From a Bayesian point of view, promulgating the false rape accusation idea is just irrational. When someone is raped (men and women are raped) they have a prior probability in mind about whether their accusation will be taken seriously. People they report to also have a prior as to whether the rape accusation is credible. In a world where most rapes are unreported there is almost no reason to adjust those priors towards "this is a false rape accusation."
Our legal system sucks and I think its bad that a person's life can be ruined or seriously damaged by a false accusation. But it is worse to be sexually assaulted and not have it taken seriously. I think if you balance it all out, focusing on the false accusation narrative is bad.
I don't think this argument is worth continuing. Not in the sense of being wrong; your argument is correct and I agree with you. But in the sense that the site that started this whole thing is insane. If you take one glance at the rest of the site it becomes quickly clear that the person managing that site is not well.
It is possible to care about multiple issues simultaneously. Saying it's demented to care about one person being wronged because other, totally different people are wronged is a bit selfish. It's okay to have a purpose that you believe in, but the world isn't black and white.
> "spending time worrying about false rape accusations in the present environment is demented."
I'm sorry, but not being concerned that some statistically significant portion of rape accusations against fullly innocent individuals often utterly destroys their lives just as much as being raped often destroys that person's life is demented. Both are absolute vile tragedies and should not occur in a truly civilized society. There's something deeply wrong and broken with the people who commit either of those acts.
