Post: #1

I wrote a new blog post for Logicate for the first time in about a year and a half. In it, I try to break down false rape claims into three general categories: malicious, opportunistic, and dissonant.

Malicious claims are intentional false claims designed to harm the accused;
Opportunistic claims are intentional false claims designed to elicit an image of the accuser in others;
Dissonant claims are false claims designed to reconcile the accuser's self-image with the sex act itself.


Here's the post: https://logicate.wordpress.com/2015/06/2...pe-claims/


So what do I want you to do? Rip it to shreds. Try to break the model. Point out where I'm being an idiot. Force me to defend my thinking. Comment here, comment on the Logicate site, email me at [email protected], whatever. Just give me honest intellectual criticism so I can strengthen the theory.

I want to develop archetypical accusers and strategies for ID'ing each type of claim, as well as (if possible) investigative procedures for the aftermath.

Thanks in advance for your help.

Post: #2

But what is the purpose? We already effectively group false rape claimers into mixtures of: malicious, attention whoring, 'hamstering', and psychotic.

Post: #3

1. I haven't seen that set of classifications actually listed anywhere, but they do closely mirror the ones in the article, which suggests I have it right.
2. Even if we 'already effectively group them,' nobody has broken down the internal logic of the accuser, which is key to decoding the accusations.
3. Those terms are subject to attack by mainstream/feminist thought as 'MRA trolling' or 'rape culture enabling' or some crap like that, which ensures the message dies. The article suggests neutral terms.

Just read it and tell me if it makes sense rather than fighting the purpose.

Post: #4

I would add another category or two. I am not sure what to call them but consider these two scenarions:

A woman or group of women find themselves in a situation and they accuse the cop/taxi driver/bartender/whoever of rape to get out of the situation. Maybe they are drunk and don't have taxi fair and accuse or threaten to accuse the driver of rape. or they just got pulled over and were found with drugs so they threaten or accuse the officer of rape. Or they are drunk and don't want to be cut off so they accuse the bartender of rape. All of these are cases that I have seen on COTWA (Pierce Harlans blog Comunity Of The Wrongly Accused which used to be named the false rape society) several times.

While I guess they could go under opportunistic, I might make a separate distinction like impaired/alibi seeking/revenge or something.

Basically these girls are using the threat of a false accusation to get their way.

Another category would be falsely accusing someone who is not only innocent but not known to the alleged victim. An example might be the recent case of the male undergraduate getting expelled because he simply looked like the alleged rapist of a coed. Or another example might be where women kill their children and blame it on some random black guy because he fits the vague description. Maybe a category of imaginary false rape claims to cover these.

I would also maybe have a category of false rape where a real rape happened but the wrong guy gets fingered. The innocence project is full of stories like that and by having that category you do give yourself some shielding against SJWs.

Post: #5

Thanks for taking the time to think through this.

(06-24-2015 11:24 PM)Troll King Wrote:  I would add another category or two. I am not sure what to call them but consider these two scenarions:

A woman or group of women find themselves in a situation and they accuse the cop/taxi driver/bartender/whoever of rape to get out of the situation. Maybe they are drunk and don't have taxi fair and accuse or threaten to accuse the driver of rape. or they just got pulled over and were found with drugs so they threaten or accuse the officer of rape. Or they are drunk and don't want to be cut off so they accuse the bartender of rape. All of these are cases that I have seen on COTWA (Pierce Harlans blog Comunity Of The Wrongly Accused which used to be named the false rape society) several times.

While I guess they could go under opportunistic, I might make a separate distinction like impaired/alibi seeking/revenge or something.

Basically these girls are using the threat of a false accusation to get their way.

This situation is malicious, opportunistic, or both, depending on the target audience. The threat is malicious, the alibi is opportunistic; however, both may exist in the same false claim.

As directed toward the accused for leverage, it's malicious: I want to get my way, so I will intentionally harm you.

It's [also] opportunistic when aimed at a third party: I want the investigating/adjudicating party to see me as not responsible, so I'm using rape to absolve me.

In the subcategories you mention, revenge is malicious, while alibi seeking is opportunistic. Impaired is immaterial to the analysis, because the logical process is still the same.

(06-24-2015 11:24 PM)Troll King Wrote:  Another category would be falsely accusing someone who is not only innocent but not known to the alleged victim. An example might be the recent case of the male undergraduate getting expelled because he simply looked like the alleged rapist of a coed. Or another example might be where women kill their children and blame it on some random black guy because he fits the vague description. Maybe a category of imaginary false rape claims to cover these.

Assuming for the sake of argument these are all false (see below), the undergraduate getting expelled is malicious: You look like X, therefore I want to harm you.

Women killing their children and blaming it on a random black guy is opportunistic. The false claim is the blaming it on the black guy, and is done so the investigator/adjudicator/public sees her as a good mother not responsible for the death of her children.

(06-24-2015 11:24 PM)Troll King Wrote:  I would also maybe have a category of false rape where a real rape happened but the wrong guy gets fingered. The innocence project is full of stories like that and by having that category you do give yourself some shielding against SJWs.

This isn't a false rape claim. It's a misidentification. False rape claims occur when the rape at issue never happened; if the woman was actually raped, it's a legitimate rape claim with the wrong defendant.

Post: #6

(06-24-2015 11:24 PM)Troll King Wrote:  I would add another category or two. I am not sure what to call them but consider these two scenarions:

A woman or group of women find themselves in a situation and they accuse the cop/taxi driver/bartender/whoever of rape to get out of the situation. Maybe they are drunk and don't have taxi fair and accuse or threaten to accuse the driver of rape. or they just got pulled over and were found with drugs so they threaten or accuse the officer of rape. Or they are drunk and don't want to be cut off so they accuse the bartender of rape. All of these are cases that I have seen on COTWA (Pierce Harlans blog Comunity Of The Wrongly Accused which used to be named the false rape society) several times.

While I guess they could go under opportunistic, I might make a separate distinction like impaired/alibi seeking/revenge or something.

Basically these girls are using the threat of a false accusation to get their way.

The word you're looking for is extortion.

Extortion, slander, scapegoating, and status. Primary reasons for false rape claims.

Post: #7

(06-24-2015 01:23 AM)lurker Wrote:  Malicious claims are intentional false claims designed to harm the accused;
Opportunistic claims are intentional false claims designed to elicit an image of the accuser in others;
Dissonant claims are false claims designed to reconcile the accuser's self-image with the sex act itself.

Use clear language instead of academic jargon.