You’re Not Helping v.28

Several years ago, I wrote about my impression of the subreddit /r/MensLib. It is a pro-feminist space for men created as a counter to /r/MensRights. As such, MensLib views men’s issues through a progressive and feminist lens. Non-feminists and non-progressives are allowed to participate as long as they do not question feminist or progressive theories.

As I mentioned in my initial post, it did not take long for MensLib to devolve into the usual heavy moderation, comment deletion, bannings, and anti-male sentiments that typically appear in pro-feminist male spaces. However, MensLib is unique in one regard: an peculiar need to “reclaim” male victimization. Specifically, an attempt to control the narrative about male victims by filtering men’s experiences through a feminist perspective. This is similar to what The Good Men Project tried to do.

This creates an interesting conundrum as feminist theory rejects the notion of male victimization as a legitimate issue in and of itself. Male victims only have value within feminist theory to the extent that they can be seen as an ironic result of men’s power, a sort of karmic backfire. Outside of the perspective, male victims cannot be acknowledged as their existence counters the feminist narrative that violence is a patriarchal tool of oppression reserved for females. This is primarily because most people who abuse males are female, and feminists argue that females lack the power, both physical and institutional, to truly harm males.

So what do you do when males are beaten or raped? Contrary to the feminist narrative, we now have decades of evidence proving men and boys are abused at about the same rate as women and girls, again, predominantly by women and girls. It is no longer possible to deny this without sounding insensitive or dishonest.

Well, if you are MensLib, what you do is acknowledge the abuse occurs and say all the proper things to make it appear that you are concerned for male victims. However, underneath that veneer of compassion lies the truth: you are not really concerned about the male victims at all. This is simply a means subtle indoctrination. Continue reading

Fact Checking Feminist Claims About False Rape Accusations: Part 3

In my prior two posts about this topic, I dissected LefthandedLunatic’s (LhL) citations regarding the frequency of false accusation. I continue my analysis below.

LhL cites a section from a report that states:

While false complaints do occur, approximately three-quarters of the incidents concluded by the police to be false appeared to have been judged to some extent at least on the basis of stereotypes regarding the complainant’s behavior, attitude, demeanor or possible motive. Suspicious file comments were made by the detectives regarding a woman who laughed while being interviewed, others who were seen as ‘attention seeking,’ and some who were said to be ‘crying rape’ for revenge or guilt motives.

This comes from one of the studies the author claims cannot be trusted, so presumably people should dismiss this comment outright. However, let us take it at face value. It is an officer’s job to discern whether a person is credible, and the officer does this by judging the person’s behavior, attitude, demeanor, and possible motive. When they file their reports, they will likely include their findings. So if it strikes them as odd for someone to laugh during an interview, the officer will make note of it. This is how officers do their job.

The author, however, disagrees:

That’s right. 75% of False Rape Accusations labeled as such by police were not because they were proven false but on the gut feelings of the police.

Again, this is how officers do their jobs. Their “gut feelings” are usually based on years of experience. It does not mean they do not make mistakes, however, it seems odd to dismiss their intuition when that is often the thing that makes them consider rape victims credible.

Which means we get plenty of false false rape accusations.

No, it does not. There is no evidence supporting that there frequent false claims of false accusations or this one:

This is probably a bigger issue then men being falsely accused of Rape.

Not only is there no evidence supporting this claim, but the implicit argument here is that is it more important to make sure police believe female rape victims than it is to ensure an innocent man does not go to jail. There is no moral or ethical defense for such an argument. You do not imprison innocent people just to make sure some cop does not disbelieve a rape victim. That is an absurd position.

There have been plenty of documented cases of police pressuring victims to sign false confessions claiming they made up their sexual assaults.

Those are terrible cases. The author, however, does not present any evidence showing that this is a common issue. For all we know, it could occur at a lower rate than discovered false accusations, and according to LhL, that would make them unworthy of concern.

Its why one of the major reasons why out of 1000 rapes only 6 rapists will go to jail while for robberies 20 will go to jail and 33 of assault and battery.

No, the reason is because it is easier to prove a robbery or assaulty happened. Thieves typically have the items they stole, and victims of assault and battery typically report the crime soon after it happened, making it easier to prove they were wounded. Contrast that with rape cases, which are often reported months later, with all the evidence gone, often include conflicting accounts from the accuser and the accused, and often have victims who may not be forthcoming. All of those affect the state’s ability to prosecute the case.

LhL then shifts to attacking the men’s rights movement: Continue reading

Fact Checking Feminist Claims About False Rape Accusations: Part 2

In the first part of this series, I discussed the reason for the feminist backlash against discussing false rape accusations, and tackled LefthandedLunatic’s (LhL) opening arguments regarding false rape accusations.

This brings me to the author’s list of statistics, which prove to be rather misleading, and given the repeated nature of the inaccuracies, misrepresentations, and omissions, I am inclined to believe this was deliberate. For example, the first citation is a 2012 report from the National Sexual Violence Resource Center. LhL cites this section about false reporting:

  • A multi-site study of eight U.S. communities including 2,059 cases of sexual assault found a 7.1 percent rate of false reports (Lonsway, Archambault, & Lisak, 2009).
  • A study of 136 sexual assault cases in Boston from 1998-2007 found a 5.9 percent rate of false reports (Lisak et al., 2010).
  • Using qualitative and quantitative analysis, researchers studied 812 reports of sexual assault from 2000-2003 and found a 2.1 percent rate of false reports (Heenan & Murray 2006).

What the author fails to also cite is the context:

To date, much of the research conducted on the prevalence of false allegations of sexual assaults is unreliable because of inconsistencies with definitions and methods employed to evaluate data (Archambault, n.d.). A review of research finds that the prevalence of false report is between 2 percent and 10 percent. The following studies support these findings[…]

In other words, the studies the report cites are admittedly inaccurate, which in turns means that neither the researchers nor the police have any real idea how frequently false accusations occur. They merely have data on the instances they caught, which they inexplicably combine with cases that lacked enough evidence to prosecute.

None of these studies can tell us how many reported cases are actually false, how many make it through to trial, or how many result in conviction, which makes this claim from the report rather presumptuous:

Research shows that rates of false reporting are frequently inflated, in part because of inconsistent definitions and protocols, or a weak understanding of sexual assault. Misconceptions about false reporting rates have direct, negative consequences and can contribute to why many victims don’t report sexual assaults (Lisak et al., 2010). To improve the response to victims of sexual violence, law enforcement and service providers need a thorough understanding of sexual violence and consistency in their definitions, policies and procedures.

That is not at all what the research shows, however, it does fit with the feminist narrative that false accusations rarely occur, which is the purpose of the report. It is meant to dismiss the concern about false accusations, not investigate the actual frequency of false accusations.

LhL goes on to state:

Now I know that 2-10% is alot and enough to give anyone pause considering how epidemic sexual assault is.

That would not appear to be the case. The author cites a study that showed:

[…] that between 2006 to 2010 the Average number of false rape accusations or baseless accusations was 5.55%, and robbery had a higher false and baseless accusation rate of 5.76%

It appears LhL thinks a 0.21% difference is evidence of the rarity of false rape accusations, so it would be fair to conclude that the author does not 2-10% is “a lot”.

The author continues: Continue reading