388
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 24 Jul 2024
388 points (98.7% liked)
News
23259 readers
2946 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
This sounds like grounds for a lawsuit, not a news article. Make them pay (literally) for being assholes.
The rape threat should have been reported to the police when it happened imho
Doing via media won't get anything done. If the org is really this bad, they are covering up and adjusting as we speak.
You can't fix this shit via court of opinion. Pests don't care.
There's a better chance of that happening nowadays vs as little as a year ago. And "reporting" often bears a trauma of its own.
Five, ten years ago?
Buried.
There would still be a record of incident even if pigs do nothing.
Criminal accusations purely based on a story will never resonate with public since anyone can make accusations for any reason...
How many monsters have been put away where after they are convicted, we hear about the years and years of countless reports? Creating a "record" punishes the victim more than the criminal, and victims can be blacklisted if they are "difficult to work with."
I'm with you that it's better to report it, but we shouldn't be blaming victims when they would rather not. We should be creating an environment with minimal barriers to reporting in order to protect victims from shame and retaliation.
And your solution is?
Teaching male children that sexual harrassment and rape are wrong.
That involves persuading their parents they should care. Note I said persuading, not teaching. They know damn well it's wrong and they don't care as long as they can get away with it.
I think their point is that going to the media might have been the best option.
Edit:spelling
What result did it achieve?
I really don't get how going to media is better than going to the police lol
But it is their decisions to make.
Well, the result is yet to be seen, the article was only published today.
We see these regularly...
Only time it really worked when it was #metoo season and dozens of celebrities came out with accusations to point where there was sufficient evidence to convict some of these pests.
I guess time will tell but I bet we won't hear about it again
And then the reporter can enjoy their retaliatory unemployment and blacklisting, probably.
Probably true,
I am not directly familiar with the UK system but from everything I have seen, it has the same problems:
The defense against rape accusations is "she was a slut". And when things are this institutionalized? You can get plenty of people who will gladly attest that the plaintiff came onto them too because they know that if the dominoes start toppling...
And in the off chance she gets justice AND comes out with any dignity? She is not officially on the industry shitlist because that would be wrong... But her career is more or less over. Because the rapists don't want to hire her for obvious reasons. But even the "normal" people will be wary of "What if she decides something we do is bad?".
No. The key to shit like this is to get the public shining a light on this first. Rather than going into a dark room and randomly spraying a bit of bug spray.
I remember coworkers talking about metoo and saying things like that or "what if she decides to report me for something ".
I always responded with "if you ever have to wonder if an action could be reported to the police, than maybe you should not do that, and if you are worried that a woman will report you, don't hang out with that person".
I never understood how this ever could be a worry.
In which jurisdiction?
In every jurisdiction with misogynist judges.
Judges do fuck shit but I doubt they like having their court cases over turned for failure to supervise counsel who violate rules of evidence.