I would rather be accused of murder than sexual assault.
A murder accusation requires investigation; the gathering of clues and evidence. It requires a grand jury of peers to determine whether the evidence gathered is sufficient to bring formal charges against the accused. It affords the accused legal representation if he or she cannot afford it, and the opportunity to bring evidence and witnesses to corroborate his or her’s defense. Finally, a murder charge requires a public trial overseen by an impartial judge, where both side present their cases, and a guilty verdict is handed down by the unanimous vote of a jury.
A sexual assault verdict requires no investigation, no grand jury, no evidence, and no trial. A guilty verdict in a sexual assault accusation requires only the accusation.
The Metoo movement has provided a platform for women to come forward and accuse their alleged assailants without judgement of their own behavior, and without fear of repurcussion. This is a wonderful thing. A culture of male repression of women has existed on planet Earth for all of recorded history, and even the bible has contributed to it. Of course women who feel they have been sexually assaulted should be able to say so without judgement and get their day in court. But their are problems.
For one thing, the nature of sexual assault is such that often it is impossible to prove or disprove, especially years after the alleged event has occurred. This is an unfortunate trait of the crime, but as such is true, it should be acknowledged, and allegations should be viewed as objectively as the denials. Today, Metoo has evolved to the point where not only are denials of the accusations immediately dismissed, but to mount a defense or question the credibility of the accuser is considered heresy. This is wrong.
There is also the problem of definition. What is sexual assault? It seems it could be anything from “unwanted sexual advances” to rape. It could be groping a person who doesn’t want to be groped, or a perceived slight for repelling an advance. It could be exposing oneself to another or even crude or suggestive remarks or behavior. The issue is in its vagueness, and Metoo has helped perpetuate the problem. If a man attempts to kiss a woman and she rejects him, is this assault? If a man tells an awful, pornographic joke at work, is this assault? If two people are engaged in a sexual encounter and one of them is rougher than the other would prefer, is this assault?
Maybe. But maybe not. So much about sexual assault seems subjective to individual personality and perception. What one person feels is receptiveness to aggressive sex, another feels trapped and awkward. This is sometimes the problem.
I am not furthering the view that men are victims in the Metoo universe. They are not. But proponents of Metoo would do well to acknowledge that even an allegation can ruin a person’s life; that a person is innocent until proven guilty; to at least feign objectivity until enough facts are discovered to make a determination about what happened.
And if there aren’t enough facts to make that determination, that is very unfortunate and possibly tragic. But it is the fair thing and it is the law that a person should not be destroyed if their alleged misdeeds can’t be proven.
Wouldn’t happen with a murder.