People who make public accusations of abuse should be approached with care and empathy, rather than dismissal, so as to not further inject poison into a social climate already infected by the regulation of interpersonal violence. Empathy, and uncritically presenting an accusation as an unassailable truth, are two actions that are not synoymous. This doesnât mean a first response to an accuser ought to be a demand for proof after shouldering trauma, but that grace towards an accuser should not entail an immediate assumption of guilt and punishment toward the accused. For reasons that should be obvious, I have never been a proponent of this due to its own real, not imagined, potential for harm. A google search pointing to the history of lynching in the United States can hopefully save me the trouble of explaining the fact that there are material consequences behind a logic like this. It is outrageous to me that a belief in this logic has been touted as âfeministâ or âprogressiveâ when it is not a truly transformative response to the specter of interpersonal violence. Not to me, at least. But, these issues are inherently complex, overwhelming, and confusing, so I donât begrudge people for trying to carve out alternatives to victim-blaming. Not all alternatives can cultivate the framework for an antidote, however, and people shouldnât shy away from the possibility that a framework has room for change to benefit victims and the interests of justice. I think candidly discussing these limitations is where that kind of necessary and sensitive transformation and change can take place.
It was interesting to me that most people with well-meaning sympathies got recently engrossed in the story that inspired âWhen They See Us,â but failed to evaluate some of the practices that contributed to the undue assumptions of guilt that landed innocent people in prison, some of which are still utilized now. While misapplied or false accusations of sexual violence are less common than ones with merit, they cannot be dismissed as harmless isolated incidents that always have negligble impact. It is clear that this isnât true for every case or every demographic (hint hint). The desire to have some sort of corroboration, some sort of concrete evidence, and/or some degree of consistency to support oneâs claims does not equate to hatred of victims. It is basic pillar of examining reality. Similarly, an accuser or victim shouldnât be raked over the coals about their mental health or personhood by a public jury, since IPV can happen to anyone regardless of their attitude, status, or mental state. On that note, because I know people may publicly ask to determine if Iâm allowed swerve in this Laneâ˘ď¸, no you wonât get any explicit and poetic disclosure of intimate personal details on the matter from me. I think Iâve spoken about it enough times for people to get an idea. I am not a sentimental gore porn dispensiary (unless you pay me).
And with all that said, my primary aim and goal is always about the truth and eliminating the real and observable failure to uphold a sociality that is resourceful and protective for victims of abuse. Iâm just one thot with a blog. But I think putting something out there that may be hard for others to articulate is better than nothin. I think there is room for improvement here.
kianamaiart
dailybridgerton
yousharknotpass
snowghoul
baratheonpilled
prguitarman
