There is much swirling concern and hand-wringing ado on the fringes of the Mens Movement when it concerns topics touching the third rail of Rape Culture. Nothing sets a Feminist's hair on fire faster than being dismissive of their favourite pet bugbear, but I am sorry, I just can't drum up even a modicum of concern for the feelings of victims anymore. The simple fact is, there is a huge swath of rape accusations that are false.
This is an 'open secret'...a truth known but cannot be spoken of.
But it's a simple fact. And the outright belligerent response of anyone who dares suggest that women just might, you know, act vindictively and play 'Let's you and him fight' using the State as Mr Wonderful positively screams "Hidden Agenda". It's plainly obvious that a large segment of our Ruling Class doesn't want us to look at this subject too hard, and attempts to clarify this subject are routinely attacked almost exclusively on ideological grounds.
This has led me, as an individual, to sorely mistrust just about every piece of information available on this subject, from Koss to Kanin. Lies, damned lies, and statistics.
Instead, I rely on personal logic. What is happening, how is it happening, and what could motivate someone to want that outcome? Simple questions that can be applied to almost any 'intractable' political problem.
The law surrounding sexual assault in Canada, at least, has degraded to the point that if a woman accuses a man of sexual assault convincingly enough, the man must prove his innocence...and failing that he goes to jail. The Law is written so ambiguously that a man can have completely consensual sex with a woman after having one drink, only to wake up in the morning to find that, in the cold light of day she feels she would never have acted 'like that' without drinking that intoxicant...
And presto chango, if the Jury agrees that the single drink did indeed effect her judgement (loosened her morals?), then not only was it right to arrest the man, he is actually guilty of Sexual Assault under Canadian Law. No, that is not a typo. And no, his 'intoxication' is not a defense, and is explicitly spelled out in section 273 of the Criminal Code.
Yes Virginia, this means that, under Canadian Law, every single drunken hookup that occurs is one changed perspective away from an actual crime of sexual assault. The ONLY legal requirement for consensual drunk hook up to turn into 'Rape of an Incapacitated Person' is a complaint on her behalf. Which can happen at any time after the incident.
So yes, technically, every man in Canada has every drunk hookup he has ever engaged in hanging over his head as a very real potential for conviction of Sexual Assault. For life.
With this situation in mind, in addition to the usual concerns attached to Rape Trials as an entity, I am not particularly charitable when it comes to how I think False Accusations should be prosecuted.
For one thing, I think that a proven false accusation should carry a sentence identical to whatever crime the false accusation alleged. So, you allege violent rape for kicks? You face the sentence for violent rape for consequences.
In addition to this, I believe that any conviction for false accusations should never, under any circumstances, be shorter than any possible time served by the victim of said false accusation. So, for example, say a victim of an FRA is exonerated after 7 years, because he can prove the accusation was false, and malicious in intent. If convicted, I believe that under no circumstances should that accuser's sentence OR time served be less than the exact same 7 years.
Now, does this mean that I think a successful defense against a rape charge means automatic charges against the accuser? Absolutely not. There are many instances where mistaken identity, or weak prosecutions, or even misapplication of the legal standard, are not the fault of the accuser, or not intentional in the slightest. There is no reason to punish these people.
I believe the principle of Mens rea applies, and in fact should be more widespread as basis of Law. For this reason, I believe any prosecution of a False Rape Accusation must, by necessity, include a requirement of proof beyond a reasonable doubt of Mens rea - the intention to commit a wrongful act. If that is absent, or cannot be proven, then prosecution should not be successful.
I hope this clears things up a little.