and with NS for a while.

It's never good to post angry. Making irrational claims doesoften result. E.g., that false accusation never causes harm, or that we're all diminishing the trauma of rape,etc.

I admit my "I'm taking my marbles and going home" statement was an unwise pique of anger. I was having a conniption.

I am still quite disgusted, but glad to see things have improved somewhat in my absence.

To be clear, I never said "false accusation never causes harm." To the contrary, I think false accusations are very wrong and a serious crime. I believe I have expressly said so in my first post. What I did say was that false accusations are unlikely to cause serious harm. You took the irrational position that they always do.

I may have implied, but did not say that everyone here is diminishing the trauma of rape. I do think many of you are. I will not yeild from that position.

this is the original post; the poll you can still see; anything more you (all) have redefined.

you make the outcome of one more and more extreme while downgrading the possibilties of the outcomes of the other until you are right.

its hardly an honest debate.

Thank you. This has been my primary point.

Gradations of harm. Certainly not never.

Of course not. Nor did I ever say otherwise.

False accusations are generally harmful. Both to the false accused and to society.

Yeah, look at kobe bryant. he averaged about 28 points, 6 rebounds and 6 assists per game this year... yet all anyone wanted to talk about was his rape trial. It has tarnished his reputation considerably.

What exacerbates this is my belief that his accuser's main intention was to become rich. That really pisses me off: she wrongly accuses him, he pays her to avoid a possible punitive amount in civl court (right?)... she is lost in history, and he becomes infamous for being on trial. She got what she wanted by lying.

Actually, you illustrate my point. You are rallying around the accused.

Kobe continues to make millions upon millions. He has not spent any time in jail, etc.

His accuser got many, many death threats and has been publicly villified.

I could be wrong, but I do not believe there has been any settlement. So, she has not made any money.

I believe in the presumption of innocence, so will accept that Kobe is not guilty and the accusation is untrue unless proven otherwise. But, although Kobe has suffered some damage to his reputation (in part because his version admits adultery and rough sex with a virtual stranger), her reputation in her community has been thoroughly destroyed.

And the presumption of innocence should run both ways here. She should not be assumed to be guilty of knowingly making a false accusation for pecuniary gain. I would note that police and prosecutors believed her and brought charges based on the evidence. She asked to have the charges dropped.

Definitely an ugly situation all around. But more of a lose-lose than an win in her favor.

Yes, I tried to point this out, but apparently there is only one sort of rape, and one outcome from false accusation.

I think yours is a reasonable position.

I missed the thrust of your point in the heat of debate last night -- and your wording tended to distract me from your point.

I think the median rape is worse than the median false accusation.

But I don't deny there are some false accusations are worse than some rapes.

Yeah, this is one of those points where I don't think Cat-Tribe is paying any attention to what I've been saying. I mentioned a couple of pages ago that rape is the worse act on virtue of volume alone, but s/he doesn't realize that I'm only pointing out that false accusations hurt far more in the most extreme of circumstances.

I am paying close attention to what you are saying and I have responded to this point multiple times.

I recognize you are saying rape is worse "on virtue of volume alone." Although that wording is rather unfortunate, I see the point you are conceding. Way more rapes = way more harm from rape.

But as I have pointed out multiple times, the second point "that false accusations hurt far in the most extreme of circumstances" is, at best, extremely misleading.

It is misleading because you and others have gone to great lengths to describe a parade of horribles from a false accusation (usually including rape among the worst of the outcomes), but merely said things like "rape is bad" for the other factor in the equation.

It is misleading because it is not the question asked.

The question of volume I raised as an aside because, in other threads, I have seen misunderstanding on this point. People often assume false reports of rape are common, which is untrue.

Please answer this question: is the median rape worse than the median false accuation?

Thank you. This has been my primary point.
my pleasure
you were doing a better job at it than i could but i was afraid that you had had a stroke and wouldnt be able to follow up today.

false accusations are and should be a crime. filing a false police report is a crime. perjury is a crime with severe consequences.

personally i feel there are times when prosecutors should go to jail for the way they railroad certain defendants. there are cases of suppression of evidence, manufacturing of evidence, coercing of confessions. these should land a prosecutor in jail for the same term the poor innocent guy got. in the same hell-hole prison.

I am paying close attention to what you are saying and I have responded to this point multiple times.

I recognize you are saying rape is worse "on virtue of volume alone." Although that wording is rather unfortunate, I see the point you are conceding. Way more rapes = way more harm from rape.

Accepted.

But as I have pointed out multiple times, the second point "that false accusations hurt far in the most extreme of circumstances" is, at best, extremely misleading.

It is misleading because you and others have gone to great lengths to describe a parade of horribles from a false accusation (usually including rape among the worst of the outcomes), but merely said things like "rape is bad" for the other factor in the equation.

It is misleading because it is not the question asked.

... If both suppositions here are played out to their logical conclusion, we realize:

--The rape victim [in the case where it actually happens] stands a healthy chance of being traumatized as a result of the incident, especially if it occurs at an early age, or especially if it's a family member. There's also the possibility of physical injury, usually this is transient but again if it happens early enough or if the guy is particularly rough, it can be permanent...

As you can see, your supposition that I've only said "rape is bad" is patently incorrect. I believe the fundamental dividing factor in our argument [which is pretty big considering the fact that we both agree that rape is worse] is the fact that I'm a man and I'm not going to rape anyone; so the only one of these possibilities that could possibly happen to me is the second. With you, the case is reversed, so you see it in a different light.

I'll admit to some degree it's impossible for me to compare these two extremes, since I've never been raped and God willing I never will be. When you get right down to it, the only things we can really judge are the things that fit most closely to our circumstance.

The question of volume I raised as an aside because, in other threads, I have seen misunderstanding on this point. People often assume false reports of rape are common, which is untrue.

We don't know how many there are for sure, we only have a rough idea. The ones we know about are the ones we find, obviously.

Please answer this question: is the median rape worse than the median false accuation?

Yes.

Given that the thread title does not specify "Rape and killing" I have to assume that we're dealing with a singular act of forced fornication. Thus its the worst case scenario in the context as it's described in the title of the discussion.

How about a husband raping their wife on a regular basis in horrific ways? Or a parent raping their child regularly all throughout their childhood? Or various other things that would fit the context.

Also, no the title doesn't mention kiling. But the title doesn't mention being sent to prison either. If you're allowed to follow routes the situation could take, why not for the other side of the debate?

I have experience of someone close to me being raped. I have experience of someone close to me being accused of raped. Both were 'average' i.e. not extreme but not something small. Both were utterly terrible and extremly harmful. But without a doubt the rape was worse. Far far worse.

Taking the worst case of an accusation and comparing it to a minor case of rape is not a fair comparison. In that comparison the accusation would be worse. But using a generalisation of the average case of each, rape is worse.

If I were to compare being brutally raped as a child by your parents and their friends in the most horrific ways regularly and compare that to a girlfriend and a few of her friends spreading a rumour about being raped, I doubt you'd accept that. So why should we accept it when that's reversed?

The average rape case the person will be traumatised, have all their future relationships affected, get extremly depressed, lose friendships/relationships and be treated badly by people who find out, even people who want to help not knowing how to act and making them feel bad, people who you want to form a relationship you might lose the chance with but have to tell them so they'll undertsand how you feel, they'll feel guilty and worthless, feel scared and fearful, feel disgusted and sickened, if they want to get justice they'll have to go through the awful experience of identifying the rapist, seeing them in court, reliving the experience in court, have to go through the actual physical pain of the rape, be haunted their whole life by it etc etc

Can you give me the average accusation case that is worse than that?

Accepted.

Yay!

As you can see, your supposition that I've only said "rape is bad" is patently incorrect.

You are right. I was wrongly making you "guilty" by association. I apologize.

I believe the fundamental dividing factor in our argument [which is pretty big considering the fact that we both agree that rape is worse] is the fact that I'm a man and I'm not going to rape anyone; so the only one of these possibilities that could possibly happen to me is the second. With you, the case is reversed, so you see it in a different light.

Actually, you make an erroneous assumption. (Stereotypical but understandable -- done the same type of thing myself too many times.)

I am also a man. And I am definitely not going to rape anyone.

Unfortunately, it is not true that it is impossible that either of us could be raped in the future. Highly unlikely. Far, far, far less likely than if we were women. But it does happen -- including outside prison. (Which I see you recognize in the next paragraph. :eek: )

I'll admit to some degree it's impossible for me to compare these two extremes, since I've never been raped and God willing I never will be. When you get right down to it, the only things we can really judge are the things that fit most closely to our circumstance.

I do think one could educate oneself about the severity of rape, but I recognize your point.

My mother has been a rape crisis counselor and activist my entire life, so I grew up knowing many, many rape victims and (unfortunately) learning many, many horror stories. I myself have worked on this cause and assisted in a rape prosecution. (Not trying to imply any authority on the subject, just explaining my sensitivity.) On the other hand, I've also defended accused rapists in court.

We don't know how many there are for sure, we only have a rough idea. The ones we know about are the ones we find, obviously.

Well, it has been studied many times and the FBI keeps track of such things in the US. It is true for any crime that some false reports may go unidentified as such. For rape, of course, it is also true that most actual rapes go unreported.

My understanding is the best data places false reports in the US at between 2% and 6% -- roughly the same as for other crimes like robbery.

Yes.

Double yay!!! Then we are in much more agreement than it seemed.

I may not need defibrillation again today. :D

... apparently there is only one sort of rape.huh?

*snipped for brevity*

Can you give me the average accusation case that is worse than that?

It depends if the person was convicted. In the average case in my opinion, if the person wasnt convicted, then your story would be worse. If they were, then what would happen to the person accussed would be worse.

my pleasure
you were doing a better job at it than i could but i was afraid that you had had a stroke and wouldnt be able to follow up today.

:D

Thanks. It was touch-and-go there for awhile whether my head would explode. ;)

false accusations are and should be a crime. filing a false police report is a crime. perjury is a crime with severe consequences.

Agreed. I have not meant to trivialize false accusations.

personally i feel there are times when prosecutors should go to jail for the way they railroad certain defendants. there are cases of suppression of evidence, manufacturing of evidence, coercing of confessions. these should land a prosecutor in jail for the same term the poor innocent guy got. in the same hell-hole prison.

Definitely.

Unfortunately, prosecutors are rarely punished even when misconduct can be proved.