• Darkard@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 days ago

    Consider that if these women came forward, then the corrupt justice system, that’s supposed to protect them, would dismiss or refute thier claims and leave them vulnerable to the powerful people they tried to expose.

    They have to be believed AND protected from those they accuse, else they are just painting a target on their backs.

    • Rooskie91@discuss.online
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 days ago

      Women have already come forward and had their lives destroyed. If the general public believed them during their trials, or honestly, if they weren’t intimidated into dropping their case, this shit would already be in prison.

      But the testimony of women is valued less by the justice system than the testimony of rich powerful men. That’s the problem. There is less trust in women overall, across the board in this patriarchal society.

      • mobotsar@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 days ago

        You’re not wrong, but I think “rich” and “powerful” carry a hundred times the weight in that sentence as “men”.

    • bss03@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      10 days ago

      refute thier claims

      That’s what the defense is supposed to be attempting in an adversarial trial system.

      My current bias is that an adversarial system is a good way to actually achieve justice, but I’d be open to learning about non-adversarial criminal trials.