False accusations lead to murder, bring to mind askme October 24, 2006 4:33 PM   Subscribe

Dude's girlfriend tells him she was raped, and names the attacker. Dude flies into rage, goes and kills the man, and buries the body off in the woods somewhere. Girlfriend was lying. Apropos of the AskMe from a couple days back.
posted by stupidsexyFlanders to MetaFilter-Related at 4:33 PM (81 comments total) 1 user marked this as a favorite

Well now I hope you all are happy!!
posted by hermitosis at 4:37 PM on October 24, 2006


W raped me.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 4:49 PM on October 24, 2006 [1 favorite]


For my part, I was raped by social injustice and man's inhumanity to man. And W watched. On the google video.

That is odd synchronicity, though.
posted by cortex at 4:56 PM on October 24, 2006


If the Navy guy had been a chaplain, there would be interesting rumors afoot.
posted by clevershark at 5:01 PM on October 24, 2006


The FBI and other experts all agree that rapes are no more often falsely reported than other violent crimes. FYI.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 5:19 PM on October 24, 2006


This is almost the plot of like the very first episode of Alfred Hitchcock Presents season one DVD.
posted by bukvich at 5:20 PM on October 24, 2006


"Quite frankly, I was scared of the consequences of what would happen, of being caught, more so than I was of the consequences of taking his life."

Spoken like a very dangerous and scary person. Let's hope they keep him locked up for a while.
posted by quin at 5:22 PM on October 24, 2006



The FBI and other experts all agree that rapes are no more often falsely reported than other violent crimes. FYI.


When did the about-face occur? Or is the CJR misleading the reader?

But the FBI has been saying since 1991 that the annual rate for the false reporting of forcible sexual assault across the country has been a consistent 8 percent (through 1995, the most recent year available). That's four times higher than the average of the false-reporting rates of the other crimes tracked by the FBI in its Uniform Crime Report. The agency's guidelines define a report as false when an investigation determines that no offense occurred. A complainant's failure or refusal to cooperate in the investigation does not, by itself, lead to a finding of false report.
posted by Kwantsar at 5:35 PM on October 24, 2006


It's this kinda shit that's a total dealbreaker in a relationship.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 6:06 PM on October 24, 2006


It's OK, he was raped by his priest and drank too much. The priest has repented and he is in rehab. Oops, wrong perp.
posted by caddis at 6:13 PM on October 24, 2006 [1 favorite]


Kwantsar, I've noticed that the poster in question very frequently has absolutely no idea what he is talking about, and uses unverifiable constructions like "other experts all agree" or "a general MetaFilter culture which almost certainly thinks" to avoid accountability for his misstatements.
posted by adamgreenfield at 6:45 PM on October 24, 2006 [2 favorites]


And in yet another uncanny life-imitates-MetaFilter moment...Girlfriend is annoying. Apropos of the AskMe from a couple days back.
posted by UbuRoivas at 6:52 PM on October 24, 2006


Like I said, I'd want more substantiation than a few sobs and some runny mascara. "If you loved me you'd believe me!" ain't enough either.
posted by davy at 7:16 PM on October 24, 2006


That's my resolution for this year -- I will not kill anyone at anyone else's request.

Just two months to go...
posted by clevershark at 7:21 PM on October 24, 2006


"When did the about-face occur? Or is the CJR misleading the reader?"

As that article mentions, people in the sexual-assault counseling field pretty much all say what I said and that's why I said it because there's where I learned it. I wasn't aware that the FBI had changed their tune since I was involved in this, which was before 1991. The article you link to, by the way, is all about the controversy over whether my assertion is correct or not and so it's not a settled question. However, prior to 1991, it is my understanding that it had been a settled question, that this was the FBI's estimate, and that pretty much everyone agreed. I wasn't aware that this had changed. I hadn't expected it to change because why would it?

adamgreenfield, please go away again. Or are you going to start following me around the rest of web and sending me harassing emails again? It was my mistake to engage you politely and friendily in that psyops thread because I both underestimated your propensity to read me in bad-faith and then attack like a rabid weasel and I failed to recall that you're such a megalomaniacal grandstander that you'd actually believe that you're the only mefite who was in psyops or that you'd be capable of referring someone to the wikipedia entry on yourself as a reference. Fuckwit.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 7:29 PM on October 24, 2006


Yes, go away, Adam. I'm sure we can find plenty of people to send EB harrassing emails.
posted by crunchland at 7:50 PM on October 24, 2006


Wow.
posted by BorgLove at 7:59 PM on October 24, 2006


EB, rather than throwing a hissy fit, just documenting your sources will shut down your opposition.
posted by caddis at 8:07 PM on October 24, 2006


EB, the vast majority of us who are prolific commenters don't have stalkers. Given that you allegedly have several, have you given any thought to the possibility that that fact says as much about you as it does anyone else?
posted by Optimus Chyme at 8:10 PM on October 24, 2006


Says he's a hottie imho.
posted by thirteenkiller at 8:10 PM on October 24, 2006 [3 favorites]


You really should consult with a lawyer who is much more qualified to deal with these types of...wha???
posted by KevinSkomsvold at 8:11 PM on October 24, 2006


"Given that you allegedly have several, have you given any thought to the possibility that that fact says as much about you as it does anyone else?"

Given that the only person I've claimed to have stalked me, and the only person in fact to have stalked me, is adamgreenfield, then maybe I'd answer your question with a "no". I've been on the net for two decades almost always using my real name, almost always making my phone number and even address available, and no one ever really stalked me the way that adamgreenfield did (which wasn't extreme, but it was not normal), then I'd ask you to consider the possibility that this fact says as much about me as it does anyone else.

Have any more questions?
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 8:15 PM on October 24, 2006


see, now this thread definitely needs images, it has gone all to hell already, only the image fest would save it.
posted by edgeways at 8:17 PM on October 24, 2006


But, hey, Chyme, I'm pleased and convinced by your reasoning so much that in the event someone blows a fuse after noticing that you're a fuckwit and they come to your house and shoot you, I'll know that, really, you deserved it. You really ought to quit being such a jerk and do things like getting your facts right and stuff. Or else.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 8:19 PM on October 24, 2006


Wanted: Volunteers to send EB harrassing emails. Stalkers preferred. Serious inquiries only.
posted by crunchland at 8:21 PM on October 24, 2006


But, hey, Chyme, I'm pleased and convinced by your reasoning so much that in the event someone blows a fuse after noticing that you're a fuckwit and they come to your house and shoot you, I'll know that, really, you deserved it. You really ought to quit being such a jerk and do things like getting your facts right and stuff. Or else.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 8:19 PM PST on October 24


Don't get me wrong. I'm as surprised as anyone that you'd be the victim of stalking. I can imagine it now, hiding outside your window, waiting for the perfect moment to strike you down. Waiting, waiting - then overhearing your long exegesis to the mirror on some trivial topic that no one in his right mind could do a forty-five minute monologue about, and then - a reversal of fortune! - I, hiding 'neath your window, literally die of fucking boredom.
posted by Optimus Chyme at 8:25 PM on October 24, 2006 [6 favorites]


Oh, you've mortally wounded me, sir! You have such a talent for finding that raw, untouched nerve that represents one's deepest vulnerability. You fiend! Your resemblance to Iago is uncanny. It's almost a pleasure to witness your malevolent brilliance.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 8:34 PM on October 24, 2006


EB, if you weren't so easily provokable I would not give you a hard time. I dig your comments and I think you're a good poster, but you just get so - taut - that it's really hard to not pluck them strings just to hear the crazy sounds. But anyhoo as long as we're airing grievances in a goofy MeTa thread what did adam do? Did he just show up one day or call you or what? Because dios's number is unpublished and I was looking for like tips.
posted by Optimus Chyme at 8:43 PM on October 24, 2006


YEAH
posted by maxreax at 8:51 PM on October 24, 2006


Goddamnit. I have the perfect image for the two of you.
posted by Ryvar at 8:56 PM on October 24, 2006


Sloppy makeout candid?
posted by cortex at 9:01 PM on October 24, 2006


Goddamnit. I have the perfect image for the two of you.

Can you type it up in ASCII?
posted by UbuRoivas at 9:10 PM on October 24, 2006


"But anyhoo as long as we're airing grievances in a goofy MeTa thread what did adam do?"

Well, I don't think it's really for the best for people to talk about these things online in public as a general rule. I'll say that his stalking was only online stalking and I didn't mean to give the impression that it was more than that. Also, it wasn't that bad. But it was unlike anything I've experienced before. He just really, really, really dislikes me to the point of hatred and that got the best of his judgment and he acted on it beyond the Internet norm. I've never done this, but I've probably been close to doing it a number of times. Or at least I've sort of thought about it.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 9:12 PM on October 24, 2006


Optimus Chyme : then overhearing your long exegesis to the mirror on some trivial topic that no one in his right mind could do a forty-five minute monologue about, and then - a reversal of fortune! - I, hiding 'neath your window, literally die of fucking boredom.

I'm sorry EB, I have the utmost respect for you and your posts (the majority of the time, anyway.) But that is just fucking funny.
posted by quin at 9:42 PM on October 24, 2006


"He just really, really, really dislikes me to the point of hatred and that got the best of his judgment and he acted on it beyond the Internet norm."

What IS "the Internet norm"? Is it proposing marriage? Begging to have your baby? Screaming "If I can't kill you nobody can!" till the rest of us die laughing?
posted by davy at 9:49 PM on October 24, 2006


Internet Stalkers are the new Canadian Girlfriends.
posted by bardic at 10:13 PM on October 24, 2006 [1 favorite]


I thought the internet norm was turning pasty-white-almost-green eating pocky sitting in the basement apartment of your parents' house looking at catgirl porn.
posted by exlotuseater at 10:30 PM on October 24, 2006


onoz, adam is coming after me on his tiny little bicycle!

You'd think grown men would have something better to do with their time than play chasey through a series of tubes.
posted by flabdablet at 11:28 PM on October 24, 2006


I've used the google.
posted by blacklite at 12:34 AM on October 25, 2006


What IS "the Internet norm"?

If I had the time, the motivation or the inline-image-posting-ability this text would be a photoshopped picture of George Wendt sitting at the bar of Cheers with a laptop. But it isn't.
posted by Grangousier at 3:26 AM on October 25, 2006 [1 favorite]


I will only comment to the effect that someone else in the thread posted the Wikipedia entry on me. Under no circumstances would I have done so myself. I have a big ego, sure, but come on, I'm not Donald Trump.

As for the rather more serious charge of stalking: really, don't flatter yourself. Me and my tiny bike have better things to do with our time.
posted by adamgreenfield at 3:43 AM on October 25, 2006


This thread has not only made me laugh till I cried, it's taught me about Pocky. Thanks, 12941!
posted by languagehat at 6:38 AM on October 25, 2006


All my girlfriends have been Canadian.
posted by Mitheral at 7:18 AM on October 25, 2006


languagehat: "This thread has not only made me laugh till I cried, it's taught me about Pocky. Thanks, 12941!"


Thanks for doing the leg work on that, LH. I immediately thought it meant something else.
posted by KevinSkomsvold at 7:43 AM on October 25, 2006


Mmm. Pocky. We should have a Pocky Day on Mefi where users eat it while they comment.

Everyday should be Pocky Day.
posted by frecklefaerie at 8:28 AM on October 25, 2006


It went from murder, rape and liability to men stalking each other (with little bikes) to chocolate-covered *ahem* 'phalluses'.

It's a top down conceptual chart of the male mind in action.
posted by jazzkat11 at 10:36 AM on October 25, 2006


You know, if Ethereal Bligh stops all the too-much-information-who-cares-gut-spilling self referencing, uses no first person pronouns in any comment he makes and comments on the topic only, not himself or whoever says anything to him for a month, I won't post about the Iraq War for a month. Jesus Christ, the guy can go on about himself.
posted by y2karl at 11:03 AM on October 25, 2006


...I won't post about the Iraq War for a month.

Hell, make that, on this end, won't post on the war in Iraq and will do the no gut spilling, use no first person pronouns, respond to no personal remarks, deliver no autobiographical information and so forth part in any comments made, too.

That seems fair--so, what do you say, deal or no deal ?
posted by y2karl at 11:45 AM on October 25, 2006


what do you say

I say egomania takes many forms. Appropos of nothing.
posted by PinkStainlessTail at 1:20 PM on October 25, 2006


You know, if Ethereal Bligh stops all the too-much-information-who-cares-gut-spilling self referencing, uses no first person pronouns in any comment he makes and comments on the topic only, not himself or whoever says anything to him for a month, I won't post about the Iraq War for a month.

Sure, you say this now, but just imagine the worm-hole that would be created in the time-space continuum. Or maybe metafilter would be thrust into a restaurant a al Being John Malkovich, with nothing but EB clones typing incoherent, multi-paragraph babble about themselves.

Hmm. Well, I guess we're a bit inured to the latter.
posted by bardic at 2:00 PM on October 25, 2006


I am full of surprises. I am also not the "norm" I spoke of. Really. I am sitting in my nice office looking at nice things and enjoying the smell of books and rich mahogany. Well, not mahogany, but definitely cherry and rubberwood.

And I have only eaten pocky once.

Thank you.
posted by exlotuseater at 4:53 PM on October 25, 2006


adamgreenfield, I don't understand your tiny bike. (Er, I'm assuming that really is you and the tiny bike is yours; could be wrong.) It works like a regular bike? Seems like there would be little mechanical advantage over a razor-type scooter. What's the story?
posted by LobsterMitten at 5:22 PM on October 25, 2006


Heh. The rapidly-becoming-legendary "tiny bike" is Sinclair Research's A-Bike, which they sent me for user testing & review on v-2.

Big ol' thread about it here reveals all.
posted by adamgreenfield at 6:01 PM on October 25, 2006


I am also not the "norm" I spoke of.

When you write 'norm', do you mean the control normal ?
Here, that would be davy.
posted by y2karl at 7:18 PM on October 25, 2006


Oh, a tiny bike. I was picturing something more like this.
posted by sfenders at 7:31 PM on October 25, 2006


Where did you get that photo? Sinclair Research isn't supposed to be releasing that until next year!
posted by flabdablet at 8:04 PM on October 25, 2006


Thanks! Just goes to show that I don't spend enough time on Metafilter.
posted by LobsterMitten at 9:19 PM on October 25, 2006


When did the about-face occur? Or is the CJR misleading the reader?

Maybe the about-face occurred between 1997 (when the CJR article you cite was written) and 2006.
posted by mlis at 11:26 PM on October 25, 2006


adamgreenfield, See what happens? You prove to be an expert in one thread and you will never live it down. You will be 'that guy who knows way too much about bikes' for ever more.

Eventually people will start summoning you to threads like Bevets and ParisParamus. You're doomed dude. Sorry.
posted by quin at 11:53 PM on October 25, 2006


Y2karl's anti self-reference fetish is a revealing desperate measure reminiscent of the selfish man who buys treats for his dog and reassures himself of his generosity. Y2karl's behavior, not his words, reveal the depth of his terminal narcissism. He solemnly mounts his podium day after day and nurses his list of those who have wronged him night after night. In between, there is a meal and whining.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 8:45 AM on October 26, 2006


Oh, dude, just STFU already.

I'll tell you what. I'll go y2karl one better: you're so egregious that if it's the only way to cram a sock in your piehole, I hereby promise not to post so much as a single word on any MetaFilter site for TWO months for every verifiable month you absent yourself from same.

The signal-to-noise ratio of the sites will skyrocket. People will be able to post and have discussions in peace, free from the eruptions of bogus little personality wars. C'mon, what do you say?
posted by adamgreenfield at 10:12 AM on October 26, 2006


Funny, meet Sad.
posted by y2karl at 10:21 AM on October 26, 2006


Made in reference to the post above the post above, that was....

Which, except for the pity it provokes, would be comedy gold.
posted by y2karl at 10:25 AM on October 26, 2006


You make a cute couple.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 11:53 AM on October 26, 2006


You all sound like assholes, currently.
posted by cortex at 11:55 AM on October 26, 2006


That's just my point, cortex! Looky here: if you get rid of me *and* Bligh in one fell swoop, the site's NAI (Nominal Asshole Index) tumbles on the spot! What's not to like?
posted by adamgreenfield at 12:20 PM on October 26, 2006


I found EB's remark about me funny ironic and sad ironic and said as much. Well, I could have kept my thoughts to myself and not made that last comment or two--my bad, my apologies. Same for the previous ones although the offer above was a serious one when made.

Bitchslapping EB online is as satisfying an act as physically bitchslapping EB would be in person. It's not a fair fight. But that shouldn't let him get a pass on being nasty to people. And he is so nasty and reacts so out of proportion to the mildest remark. For evidence, scroll up. I called no one a fuckwit, a stalker, accused no one of terminal narcissism and so on and so on. Beyond venting on his exasperating tendency to endlessly talk about himself and his inexhaustible need to smite all enemies, I didn't call EB names or belittle him. That's his game, not mine.

Jesus Christ, the guy can go on about himself.

That is the harshest thing I said here.
posted by y2karl at 1:00 PM on October 26, 2006


Yes, but looky here: if you'd just stop acting like an asshole, that NAI would drop too. The Rothko/dios collaborative timeout was cute; this is just annoying.
posted by cortex at 1:01 PM on October 26, 2006


I don't know to whom your last comment was addressed, cortex, but I am not a party to anyone else's feud and this is not a tag team pile on from my POV. I made my remarks yesterday from exasperation, today from in between amusement and pity and, as noted above, wish I had not made any at all, seeing now as how they just prolonged another fight. But I have apologized for them already. End of story. I wish.
posted by y2karl at 2:40 PM on October 26, 2006


cortex, I don't know what you're referring to ("Rothko/dios"), but I do earnestly believe that a bargain like the one I moot above would be perceived as helpful by just about anyone who genuinely cares about the quality of discourse hereabouts.

I'm a marginal commenter here, at most, right? And honestly, when I do post here these days it's usually because I simply cannot contain my sense of flabbergastedness that nobody's yet checked the nonsense someone like EB spews. I'm under no illusion that anyone considers that particularly interesting or useful, so it's a net plus if that goes away.

You're right insofar as, if I simply refrained from posting at all, nobody would have to deal with the consequences. And that's probably the best (and certainly the wisest) course of action I could adopt. But I have a burr in my shoe about letting so many of EB's posts go unchallenged, as they so often do.

Putting aside for a moment the question of how pompous or boringly self-referential they are, they're so very often simply wrong. He makes a lot of assertions that simply are not so, and when challenged on them, resorts to the most childish insults. (It kinda reminds me of this poor kid named Whitman I knew in third grade, whose misfortune it was to be the veritable paradigm case of "dork," and who used to greet his tormentors with a cry of - and here you have to imagine the snot-caked nostril and the lisp - "I hope your house is the first one bombed in World War III.")

Now, there's a lot about the world that's wrong, and I'm not often able to do something about it. I can't challenge Don Rumsfeld on the wisdom of his implementation of the RMA, for example, or Steve Jobs as to why iTunes acts a little more like a Microsoft application with every passing version. I can't wave a magick wand and make it so more people choose great old Ozu films over Jessica Simpson vehicles. I haven't been able to ensure that great authors like Jack Womack or bands like Ruin get the sales and recognition they deserve. I can't even get my own mind to stretch enough so as to wrap it around some writers and thinkers I really, really want to understand better. But I do have an account on MetaFilter, and by golly, when someone spews a whole bunch of opinionated, misleading, gratingly narcissistic horseshit, now that I can do something about.

I'm sincerely sorry if you find it merely so much assholism. God knows there's enough of that in the world already. But somebody's gotta point out that this guy is spouting nonsense, and mischaracterizing the words of a great many far more intelligent and interesting people into the bargain, and if it's not gonna be anyone else then it might as well be me.
posted by adamgreenfield at 3:15 PM on October 26, 2006


But somebody's gotta point out that this guy is spouting nonsense

It's that sort of weird devotion to the rightness and necessity of your mission that makes me crazy. You're so convinced that the world needs saving from EB, and that it's your job to do the saving, that certainly the rest of us will welcome your grandstanding on the subject.

There's thousands of users here. You and EB are two of 'em. He comments a fair bit, you comment apparently not so much, and everybody else combined comments so much more that the fantasy of Removing The Taint or whatever is ridiculously self-centered. EB's comments and your own are whispers in a stadium.

I just think it's not nearly as big of a deal as you seem to be presenting it as.

I don't know to whom your last comment was addressed, cortex

At adamgreenfield, y2karl—the NAI and "looky here" nonsense and all. Sorry for the confusion. Fucked by preview, as always.
posted by cortex at 3:27 PM on October 26, 2006 [1 favorite]


Oh, come on, you're not being even remotely fair. I've already said I'm under no illusion that anyone considers that particularly interesting or useful.

Does that sound like someone "convinced that...the rest of us will welcome your grandstanding on the subject"?
posted by adamgreenfield at 3:34 PM on October 26, 2006


Your repeated grandstanding on the subject seemed to imply it, I guess.

I don't know why I'm in such a bitchy mood this afternoon, anyway. I recognize the contradiction in going on at length about how you're going on at length about EB going on at length, and etc. I apologize for my part in stirring the shit.
posted by cortex at 3:49 PM on October 26, 2006


It's that sort of weird devotion to the rightness and necessity of your mission

Or the inverse, your penchant to play Samwise Gamgee.

Coin, meet other side.
posted by bardic at 4:27 PM on October 26, 2006


Granted. And like I said, I've been inexplicably cranky today.
posted by cortex at 4:49 PM on October 26, 2006


Me too.

We all have favorites here and so on. We all get more involved in personalities than we should.

My specific problem with EB is that he constantly puts other posters down but disguises it in so much two-bit sophistry and raw verbiage that some people don't realize how constantly spiteful he is. But hey, I'm one of those leftie mefites that can't think for himself. Off to my Chomsky lecture.
posted by bardic at 5:07 PM on October 26, 2006


Nail on head, dude, and very well said. It's the sheer, limitless contempt for everyone else rolling off every last one of his comments that really sets my teeth on edge.
posted by adamgreenfield at 5:27 PM on October 26, 2006


See, I guess I just don't get that. Not to suggest EB can't be contemptuous or condescending, but the sheerness and limitlessness and everyoneness doesn't shine through for me. I don't really argue with him very much, though.
posted by cortex at 5:37 PM on October 26, 2006


MLIS, it should be readily fucking apparent that I understand that the article was written long ago:

1. The publication date is in the goddamn link.
2. I specifically asked "When did the about-face occur? "
3. The short excerpt that I pasted read that the data was (through 1995, the most recent year available)

Do you think it's news to me that Maybe the about-face occurred between 1997 (when the CJR article you cite was written) and 2006?

Really? I mean, have you read EB's almost-sorta-retraction? It appears that any about-face, if there was one, occurred prior to 1995, doesn't it? But it could have happened hence. But, even better, it could be than no about-face ever occurred at all.
posted by Kwantsar at 7:17 PM on October 26, 2006


No one escapes the black hole.
posted by flabdablet at 9:04 PM on October 26, 2006


Yeah, I was wrong about the FBI position. My comment defending myself was only intended to defend myself from charges that I just pulled the stat out of my ass. I had good reasons for thinking it was true and a lot of people, apparently, still think it's true. I don't really know what to think now. I always suspected that there are reasons to think that the false reporting of rape might be slightly higher than other crimes. The current FBI estimate seems too high to me, though. But at any rate, the popular thinking has always been that this was very, very commonplace and accusations of rape always have to run a gauntlet of proving that they are sincere in a way that no other accusations of violent crimes do. You can see the cultural sexism in this and understand why rape crisis advocates and feminists have embraced the "no more common than other false reportings" positions enthusiastically. If it's false, it's a corrective to a much more damaging falsehood.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 9:17 PM on October 26, 2006


« Older Slow Servers   |   Good riddance to bad images Newer »

You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments