Yesterday, there was a diary on the Rec List about Julian Assange and some supposed 'conveniently timed' allegations against him of rape. I read through some of the comments and was appalled that on a supposedly 'liberal' site, there were some very noxious opinions having to do with 'convenient timing' and people thinking that these women simply 'made up' the allegations or 'asked for it' in some way.
I didn't stick around to see if there was a rebuttal. I was too disgusted.
http://www.nytimes.com/...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/...
http://www.read-news.info/...
Rape is a serious allegation. It's a serious crime, that changes the life of the victim. Non-consent is still rape. If you change your mind mid-intercourse, because the condom broke, and the other participant carries on against your objection, that is still rape.
I understand some people here hold Julian Assange of Wikileaks in a folk-hero like status. I would caution against such things. Mr. Assange is a complex individual, like many of us are, with many sides. One of those sides runs a website that is devoted to free release of classified documents, which benefits a lot of people here and causes consternation elsewhere. But, another of those sides may well be a man who doesn't take 'no' for an answer where sex is concerned. Those two things can be contained in one individual. To imply one must have some sort of relationship to the other is not only unfair to the victims of such crimes, but diminishes them in a way no one should be diminished.
So before we resort to hagiography and folk hero status where Mr. Assange is concerned, and trashing the character and reputations of the women who are making the allegations (an old trick, designed to justify rape), let's pause a moment and engage a little less in conspiracy theory.
If these women are making false allegations, that will be proven soon enough - but I cannot sit idly by and watch people on this site treat alleged rape victims with such a jaundiced eye. Let the law do its job.
Just my 2 cents.