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.
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.