Honey Badger Radio: Anonymity For Me But Not For Thee

Show Link

Show Notes

Time: 9 PM EST/ 8 PM CST/ 6 PST

Date: 12/12/2013

Currently we afford rape accusers anonymity. We only afford anonymity to the accuser for rape or other sexual crimes; we don’t do this for any other crime.

The rationale is that rape accusers face unique stigma for being seen as rape victims. Or rather they face the unique stigma of being accused of really having engaged in consensual sex.

As for the presumptively innocent men that they accuse…

Well, who gives a fuck about them and the stigma they face.

Join us tonight on this episode of Honey badger radio, Anonymity for me but not for thee. As we discuss anonymity in rape trials.

Also, last week we were trolled by 4chan. Specifically 4chan’s my little pony board. After weathering the fury and find it less than furious, we have to ask… did 4chan white knight… us?

Show Archive

Last Week’s Show notes(with link to trolling screen shots)

 

Alison Tieman
Follow me

Alison Tieman

Artist/Writer at Xenospora
Alison has been researching men's issues since her mother gave her "Princess at the Window" by Donna Laframboise in 1994 when she was 16. She's taken part in men's rights communities since she started posting on soc.men in 2003. Since 2011 she's run the gender apostate blog Genderratic with her pal Gingko the wonder leaf and she founded Honey Badger Brigade in 2013 with Hannah Wallen and Karen Straughan. According to Vice the pony she most resembles is Fluttershy.
Alison Tieman
Follow me
facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestmailby feather
  • http://daisysdeadair.blogspot.com/ DaisyDeadhead

    What about anonymity for male rape victims? Do you disagree with that too?

    Jerry Sandusky would still be having his sick parties in the locker room showers if there was no anonymity, you know.

  • http://danipettas.com Dani

    I like the holidays-themed Mr. Tentacles.

  • Ginkgo

    “What about anonymity for male rape victims? Do you disagree with that too? ”

    I want anonymity for a accusers and for the accused. If things turn out to be flaky on the accuser’s side in the course of the investigation, then it’s time to open a perjury investigation and at that time, in the future, as part of that separate investiagtion where there is no anonymity for the accused.

    I am in favor of public anonymity but the accused and her/his counsel are not part of the public, they have the right to face the accuser and know who it is. With draconian penalties for disclosure.

    Something else we need to make that work is incentives for the police to pursue these perjury investigations, in the form of the same sentences for perjury as for the crime that is the subject of the perjury. police are evaluated on a (fuck up, senseless, unjust and counter-productive production model) that rates them on how many months ofincarceration their investigations result in, and until that model is done waau with it’s what we have to work with.

  • Paul

    slightly off topic, but have you all seen this?:

    http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/Battered+women+morally+entitled+kill+abusers+professor/9270200/story.html

    I’m not lying when I say I might actually be sick over this.

    The only way such a law could ever be morally justifiable is if you believe women are incapable of abusing a law like this. You have to literally believe that no woman anywhere would EVER use a law as a way to get away with murdering thewir husbands. That women are literal paragons of virtue and do not have the capacity for evil or deception. You have to believe that women are not actually human.

    And if you believe that,you have no right to be advising anybody on policy of any kind. If you believe that, your head is so far up your own rectum it is actually coming right back out your own mouth.

  • Ginkgo

    “The only way such a law could ever be morally justifiable is…”

    No, there is no way it could ever be justifiable. This is the Burning Bed sociopathy all over again. it is completley unaccepatable in any kind of civilized society. this is the Privielge Princess gone berserk.

  • http://daisysdeadair.blogspot.com/ DaisyDeadhead

    Gingko: I want anonymity for accusers and for the accused.

    Again, Jerry Sandusky is our object lesson–a rich, famous, politically-well-connected perp. The other accusers only dared to speak up after the initial victim did.

    Would that have happened with anonymity for the accused?

  • Druk

    How do you get anonymity for the accused when they are regularly suspended from their positions at exactly the same time as a notice that a sexual assault investigation is taking place? Journalists aren’t what they used to be, but they can still make that connection.

  • Ginkgo

    “Again, Jerry Sandusky is our object lesson–a rich, famous, politically-well-connected perp. The other accusers only dared to speak up after the initial victim did.
    Would that have happened with anonymity for the accused?”

    You are mamking an important point. This is the thing: at a certain point the accused becomes either the convicted or the acquitted. Then you go after him or her again with these other counts.

    So now oyu have another poitn, which is that as a practical matter, there won’t be any subesequent trials because of the expnse and that only measly count will yiled a shorter sentence than the rapist really merits. And I don’t have an answer for that.

  • Jupp

    Daisy,
    it makes sense to grant underaged alleged victims with more protection.

    About the general question:
    in this age of internet and easy possibilities to publish accusations anonyously,
    I wonder how realistic it is to keep accuser or accused anonymous.

  • http://daisysdeadair.blogspot.com/ DaisyDeadhead

    Jupp, some were under-aged but some (first accuser) had reached legal age. Remember, this went on for decades.

    Your second point is well-taken… I think it might well be impossible.