Mark Humphrys (politics)

Search:


Scepticism - Sex


  Proof in sexual crimes

Proof in child abuse cases

Reactions to child abuse

Age of consent

Trans issues


Sex

Controversies to do with sex.

For woke people, discussion of sensitive issues to do with sex should be done in an atmosphere of hysteria, where you are "cancelled" if you say the wrong thing. That is how woke people think these issues should be discussed.

Woke people believe most of the topics below should be discussed in an atmosphere of hysteria. I'm not kidding.




Proof in sexual crimes

Sexual crimes (rape and child abuse) are as ancient as humans. They have often been sanctioned by religion, for example the rapists Moses and Muhammad, who told their followers to rape. In the modern age, ISIS and other jihadis are rapists and proud of it.

Western societies have long criminalised rape but controversies remain. In particular controversies over the level of proof needed. Anger at alleged sexual crimes can easily lead to mob hysteria, which can take many forms, from "cancellation" in the culture to unjust arrests to (in the past) actual lynchings.

As I say on the scepticism page, all things must be proved. Rape and child abuse can be hard crimes to prove. It is one thing if the rape or abuse is caught on the day. The difficult situation is when the abuse was years ago, and the victim was shamed or bullied into not speaking, and only has the courage to speak up today. Such a situation is common, even the norm with child abuse. But what has happened to the proof? Where has the evidence gone? How do we know the claim is true?


  


Disproven claims:
The movie Brian Banks (2018).
Brian Banks spent nearly 6 years in prison for rape. Later his accuser admitted she made it up.



Proven claims:
The documentary The Other Side of Jimmy Savile (2012) finally exposed Jimmy Savile's decades of sexual abuse of teenagers and children.


  

Brett Kavanaugh

Scepticism should certainly be applied to accusations of rape and abuse that only emerge once the accused becomes famous, or rich, or is running for political office.

Certainly an accusation is far more credible when made early, and when the accused is a nobody.




Christine Blasey Ford claimed she was sexually assaulted as a teenager at a party in the 1980s by a teenage Brett Kavanaugh.
However there is no evidence she ever made this claim before 2018, when Brett Kavanaugh was running for a place on the U.S. Supreme Court, with highly charged political partisan feelings for and against his nomination.
This is exactly the kind of situation where the utmost scepticism should be applied to the claim, and strong evidence sought to prove it is actually true.
Ford's story was ultimately dismissed, because:
  1. There is no evidence the party ever happened. Ford did not know the location or date or even year of the party. She changed her story more than once about what year in the 1980s it was.
  2. There is no evidence Ford ever met Brett Kavanaugh in her life.
  3. There is no evidence she ever mentioned Brett Kavanaugh to anyone before 2018.
  4. There is no evidence she ever heard of him before 2018.
  5. The people said to be at the party have no memory of it. Crucially, Ford's close friend Leland Keyser, who Ford said was at the party with her, said she had no knowledge of the party or of Brett Kavanaugh, and that Ford never mentioned the attack.

We can be charitable to Ford and say her story could be true, but no one should accept it until this huge lack of evidence is addressed.

  


Proof in child abuse cases

The horror of child abuse leads to many people wanting the issue discussed in an atmosphere of hysteria. They are so focused on the horror that they lose sight of what is needed to prove it, or indeed prove any accusation of sexual crime.

Human memory is fallible, and the brain is strange, and while claims of historic crimes, which have left no physical evidence, could of course be true, scepticism must always be applied to everything. All things must be proved.





Reactions to child abuse

Child abuse and rape are crimes that historically were ignored and covered up, so the modern confrontation is a welcome correction:


But we may have even over-compensated, to the extent that our response to these crimes is sometimes based on hysteria rather than reason. As a result we are susceptible (and will remain susceptible) to periodic hysterical witchhunts like the "ritual abuse" and "Munchausen Syndrome" witchhunts above. Consider the following:

  1. It sometimes seems in a world confused about morals as if child sexual abuse is the one thing we can agree on as the ultimate evil. We sometimes seem to have lost sight of the fact that killing or permanently disabling someone is worse. For example, paedophiles get burnt out of their homes, and attacked and killed in prison, and so on, in a way that murderers don't. And yet surely the murderer has committed an even worse crime.
    • Don't get me wrong. I don't have a problem with long prison sentences for child abuse and rape. I just think the sentences for murder and disabling should be even longer. To be a murderer should be a stigma even worse than being a paedophile.

  2. All sexual crimes, by their nature, lend themselves easily to miscarriage of justice. If someone says they were sexually assaulted, how can you prove them wrong? Historical claims of child abuse and rape years after the fact will have no forensic support. They may of course be true, but clearly there is a higher risk of miscarriage of justice than in other crimes.
    • Mission to Prey, RTE's famous libel against an Irish priest in May 2011.
    • Nora Wall, an Irish nun wrongfully convicted of rape in 1999. She was the first woman in the history of the Irish State to be convicted of rape. And it was bullshit. She was innocent.

  3. As a result of our somewhat over-the-top reaction to child abuse, we cast suspicion on all interactions of men with children (even though hardly any men are paedophiles), and we are driving away men (other than their fathers) from childrens' lives (and this at a time when more and more children do not even have their father around). Due to paranoia about child abuse, there is a steady drop in male primary school teachers, boy scout leaders, etc. And all research shows that this is really bad for boys in particular. We complain that boys have no steady male role models in their life. And yet we look with suspicion on any adult male who interacts with them.

  4. Due to fear of paedophiles, we also prevent our children playing outdoors, walking to school, etc., in a way we never did before. Yes, there is a risk. But the risk is actually small. While the negative impact on children's health is definite and large.

  


Denmark's Forest Kindergartens.
Due to fear of predators, cars, etc., we prevent our children going outdoors in a way we never did before.
But children need freedom.




Age of consent

Age of consent is very much an issue that woke people believe should be discussed in an atmosphere of screaming hysteria. If the age of consent is 17, and you suggest it should be 16, you are a paedophile. That kind of hysteria.

In contrast to them, I think the issue of applying the law to the grey area of willing teenagers age, say, 14 to 17, is an issue that deserves sensitive and careful consideration, rather than the application of blunt hammers and screaming.


  

Adult females and teenage males

  


28 year old Texas teacher Haeli Wey was arrested and got 10 years probation for having sex with two 17 year old male students.
Below almost every article about her, male commenters express jealousy and say they wish she had been at their school.
Because males and females are not the same.



Politics      Religion      Since 1995.      New 150 G VPS server.


Banned in Iran: This site is banned in Iran.

Blocked on Twitter by the regressive left and Islamists: I love debate. I love ideas. But the Western left and their friends the Islamic right do not return the favour. Their response to opposing ideas, whether expressed politely or robustly, is often to block. See Who blocks me on Twitter.

I will debate almost anyone. Stick to ideas and I will debate you. But I do have rules. See Who I block on Twitter.

The Twitter dark age, 2016 to 2022: I am on Twitter at markhumphrys. Twitter was a great place for debate before 2016. You could meet everyone in the world, and argue about ideas. Starting in 2016, Twitter became increasingly broken. It became full of reporting and bans and censorship. In 2019, Twitter even started shadowbanning me for no reason that was ever explained, or could be appealed. With the arrival of Elon Musk in 2022, Twitter's dark age of censorship may end. Let's hope so.

I am also on Parler at markhumphrys. I am on Gettr at markhumphrys.