It’s easier to attack the victim than the violence. So it becomes—Why come forward now? How do we know we can trust them? What if they are like previous people we disbelieved before? Instead of—Did this event happen? Were they in the same place at the same time? Who else knows? What did they say?

April 10, 2026 - 22:24 UTC

4
3
476
Anyone who has studied trauma at all knows that it can be many years before people are ready to process it. All the more so in cases like this where they know they will be treated like shit in this misogynistic society.
0
0
7
If you read the articles and listen to the testimony of the victims and the witnesses and people they told, you’ll typically get the answers to all of these questions—and they’re usually favorable to the victim, too! But the societal script around allegations is to question IF we believe the victim.
5
1
405
I have never been comfortable with the "always believe the accuser" simplistic view. What you describe is the more reasoned approach. Look at the evidence, look at the motive (tends to favor the accuser, who has much less motive to lie than the accused), and if you look at character, look at both.
1
0
1
Why should we believe this FEMALE, who is obviously jealous of the male? After all, she went after him. Clearly, she has loose morals. He's the real victim.
0
0
1
Sometimes timing is because it was going to leak anyway and the victim decided to get in front of it so they can own their story. It's pretty clear from the SFC article that was the case here, and kudos to her because that's brave af.
0
0
70
So many people “just asking questions” that are answered in the damn article.
0
0
7
I reserved judgement until I read the complaints. They have contemporaneous texts and medical records.

This is real. I really hope some of these or all can still be prosecuted
0
0
2
🎯
We never hear these sceptics raise a voice when someone says their car was stolen.
Unconscious bias is a bastard.
0
0
12