Rape

Tiger, You were saying... "I'm going to sound harsh, but whatever, if you don't come forward as early as possible and your accuser doesn't get convicted because how long you took, that is your fault and your fault only."

@tigerfestivals I'm not sure how that video is supposed to somehow just shut down yaasshat's logic or something if that was your intention?

I'm not sure either. My data is pretty crappy, soooo...Didn't watch. His intention is to protect innocence, as is mine. I get that. His follow thru leaves a looooot to be desired.

@yasshat You said children being abused don't come forward. That girl in the video did and got her abuser taken care of by coming forward relatively early. That's the point of the video.

So, you're still going to go on with your victim blame stance? Many kids do go forward, many aren't believed BECAUSE they're kids and let's not forget "uncle so 'n so wouldn't do that.". You heard much about the catholic church scandals, most involving children? Hundreds, if not more, for decades. Do you think they all just kept quiet until they were adults or do you think they just weren't believed, maybe they were scared or didn'tknow what they could do? And what about those that were groomed to believe it's perfectly fine for adults to touch them like that? I get it, it's a serious accusation and fucks up a person's life, right or wrong. But, one can not just say "No evidence means no crime.". The multiple victims coming forward might want to challenge and change that. Predators do get away. ALL. THE. TIME.

@Teacup nothing that you have said in your post makes any sense whatsoever. I'm not a lawyer, but I'm 90% certain that notes taken from psycological testing/notes taken from a theropist/etc.. can all be considered valid evidence of a rape/sexual assult taking place. You would just have to prove that it was the defendant who committed the sexual assult. This can be done by disproving an alibi or having testimonies of people who you were in contact with (for an example, if your claim was that you were drunk from a party and he took you home and had sex with with you, you could use other people who were at the party as evidence that he was the one who took you home). I'm not defending the abuser by saying that there must be evidence that a rape took place. It's taking a neutral stance on a claim and using evidence that is presented to me to make a sensable conclusion on a situation. For an example, if I were to claim that you killed 10 people last night, you probably wouldnt appreciate it if people were to just take my word for it (seeing how you probably didn't). Instead, I would have to try to convince people that you killed 10 people and based on the evidence that I present (or lack thereof) they would make up their mind as to whether or not you actually did kill 10 people. People don't automatically start off in a state of believing that you killed 10 people, nor do they disbelieve in it. Every claim starts off as neutral, and then evidence is used to convince people that you did/didn't do it. It's not as binary as you think it is, where it's either they believe you or they dont believe you. People can be agnostic about it. Next, if we were to blindly believe in every rape allegation made, it would lead to situations where people could, and likely would, take advantage of it. Consider this hypathetical situation: Let's say Hillary Clinton ended up winning the 2016 elections. There would be a large number of republicans who would be upset with the outcome. Someone could HYPATHETICALLY claim that Hillary Clinton raped him. Since he would be automatically believed by everyone, everyone would turn against Hillary and Trump would be voted in instead. A situation like this is currently prevented because of the existence of a fair trial, and therefore people realize that making fake rape claims would likely result in failure. However, with the removal of a fair trial and the requirement of evidence would lead to the normalization of false rape claims which would ultimately ruin someone's life over an event that didnt happen. Finally, when you say "Basically I think it's silly to fight so much for the possibly innocent abuser and not fight for the possibly innocent murderer", this doesnt make any sense because I do fight for the possibility of the possibly innocent murderer for the same exact reasons as why I fight for the possibly innocent abuser. It just never comes into conversation because people arent going around saying that we should convict everyone who is accused of murder. Someone who is accused of murder should undergo the same judicial proceedures as any other serious crime in existence. Just because we are currently talking about rape allegations instead of someone being accused of murder doesnt mean that we dont have the same exact opinions of people who are accused of murder.

@Yasshat I never stated no evidence means no crime, I'm aware of the horrid shit going on in the churches, not only that but the muslim grooming gangs in the UK. I get that it maybe harder for children to come forward, but the part when you said kids aren't believed throws me off. I'm under the impression that if a kid accuses an adult of sexual misconduct, they'll instantly be believed due to the stigma of pedophilia. This is what I believe that either accusers or wrongly accused cannot really coexist. In one hand accusers can potentially get all abusers jailed if everyone only believe what the accuser says, but in turn innocent people will be thrown behind bars, on the other hand accusers are never believed and many predators go off free, but that means no innocent person will ever be jailed. I don't think we'll ever get the coexistence of those who're abused and get all the abusers jailed while protecting innocent people of being falsely accused and being jailed, because sadly bad news travels faster than good news and with the internet,MS Media and Social Media it makes things that much worse. So my stance is the former, I'd rather let a million guilty rapists go free than to jail one innocent person, BUT if there is a better alternative, as I mentioned earlier then I'd take it where all abusers get thrown to jail without one innocent being thrown into jail. Sadly we don't live in a perfect world. That's just the way I see it.

So... lemme get a couple things straight here... The dude (tiger) that has admitted to wanting a sexdoll cuz he's so disconnected from reality and real women due to the mass amounts of rape/loli hentai porn he watches daily (again, his own admission) is trying to be the voice of reason of rape irl? And teacup, a rape victim, has no idea what she's talking about, but a dude that is not a lawyer... does? Everyone, hold my beer, cuz Imma go back and read panda's logic that a rape victim has no reason to be scared to come forward cuz it's not like the rapist is gonna kill her...