By now, I’m sure most of you are well aware about the UVA rape case. For those of you who are not, here’s the summary:
A few months ago, the Rolling Stone published an article about how a college girl (referred to as “Jackie”) was allegedly gang raped by seven men at a UVA frat party. I say allegedly because it was later revealed that the story had several discrepancies, and as such, the Rolling Stone, showcasing journalistic integrity, retracted it. The story was further investigated by the police, who recently announced that they could not find enough substantial evidence to support it.
You’d think that would be the end of the story, right? There’s no evidence to support it; therefore, it didn't happen. Does this mean that it absolutely never happened? Well, there’s a slight possibility that future evidence will be revealed to prove that it did, but until then, we can safely assume that it did not.
Sadly, the feminists who’ve been covering and following this story have not been as rational. Even with overwhelming evidence showing that this rape probably didn't happen, they still insist that it did and have been accusing anyone who thinks otherwise of being “rape apologists” who support “rape culture”—a concept that even the nation's largest anti-sexual assault organization, RAINN, denies.
The feminist anti-rape hysteria has even spawned the embarrassing hashtag #IStandWithJackie, where internet feminists voice their support of Jackie’s story even in spite of all the evidence against it.
The Amazing Atheist and Thunderf00t have both recently made videos about this topic, and they did such an exceptional job that there’s really no need for me to further add my two cents.
Instead, I want to address a video by one of those delusional feminists who insists on “Standing With Jackie.” That feminist is none other than Laci Green, a contributor to MTV News—and further proof that MTV has died the way of the dinosaurs.
No less than five seconds into her video and she instigates face palms with the most loaded bad faith question:
Here’s a little question: why does everyone think that victims of rape are making it up?Sigh.
You know, I really hate talking about rape. It’s a very sensitive subject that always handled the most insensitively. And I always feels as though I’m arguing on the wrong side: because unless you fully support hanging a man from the highest tree simply because one woman (or even one man) pointed at him and accused him of rape, feminists will label you a "rape apologist."
And I’d really hate to address this video, because it’s quite clear that Laci is arguing from bad faith, and thus has no interest in acknowledging any answer to her question that’s more loaded that a loaded potato at TGIFriday’s.
But, in the sake of free inquiry and open dialogue, I’ll bite the bullet.
Here’s the answer that I left on her video:
Laci, dear, I know you’re asking that question in bad faith, and thus you have no interest in acknowledging any answers to it, but for the sake of dialogue, I’ll answer your question anyway.You can't say I didn't try, though you're free to wonder why I even bothered.
No, Laci, we do not believe that victims of rape are always making it up. We only believe they are making it up—and here is the important part—when there is no evidence to support their claims.
Yes, I know we should give rape victims—any victims of any crime—the benefit of the doubt, but we should also apply scrutiny to their claims and investigate them to make sure that they truly hold water.
For example, with the recent UVA rape story, there was no evidence to support the alleged victim’s story. After Rolling Stone published its article, it was later revealed that most of the events and details in the story were either wrong or did not happen, so the magazine did what any self-respecting journalistic publication would do and retracted the story. Then the police further investigated the story, and arrived to the conclusion that there was no evidence to support it. Now is it still possible that the woman was still raped? Yes. But right now, there is no evidence to corroborate her claims, so we have to assume it did not happen.
Does this mean all rape victims are lying? No. When there is evidence to support their claims, that is when we know they are telling the truth. This was the case with the Steubenville rape case. There was more than enough evidence to prove that the girl was raped, and thus the men who raped her were convicted of the crime. There is no doubt that her rape happened, because there was enough evidence to corroborate her story.
Now, if for some chance, new evidence would come along to prove that the UVA rapes really did occur, people would be more than willing to change their minds and believe it. Feminists, on the other hand, are more than willing to “Stand With Jackie”, even after all the evidence concludes that the rape did not happen. That is the main difference between people like me and feminists like yourself: we are more than willing to change our minds when new evidence arises.