3 ms·
That is a very interesting interpretation, and very charitable; but it could just as easily be explained by malice because justly or not, the revelation has pre
by rue 16y ago
That is a very interesting interpretation, and very charitable; but it could just as easily be explained by malice because justly or not, the revelation has pretty much destroyed his reputation with a very, very small potential of successful redemptory action.
I think that she did it without really thinking it through because she is personally involved. People do not always make the best decisions under those circumstances, which is why we have the legal framework.
I must stress that I cannot really blame her, I do not know how I would have acted in similar circumstances. I just wish she had not done it because when naming names becomes precedent, something bad will happen to someone undeserving of it.
- SkyMarshal 16y agoAgree with your second and third paragraphs. I was also a bit shocked as I was reading it when she named him. It would have been even more charitable not to, since he clearly would have known who she was referring to upon reading that blog post even without his name, and would have had the same opportunity to find a way to right his wrong. But you can't expect a woman to act charitably after being sexually assaulted. That she hasn't pressed charges is still above and beyond the call of duty on her part, and I do think the road to redemption for a guy in this situation is clear, though not easy. PS - all this presumes guilt; consider it hypothetical.
- rue 16y agoI do not think we should really presume anything. > That she hasn't pressed charges is still above and beyond the call of duty on her part, […] This I disagree with. A public outing can be just as, if not more damaging to the alleged assailant. It is possible that she also thought or thinks along your tracks, but I do not think it is factually true that this is somehow a "soft" option.
- SkyMarshal 16y agoWouldn't pressing charges = public outing + legal ramifications? Seems clearly worse than just a public outing. And no, definitely shouldn't presume anything in these cases, which is what I meant by that last line.