Quote:
Originally Posted by StimAbuser
Well him not flat out calling her a liar/denying it is encouraging women to be believed imo, doesn't mean they shouldn't investigate the matter in case she is grossly exaggerating or straight lying. Also he says he doesn't remember it the way she remembers it, not just that he doesn't remember anything.
Snap believing all accounts of women would be just ridiculous, as sometimes this stuff IS made up.
He is encouraging women to tell their side by not calling her a liar, denying it, attacking her, and letting an investigation happen independent of himself.
Stepping back and letting the facts speak encourages women to come out to tell the truth, but no investigation also encourages women to make stuff up.
"Women should be believed after we stage an investigation to prove it" is some Orwellian definition of "women should be believed." The attempt at building a norm ("women should be believed") is to spare women from a potentially painful and embarrassing investigation that deters people from reporting sexual harassment and abuse. The norm assumes, on its face, that women wouldn't just make it up.
If Franken wants to insist on an investigation -- that's clearly a legal right if he's facing prosecution for a crime, it goes without saying.
In these sorts of contexts, "women need to believed...once we spend the time and money to conclusively prove it" is a canard. What Franken means, as you say, is: don't pile on and call her a liar, we need an investigation. That's fine, it's better than "pile on and call her a liar" but it's a pretty low bar to cross. Hardly champion of women stuff.
Since the picture exists, he lost the benefit of the doubt by his own admission and so "women need to be believed" in spite of what you can see and his calls for an investigation is really, deeply Orwellian, not just the sort of pedestrian poor use of language.