4 ms·

Concur, she doesn't seem to be entirely stable or reliable. I know you're supposed to believe the victim and all, but I think I'd rather keep my beliefs eviden

• yawpitch 3y ago
  Pretty much all of the evidence on survivors of CSA is that it’s entirely unreasonable to expect “stability” in someone who experienced sexualized trauma as a child, especially as that “stability” is relatively measured by someone without that particular lived experience. Believe the victim, full stop, unless and until evidence actively contradicts their statements.
  • fennecbutt 3y ago
    Isn't that guilty until proven innocent, then?
    • yawpitch 3y ago
      No, of course not, guilt and innocence is something that gets determined _after_ an accusation is investigated… in all other cases we presume the accuser is (or may be) telling the truth — “officer, that man stole my watch” should _always_ cause the officer to check if there was a watch and who is currently in possession of it, and if you had a watch and had reason to believe someone else stole it you’d expect exactly that — why not with people reporting sexual crimes? The accused is still presumed innocent until proven guilty, but there’s no value in presuming the accuser is lying… doing so is just presuming the accuser is guilty of perjury / fraud before _they_ are proven guilty.
  • bilvar 3y ago
    Nope. Just nope.
    • yawpitch 3y ago
      And that, right there, is why child molesters and rapists are rarely, if ever, caught on their _first_ offense… we assume the victims are lying. Which, oddly, we don’t do with pretty much any other kind of crime.
      • deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]