I don't like when people say it either, because they're saying it to attack the accuser. That blame should go to people eager to have a false accusation to point to (for the rest of time) whenever accusations come out that they don't want to believe.
IF someone makes accusations that turn out to be false, criticize them for their actions and the direct harm they've caused, not things out of their control.
I appreciate the thoughtful response, though.
Got it. That makes sense, thanks.
I’ve been thinking about this some lately, and I can’t quite organize my thoughts properly, so I apologize in advance. It seems like the general consensus is that women should be encouraged to come forward publicly, their claims should be investigated publicly to the fullest extent (presumably by journalists), and then both the accuser and the accused are judged in the court of public opinion. On the surface it seems the safe approach, maybe even the obvious one. But when I think about what the likely outcomes are, I can’t help but wonder if there is a better way.
For one, the framing that suggests a full investigation will bring to light a set of facts that allow for a real “verdict” seems to be a set up for failure. I don’t have any official stats to prove this, but would anyone argue that the vast majority of these cases won’t be resolved by clear evidence one way or the other? Of course there are exceptions, but most cases end up like Tara Reade. And so there are exhaustive arguments about “credibility” and everyone looks at each other with disgust as they lines up on opposite sides.
But how good are we really at determining credibility? Putting aside for a second the biases that we all have based on politics, news source, life experiences, etc. Even with a perfectly unbiased look at the results of these investigations, how much confidence do you have that you are getting it right? Even if there is someone with significant credibility problems, to paraphrase someone earlier in this thread, liars can still get raped. And conversely, scummy pervy dudes can get falsely accused of rape. Most of the time, we really just don’t know one way or the other. But that’s so deeply unsatisfying that everyone is shoehorned into “I believe her” or “she is not credible.” And that puts us in a really shitty spot, because then what.
It certainly doesn’t help politics. So much time is wasted on arguments about things that are ultimately unknowable and unprovable, and it fosters a real enmity between groups that transcends simple policy disagreement.
I also don’t think it helps the cause of justice. Hopefully no one is arguing against punishment for instances when a criminal case can be proven; and for personal and/or professional consequences for cases with clear evidence of harassment. But absent hard evidence, I think it’s difficult to make a moral/ethical case that someone accused should face significant consequences base what is ultimately a subjective assessment of credibility.
But maybe none of that matters, because the most important group in all of this is the victims. And maybe the above problems don’t matter if this is the best way to support and empower victims. But…is it? I’m asking because I really don’t know. I’m sure there is tons of scholarship on this and I’m admittedly ignorant. I’m also a white dude who hasn’t experience even a hint of meaningful harassment of any kind. So I probably deserve some shit for this, and I’d love to learn. But we’ve seen several of these cases play out over the years. And it’s great when someone like Weinstein is brought to justice. And it’s awful when an accusation is proven to be false. But those are the outliers. Usually, it’s cases like Dr. Ford, who was harassed so badly she had to move multiple times to escape the threats. Tara Reade has seen her reputation, fairly or unfairly, smeared in an incredibly public way, and I can’t imagine the next few years are going to be a cakewalk for her. And I think it all comes back to that fall choice: I believe her or I don’t.
I am typically annoyed when people talk about how broken something is without suggesting a solution to fix it. But I honestly don’t know what the right solution is here, and victims of abuse, not me, should be the ones making these kind of calls. But is there any way we can re-frame or re-center our approach to these cases. Can we make the focus on supporting the victim rather than punishing the accused? Would that allow us to come together as people that care about people rather than political groups defending our own? Is it possible to protect and empower victims that way, or the lack of consequences undermine the work?
This is hard, fuck.