>>10955599Yes, I have seen that picture. But the thing is the analogy fails.
You see, in both cases of mugging and rape, the police officers will investigate.
If they find the wallet on the mugger, he is guilty. If you came to the police two weeks after the deed and the mugger has ditched the wallet, you're fucked. Police will close the case because there are no grounds to prosecute.
If they find the rape wounds in the vagina (and there are pretty good ways to determine if they are indeed defense wounds, or simply rough sex wounds), the man is guilty. But if you came two weeks later, there is no way to prove it your guilt, yet police will prosecute you, drag you to court (even detain you), and only at the court will they take the lack of evidence and set you free.
So, if you're the accused mugger or rapist, what happens? You were upright citizen, a good guy.
If you were accused of mugging, your friends, family and colleagues will side with you. Because they know you, and because police found out no base to drag you to court.
If you were accused of rape, the police will take it to the court even if there is not evidence whatsoever. Only thing left to somewhat mend your reputation is counter-sue. And even then, it's again your word against theirs, because you can't prove you didn't rape them. So even if they lost at the court, they still managed to make you harm, because society always sides with women.
And I say this as a guy who also wrote this:
>>10955467