4 ms·

Yes, the problem is that on the far past, "believe the man" was the unwritten rule, and instead of just abolishing it, people decided that to correct that we sh

Yes, the problem is that on the far past, "believe the man" was the unwritten rule, and instead of just abolishing it, people decided that to correct that we should move to a explicit "believe the woman". It is just another instance of our tendency as a society of over-correcting on sensitive and politically charged issues. Maybe this is a cultural artifact of our heritage of abrahamic religions. Probably this is not the case in a Confucionist heritage like China.

anthony_d 5y ago
> Yes, the problem is that on the far past, "believe the man" was the unwritten rule That seems disingenuous at best. The US system of justice is based on assuming innocence until guilt is proven. That favors anyone who has been accused of anything. Flipping the assumption in only the case where a woman accuses a man undermines the entire system.
- elzbardico 5y ago
  I have the impression you didn't read my comment till the end.
- dragonwriter 5y ago
  > The US system of justice is based on assuming innocence until guilt is proven. The US system of criminal justice is based on a strong presumption of innocence in court (and the civil system has a much weaker presumption), but those presumption are not intended to apply thr same way to the people who investigate crimes or to institutions who perform non-criminal, including investigatory, functions. If you apply a strong presumption of innocence to the investigative function, you never investigate and never find evidence.
dragonwriter 5y ago
> Yes, the problem is that on the far past, "believe the man" was the unwritten rule, and instead of just abolishing it, people decided that to correct that we should move to a explicit "believe the woman". To the extent that that relates to a real problem the problem is that when things become slogans detached from context, they tend to lose critical parts of their meaning. “Believe women” does not mean “uncritically accept as absolutely true what women say without further investigation of facts”, but to treat women’s accusations as serious and not make sexist assumptions about the probability that an accusation is false because of its nature at the outset. (In part, the is a reactive effect wherein criticism directed at a deliberate strawman interpretation has, through the forces of oppositional tribal identities, actually generated support for what was initially a strawman in the tribe opposite to the one deploying the strawman.)
t0mbstone 5y ago
Pendulums don't just swing to the center and stay there. It can take a bit of back and forth before the middle ground is reached.

anthony_d 5y ago

> Yes, the problem is that on the far past, "believe the man" was the unwritten rule That seems disingenuous at best. The US system of justice is based on assuming innocence until guilt is proven. That favors anyone who has been accused of anything. Flipping the assumption in only the case where a woman accuses a man undermines the entire system.

elzbardico 5y ago
I have the impression you didn't read my comment till the end.
dragonwriter 5y ago
> The US system of justice is based on assuming innocence until guilt is proven. The US system of criminal justice is based on a strong presumption of innocence in court (and the civil system has a much weaker presumption), but those presumption are not intended to apply thr same way to the people who investigate crimes or to institutions who perform non-criminal, including investigatory, functions. If you apply a strong presumption of innocence to the investigative function, you never investigate and never find evidence.

dragonwriter 5y ago

> Yes, the problem is that on the far past, "believe the man" was the unwritten rule, and instead of just abolishing it, people decided that to correct that we should move to a explicit "believe the woman". To the extent that that relates to a real problem the problem is that when things become slogans detached from context, they tend to lose critical parts of their meaning. “Believe women” does not mean “uncritically accept as absolutely true what women say without further investigation of facts”, but to treat women’s accusations as serious and not make sexist assumptions about the probability that an accusation is false because of its nature at the outset. (In part, the is a reactive effect wherein criticism directed at a deliberate strawman interpretation has, through the forces of oppositional tribal identities, actually generated support for what was initially a strawman in the tribe opposite to the one deploying the strawman.)

t0mbstone 5y ago

Pendulums don't just swing to the center and stay there. It can take a bit of back and forth before the middle ground is reached.