Realize… many, many bad people are bad because they respond to facing adversity – real or perceived – by trying to forcibly transfer it to some unwilling, innocent person, a scapegoat, instead of using their strengths or confronting their weaknesses in order to overcome it.
People who, citing their own victim experiences, blame targets of unproved allegations and demand retribution against them without evidence, are an example. They’re trying to transfer their suffering at the hands of their perps to the accused, regardless of guilt or innocence.
“If you don’t condemn this unrelated scapegoat who only has ‘being accused’ in common with my perp, you’re telling me my victimization doesn’t matter!”
It’s a completely irrational statement.
Your victim experience has nothing to do with the validity of anyone else’s accusation.
Blame-shifters like that aren’t scoring a point for victims everywhere, or striking back against a dominating patriarchy, or even defending a fellow victim against the possibility of a perp getting away with a crime. They’re just using the situation for their own purposes.
Your perpetrator’s guilt doesn’t make all who are accused guilty.
Your pain doesn’t validate all accusers.
Your target isn’t responsible for your experience, or the attitude or actions of your attacker.
You are using your target as a surrogate rage sink.
It’s about power.
It’s fueled by instinct, too. When we as a society have greater compassion for any group, those we see as vulnerable or victimized, there’s open sympathy toward scapegoating others with some unrelated, immutable characteristic in common with that group’s tormentors.
It’s instinctive, yes… but also misguided. Having some unrelated, immutable characteristic in common with a wrongdoer doesn’t confer guilt upon anyone, and making an innocent into a scapegoat in no way addresses that original wrongdoing.
It just creates another victim.
Meanwhile, the victims of the original wrongdoing gain nothing of value from this. They’re not un-victimized. It doesn’t protect potential victims of future wrongdoing. It’s not even closure because this isn’t the person who hurt them.
And it’s damaging to their character.
We’re told rape is about power and domination, targeting all women. When you use your social power to contravene an innocent man’s refusal to be the chosen sacrifice – his life & family destroyed – for some female victims’ collective rage against all men, how are you any better?
A person who willfully tries to force the suffering from his/her adverse experiences onto an unwilling, innocent substitute is bad regardless of the nature of that experience.
Sympathy for the devil isn’t redemption.
Our civilization can’t evolve without understanding this.
- How did gynocentric culture come about? | HBR Talk 305 - April 18, 2024
- Are women the weaker link? | HBR Talk 304 - April 11, 2024
- Some facts about early suffrage might shock you! |HBR Talk 303 - April 4, 2024
by 
Thanks
Thank you so much,
for being a woman articulating thoughts, that, even if I had phrased them this well, would have been tarred immediately by the #fakefeminist establishment as being a man criticising the poor little vulnerable victims from my position of white male privilege.
That privilege includes two years of being a witch hunt target as a paedo because a serial fantasist and borderline personality picked me and four others for her victims.
The trouble doesn’t just end like the employment and does either.
So yeah.
The poor vulnerable woman narrative is a big bundle of bullshit.
You assume they are honest in their claims.
They might have been victimized, some have but even when they were it has nothing to do with their claims.
The victimized innocent have no interest in disrupting what keeps them safer than otherwise.
Lack of due process is likely to hurt the disenfranchised more often and harder.
The disenfranchised know from experience that in a popularity contest they most frequently lose.
But it’s not only that, they also know that if equal protection is thrown out, they and their own are likely targets.
They also know that if anyone one is silenced they are the first ones to be silenced if not close seconds.
They know that if property is disrespected, theirs is likely to be taken first.
And it’s for that reason that they are likely to either be unlawful or at least see themselves as unlawful.
But just as the left is losing ground to the alt-right for failing to be better than it, the moderate right and left loses ground with those people for failing to be the obvious choice by being sufficiently better than the alt-right or the ctrl-left.
Exactly due to being usually disenfranchised, most of those in this camp did not receive proper nurture to grow into satisfactory IQs or acquired the necessary experience to make use of it, so it’s our job to make it as obvious as possible.