Again, working with abuse survivors, there are many, MANY reasons why a person may or may not come forward, and when. But this has been mentioned ad nauseam here and not worth repeating.
I believe that some people can get traumatized by something we don’t expect them to and should be treated accordingly. But that doesn’t mean other people should be held responsible for all of their trauma. Fragility beyond reasonable expectation is their own responsibility unfortunately.
Before we can investigate, we will have to decide what happened merits an investigation. For that she has to testify. Her being traumatized by the event doesn’t make the event crime necessarily.
Oh please.
This is the classic mentality of the abuser. “if you were traumatized by my behavior, its your problem”.
Good grief.
It’s not just about the accuser and the accused. I wonder how all this sounds to real rape victims. This is nowhere near their hurt, I would think.
“We” can investigate? “We” have to decide? Really? Nope, this isn’t up to “us”. All this arguing here is tiresome. I would recommend listening to Biden’s interview today. Very respectful.
Well, fortunately, that isn’t how the law works.
Several of us have commented about how it sounds to us. Feel free to read my earlier posts.
I got the impression that the trauma was related to her fear that she might suffocate, either because the guy had his hand over her mouth or because at one point, she had two guys on top of her, as well as her fear of being raped.
I don’t think you have to be particularly fragile to be traumatized by such an experience.
Marian, not sure. To me, it just sounds like a rough housing not any harm intended. Maybe she she can clear that up when she testifies.
It sounds like a situation that may have gotten carried away, and was ultimately an assault.
Regardless of whether it can be “proved” or whether it should change the outcome of the appointment is not IMO the major issue here, in these discussions. What disturbs me is the rush to judgment about her intent and minimization of the impact of her experiences on her (not us).
Guilty until proven innocent, I say!
“But I didn’t do it”–Prove it!
“But I don’t even think I was there”-Prove it.
“When was it?”- I don’t know, prove you weren’t there.
“I wouldn’t have done something like that”- You aren’t even showing remorse. How can we know you’ve changed and grown if you haven’t owned up to it and apologized?
“I’m not going to apologize for something I didn’t do”-Maybe you don’t remember, because you were drunk.
“But I didn’t do it”-Who cares? You’re a man. Some man did it, men do terrible things to women all the time. If you can’t prove you didn’t do it, you’re guilty.
This is going to backfire, Even though I don’t want it to go that way, I plan on being sadly amused when it does.
What disturbs me is calling someone a rapist when there has been no evidence and there is no ability to effectively refute the allegations.
Where is there indication of being called a rapist?
Yes, and misdemeanor assault at that (per a Baltimore attorney that the WaPo quoted a few days ago).
Maybe she can, yes. I’m surprised by how many people think of what happened as just roughhousing, but given that people do think that way, hearing her perspective could be useful.
This isn’t a court of law. It’s an elaborate version of a job interview. The standard is different.
It’s more his conduct right now that’s at issue. If he did what she said and remembers it but is lying about it now, that matters. Or if (as I suspect), he was in the habit of drinking so much at high school parties that he has gaps in his memory, but he doesn’t acknowledge the possibility that the incident might have happened, that matters, too.
And the guilt by association! Well. You went to a prep school, lots of misbehavior there, so you must be guilty.
The term “rapist” is being used all over the place.
All over the place? Where? Here? Not seen that. Can you provide links to where he is being called a rapist? She didnt say that, AFAIK. I tried to google his name and “rapist”. Got nothing. So a link would be appreciated. And all the false accusations made against Ford (I posted a NYT article earlier) are also egregious.
I can’t provide links, but plenty of people on social media are using that term. One example from my feed “Maybe she came forward because she didn’t want a rapist being on the highest court in the land.”
Just heard the interview on Left Coast time. Typical pol trying to stake out a case for the next election.
The interviewer missed the perfect opportunity to delve further: ‘what exactly, should the FBI investigate and how’ (in a he said-she said and no apparent witnesses)? Anita Hill was different in that it was a harassment claim by a government employee and a federal law. It was also not 3 decades old.
Second, Joe’s pov about the person (aka woman) should always be believed (without any corroborating evidence) is just wrong according to our laws and constitution. (The courts have started to rule on such things wrt Title IX investigations…)
“plenty of people”? Where? Cannot find it anywhere. Where is that quote from? Without posting the link, its ok to type out the place(s) where these accusations can be found.
And if the NYT article about the debunked Ford rumors is behind a paywall, here it is in the Seattle times https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/debunking-5-viral-rumors-about-christine-blasey-ford-kavanaughs-accuser-2/