R0bert,

The following is an excerpt from the Waikato Times published some time ago. I would be fairly confident that nothing much has changed since the justice system in NZ and in Australia is still very accommodating of a false allegations (perverting the course of justice). Of course the spokeswoman for the women's crisis service, as an imperative poo poo'd the findings of the police investigation of 147 reports, as those findings are an anathema to its industry bleatings:

>"The high number of false accusations also create difficulties for
>genuine victims. Detective Senior Sergeant Mike Whitehead of
>Hamilton CIB said police tended to delve more closely into sex
>complaints they receive, giving the impression of over-vigorous
>investigating. "Because so many sex offence complaints are shown to
>be false, we are obliged to look extremely carefully at every
>complaint we receive. In that process, extra trauma can be created
>for genuine victims." Mr Whitehead said.

>The nature and complexity of sex allegations meant police put huge
>resources into those investigations. "Irrespective of other
>commitments, we will always push resources into these types of
>offences. As a consequence, other things will be put to one side."

>One investigation into a sexual violation last year took nine police
>42 hours to prove it was untrue. The investigation cost the taxpayer
>$7,417. The costs included salaries, doctors fees and forensic
>testing.

>"It's not a case of disbelieving the complainant. We have to prove
>it is false."

>Police rarely prosecute people who have made false complains about
>sex crimes. Mr Whitehead says police will focus on the reason for
>the false complaints. "Invariably, we will find there are other
>issues behind most false complaints. We try to have those issues
>addressed." Reasons given to police in the past for making false sex
>complaints range from young girls who need to explain a pregnancy,
>failed relationships where a complainant is seeking sympathy or out
>of spite.

Craig

‘Killarney, you're just feeling a bit miffed because you don't like having your controlling nature pointed out.’

If I were so into controlling others, wouldn’t I stick to commenting on threads where I have the numbers to control and dominate?

Consider this …

So far on this thread, there have been 18 male commenters, most of whom have commented multiple times, ALL of whom are strongly vocal in their disdain for women in general and anti-feminism in particular, and have a well-worn OLO history of strident anti-feminism.

So far on this thread, there have been 4 female commenters. One of them, onthebeach, has an OLO history of strongly vocal, strident anti-feminism and a pro-male POV – so I’d put her more in the 'other' camp.

That leaves 3 female commenters, the author, myself and Suse, offering a female perspective. So that leaves roughly a ratio of 19:3.

As I said … if I were into controlling any debate or discussion, I’d be much more inclined to stick with the dominant group. Much easier to bully and control others when you have the safety of numbers.

Sarah

The above comment to Craig is not meant to be an empty ad hominem. I’m making what I consider to be an important point about the dynamics of gender violence and domestic violence.

Many men (thankfully not all) display a disturbing cognitive dissonance about female power and control. Moving in packs – either physically, emotionally or intellectually - is a common male-defensive tactic designed to alleviate their fear of female power. It’s also a common form of male violence designed to psychologically intimidate and control both men and women.

Much of the so-called research on gender violence being increasingly cited by male advocacy groups is based on dodgy data-gathering methods designed to overinflate male victim figures, underplay the male-on-male perpetrator role, and portray a false scenario that women are much more violent than they really are (again, that age-old fear of female power).

When feminists rightfully challenge this so-called research, they are portrayed as trying to silence all criticism of female violence and to control the discourse on DV as only something men do to women.

Men are never going to be 'champions of change' until they face up to two things: 1. their crippling fear of female power and 2. the cultural relationship between violence and male identity.

"ALL of whom are strongly vocal in their disdain for women in general "

another lie on Killarneys part, no disdain at all for women generally from most of the male posters, there has been the odd exception over time on OLO. It's not the norm just as Killarney and Suseonlines contempt for men is a out of the ordinary amongst most women.

I'll admit to a strongly critical view of feminism, my disagreement in that space is on record.

Hunting in packs implies a coordinated plan rather than happening to share the same space. For the most part the male commentators are more than willing to make disagreements with each others views know. The fact that in many aspects of issues relating to feminism we agree on the broader issues does not make a pack nor imply any requirement for intellectual conformity.

Perhaps the reason there are so few female posters is the bullying by Killarney of women to toe the feminist line (and her version of it). Others like Killarney but a little less determined perhaps don't cope well with an environment where men are easily put in their place and silenced.

R0bert

RObert
I agree that the young woman who made a false allegation of rape should have a mental health assessment. It is certainly attention seeking behaviour – though extremely malicious in its intent. According to Rosocop’s article, the reasons given to police in the past for making false sex complaints range from young girls who need to explain a pregnancy, failed relationships where a complainant is seeking sympathy or out of spite.

I also agree with you about how we manage perceived risk. Is walking alone a risky activity? I believe both men and women should feel safe to walk alone without feeling at risk of being attacked. However, many women do not feel safe – particularly walking alone at night evidenced by the number of women who have attended Reclaim the Night marches since 1978.

Albury Mayor Kevin Mack has apologised for the comment in which he encouraged women to walk in groups in an effort to discourage offenders. To quote verbatim: "I always have encouraged women not to walk alone, to have someone with them at all times, because that in itself is an invitation for someone to take advantage of you”. I am not surprised he received opprobrium for this view. Even without the word "invitation", his comment seems to suggest it is unsafe for women to walk alone, and thereby a risky activity.

Killarney makes an observation about the gender representation on the OLO forum. Research shows that women are more likely than men to withdraw from unfriendly online communities.

Sarah, I suggest its a big ask for someone to be overly friendly towards a person who won't acknowledge the character flaws of their own gender eg false or grossly exaggerated allegations, and take every opportunity to bang on about the opposite gender.

Do you think your Champion for Change, Ken Lay would ever call for investigation into false allegations like that which was carried out by the Hamilton Police, had he continued in his role with the police? I think never in a million years. He knows what side his bread is buttered on and I don't see him as having that level of integrity. What do others think?