Donnerstag, Juli 09, 2015


Die Wikipedia wird immer noch nach feministischen Maßgaben umgestrickt, was weiterhin mit der Verunglimpfung von Personen einhergeht, die ideologisch nicht auf Linie sind. Das geschieht zwar ohnehin kontinuierlich, führt aber jetzt in den Sommermonaten zu größeren Konflikten, weil aktuell offenbar andere Leute ebenso viel Zeit haben, wie die Feministinnen-Combo, die das ganze Jahr über mit dem Bearbeiten der Wikipedia-Einträge beschäftigt ist. Diese Combo genießt in der Online-Enzyklopädie noch immer Narrenfreiheit für jede Form von Rufmord und Denunziation.

Die USA Today problematisiert anhand der Torhüterin Hope Solo die doppelte Moral im Zusammenhang mit häuslicher Gewalt, je nachdem ob der Täter männlich oder weiblich ist. Einen vergleichbaren Artikel fand man gestern im britischen Telegraph.

"Was ist mit den Rechten der Männer?" fragen die konservativen Fox News und reagieren damit auf das neue Gesetz im US-Bundesstaat New York, dem zufolge ein Mann als Vergewaltiger gilt, wenn er mit einer Frau Sex hatte und nicht nachweisen kann, dass sie während jeder Phase begeistert dabei war:

"It is important to improve the rights of women who are victims of sexual assault on college campuses," Kelly added. "But we are going in a direction where we almost entirely eliminate the rights of men. And there’s a presumption now in these campuses, thanks to the Obama administration, of guilt. There’s a presumption of non-consent. And if you are a young man who gets accused, it’s your burden to go in there and prove consent, and we’re getting to the point where you have to have a contract. And if you don’t, you’re gonna be presumed a rapist."

Im Washington Examiner spricht sich Ashe Schow indes dagegen aus, dass dieses Thema für den Lagerkampf "links" gegen "rechts" missbraucht wird:

Tiffany Hunt, who promotes due process with the organization Families Advocating for Campus Equality, told me that this issue shouldn't have turned in to a political one.

"This issue, to me, isn't one of Left or Right politics; it is one that concerns all of our students on campus," Hunt said. "All students' lives matter, and trust me, as a parent, the day you get the phone call that your child has been wrongly accused on campus, you are not thinking Democrat or Republican, you're think about their safety, their future, their life."

At a conference I spoke at earlier this year, one parent of an accused student asked another how she could still be a Democrat after what her and her son had gone through. The answer was not too difficult — a potentially false accusation against one's son doesn't affect one's feelings on foreign policy or taxes or welfare.

"The families of FACE are Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent. We are mothers, fathers, daughters and sons," Hunt said. "Our stories are all a little different, but we share the same pain. We have all experienced injustice on campus, and we are working to have our voices heard."

It isn't hard to see how we got to this point. It's easy to stand up for someone who accuses another of sexual assault. Feminist firebrand Jessica Valenti acknowledged as much in the aftermath of the Rolling Stone gang-rape debacle.

"I choose to believe Jackie," she wrote in The Guardian. "I lose nothing by doing so, even if I'm later proven wrong — but at least I will still be able to sleep at night for having stood by a young woman who may have been through an awful trauma."

No one is pro-rape (though activists claim otherwise), and no one wants to be against an accuser. But when an accuser's story doesn't add up, she is not a victim — the victim becomes the person wrongly accused.

In today's climate, it is impossible to stand up for someone wrongly accused without being attacked. Once someone is labeled a "rapist" — even without evidence — he apparently forfeits his right to exist and must be expelled and have his life and future ruined.

That, of course, is ridiculous. The truth must matter above all else, not what category someone belongs in — and due process is that tool by which we figure out whom to believe. If an accuser is a victim, she (or he) deserves all the support in the world. If the accused is innocent, he deserves support. That's not even getting into situations where the evidence is unclear one way or the other.

It shouldn't be up to Republicans to stand up for due process or up to Democrats to stand up for victims. Both sides should be working toward the truth in each case.

As Hunt said: "This is not a left or right issue, it is a life issue."

kostenloser Counter