I am glad that I managed to keep a distance from this thread long enough to see how the story developed.
Two more actresses have come forward to tell stories about Deen being a sleazeball backstage (while he didn't rape them, he did attack them) These stories make Stoya's rape claim more credible, it gives the rape allegation more weight.
My nature is very skeptical so I sit on the same corner as
@DeezNA. From the top of my head I can come up with at least 5 reasons why someone in the position of Stoya would want to make up a story like this. Those who dismiss
@DeezNA PR interpretation as crazy don't really know how far people are willing to take things to gain popularity. Looking at the catfights and drama on MFC's top 20 lately could give you a hint. I once saw a girl make up a story about having cancer on a popular camsite. Even if the PR thing wasn't the motivation behind it, there are many more reasons why she could have made something like that up, including revenge because she was, after all, the guy's ex.
So while I do believe she could be telling the truth, I also believe she has reasons to make this up. Both seem to me just as likely considering the gauche way in which she disclosed it (via Twitter). The difference between me and many people is that for some we have a moral obligation to "stand" with anyone who claims rape simply because of the nature of the crime and how traumatic it is for the victim. But I do not believe we have any moral obligation whatsoever to "stand" with anyone claiming something as serious as this if doing it could victimize and traumatize an innocent person if the allegation happens to be a lie.
So I want to talk about the other victim, the one few people talk about: the guy who gets accused of rape without a shred of evidence to the fact. I am not talking specifically about Deen here, but about all the men who have been accused of rape in the past and have been proven innocent,
sometimes after 16 or 20 years in prison.
Some people have said on this thread that "standing" with Stoya (the victim) has nothing to do with passing judgement on Deen (the accused). But that is the thing, you cannot have your cake and eat it too. Because you either believe the story Stoya is telling is true, that she has gone through a traumatic experience
because Deen is guilty of raping her; or you choose not to believe in her story and therefore Deen would be innocent. Either way you are passing judgement whether you like it or not. Standing with Stoya means condemning Deen, and it doesn't take the power of the State to make things a living hell for the accused, even if he is innocent. The social consequences of an accusation like this can break a person. I would hate to be on the side of the people lynching someone only to find out it was all a lie.
The alternative is simply remaining skeptical, choosing neither to stand with the accuser or to defend the victim, choosing to neither believe or disbelieve until proof is given, and not pass judgement on anybody until you know what happened. I understand that proving a rape happened is difficult especially if it happened years ago. I also understand the fear someone might have of their testimony being dismissed for being a woman, or for her outfit or the fact that she is a sex worker. I think all of these are things we need to take into consideration. But on the other hand,
it isn't just rape. Most crimes are hard to prove, you cannot even process a murder case without a body, for example. And many people who are guilty of murder get away with it every year simply because they knew how to dispose of the body. Does it mean the crime didn't happen? No, but am I ready to accuse someone of murder without proof? No. We cannot base an entire trial on testimony.
If Stoya and the other women claiming Deen attacked them didn't go to the police or to the hospital right away, then they need to understand it will not be as easy to prove that he did attack or rape them 5 years or 10 years down' the line. If you don't take measures to preserve the proof you might have by going to get your body checked up by someone who could offer testimony later you can't expect us to believe in your word without further proof. It might have happened, but expecting people to be punished based on hearsay sets a very dangerous precedent.
And this is the thing,
it isn't a matter of whether you believe in Stoya or in Deen. It is a matter of whether you believe in Stoya or you don't. Deen didn't claim anything. He cannot prove he didn't rape her. Because Stoya was the one who came foward with this allegation, the burden of proof lies on her. It might be difficult, but it is what it is.
So all in all, I am not willing to "believe" in Stoya. I don't "believe" in random people I don't know. Even with the other girls that have come forward (all of them porn actresses who could simply be looking for 5 more minutes) I am not willing to forego proof and "believe" this guy is a rapist. Obviously the more people come forward and the more anonymous the "victims" are, can persuade me to think there is more weight to her word. But I am not hoping a trial foregoes all evidence or that we socially take Deen's head and put it on a pike just because I "believe" in Stoya. It sounds really awful to me to go about it this way.
Talking about rape in general, there are many reasons to claim someone raped you when nothing happened. Some crazy girls will do it if they regret having sex with a guy or are caught by their families, especially if their social circle places a high value on virtue. Then there is so much feminist lobbying and media frenzy surrounding allegations of this kind that a girl with an ego issue will sometimes want to cash on that (take our friend Jackie from UVA)
There have been so many rape allegations that produced horrible consequences for the alleged culprits, and that were proven to be false a few months after... The Duke Lacrosse team guys will never be able to get their lives back, even when they were proven innocent, the smearing is done, there is no way to undo it. And neither will their coach who had nothing to do with the rape, but media went so beserk he lost his job and his reputation was destroyed.
