Quote:
Originally Posted by Northern Monkey
He’s not victim blaming in the post you quoted he’s saying he doesn’t know if there are any actual victims because nothing’s been proven yet.
|
I agree that it's fine to take the 'innocent until proven guilty' route and I generally agree with what you're saying about what probably led to his abuse (if it happened), but I think Marsh is right about The Truth's intention with his post.
Quote:
|
All these women were so holier than thou so innocent none of them realised going up to his hotel room in the early hours could possibly lead to a kiss and a cuddle and who knows maybe a big role in a hollywood blockbuster
|
This is victim blaming
Quote:
|
clearly a load of the accusations are exaggerated politically correct drivel of events that happened years ago and taken way way out of context by a bitch slapped feminist media
|
Claiming to know the facts of the case and that the accusers are in the wrong, without the court process being followed first... this doesn't fit in with 'innocent until proven guilty' at all.
Quote:
|
Why havent any of these so called brave women come forward in the last 30 years? probably because most were complicit in the flirting/sex that happened.
|
More victim blaming (and in doing so also answers the very question he's asking)
Quote:
|
Theres a zillion and one money grabbing kiss and tell women in hollywood as has been proven thousands of times...theres thousands fo false accusers, blackmailers, exaggerators trying to screw some money
|
There's also a hell of a lot of men who sexually assault women and men in power who abuse their positions, so if this ^ is an argument for why women should be discredited, then the counter argument of why they should be believed is just as valid.
The Truth isn't simply saying 'let's not judge until we know the facts', he's trying to discredit the women coming forward and he's making generic statements that put fault on women who find themselves in these situations. He's assuming the women are in the wrong without knowing the full facts and then in the next breath saying we shouldn't be judging the man involved because we don't know the full facts.
Yes he's also saying that the court process should be followed which is true and 'innocent until proven guilty' is valid, but it's very hypocritical to say that and then position the women as either liars or partly to blame - that's taking a side, so you can't do that and then complain that you feel other people are taking a side too.