Should there be some sort of statute of limitations on charges of sexual harassment?

By not immediately reporting the crime of rape, the victim is essentially destroying evidence, to instead claim a person should be found guilty solely on the claims of the victim, any contradicting evidence allowed to vanish with time.

Parrish said:

Thanks for manspainling, TD and TM.

Click to expand...

That's nothing but a sexist smear slogan.

Parrish said:

Thanks for manspainling, TD and TM.

Click to expand...

I don't know what you mean.

Is the US the only country where more men are raped than women?

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/cifamerica/2012/feb/21/us-more-men-raped-than-women

Parrish said:

Thanks for manspainling, TD and TM.

Click to expand...

there is some interesting dichotomies at work because if someone claims women need decades before they can report objectionable behavior-be it harassment or worse, that is essentially saying these women are weak or incompetent.

TurtleDude said:

there is some interesting dichotomies at work because if someone claims women need decades before they can report objectionable behavior-be it harassment or worse, that is essentially saying these women are weak or incompetent.

Click to expand...

At best. However, it more appears for the publicized cases the motive is monetary and attention seeking.

Maybe some of you guys may have guilty a conscience.

joko104 said:

Is the US the only country where more men are raped than women?

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/cifamerica/2012/feb/21/us-more-men-raped-than-women

Click to expand...

Personally I think the entire prison system is broken and has been for probably at least a hundred years.

It focuses on punishment and allows exploitation of captive labor by those in control of it.

Rather than working to rehabilitate those who can be (the majority, if it was working) and protect society from those who cannot be.


Part of the problem is how laws are enforced, but not the only part.

The money to be made off the captive labor drives the law enforcement to ensure a constant supply of said labor.

Parrish said:

Maybe some of you guys may have guilty a conscience.

Click to expand...

not at all-rather I tried or handled dozens of Title VII claims. 95% of them were bogus. the good news is in the federal system, plaintiffs have a certain limited amount of time to notify the government of an intended claim for sex discrimination. if they don't, they are SOL. I think I had at least 50 claims dismissed for "failure to properly exhaust administrative remedies" meaning the person didn't file a claim until say they were disciplined for malfeasance etc. The valid cases, we almost invariably settled.

TurtleDude said:

I see that the head of CBS is out due to charges of ranging from sexual harassment to what may be termed felony attempted rape

https://www.usatoday.com/story/life...new-sexual-misconduct-allegations/1249724002/
The latest New Yorker story by Pulitzer Prize winner Ronan Farrow includes allegations that Moonves, 68, forced oral sex, exposed himself, committed violent acts and derailed careers in incidents that occurred from the 1980s to the early 2000s.
In the new report, the accusers, who give their names, describe a range of damning actions.
Phyllis Golden-Gottlieb, who was a Moonves colleague at Lorimar-Telepictures studio in the 1980s, describes an incident in 1986 in which she says Moonves forced her to perform oral sex.

IS there a point where the public, companies and employers should reject charges that aren't brought for decades? I am not speaking to actual criminal charges but to given credibility to claims brought years and years after they allegedly happened.

Click to expand...

well your question and info in the OP dont match, what you described is not sexual assault. I may be willing to allow limitations on sexual harassment as long as it was clealry defined what the harassment is but not so much on rape/ sexual assault and never for minors.

TurtleDude said:

there is some interesting dichotomies at work because if someone claims women need decades before they can report objectionable behavior-be it harassment or worse, that is essentially saying these women are weak or incompetent.

Click to expand...

Victim shaming? Really?

The Royal Commission results handed down last year involving the extent of child abuse in the Catholic church, showed that of the estimated 4500 victims, 90% of them were boys. The average time it took between a victim being abused and reporting it, or seeking redress, was 33 years.

Were those males weak or incompetent?

Of course not.

I can't believe some of the **** I read here from people at times.

I see rape as an extremely horrific crime - so much I would support the death penalty if 1.) the victim is otherwise seriously and permanently injured or disfigured by assault, 2.) the victim is made made pregnant by the rape and/or 3.) the victim is infected with an incurable disease. By the same measure, then, I take a rape accusation as extremely serious as well.

These high profile cases seem to nearly be all by women who were seeking employment benefits from a man and this did not turn out how she wanted it to. Years to decades later she declares it was rape or some kind of sexual harassment, seeking money and publicity out of it. I have NO sympathy for that. Those women had NO legitimate reason to delay, other than again economic motives then and now.

Police would never touch these cases nor would lawyers other than they are high profile cases against famous and wealthy men enough to draw media attention - and then the fury of the Democratic Party and its operatives in the MSM and press working women for votes. If an ordinary person went to the police saying "27 years ago a guy who is now rich raped me - for which there was NO violence, NO weapon and NO threat of violence, the police would take a report as required and deep six it.

Because delaying reporting it severely damages the ability of the accused to make a defense, unless there as a VERY compelling reason the woman did not immediately report it I am highly skeptical that it was rape or sexual harassment. There people, female and male, that try to use sex to gain an inroad to influential or powerful people who may be able to provide the person with economic benefits in return. Such influential or powerful people may take advantage of that, but that is no crime.

Go to any high dollar bar hangout and there are a LOT of women dressed to kill looking for older wealthy men to try to hook. If the next day the man says "thanks" but also "goodbye," that didn't somehow suddenly become sexual harassment nor rape. It meant she gambled incorrectly and the man called her hand at the end for what it really was.

Serenity said:

Victim shaming? Really?

The Royal Commission results handed down last year involving the extent of child abuse in the Catholic church, showed that of the estimated 4500 victims, 90% of them were boys. The average time it took between a victim being abused and reporting it, or seeking redress, was 33 years.

Were those males weak or incompetent?

Of course not.

I can't believe some of the **** I read here from people at times.

Click to expand...

What is not mentioned is what changed is it became learned there are HUGE payoffs for "seeking redress." This was not the case years ago. Years ago, if a person pursued BOTH criminal charges AND a lawsuit - willing to drop criminal charges if the lawsuit settled - was considered 1.) criminal extortion and 2.) prosecutors would then rarely touch the case.

Now, lawsuits and criminal prosecution of "MeToo"ism is a highly lucrative field of law. A person should be limited to 1 of 2 courses. 1. Prosecute, but the only civil recovery then could be actual damages awarded as restitution by the criminal court - but not punitive damages as the conviction is the punishment or 2.) sue for punitive damages but then may not prosecute.

It has become legalized extortion in some instances and that should not be tolerated.

Serenity said:

Victim shaming? Really?

The Royal Commission results handed down last year involving the extent of child abuse in the Catholic church, showed that of the estimated 4500 victims, 90% of them were boys. The average time it took between a victim being abused and reporting it, or seeking redress, was 33 years.

Were those males weak or incompetent?

Of course not.

I can't believe some of the **** I read here from people at times.

Click to expand...

Oh I certainly believe someone victimized as a child should be able to wait until they hit 18 to complain. That is the rule with tort laws in most of the USA. If you say suffer a tort at age 14, you have until a year after you turn 18 to file a claim. If you are 29, you have a year.

and in many cases these people are not victims-merely they claim to be victims and with thirty years of time that has gone by-its rather difficult to know who is telling the truth

BTW one of the last cases I worked on involved sexual abuse of a boy by a priest-20 years later.

joko104 said:

What is not mentioned is what changed is it became learned there are HUGE payoffs for "seeking redress." This was not the case years ago. Years ago, if a person pursued BOTH criminal charges AND a lawsuit - willing to drop criminal charges if the lawsuit settled - was considered 1.) criminal extortion and 2.) prosecutors would then rarely touch the case.

Now, lawsuits and criminal prosecution of "MeToo"ism is a highly lucrative field of law. A person should be limited to 1 of 2 courses. 1. Prosecute, but the only civil recovery then could be actual damages awarded as restitution by the criminal court - but not punitive damages as the conviction is the punishment or 2.) sue for punitive damages but then may not prosecute.

It has become legalized extortion in some instances and that should not be tolerated.

Click to expand...

Care to actually answer the question I asked?

Were those males weak or incompetent?

Click to expand...

TurtleDude said:

Oh I certainly believe someone victimized as a child should be able to wait until they hit 18 to complain. That is the rule with tort laws in most of the USA. If you say suffer a tort at age 14, you have until a year after you turn 18 to file a claim. If you are 29, you have a year.

and in many cases these people are not victims-merely they claim to be victims and with thirty years of time that has gone by-its rather difficult to know who is telling the truth

BTW one of the last cases I worked on involved sexual abuse of a boy by a priest-20 years later.

Click to expand...

Same question to you as Joko. Care to actually answer the question I asked?

Were those males weak or incompetent?

Click to expand...

Serenity said:

Same question to you as Joko. Care to actually answer the question I asked?

Click to expand...

different issues. those males were almost always children being victimized by authority figures.

TurtleDude said:

different issues. those males were almost always children being victimized by authority figures.

Click to expand...

You said (referring to the time line of the report)

TurtleDude said:

there is some interesting dichotomies at work because if someone claims women need decades before they can report objectionable behavior-be it harassment or worse, that is essentially saying these women are weak or incompetent.

Click to expand...

I stated that the Royal Commission data shows that of the estimated 4500 victims, 90% of them were boys. The average time it took between a victim being abused and reporting it, or seeking redress, was 33 years.

In your opinion, were those males weak or incompetent for waiting "decades to report the behaviour"?

Serenity said:

You said (referring to the time line of the report)



I stated that the Royal Commission data shows that of the estimated 4500 victims, 90% of them were boys. The average time it took between a victim being abused and reporting it, or seeking redress, was 33 years.

In your opinion, were those males weak or incompetent for waiting "decades to report the behaviour"?

Click to expand...

I think in some cases yes, in other cases no. I think there is a huge difference between the cases of priest abusing 12-14 year old boys vs these current cases where adult females are claiming things like groping or "boob grabbing" or unwanted attention and waiting years to report it. Now if we are dealing with a 13 year old girl who was raped by a teacher, that is very different then some of the me too cases. IN the matter I last dealt with, the victim had repressed his assault until his fiancée-took him to a church where the molester had been the parish priest and the victim had a break down. Chances are, if his fiancee was Protestant or wanted a civil service, we never would have learned about the assault. and he certainly didn't do it for money. And it was only after his family and his fiancee investigated did he discuss it

Serenity said:

Care to actually answer the question I asked?

Click to expand...

I'd have to hear what each one had to say before answering. I do NOT agree to the pigeon hole-ing. For example, notice how some just assert the allegation of the woman stated in the OP is telling the truth and the man is guilty. No evidence. No witnesses. No trial.

My answer is each man would have his own motives for coming forward, nor does that mean all or any are telling the truth. They are not clones of each other or for which all priests accused are automatically guilty of every accusation.

There was a time where in much of the country if it was learned a white girl or woman was with a black man, she had to accuse him of rape to protect herself from social condemnations.

There are some on this thread that black man absolutely would NOT want on the jury given the clear presumption some are making that all accusations of rape are true - no evidence or trial required. The mere accusation proves guilt beyond any doubt. Many black men have gone to prison wrongly on that assumption. Same concept, different era and different target. Now it is wealthy, powerful men who are automatically guilty merely by virtue of the accusation.

cardinal said:

my first question is this: Does the trauma of rape end after the statute of limitations?

Fun fact: The reason why women don't come forward sooner is embedded within the op's question.

Click to expand...

this!!! ^^^^^

Cardinal said:

My first question is this: does the trauma of rape end after the statute of limitations?

Fun fact: the reason why women don't come forward sooner is embedded within the OP's question.

Click to expand...

Fun fact: fairly older people read #MeToo as Pound MeToo.

joko104 said:

There are some on this thread that black man absolutely would NOT want on the jury given the clear presumption some are making that all accusations of rape are true - no evidence or trial required.

Click to expand...

Bull ****.

Who in this thread has stated that "all accusations of rape are true - no evidence or trial required"?

Why #MeToo is so annoying and "wrong" in my opinion.

Many children are horrifically abused, including sexually. Some are abused, starved, isolated and raped for years. Rarely is this anymore than a minor local news story in the newspaper, if that.

But, a woman claims a high profile wealthy man forced her head - when she was an adult - down to his crotch after seeing him pull out his penis - for which she decides she just had to give him a BJ - over 3 decades ago and this is the face of rape and national news.

Just like racism has been trivialized by the political left, and sexism has been trivialized by the political left, now rape and sexual assault is being trivialized by the political left. Of all the rapes over the last 30 years - men and women - the account in the OP isn't even in the top 1,000,000 of the worst rapes or sexual assaults.

In addition, I intensely oppose the presumption of innocence being totally thrown out the window, plus this is another example of there is one set of justice for the rich and famous - and another for the average person and poor.