A man claims Corey Booker sexually assaulted him. At this point we have absolutely nothing concrete to go on and clearly Booker is innocent until proven guilty.
The question before us is, “Do we apply the same standard to Bookers accuser that we apply to Kavanaugh’s?”.
Or, Does the fact that Booker’s accuser is a man mean that we automatically don’t believe him?
This illustrates the problem with the “Uncritically believe all women” narrative, it places more importance on the gender of the alleged victim, than on what actually happened.
Hopefully it’ll bring a little balance to the conversation.
Even if this proves to be false, the questions are still valid as a hypothetical.
2 comments:
Now here's a case where the accused has an incident in his history. In a trial situation, the jury would likely be instructed to ignore it and focus on the facts regarding this latest allegation. It is natural to assume the allegations are likely true because of that past history, but regardless, that history is separate from the case at hand. We as individuals must do the same and presume Booker's innocence despite his history. Even if Booker has a long and well known history of sexually abusing people, that history doesn't mean each accusation against him is legitimate. His history means he's also ripe for extortion by those who might see some way to profit by accusing him. Those who automatically believe the woman never consider this possibility. The fact is...and this might be a news flash...but people lie. They lie for all sorts of reasons.
Your point about the accuser being a man is a good one, but I suspect some might try to make a distinction given that women are far and away more likely to be victims of sexual abuse. However, that doesn't matter, either. Each situation must be judged on its own merits, and goes for women. Just because they've been abused more often...TOO often...that doesn't mean we just straight up and believe them any time one of them makes an allegation. Nor does it mean that we don't give male accusers the same benefit of doubt.
It is right and just to assess the character of both accuser and accused when all we have is the accusation.
That’s what happens when you move judgement away from the individual and the specifics of the incident. Instead it’s been turned into a referendum on something most of those making the argument deny the existence of.
Post a Comment