“Believe Victims/Women” doesn’t mean simply accepting what they said as permission to destroy the accused’s life. It is a call for the destruction of rape culture which denies victims justice and even convinces people that they are perpetrators.
The use of sexual misconduct accusations as a way to gain power or prevent someone from having it is basically a nonissue as far as powerful people being accused of it. Both of the examples here got their power despite the accusations (and in Kavanaugh’s case possibly in part due to them since so many conservatives and reactionaries rallied behind him seeing him as a possible martyr at worst or a victory over the “woke mob” at best.
With that being said, there are some circumstances which call for greater skepticism, such as when a white woman accuses a man of color (in particular a Black man) of sexual assault or harassment. But that is because the woman’s whiteness grants her privilege in the “gender arena”, so to speak.
As for other cases where the average person is accused, reducing the grasp of and ultimately dismantling the patriarchy would help them as there would be less opportunities for them to have enough power over anyone to sexually assault them.
> “Believe Victims/Women” doesn’t mean simply accepting what they said as permission to destroy the accused’s life. It is a call for the destruction of rape culture which denies victims justice and even convinces people that they are perpetrators.
This is the problem with this genre of slogans (similar to "Defund the Police"), the extremists will argue "No, we actually mean it literally, you should believe all women" while the more sane faction will argue "No obviously we don't mean it literally, what it actually means is XYZ". The ambiguity seems almost intentional and I'm not a fan. People should say what they mean directly.
“Believe Victims/Women” doesn’t mean simply accepting what they said as permission to destroy the accused’s life. It is a call for the destruction of rape culture which denies victims justice and even convinces people that they are perpetrators.
The use of sexual misconduct accusations as a way to gain power or prevent someone from having it is basically a nonissue as far as powerful people being accused of it. Both of the examples here got their power despite the accusations (and in Kavanaugh’s case possibly in part due to them since so many conservatives and reactionaries rallied behind him seeing him as a possible martyr at worst or a victory over the “woke mob” at best.
With that being said, there are some circumstances which call for greater skepticism, such as when a white woman accuses a man of color (in particular a Black man) of sexual assault or harassment. But that is because the woman’s whiteness grants her privilege in the “gender arena”, so to speak.
As for other cases where the average person is accused, reducing the grasp of and ultimately dismantling the patriarchy would help them as there would be less opportunities for them to have enough power over anyone to sexually assault them.
> “Believe Victims/Women” doesn’t mean simply accepting what they said as permission to destroy the accused’s life. It is a call for the destruction of rape culture which denies victims justice and even convinces people that they are perpetrators.
This is the problem with this genre of slogans (similar to "Defund the Police"), the extremists will argue "No, we actually mean it literally, you should believe all women" while the more sane faction will argue "No obviously we don't mean it literally, what it actually means is XYZ". The ambiguity seems almost intentional and I'm not a fan. People should say what they mean directly.