1279
I really would
(lemmy.nz)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 03 Nov 2026
1279 points (98.4% liked)
Political Memes
12815 readers
3339 users here now
Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
1) Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
2) No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
3) Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
4) No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
5) No AI generated content.
Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
I'm fine with this, as long as false charges are just as severely penalized.
If the truth can ruin the perpetrator's life, then the truth should ruin the accuser's life when appropriate
You shouldn't need a conditional like "as long as" anything. You should be fine with it when rapists are penalized, unconditionally. Do better.
Not to mention false charges are already penalized. The point of this is that the true ones ruin the victim's life too.
The problem is that then a true report that doesn't lead to a conviction for whatever reason results in punishment for the accuser. In an innocent until proven guilty system, which I'm sure we can agree is the best option, this means the accuser is guilty until proven innocent. The practical effect would be (and was, when something similar was completely by accident implemented in Pakistan) rape victims getting punished for reporting rape.
Edit: If anything, it should be the other way around: What "ruining someone's life" means in practice is that it excludes them from polite society (and therefore pushes into impolite society*), which among other things means they're unemployable or close to unemployable. Among other things, this is bad because it causes rapists to be more likely to rape again.
That's exactly what these type of people want for rape victims.
He thinks that an accusation is as bad as being raped.
That's too uncharitable an interpretation. "Punish false accusers for trying to ruin victims' lives (among a whole host of other reasons)" is an appealing sentiment that simply fails to be applicable in reality. This could be the case, but it doesn't necessarily have to be.
I've seen enough of this argument to know that it is inherently bad faith and is equating being a victim of rape to being a victim of a false accusation.
Or maybe it's just something that's obvious at first glance with non-obvious pitfalls.
what about only punishing false accusations that can be proven, for example a text message saying „if you dont pay me I am gonna accuse you of SA-ing me“?
I'll leave it to people better informed than me to pick through the pros and cons of this, but for the most part it seems like a solution looking for a problem. Besides, perjury is already a crime in most jurisdictions.
How many strawmen are y'all going to construct to attack rape victims?