← Back to context

Comment by Aurornis

1 day ago

I do not know anything about this author’s situation and won’t pretend to, but I did watch a sexual misconduct accusation play out in person once. The speed at which everyone assumed the story was true and turned against the accused was basically instant.

However there were some key details about the accusation that didn’t add up. The accuser tried changing the details of the story once they realized others were noticing the problems with the claims. It also became clear that the accuser had an ulterior motive and stood to benefit from the accused being ostracized. The accuser also had developed a habit of lying and manipulation, which others slowly began to share as additional information.

This was enough to make the situation fall apart among people who knew the details. However, word spread quickly and even years later there are countless people who only remember the initial accusation. Many avoided the accused just to be safe. The strangest part was seeing how some people really didn’t care about the details of the situation, they viewed it as symbolic of something greater and believed everyone was obligated to believe the accuser in some abstract moral sense.

It remains one of the weirdest social situations I’ve seen play out. Like watching someone drop a nuclear bomb on another person’s social life and then seeing how powerless they were to defend against it. In this case it didn’t extend to jobs or career. Their close social circle stuck with them. However I can still run into people years later who think the person is a creep because they heard something about him from a friend of a friend and it stuck with them.

> The strangest part was seeing how some people really didn’t care about the details of the situation, they viewed it as symbolic of something greater and believed everyone was obligated to believe the accuser in some abstract moral sense.

Why is that strange? That's what the propaganda tells them to do - they're just doing as told: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Believe_women

> The strangest part was seeing how some people really didn’t care about the details of the situation, they viewed it as symbolic of something greater and believed everyone was obligated to believe the accuser in some abstract moral sense.

It's what happens when we see people as stand-ins for their group, but we can't see the individual behind it.

I've seen four "in person", one very public (just purely IRL public).

I didn't see anyone (with one exception) pick sides immediately; although most people's "picked" side was "not involved". (The one exception was a community organizer who definitely has Been Through This Before).

For three of those, I did my own homework - a lot of asking around, and then a lot of conversations with both people. In the end, most of that didn't matter: the accused ended up damning themselves (or not!) pretty immediately when I talked to them about it.

  • > I didn't see anyone (with one exception) pick sides immediately

    > the accused ended up damning themselves (or not!) pretty immediately when I talked to them about it

    So you mean yourself being the exception?

    • Haha. No. I spent hours before hand talking with involved other people, and then I spent hours talking with these people, and then hours more processing the conversations (on my own and with advisors).

      It’s just that in the end, it turned out that the things that decided it one way or the other had come up pretty early in the conversations with the accused.