Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 sebster wrote:
[

 cuda1179 wrote:
The Morgan Freeman accusation was laughably bad. I watched the video of that "harassment" and thought "that's what she's complaining about"?

One of two things is happening here.
1) You have absolutely no idea of what Freeman was actually accused of.
2) You know what he was accused of, and after reading that Freeman repeatedly tried to lift up a girl's skirt while asking if she was wearing any underwear while being told to stop, you thought there was nothing wrong with that.

I really hope it's #1. Can you please confirm it's #1, because if not, holy crap.


If you ever need to see an example of how power dynamics work, just look at the reaction to #metoo. People have spilled gallons of ink worrying about men who might lose their careers to this, but almost nothing has been written about the women who's careers were destroyed after refusing to submit, or for speaking out afterwards. And there is now vast concern given to the chance that a man might be falsely accused and then penalised, and while that is a legitimate concern, it is telling that there is no similar concern for the women who were attacked after making their accusations, and who still suffer consequences even after their claims were proven true.

The Morgan Freeman incident I was referring to (as I did say video) was the incident involving a pregnant reporter interviewing Freeman and Michel Caine about one of their movies. THAT incident was oddly overblown. I did not hear about Freeman lifting skirts. Was that a recent incident or something from decades past? (not that it excuses such behavior)

As to whether or not to believe an accuser, I'm not saying you should dismiss an accusation. I believe they should always be taken seriously and investigated. I am saying that they should never be thought of as either a lie or the truth. It should be a neutral system until more evidence is presented.

There was a significant backlash towards accusers after that whole Rolling Stone incident. Especially when in the aftermath of it a number of prominent reporters and feminists LITERALLY stated that if some men are falsely accused it's okay because it furthers an agenda. I mean, let's face it, you know someone has gone too far when their antics get mocked on an episode of Law and Order: SVU.

In the end it's quite a balancing act. There is that old adage that it's better for 10 guilty people to go free than for one innocent to be imprisoned.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 sebster wrote:

 cuda1179 wrote:
However, thanks for trivializing a rather traumatic part of my life, greatly appreciated.

If you want to get precious about people trivialising other people's lives, maybe you want to think twice before putting harassment in mocking quotations, when describing a man trying to lift a girl's skirt repeatedly while asking if she's wearing underwear, and claiming surprise that there was nothing to complain about.

One of the things about a callous culture where people ignore or mock other's worst moments is that it has a habit of coming back around.

You post ninja'ed me on this, but I did address that I wasn't aware of the skirt lifting. I was referring to the alleged on-video harassment during an interview.

 Formosa wrote:
This whole movement stinks to high heaven, it’s one sided nature and “guilty until proven innocent” media circus does not sit well with me.

And if you dare to suggest that maybe even one of them might have got it wrong, you're an evil victim-blaming misogynist.

There is no win here, for anyone.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Formosa wrote:
This whole movement stinks to high heaven, it’s one sided nature and “guilty until proven innocent” media circus does not sit well with me.

And if you dare to suggest that maybe even one of them might have got it wrong, you're an evil victim-blaming misogynist.

There is no win here, for anyone.

Getting back to Chris Hardwick in specific, a number of media outlets are now ripping into him for denying the allegations. One of my favorites so far: https://mashable.com/2018/06/16/chris-hardwick-nerd-culture-conversation/#cIutyx8GHmq5


So, I guess making a streamlined, carefully worded response to extreme allegations of misconduct is now wrong.

Overall the amount of false allegations made is only a very small percentage. While a one versus one allegation is a lot harder to approach than multiple independent ones, in this case it seems plausible (some writers at his place of work backing her up?). The only thing that is possibly verifiable in this case seems to be his efforts to get her blacklisted.

Overall the MeToo movement is important to try and breach a culture of inaction. If innocent people get caught up in it then that is lamentable and they should be publically cleared. However to disparage the entire movement for the actions of a few liars goes to far. If that was the case everything has the same issues with dishonest people.

 Ouze wrote:

 TheMeanDM wrote:
I am, if anything, on the side of fairness and justice and letting a legal process play out *before* a person's life and career are ruined by accusations.

Thoughts?

In a lot of these cases there will never be a legal process, especially when the incidents happened outside of the statute of limitations. I don't think there should be a statute of limitations on sexual assault, but there is, and it lets offenders escape justice.

If people decide not to work with someone because of accusations of poor behavior, that's how freedom of association works.

Then if the accusation was pointless lie then that needs to come down REAL hard. The accusers life needs to be brought down. Jail time. Fines(though sometimes their full wealth might not be enough...But maybe life prison would be sufficient deterrant).

If there's false charges laid that ruin peoples lives just by accusation because nobody bothers waiting for checking whether they are true or not then only way that can work is make sure penalty for false accusations are so damn high people don't make those for personal vendettas.

 Disciple of Fate wrote:
Overall the amount of false allegations made is only a very small percentage. While a one versus one allegation is a lot harder to approach than multiple independent ones, in this case it seems plausible (some writers at his place of work backing her up?). The only thing that is possibly verifiable in this case seems to be his efforts to get her blacklisted.

Overall the MeToo movement is important to try and breach a culture of inaction. If innocent people get caught up in it then that is lamentable and they should be publically cleared. However to disparage the entire movement for the actions of a few liars goes to far. If that was the case everything has the same issues with dishonest people.

The problem is that when someone get's smeared with even so much as an allegation of being a rapist or sex offender, then they carry that stigma for the rest of their lives. It doesn't matter if they are found innocent of wrong doing in a court of law, or the accuser fesses up that they were lying. There are plenty of people who either believe that they are guilty by accusation alone, or they wormed their way out of it like a shifty rat. Others will take a "better safe than sorry" approach and avoid/stigmatize the accused, thanks in large part to the number of actual sex predators lurking about and the problem of repeat offenders.

This so-called "movement" reeks of BS to me. And it's easy enough for people to jump on the bandwagon, not caring or thinking of the long term consequences to those not guilty. We live in a society of vindictive people, brain dead idiot followers, self-centered attention whores, and digital shut-ins that don't have to face the consequences of up somebody's life and/or livelyhood due to BS claims.

And if anything, this kind of crap actually HURTS the efforts to combat sex crimes and make the public aware of how serious the problem can be.

 oldravenman3025 wrote:

 Disciple of Fate wrote:
Overall the amount of false allegations made is only a very small percentage. While a one versus one allegation is a lot harder to approach than multiple independent ones, in this case it seems plausible (some writers at his place of work backing her up?). The only thing that is possibly verifiable in this case seems to be his efforts to get her blacklisted.

Overall the MeToo movement is important to try and breach a culture of inaction. If innocent people get caught up in it then that is lamentable and they should be publically cleared. However to disparage the entire movement for the actions of a few liars goes to far. If that was the case everything has the same issues with dishonest people.

The problem is that when someone get's smeared with even so much as an allegation of being a rapist or sex offender, then they carry that stigma for the rest of their lives. It doesn't matter if they are found innocent of wrong doing in a court of law, or the accuser fesses up that they were lying. There are plenty of people who either believe that they are guilty by accusation alone, or they wormed their way out of it like a shifty rat. Others will take a "better safe than sorry" approach and avoid/stigmatize the accused, thanks in large part to the number of actual sex predators lurking about and the problem of repeat offenders.

This so-called "movement" reeks of BS to me. And it's easy enough for people to jump on the bandwagon, not caring or thinking of the long term consequences to those not guilty. We live in a society of vindictive people, brain dead idiot followers, self-centered attention whores, and digital shut-ins that don't have to face the consequences of up somebody's life and/or livelyhood due to BS claims.

And if anything, this kind of crap actually HURTS the efforts to combat sex crimes and make the public aware of how serious the problem can be.

That's an issue on the side of society as well. While the stigma is regretable what can you do against it? Its as problematic an issue (if not in size) as a culture of silence. Its an issue regardless of the existence of the movement. There is no easy solution to that issue, but it is only a single issue in the wider problem. But even with that stigma, false allegations are still rare, they are employed by terrible people regardless of how society acts around sexual assault (they would only stop working in an uncaring society).

The movement is important for breaking through a culture of public silence. Any movement is going to suffer from dishonest people, writing off the entire movement goes too far. What if people had done that in the past to movements like the anti-war movement or civil rights? The issue is, this kind of "crap" wouldn't have surfaced a few years ago because nobody in the industry really cared about tackling sexual assault. The dishonest people are only coming out of the woodwork because the movement is making waves, using that to push back against the movement is seriously flawed.

Witch hunt. Innocent until proven otherwise is the only rule worth to live by here.

If anyone here has ever been bullied in school, you will know that the court of popular opinion is a primeval pit of nastiness.

Episode from Ammianus Marcellinus work Res Gestae:

Numerius, the governor of Narbonensis, was on trial [for embezzlement] before the Emperor, and, contrary to the usage in criminal cases, the trial was public. Numerius contented himself with denying his guilt, and there was not sufficient proof against him. His adversary, Delphidius, “a passionate man,” seeing that the failure of the accusation was inevitable, could not restrain himself, and exclaimed, “Oh, illustrious Caesar! If it is sufficient to deny, what hereafter will become of the guilty?” to which Julian replied, “If it suffices to accuse, what will become of the innocent?”

 Disciple of Fate wrote:
[. But even with that stigma, false allegations are still rare, they are employed by terrible people regardless of how society acts around sexual assault (they would only stop working in an uncaring society).

.

Not really doubting that false allegations are in the minority. I'd just like some kind of verifiable statistic with citation.

 Disciple of Fate wrote:
That's an issue on the side of society as well. While the stigma is regretable what can you do against it?

Not go for a public hunt based on accusations but convictions? You know, whole innocent until proven guilty. Juristical standard west is so proud of...

Don't hunt by accusations but instead come down like wrath of god(figuratively) for those proven guilty.

Was proud of. No longer.

 cuda1179 wrote:

 Disciple of Fate wrote:
[. But even with that stigma, false allegations are still rare, they are employed by terrible people regardless of how society acts around sexual assault (they would only stop working in an uncaring society).

.

Not really doubting that false allegations are in the minority. I'd just like some kind of verifiable statistic with citation.

Link doesn't want to work, but depending on what statistics you want to go for it averages at around 5-6%
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.nsvrc.org/sites/default/files/Publications_NSVRC_Overview_False-Reporting.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwjZpYvFl93bAhXPL1AKHfuPCU4QFjAIegQIBhAB&usg=AOvVaw1zs97YRv7CpQEzK8W0wyDP

It still shocks me the excuses people will come up with to defend sexual assault. Because if you are going to straw-man and say 'you're an evil victim-blaming misongynist' for suggesting a false accusation happened, or that obviously a 'carefully worded resppnse is wrong' then you are defending sexual assault. You deliberately decided to exagerrate things in order to delegitimize a massive problem (never mind accusers who's lives are ruined even when their allegations are TRUE) so you've officially taken that side. Not to mention de-legitimizing the concern you SUPPOSEDLY have. So defend the rapists, but history will not remember you fondly.

tneva82 wrote:

 Disciple of Fate wrote:
That's an issue on the side of society as well. While the stigma is regretable what can you do against it?

Not go for a public hunt based on accusations but convictions? You know, whole innocent until proven guilty. Juristical standard west is so proud of...

Don't hunt by accusations but instead come down like wrath of god(figuratively) for those proven guilty.

Well duh, if only someone had thought of that sooner! You and I don't control society, a lot of things could be done a lot better but there just isn't enough of a control measure in a free society for that.

Another issue is that the system doesn't catch everyone, plenty of people will never get convicted over it, thinking about people like O'Reilly and Ailes. You need to have a solution somewhere in the middle to be able to tackle it.

Are you people going to ignore that people that bring up allegations ruin their lives too? Likely fired from their job, forever blacklisted by other businesses because no one likes a whistle-blower, and constantly harassed by regressives, internet trolls, and donkey caves in general. The idea that this is one sided is a bold faced lie.

And it's pathetic that THIS is only thing people seem to clutch the pearls of "Innocent until proven guilty" and denounce the court of public opinion when comming out for being gay can still ruin your career, or having a funny name get you treated like a wanted criminal by security and police. There are so many more abortions of justice being committed by our actual legal system but people having the gall to support investigations into sexual assault is apparently the thing that's going to lead to the fall of justice.

The investigation itself is not the problem, cannot be the problem. Someone getting fired before he has even been proven guilty or innocent IS the problem. It's systemic and not an isolated incident.

There are indeed many more problems with justice, but those are not the topic on hand here: This topic is about accusations and guilt. Please stay on track.

But going by just what the court says is just creating a different issue. What about all those cases that won't go to trial or when someone that is guilty walks? Its an impossible standard. As a public company your image means a lot, that's why you fire people like this, its bad for business (unless of course they bring in the ratings, then they close ranks). That's not a false allegation problem, thats a business issue.

Karak Norn Clansman wrote:
The investigation itself is not the problem, cannot be the problem. Someone getting fired before he has even been proven guilty or innocent IS the problem. It's systemic and not an isolated incident.

There are indeed many more problems with justice, but those are not the topic on hand here: This topic is about accusations and guilt. Please stay on track.

But someone being fired for speaking out as the victim repeatedly fails to be worth mentioning.

Not to mention that courts are not infallible, things that are immoral are not necessarily illegal (and vice-versa), plea bargains are a thing, there's a lot of problems with basing one's sense of right and wrong purely on legality case.

As for criminal charges against accusers, you can already bring a civil case against defamation, making it criminal just worsens the problem of burying rightful claims under fear and legal debt

I don't want to believe it but suspect its mostly true, and whilst I'm not defending him I don't think 'geek' culture is any more or less prone to this kind of behaviour and have a mild urge to inappropriately touch the next forker who declares us all toxic, most likely with a crowbar

Karak Norn Clansman wrote:
The investigation itself is not the problem, cannot be the problem. Someone getting fired before he has even been proven guilty or innocent IS the problem. It's systemic and not an isolated incident.

There are indeed many more problems with justice, but those are not the topic on hand here: This topic is about accusations and guilt. Please stay on track.

This does not only apply to this. Politicians, when accused of corruption, are always forced to step aside until things have been cleared in a proper investigation. Why is this different?

 Turnip Jedi wrote:
I don't want to believe

Believe me, man. I heard you. I didn't know who this guy even was without Google, but that's exactly how I felt about Louis CK.

The problem is when you take the leap from "I don't want to believe" to "I refuse to believe because I like this person", because that's how this keeps going.

Karak Norn Clansman wrote:
The investigation itself is not the problem, cannot be the problem. Someone getting fired before he has even been proven guilty or innocent IS the problem. It's systemic and not an isolated incident.

There are indeed many more problems with justice, but those are not the topic on hand here: This topic is about accusations and guilt. Please stay on track.

This is somewhat complicated by the times it's an open secret that som men, such as Weinstein and Cosby, have been raping people for decades.

The one take away from the other thread on the topic is that you can't call a duck a duck unless the jury declared it a duck

Watch out Rosebuddy, its going to come and haunt you for that statement

'Why did they not come forward sooner".
"False claims"
"Tired of #MeToo"
"How dare X be suspended by Y" followed by "Trial without jury,No rule of law!"
"Blacklisted? never heard of her, can't be that good."
"Stating you may have been abused actually hurts the good cause".

Not sure what else can be said in this thread. I don't think Hardwick will go on trial, but I don't doubt that the contents of Chloe Dykstras article are true.

It's not wrong that Hardwick has been suspended or had shows suspended.

I'm not entirely sure the court of public opinion is a real issue here?

So, are we starting to see the (inevitable) backlash against #MeToo movement surfacing now or has it always been there, just at a different Noise-to-Signal ratio?

 Disciple of Fate wrote:

 cuda1179 wrote:

 Disciple of Fate wrote:
[. But even with that stigma, false allegations are still rare, they are employed by terrible people regardless of how society acts around sexual assault (they would only stop working in an uncaring society).

.

Not really doubting that false allegations are in the minority. I'd just like some kind of verifiable statistic with citation.

Link doesn't want to work, but depending on what statistics you want to go for it averages at around 5-6%
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.nsvrc.org/sites/default/files/Publications_NSVRC_Overview_False-Reporting.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwjZpYvFl93bAhXPL1AKHfuPCU4QFjAIegQIBhAB&usg=AOvVaw1zs97YRv7CpQEzK8W0wyDP

The link worked fine for me. I don't want to be the fly in the ointment, but you are slightly misquoting the statistics. 5-6% of those are PROVEN false. The number proven false + the number proven true doesn't really equal 100%. There are a number of cases where there is a lot of grey area where we really don't know the truth. To simply assume they are all true isn't quite logical.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
It still shocks me the excuses people will come up with to defend sexual assault. Because if you are going to straw-man and say 'you're an evil victim-blaming misongynist' for suggesting a false accusation happened, or that obviously a 'carefully worded resppnse is wrong' then you are defending sexual assault. You deliberately decided to exagerrate things in order to delegitimize a massive problem (never mind accusers who's lives are ruined even when their allegations are TRUE) so you've officially taken that side. Not to mention de-legitimizing the concern you SUPPOSEDLY have. So defend the rapists, but history will not remember you fondly.

It's not a strawman when those things actually happen.

Hardwick was called out for releasing a carefully worded statement. Can people not even defend themselves from accusations anymore?

 cuda1179 wrote:

 Disciple of Fate wrote:

 cuda1179 wrote:

 Disciple of Fate wrote:
[. But even with that stigma, false allegations are still rare, they are employed by terrible people regardless of how society acts around sexual assault (they would only stop working in an uncaring society).

.

Not really doubting that false allegations are in the minority. I'd just like some kind of verifiable statistic with citation.

Link doesn't want to work, but depending on what statistics you want to go for it averages at around 5-6%
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.nsvrc.org/sites/default/files/Publications_NSVRC_Overview_False-Reporting.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwjZpYvFl93bAhXPL1AKHfuPCU4QFjAIegQIBhAB&usg=AOvVaw1zs97YRv7CpQEzK8W0wyDP

The link worked fine for me. I don't want to be the fly in the ointment, but you are slightly misquoting the statistics. 5-6% of those are PROVEN false. The number proven false + the number proven true doesn't really equal 100%. There are a number of cases where there is a lot of grey area where we really don't know the truth. To simply assume they are all true isn't quite logical.

The issue is that there are no strict guidelines as to what constitutes a 'false' report, the actual number might also be lower. You don't have to assume that they are all guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt either, grey area is exactly why few reports actually end up in convictions. Just know that this is the percentage proven false, its a small amount if you take into account that perhaps as much as half or even more never gets reported (some going as low as only 3 out of 10 going to the police). Do malicious people exist who throw around false allegations? Sure. Do they make up a significant part of all allegations? Incredibly doubtful. Letting the idea of false allegations direct the main line of debate on sexual assault is unhelpful at best and destructive at its worst.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 cuda1179 wrote:
Hardwick was called out for releasing a carefully worded statement. Can people not even defend themselves from accusations anymore?

Can anyone actually find his statement? I was trying for a bit and its a merry-go-round of pages linking to each other.

I believe that the actual quote was in the link I provided.

"As a husband, a son, and future father, I do not condone any kind of mistreatment of women."

 cuda1179 wrote:
I believe that the actual quote was in the link I provided.

"As a husband, a son, and future father, I do not condone any kind of mistreatment of women."

Yeah but its just a single line from the whole, following the links ends up nowhere and googling statement inevitably ends up with all his business partners statements instead of his.

But to be fair, that line is pretty terrible. All men are someone's son, most men end up as someone's husband and/or father, its a pretty bad defense as far as trying to reject allegations go, seeing as those three criteria overlap with most male perpetrators of sexual assault. I guess(?) from reading that opinion piece the carefully crafted part feels insulting to the writer because it comes off as gaslighting, in essence the writer believes her and as such finds the statement hostile (maybe some other word). Hard to say without the whole thing.