Consider my anonymity a defence against the ravages of identity politics. It encourages people to concenrate on what I've said rather than who I am to say such a thing. Nobody should be bypassing reasoned debate on the grounds of someone's sex, gender, race, or anything else. Identity poltiics is theoretically about equality, but that is not how it tends to behave in public discourse. However, that is by the by.
And yes, I agree with you in principle, but only partially. I have no problem with openness about such issues, particularly when there can be a demonstable outcome. As was the case with Bill Cosby, Harvey Weinstein et al. For women to be empowered to tell their stories, those stories must be backed up by due process. We have to be selective about the stories we choose to tell - the scattergun rumour mill approach will not work.
By encouraging victims to share stories on social media you're risking a few things. Firstly, you might cause a mistrial by default. Secondly, any and all discussion is admissable in court - you're giving the defence lawyers ammuniton with which to discredit any given accusation.
This isn't about discrediting women from opening up, it's about funnelling people into due process and equanimity. You want bad men prosecuted? Great. Me too. You want people to be dragged through the proverbial mud because of what people say on social media. I don't think that's a direction I want society to go. That's a tactic that was used to burn witches and prosecute communists and I find it morally repugnant regardless of who does it.
The real work needs to be done in the courtrooms and within the education system. We need to be empowering women to prosecute at the point of abuse - where a prosecution is likely and necessary. That's how you demonstrate to the next generation that there is accountability. If you think that article is doing that, fine... but I disagree with you. I think it's leading feminism closer to misandry and away from the idea of equality. It's a short sighted approach to a complicated issue.
Disagreement is not a form of oppresssion. Debate is not tone policing - it's questioning the underlying assumption of a given position. As I did with the OP and you did with me. Anyone who puts something out on social media should be prepared to defend it.
