"So does this support or not support your claim!" is a ligitimate question, Does this stat mean every time some claims there is a rape it goes to trial even without evidence thus supporting your "claim", or does this mean even with enough evidence to go to trial the accuser is not believed, thus contrdicting your claim, either is possible or some combination of the two is possible.
I think my claim is supported no matter WHAT the numbers say. Don't "Parse Out" my post. Immediately prior to the portion you pulled out, I was speaking of "Stereotypes". Love it! Must be from the airforce! Watch out below!
ARMY!!!
I already answered your question. But let me try again. I'll type slower. Maybe that will help.
I'll first quote the ENTIRE statement I said and not just the part you quoted.
We are always talking about how we shouldn't stereotype. Yet, when the subject of rape comes up, there are always 2 stereotypes. 1) It must have been a MAN who raped the woman; and 2) If she accuses rape, then it MUST be true.
WE are not the courts. WE are not the investigators. WE do not know all the evidence pro or con. I am not talking about police, military investigations, courts, etc... I am talking about WE. As in those posting on this forum and those who sit around the table and talk about these things. WE STEREOTYPE the situation. WE tend to believe that if a claim of rape is made, then it must be true, the woman is the victim, and the accused it guilty. WE don't automatically say: "We should wait until the court rules"; or something similar. This thread alone has had a number of posts about "Not BLAMING the victim". To "ASSUME" that she IS a victim, that everything one has read about her accusations is completely true.
The fact that so many rape charges are acquitted, means either that there isn't enough proof that the accused did in fact rape the accuser; or that there is a stereotype on the court's position that the accuser must be partially to blame. But again, I'm not discussing the courts, police, military justice, etc... I'm talking about WE the posters. We tend to automatically assume that because an individual makes an accusation of rape, it must in fact be true. I have no real knowledge of the case that this thread originally mentioned. The accuser can possibly be 100% a victim. She in fact most certainly could have been raped. But that's not for me, you, or anyone else here to say. We don't know. We can most definitely have opinions, but I'm simply saying that our opinions shouldn't be based on an "ASSUMPTION" that the accusation is true and that the accused is guilty. That's why I used the word "IF" a lot in my posts. "IF" alcohol was involved. "IF" the accused is guilty. "IF" the accusations are true. Point is, I don't stereotype an accused as automatically being guilty or the accuser as automatically being a victim. I also don't assume the opposite either.
My contribution to this thread was simply to point out that individuals, ALL individuals, need to be more responsible for their own actions. This includes individuals who are put into a position that potentially victimizes them. Chances are slim that they were completely put into that position against their will. In this particular case, it's unlikely that she was forced to go to the party. Or forced to drink beyond intoxication. But as I said previously, this doesn't justify or condone any actions by the accused, "If" such actions were not consensual. Simply pointing out the "Fact" that each of us has control over our own actions. As such, we need to be more responsible so as to not put ourselves into a position where we no longer have control.
. 
