Feminist reaction to kesha contract trial shows why it's scary to be accused of rape.
Scroll to see replies
Original post by ivybridge
Can I ask how you know they are distorting figures as a political group? Like, any actual concrete evidence or?
Sure thing:
1) We are regularly told there is a 23% pay gap, that women earn 77p for every pound a man earns. This figure is arrived at by adding up the total earnings of all men and all women, then comparing them. It takes no account of hours worked, length of time in job or education. In fact, it doesn't even account for men and women doing different jobs! This is a blatant fixing of the figures, because without accounting for these things the figure is utterly meaningless.
2) The US justice department announced that 20-35% (approx) of women who visit the ER was a result of domestic abuse. It turns out that this was 20-35% of women who visit the ER for violence-related injuries, not 20-35% of all women who visit ERs. The actual figure as a percentage of all women who visit ERs is less than 0.5%
3) A widely quoted figure - so much so that it appeared in a white house report - says that one in five women at college will be sexually assaulted. A closer look at the survey that produced this figure reveals all kinds of problems. Firstly, a huge non-response rate which suggests that those who hadn't suffered a sexual assault were less likely to have responded. Secondly, this poll didnt actually use criminal sexual assault. it's parameters were so broad that people who reported feeling regret after the fact, someone attempting to kiss you when you didn't want them to or sexual acts whilst intoxicated were all included under having been sexually assaulted.
Those three are very widely claimed (especially the gender pay gap) and that is just off the top of my head. I think you'll agree that each of these is at best misleading, and at worst deliberate misinformation.
Original post by Luke Kostanjsek
Sure thing:
1) We are regularly told there is a 23% pay gap, that women earn 77p for every pound a man earns. This figure is arrived at by adding up the total earnings of all men and all women, then comparing them. It takes no account of hours worked, length of time in job or education. In fact, it doesn't even account for men and women doing different jobs! This is a blatant fixing of the figures, because without accounting for these things the figure is utterly meaningless.
2) The US justice department announced that 20-35% (approx) of women who visit the ER was a result of domestic abuse. It turns out that this was 20-35% of women who visit the ER for violence-related injuries, not 20-35% of all women who visit ERs. The actual figure as a percentage of all women who visit ERs is less than 0.5%
3) A widely quoted figure - so much so that it appeared in a white house report - says that one in five women at college will be sexually assaulted. A closer look at the survey that produced this figure reveals all kinds of problems. Firstly, a huge non-response rate which suggests that those who hadn't suffered a sexual assault were less likely to have responded. Secondly, this poll didnt actually use criminal sexual assault. it's parameters were so broad that people who reported feeling regret after the fact, someone attempting to kiss you when you didn't want them to or sexual acts whilst intoxicated were all included under having been sexually assaulted.
Those three are very widely claimed (especially the gender pay gap) and that is just off the top of my head. I think you'll agree that each of these is at best misleading, and at worst deliberate misinformation.
1) We are regularly told there is a 23% pay gap, that women earn 77p for every pound a man earns. This figure is arrived at by adding up the total earnings of all men and all women, then comparing them. It takes no account of hours worked, length of time in job or education. In fact, it doesn't even account for men and women doing different jobs! This is a blatant fixing of the figures, because without accounting for these things the figure is utterly meaningless.
2) The US justice department announced that 20-35% (approx) of women who visit the ER was a result of domestic abuse. It turns out that this was 20-35% of women who visit the ER for violence-related injuries, not 20-35% of all women who visit ERs. The actual figure as a percentage of all women who visit ERs is less than 0.5%
3) A widely quoted figure - so much so that it appeared in a white house report - says that one in five women at college will be sexually assaulted. A closer look at the survey that produced this figure reveals all kinds of problems. Firstly, a huge non-response rate which suggests that those who hadn't suffered a sexual assault were less likely to have responded. Secondly, this poll didnt actually use criminal sexual assault. it's parameters were so broad that people who reported feeling regret after the fact, someone attempting to kiss you when you didn't want them to or sexual acts whilst intoxicated were all included under having been sexually assaulted.
Those three are very widely claimed (especially the gender pay gap) and that is just off the top of my head. I think you'll agree that each of these is at best misleading, and at worst deliberate misinformation.
Fair enough. May I ask if you think there are any legal wrongs on the issue of rape? Like do you think any laws are wrong or non-existent when they should be?
All mods on tsr have raped me up the bum hole.
Original post by ivybridge
Fair enough. May I ask if you think there are any legal wrongs on the issue of rape? Like do you think any laws are wrong or non-existent when they should be?
I have an issue with the fairly sizable difference between sentencing of men and women in cases of statutory rape, it's pretty ridiculous (although this applies to differences in sentencing of men and women across criminal convictions). But that said, I dislike the use of statutory rape and abuse of a position of trust laws generally, I feel like they're often used when they shouldn't be.
As I said previously, I dislike the recent change that put the onus on the guy to prove he didn't commit rape, rather than the onus being on the prosecution to prove he did commit rape. I think it flies in the face of everything the British judicial system should stand for; innocent until proven guilty is a core tenet of our legal system. And on a related note, I'm not sure where I stand on the fact that if a woman chooses to get inebriated, has sex whilst inebriated, then regrets it the morning after, the guy could be considered to have committed rape as the woman didn't 'have the capacity to consent'.
I agree with you to a point - people accused of rape should be granted anonymity until/if proven guilty. However, it's insanely difficult to prove beyond reasonable doubt that someone has been sexually assaulted/raped, and this sort of atmosphere these comments create ('prove it or we'll assume you're lying', 'he was acquitted so obviously she wasn't raped' etc.) aren't helpful in encouraging woman - and men - who have been sexually assaulted/raped to come forward and, tbh, make those who have feel like ****, like if it remains unproven then people will think we're lying when it's not that simple.
Also, what is it with you lot and ~feminists~? We're not the spawn of Satan ffs. As another side point, what's more important - a broken/release from a contract, or the potentially compromised safety of a woman who may have already been attacked? Hmm I wonder what would be worse for the billion dollar company... the loss of money of course. As already said, Kesha's not taking him to court to accuse him of rape - she's taking him/Sony to court to get her contract terminated. In these circumstances, I think I'd err on the side of caution and make Sony lose a tiny bit of money (relatively) to potentially keep a woman safer.
Also, what is it with you lot and ~feminists~? We're not the spawn of Satan ffs. As another side point, what's more important - a broken/release from a contract, or the potentially compromised safety of a woman who may have already been attacked? Hmm I wonder what would be worse for the billion dollar company... the loss of money of course. As already said, Kesha's not taking him to court to accuse him of rape - she's taking him/Sony to court to get her contract terminated. In these circumstances, I think I'd err on the side of caution and make Sony lose a tiny bit of money (relatively) to potentially keep a woman safer.
Original post by Luke Kostanjsek
And on a related note, I'm not sure where I stand on the fact that if a woman chooses to get inebriated, has sex whilst inebriated, then regrets it the morning after, the guy could be considered to have committed rape as the woman didn't 'have the capacity to consent'.
As far as I understand, this 'a woman regrets it the next day and it's rape' thing is a sensationalist wave made up so people can get angry at those damn feminists!!!111!!1 My understanding of the law is that if a woman's drunk to the point where she's having to be held up/doesn't know where she is/can barely talk/is blacked out and you have sex with her, that is when she's unable to consent.
Original post by abruiseonthesky
As far as I understand, this 'a woman regrets it the next day and it's rape' thing is a sensationalist wave made up so people can get angry at those damn feminists!!!111!!1 My understanding of the law is that if a woman's drunk to the point where she's having to be held up/doesn't know where she is/can barely talk/is blacked out and you have sex with her, that is when she's unable to consent.
This is a problem it is unclear at times what is too drunk
Original post by abruiseonthesky
As far as I understand, this 'a woman regrets it the next day and it's rape' thing is a sensationalist wave made up so people can get angry at those damn feminists!!!111!!1 My understanding of the law is that if a woman's drunk to the point where she's having to be held up/doesn't know where she is/can barely talk/is blacked out and you have sex with her, that is when she's unable to consent.
Apologies, I should have been clearer here; the issue I have is that the level of drunkness required is really quite subjective. For instance, I know that when I start drinking I lose my coordination long before I lose the ability to think straight, so saying I couldn't walk in a straight line therefore couldn't consent would be untrue. Similarly, I know people who look entirely in control of their body but couldn't string a thought together when drunk. Even more of an issue is that it is likely that both people who took part in the act would have been drinking. So what happens if they both got utterly smashed, but only one of them regrets it the morning after? So I feel like the law isn't very well thought through and is therefore likely to result in unreasonable convictions.
(edited 8 years ago)
The feminist argument seems to be "OMG she's not even trying to take her rapist (???) to court for rape, she just wants not to have to work with him any more!"
There is no awareness that, without a conviction of rape, there is no reason for the judge in this case to free her from her contract.
Sony has refused to market her music if she changes producers. Everyone has his price, and Kesha should simply do what other artists have done, and either make music under a new name or move to another label, who, if Kesha is worth it, will pay severance money to Sony.
There is no awareness that, without a conviction of rape, there is no reason for the judge in this case to free her from her contract.
Sony has refused to market her music if she changes producers. Everyone has his price, and Kesha should simply do what other artists have done, and either make music under a new name or move to another label, who, if Kesha is worth it, will pay severance money to Sony.
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by Satoshii
claps for @ivybridge always defending illogical feminist comments and posts to get some lurvvvv 
The people who respond to his illogical comments don't help the discussion.
Original post by joecphillips
I have been told I have twisted views as I have said it is innocent until proven guilty.
Apparently that means I defend rapists
Apparently that means I defend rapists
Innocent until proven guilty is slightly different with rape cases. Because it's actually very hard to prove someone was raped (unless they're beaten black and blue there's often no way of telling whether it was consensual or not, and that's only if they got checked over in time anyway), pretty much all people accused of rape get off. Because of that, it's very hard for rape victims to come forward, and also because of other social reasons like random people on the Internet speculating over whether or not it happened. I don't think the 'innocent until proven guilty' rule should apply (certainly not socially) when it comes to rape because it just creates an environment that unintentionally favours rapists, as they almost certainly will not be proven guilty, meaning less and less victims will come forward.
However, I also don't think we should take the accuser's side and string up the accused right away...false accusations (at least, ones that make it to trial) are extremely rare but it only takes one person to accuse you.
Original post by lameteenager
Innocent until proven guilty is slightly different with rape cases. Because it's actually very hard to prove someone was raped (unless they're beaten black and blue there's often no way of telling whether it was consensual or not, and that's only if they got checked over in time anyway), pretty much all people accused of rape get off. Because of that, it's very hard for rape victims to come forward, and also because of other social reasons like random people on the Internet speculating over whether or not it happened. I don't think the 'innocent until proven guilty' rule should apply (certainly not socially) when it comes to rape because it just creates an environment that unintentionally favours rapists, as they almost certainly will not be proven guilty, meaning less and less victims will come forward.
However, I also don't think we should take the accuser's side and string up the accused right away...false accusations (at least, ones that make it to trial) are extremely rare but it only takes one person to accuse you.
However, I also don't think we should take the accuser's side and string up the accused right away...false accusations (at least, ones that make it to trial) are extremely rare but it only takes one person to accuse you.
While the conviction rate for rape is pretty low it's nowhere near as bad as you're making out. It's currently at 57% which hardly means 'pretty much all accused of rape get off'. The right to be seen as innocent until proven guilty is a human right enshrined in our domestic legislation; it should never be taken away from anyone. If it favours rapists then it also favours robbers, murders, fraudsters and every other criminal so if you think it should be changed for rape why not everything else? Like I've already said more than half are found guilty so stop making out like a rape conviction is so rare.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by scrotgrot
There is no awareness that, without a conviction of rape, there is no reason for the judge in this case to free her from her contract.
That's simply wrong. The judge in a civil case would be able to make his own determination of whether she was raped on the balance of probability. This is the same as why OJ was found liable in a civil court without a conviction for murder.
Original post by Underscore__
While the conviction rate for rape is pretty low it's nowhere near as bad as you're making out. It's currently at 57% which hardly means 'pretty much all accused of rape get off'. The right to be seen as innocent until proven guilty is a human right enshrined in our domestic legislation; it should never be taken away from anyone. If it favours rapists then it also favours robbers, murders, fraudsters and every other criminal so if you think it should be changed for rape why not everything else? Like I've already said more than half are found guilty so stop making out like a rape conviction is so rare.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Posted from TSR Mobile
This is 57% of people where the CPS had enough evidence to bring charges, not 57% of all reported.
But yes innocent until proven guilty should apply to people accused of rape in criminal courts.
Original post by SmashConcept
This is 57% of people where the CPS had enough evidence to bring charges, not 57% of all reported.
But yes innocent until proven guilty should apply to people accused of rape in criminal courts.
But yes innocent until proven guilty should apply to people accused of rape in criminal courts.
I'm aware of that, that's exactly what conviction rates should be judged on
Posted from TSR Mobile
What I don't understand is the alleged rape happened 10 years before, why didn't she take him to court back then, and why did she sign a contract knowing he'd be the producer? Or did the producer change after she'd signed?
Regardless of whether it's true, this guy's life will never be the same again.
Regardless of whether it's true, this guy's life will never be the same again.
All this case proved was how scary it is to be in a conversation with stupid people. Some feminists assume without evidence that the alleged rapist must have done it; and then some anti-feminists assume without evidence that the alleged rapist must not have done it.
Original post by Mancini
I have not actually chose to hide behind my keyboard , I am not a keyboard warrior, I could have chosen to post this under anon and hid away from the possible illogical rampant feminist reaction. Instead you can see my name Mancini. The legal system in this case has worked fairly and I agree with it, it's not everyday I agree with an American courts legal system.
Really truth is that this is just going to become another social media type event for feminists to band together with no logic just another spectacle to band together.
If you feminists really care about Kesha and support her please put your money where your mouth and set up a funding account and put your good money in it to buy Kesha out of her contract. Do something that really shows you care , show me an action instead of just mumbling and bashing buttons on your keyboard! You feminists love these events so it should be fun for you, maybe even go and protest outside so we can see your lovely faces on screen.
It's so sad the lack of logic on show with modern feminists it's very sad, really I should be happy because it further destroys this group taking away any credibility they have.
Really truth is that this is just going to become another social media type event for feminists to band together with no logic just another spectacle to band together.
If you feminists really care about Kesha and support her please put your money where your mouth and set up a funding account and put your good money in it to buy Kesha out of her contract. Do something that really shows you care , show me an action instead of just mumbling and bashing buttons on your keyboard! You feminists love these events so it should be fun for you, maybe even go and protest outside so we can see your lovely faces on screen.
It's so sad the lack of logic on show with modern feminists it's very sad, really I should be happy because it further destroys this group taking away any credibility they have.
Honestly, I can see the argument from both sides but mainly I agree with you. People are standing by Kesha without any proof. I'm not saying she's lying but without all the evidence the courts can't possibly go in her favour. Rape is such a difficult topic because it's such a serious crime but it's the heardest one to get justice for. However, this isn't a feminist thing. I'm a feminist. So please educate yourself, feminism is about equality of the sexes and if you think that's a stupid 'group' then you're just a misogonyst
Original post by katieew
Honestly, I can see the argument from both sides but mainly I agree with you. People are standing by Kesha without any proof. I'm not saying she's lying but without all the evidence the courts can't possibly go in her favour. Rape is such a difficult topic because it's such a serious crime but it's the heardest one to get justice for. However, this isn't a feminist thing. I'm a feminist. So please educate yourself, feminism is about equality of the sexes and if you think that's a stupid 'group' then you're just a misogonyst
That's how you define it, I've also seen/heard others says it about the advancement of women's rights which, given the name, seems more plausible
Posted from TSR Mobile
Quick Reply
Latest
Trending
Last reply 1 day ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 1 day ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 1 day ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 1 day ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
