VOY - Retrospect

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

The "not believing rape victims" charge - on the one hand, I can see why it gets people upset, as Chuck himself mentioned in the episode, but on the other hand, I've done that myself, when hearing their accounts and finding it wanting, when the woman or women in question are not behaving in a realistic manner, and so I wonder how accurate said accounts are. What does that make me?

At such point, do you further wish for truth on the matter to be revealed, or do you make up your mind about the whole case based on that instinct?

[Yukaphile]

The former. That's what leads me to such feelings. Without that, I tend to believe it - that's when the weaknesses in the story leads me to conclude it feels dubious, in the case I mentioned.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

The former. That's what leads me to such feelings. Without that, I tend to believe it - that's when the weaknesses in the story leads me to conclude it feels dubious, in the case I mentioned.

Those feelings you're mentioning don't have anything to do with the truth being revealed though. How much do you actually trust such instincts on the matter?

[Yukaphile]

It was submitted anonymously, so that makes it even harder to trust said person reporting it - given that I need a name to go with the account. It makes one question why it's being submitted anonymously and why the women are not behaving realistically... unless, of course, it's that it's partially or completely fabricated. Belief, outside a court context (if you're a juror, you have to remain impartial, or close to it), costs us nothing, I know that's true. But only for living, breathing people who have names. And as Chuck himself said in "Profit and Lace," it's always important to name the victims.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

It was submitted anonymously, so that makes it even harder to trust said person reporting it - given that I need a name to go with the account. It makes one question why it's being submitted anonymously and why the women are not behaving realistically... unless, of course, it's that it's partially or completely fabricated. Belief, outside a court context (if you're a juror, you have to remain impartial, or close to it), costs us nothing, I know that's true. But only for living, breathing people who have names. And as Chuck himself said in "Profit and Lace," it's always important to name the victims.

So I guess you're saying that you've made up your mind on the matter. Believing it impossible for it to be true.

[Yukaphile]

Could be true. I suspect it isn't, though. I do need names to go with the victim, though. Is that so unreasonable?

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

Could be true. I suspect it isn't, though. I do need names to go with the victim, though. Is that so unreasonable?

Well I guess we'll just have to work with that.

[TrueMetis]

What precisely is "behaving in a realistic manner"? This is getting perilously close to when people ask a rape victim "why didn't you fight back?"

[clearspira]

What precisely is "behaving in a realistic manner"? This is getting perilously close to when people ask a rape victim "why didn't you fight back?"

I can't answer that, and I doubt anyone else here can either. But there are police psychologists who have spent their lives studying thousands of victims and criminals, and they are damn good at noting the common parallels between the guilty and the innocent. I watch the crime channel a lot, and some of these experts are nearly omniscent in their predictions. Human beings are not as unique and unpredictable in their actions as we like to think.

[Zoinksberg]

If an expert seems like they have perfected the knowledge of human psychology then they are cherry picking results for TV and/or are fabricating their results. Having too much belief in a particular psychological science as nearly infallible is how things like false repressed memories became such a big problem.