But how could it be proved factual? You do realize that it is rare for solid physical evidence to exist? Maybe you mean a DNA sample from a rape kit? Keep in mind that the statistics say that about half of rapes are committed with a condom, so there would be no DNA evidence then. And even when there is DNA evidence, it is always a possibility that woman might have willingly had intercourse with the man and then blamed him later. (There are a variety of different reasons some women do this. Most commonly if the man had sex with her but then afterwards reveals he has no interest in staying with her, and so in actuality he deceived and took advantage of her, then she is angry and wants to get revenge) So even DNA evidence may not be obvious "proof" that a rape actually occurred.
You still haven't got your grammar correct. You can believe what you like about the poster, but grammatically, there was nothing sexist in their statement.
FoxHastings said: ↑ ""Put men in prison based only on the word of a woman? """ The underlined words say it all.....all sexism, "only " "a woman".... ""Put men in prison based only on the word of a woman? """ The underlined words say it all.....all sexism, "only " "a woman".... Sorry, your "defense" of sexism doesn't work....he could have stated ""people put in prison based on only one witness's testimony."" But that wasn't the agenda, was it ? ...... The "word of a woman" IS a woman's word....."only the word of a woman" is demeaning women. Uh, "" we have a man's innocence based only on a man's word."" Sorry, but I know the OP's history concerning women......and his agenda... Haven't got a defense yet , I see
A post of mine was wrongly removed so I will restate my point made then. We have a supreme court nominee who attended Harvard law school. She has a Juris Doctor degree from Harvard law school and she cannot say what a woman is. This is important on a thread like this. How can we say "word of a woman" when we cannot even define what that means? This is the idiocy of the left. When a senator from Hawaii says all women must be believed it is not only idiotic but elite democrats cannot even tell us what a woman is any longer.
And if you followed the rules of grammar, you don't have a leg to stand on. Are we done with the petty posts now? The post is not sexist. The word 'only' applies to the word 'word', as in, nothing else to support the person's claim but their word. 'Woman' refers to the person making the claim. Just as the statement 'only the word of a person', or 'only the word of a man' are not sexist statements. In this case, the majority of rapes involve a man and a woman. So, depicting the 'victim' as a woman is perfectly acceptable in the context it was used. Trying to claim it was 'sexist' based on some previous dealings with the OP, you'll need something stronger then rearranging the words used.
FoxHastings said: ↑ ""Put men in prison based only on the word of a woman? """ The underlined words say it all.....all sexism, "only " "a woman".... ""Put men in prison based only on the word of a woman? """ The underlined words say it all.....all sexism, "only " "a woman".... Sorry, your "defense" of sexism doesn't work....he could have stated ""people put in prison based on only one witness's testimony."" But that wasn't the agenda, was it ? ...... The "word of a woman" IS a woman's word....."only the word of a woman" is demeaning women. Uh, "" we have a man's innocence based only on a man's word."" Sorry, but I know the OP's history concerning women......and his agenda... Haven't got a defense yet , I see
Repeating yourself doesn't make you correct. You obviously don't have anything to support your position.
FoxHastings said: ↑ ""Put men in prison based only on the word of a woman? """ The underlined words say it all.....all sexism, "only " "a woman".... ""Put men in prison based only on the word of a woman? """ The underlined words say it all.....all sexism, "only " "a woman".... Sorry, your "defense" of sexism doesn't work....he could have stated ""people put in prison based on only one witness's testimony."" But that wasn't the agenda, was it ? ...... The "word of a woman" IS a woman's word....."only the word of a woman" is demeaning women. Uh, "" we have a man's innocence based only on a man's word."" Sorry, but I know the OP's history concerning women......and his agenda... Haven't got a defense yet , I see I haven't seen anything meaningful from you.....just an inability to read or comprehend what is posted...and a gratuitous insult to show you are floundering
You are right. It can be very difficult. It's why women need to come forth as soon as there is a violation. There are support groups nowadays. Yes it is often "he said she said'. Wonder if the "woke" crowd has ever considered that maybe the Sexual Revolution brought a lot of this shady area on? Both men and women are loose in their morals and it is not so easy as to define when a women says "STOP". It is an area that has become far more grey. I don't point a finger here at ANYONE. In fact, for a while, I was part of that "Sexual Revolution"......before I gained an ounce of wisdom. Now I am ridiculed often for my "prudish Christian" values.
So the explanation of grammar showing you are incorrect, is 'nothing meaningful', yet you have supplied nothing to support your position. What gratuitous insult? If you don't support your position other than repeating the same thing over and over again, isn't an insult. I'm not floundering, you are ignoring facts place in front of you. That means you don't have a leg to stand on.
Yes, yes, and yes. I made that point in another thread. In the old days, things were a lot more simple. Probably not the best example, but even in Muslim societies today women won't dare be alone together with a man because she will have no way to prove if rape happens. To the Muslim culture, this is just obvious common sense. Heck, if she drinks alcohol in a setting around men, she is pretty much "asking for it".
You are right on. Also women that honor their own virtue deem to be more honored and protected by other men.
First it was a whole thread complaining that a paedophile got too severe a sentence and now excuses for rape
That would not be a witness that would be the accuser. Do you believe the mere accusation in any crime should be sufficient for a conviction of that crime?
In that courtroom if I sued you for coming over and beating me up and it was just my word should I win?
As I said - this is what the court system is for - now don’t tell me YOU a approve of the paedophile thread
You are innocent until proven guilty, you do not have to be proven guilty. If it is investigated and it is only the accusation then no, no one should be convicted merely on an accusation.
For what? In you country can you be put in prison merely on an accusation? Goes to court. The prosecution puts the accuser on the stand. They offer nothing else. Is that enough to convict? I don't know what is the pedophile thread.