Why are men accused of sexual misconduct seen as guilty, but not women?

[Anonymous]

Updates

4 mo

When it comes to men, accusations of sexual crimes are the same as a conviction.

[NaultD]

As a guy sexual attention is in high demand. Even from potential dangerous females.

https://youtu.be/UJ6pLKlU-8Q?si=T4juSi_9rcItzBl4

I'm in alaska and rape is all too common. At the same time if a rape victim tries to use self defense with a gun. They tend to end up with murder charges because they talked to the police.

You do have a right to remain silent and rights to a lawyer. Anything you say will bite you in the ass later so shut the fuck up.

[Texaskid1]

Because men have been made out to be automatically guilty since there is this old idea that men cannot control their sexual urges and will take the first woman that flings herself at him. Thus, when a man is accused of something people just automatically deem him to be guilty even before he has had a chance to defend himself or before getting all the relevant facts.

[Kelley1]

There are more men than women at the extremes. That plus our society defines men as potential rapists.

[Asker]

What do you mean when you say there are more men than women at the extremes? The extremists of what exactly?

Our society also defines women as potential embezzlers and generally as thieves. Do you think of a bunch of men get together and accuse you of being a thief that you should be prosecuted for it or ostracized for it, particularly if the accusation is without evidence?

[Kelley1]

The bell curve for men is wider than the bell curve for women. Therefore, at the extremes (both ends), there are far more men than women. For example, there are more men geniuses at one end and more men idiots at the other end. There are more men than women criminals, and there are more virtuous men than women. Therefore, there are more men than women sexual abusers.

[Asker]

Population size on the bell curve is determined by amplitude, not width. You're assuming sexual abuse is normally distributed based on what you wrote. I'd like to see some proofs for that.

[Kelley1]

It is exactly as I stated. You want to argue and I'm with your nonsense.

[Anonymous]

Well I can tell you I am not like that.
I’m capable of critical thinking.

[MrChinaski]

It's considered unmanly to not be excited about sexual interest from the opposite sex on every possible occasion. So men just put up with misconduct and carry it around silently like so many other burdens.

[Asker]

I'm talking about women just randomly claiming sexual misconduct from men who have done nothing to them except maybe said hello once or twice. There are women who do these things, and I think they do it for money, primarily.

[MrChinaski]

To return to your original question and the update thereof, conviction rates on sexual assault are like 1 or 2 %. So supposing you are correct and women make false accusations leading to convictions and suppose that explains even 10% of convictions (which seems a fantastically high assumption) ... then 99.8 to 99.9% of sexual offences are not a result of false accusations.

[Asker]

You may want to take a look at the rate of payoffs.

[MrChinaski]

Thanks, anon.

[strateguy632]

After political usage , like the kavanaugh instance , they lose all credibility to me , therefore the left made up 'me too' if one accused , next a hundred other ladies said 'me too". So the TV said to believe them. But only man are mentioned. No instructed if lady hit scratch or seks misconduct.

[Anonymous]

Id like to think in the future or far future, maybe court cases or future high profile cases may show lesbian couples having misconduct issues or even potentially woman on man misconduct aka it was truly the woman the aggressor

But again it's all whatever I read in the newspapers like everyone else -

[Opinion Owner]

Either woman on woman misconduct or woman on man misconduct. As wisdom would say "case by case basis" - and that's the fair value of fair law.

[Opinion Owner]

Was that update a parody of a Law and Order voiceover intro? 👀
©️ "In the fictional criminal justice system, voice overs on fictional crime dramas always start with a moody voice over, a dramatic statement, and of course - a deep gong gong noise" - gong gong 🔔

[HighValue]

Because most of society hates men just for existing and treats men very unfairly.

[MemeSupreme]

i feel like the both of them aren't seen as guilty enough, but i get wym

the world is just fucked up

[lightbulb27]

males are generally considered the aggressor. not always true.

[Agape93]

Because men have perpetuated the myth that women aren't capable of it

[Dargil]

Women in authority over boys increasingly are.

[In_Trance]

You're incorrect. Just because you don't hear about it doesn't mean it doesn't happen.

[NicholasofAustralia]

Say my man - Was that update a parody of a Law and Order voiceover intro? 👀
©️ "In the fictional criminal justice system, voice overs on fictional crime dramas always start with a moody voice over, a dramatic statement, and of course - a deep gong gong noise" - gong gong 🔔 I can't tag Asker. Ah well ❤️‍🩹

[slatyb]

You mean the men accused by dozens of people? What woman has been accused of sexual misconduct by multiple people?

[Asker]

The number of people that been together to make sexual accusations against one person is not a measurement of the truth of that accusation. Women often support each other in ways that men do not. Again, that support that women lend to other women is not a measurement of the truth of what they are alleging. I also note that these accusations often result in payments to the accusers thus making the role of an accuser more attractive than it would otherwise be.

[Asker]

The first sentence above should read " the number of people that band together"

[Asker]

The corollary to this would be an assertion that the number of people in a Lynch mob determine the truth or falsity of the reason why the person is being lynched. That is a hideous fallacy.

[slatyb]

No, that's not a corollary. With people like Epstein and Harvey Weinstein, there are muliple women giving detailed descriptions of being abused. It's not credible that they are all part of some vast conspiracy. Yes, sometimes jilted woman will make false claims of abuse of themselves or of a child. But in such cases, there is only one accuser with a motive.

[Asker]

It most certainly is credible that they are members of a conspiracy. Epstein and Weinstein are both, interestingly, worth a lot of money. Those women wanted money. Do I need to say more? You seem to believe that if enough women get together and gossip about a man, that automatically makes him guilty of something. I think it makes you guilty of not being able to think clearly. Certainly guilty of not being able to be fair. In our system, we ask for evidence. If there is no evidence, we don't convict people. Try to get straight about that.

We don't convict people just because you don't like the alleged crime and you like the accusers. In your world, I would be curious to know how many women it takes to convict somebody in your mind of whatever it is the women are alleging. Is it two women or three or ten? How many is it? How many women accusers equals a conviction?

[slatyb]

To convict someone? It takes one with credible testimony. But for these men there are dozens with detailed reports. Anyway you are just trolling so I'm done here.

[Asker]

So if I understand you correctly, you are completely in favor of convicting any man if enough women accuse him of something Even if there's no evidence since a woman's word is good enough for you, right?

[Asker]

I really wish you'd think about what your advocating here. It seems like you are perfectly willing to abandon due process if enough women accuse a man of something, even if there is no evidence. Punishing people based on the word of a mob is a long way from due process my friend.

[CupcakeTheDestroyer]

Because sexual predation is inherently masculine in our patriarchal society

[Asker]

What makes you believe that? And if you do believe it, how do you know it? Because it gets reported more often!

[CupcakeTheDestroyer]

Because sexual predation is about power, mainly physical power. How many times have you heard people talk about the strength competitions between women and men?

[Asker]

No, it's not about physical power. You can have physical power with a gun or a knife in your hand. Sexual predation does not involve physical power.

[Asker]

OK, for the most part, it doesn't involve physical power; occasionally, it might, but mostly what it involves is women being talked into doing things that they later regret.

[CupcakeTheDestroyer]

You don’t think influence or psychological control is a form of power?

[Asker]

That is a pernicious falsehood. Women routinely engage in sex in order to extract money from men. Women also routinely engage in sex with under age males.

[CupcakeTheDestroyer]

Men do the same thing, I’m not sure why you’re bringing this up. Sexual predation is not exclusive to men, but it happens to come from men more often

[Asker]

No, it doesn't happen to men more often. It probably happens to men and women equally. It's just that men often use physical means and women often use psychological means. Either one has power, as you graciously admitted.

[CupcakeTheDestroyer]

Yes, and all of it is bad. I’m not sure why you need that to be specified

[Asker]

I don't need anything specified, thank you. You are the one who keeps re-emphasizing things that don't need it.