What is the general consensus on Makhaya Ntini's controversial history

[Shady Slim]

Not what I said was it? I said biased towards women. Unless I've been severely misinformed females tend to get less harsh sentences for the same crimes as men and are heavily favoured in divorce and child custody hearings.

But noted

from what i understand and sledger could correct me on this, the former is true the latter is definitely not

 

[Shady Slim]

Right again.

i mean the discussion has been fairly civil and open minded itbt i'd say it's been quite productive tbh

 

[mr_mister]

i mean the discussion has been fairly civil and open minded itbt i'd say it's been quite productive tbh

It teetered on a cliff but managed to regain its balance

You switch up some of the participants though and we'd have seen a freefall

 

[Lillian Thomson]

This thread is definitely producing a concensus on Ntini’s controversial history.

 

[TheJediBrah]

fwiw in the realm of ***ual assault the courts are in noooooooooooo way tilted towards complainants whatsoever, so far from the case. judges, jurors, and even many defense lawyers, still approach the task with "if she is promiscuous or dressed sultryly or drunk or consented to some acts then she must have wanted it", and you have basically as a default the entire ***ual history of complainants scrutinized when theyre on the stand while face to face with the person who assaulted them

That does sound pretty ****. I could give examples of the opposite though (which I know you'll hate but haha I'll do it anyway) where women have admitted years, even decades later that they lied about being raped by a man who's serving a prison sentence and the woman was never punished at all and had her identity protected. So as anecdotal as it is, it's not a one way street.

What's the alternative? Assume every accused man is guilty? I mean there's no perfect solution where every guilty person is found guilty and every innocent one is found not guilty. There has to be a point you draw the line and say "this is the system we are going with, evidence needed etc" and that a certain number of guilty men will walk free / innocent men will be found guilty.

If you're in the camp of "too many guilty men going free" and a side effect of the change you want is going to be "more innocent men will be found guilty" then I respect that. You clearly have plenety of experience in the industry and if that's how you believe justice will be best served it's out of my pay grade to suggest otherwise. You might be right.

 

[sledger]

Not what I said was it? I said biased towards women. Unless I've been severely misinformed females tend to get less harsh sentences for the same crimes as men and are heavily favoured in divorce and child custody hearings.

But noted

well it literally was but ok

 

[Coronis]

I will just chuck in a personal anecdote here that I was involved in a case similar to some things mentioned prior in this thread during college.

A friend of mine ended up heading off with a girl we all knew one night at a pub, both quite intoxicated, me and my mates all saw them kissing at the pub and then it was brought up by some ofthem when they next saw him. the very next day though the girl was talking to me (not sure why exactly, we weren’t previously close and not afterwards either) talking about her experience and how she was really embarrassed she had ended up with that particular guy out of everyone. A couple of weeks later she had made an official complaint to the university (we were all living on campus at the time) and I got called in as a witness which was extremely fun.

Obviously I look at each individual case I hear about separately and judge it only based on its own merits but this experience with changing stories and the consequences (my friend was found not guilty of any wrongdoing but left the campus and university to a different state anyway because rumors about the case and what had happened spread and made it almost impossible for him to stay there) made me very wary in cases like this and sympathetic to people claiming to be falsely accused. Then again of course I know there are people who will just throw that out there and try to use it as an excuse to get away with awful things.

I really hate seeing these cases pop up at all especially when it turns into this he said she said.

 

[TheJediBrah]

from what i understand and sledger could correct me on this, the former is true the latter is definitely not

You're telling me that women aren't favoured in child custody cases? **** this would take a bit of convincing

 

[BoyBrumby]

courts are absolutely not biased towards complainants

they are usually biased towards the defendant, if anything

usually ends up with the complainant themselves effectively on trial, absolutely dire stuff

The BBC reported very recently that just 1.3% of rapes reported to the police end up with the alleged attacker even being charged:

Why do so few rape cases go to court? - BBC News

Stretches credulity way beyond breaking point to suggest that for every rape victim there are more than 48 malicious complainants seeking to do a good man down.

 

[Flem274*]

am very much a layman here, but aren't courts biased on a situational basis?

guys get away with *** crimes, women (who commit less) even more so, and if you're famous or 'a young man from a good family with so much promise' then don't even try convict them (a certain black cap).

murder on the other hand, we all love a false conviction here in the jury.

 

[Shady Slim]

You're telling me that women aren't favoured in child custody cases? **** this would take a bit of convincing

do bear in mind until very very recently we as a society have been built around the traditional family where the woman raises the kid at home while the man is out earning income and working fulltime. family court act says the court must always do what's in the best interests of the child, naturally then they would award majority custody more often to the parent who is not working fulltime, who's spent more time raising the kid and nurturing it, than to the parent who works nine to five and had less of a role in the upbringing of the child.

you'd expect as a corollary of normalising concepts like the stay at home dad and normalising of properly evenly divided parenting arrangements you'd see more men getting a greater share in a custody arrangement

edit:

this also isnt to say just to be clear that working fathers don't love the kid just the same, just that the contributions made to the joint enterprise of the marriage they make is a different one

 

[Shady Slim]

do bear in mind until very very recently we as a society have been built around the traditional family where the woman raises the kid at home while the man is out earning income and working fulltime. family court act says the court must always do what's in the best interests of the child, naturally then they would award majority custody more often to the parent who is not working fulltime, who's spent more time raising the kid and nurturing it, than to the parent who works nine to five and had less of a role in the upbringing of the child.

you'd expect as a corollary of normalising concepts like the stay at home dad and normalising of properly evenly divided parenting arrangements you'd see more men getting a greater share in a custody arrangement

this is why, relatedly, the same can be said of property settlements. yes at a glance it may seem unfair that the only partner in the family who "worked" has to give up half the matrimonial home and continue to pay child support payments even if he has time with the kids weekends n every second wednesday which cost him money anyways, but it's a recognition that the home maintenance, child raising, etc of the wife are just as important to the joint enterprise of the marriage.

wife stays at home and sacrifices chance at further tertiary education, career mobility, earning capacity, and so on, and contributes to the joint enterprise by the labours of time at the home - then if the marriage breaks down the side of the enterprise the husband maintained (remunerated work) continues on after the breakdown of the marriage, and on that front he's no worse off, but for the party whose contributions to the enterprise were measured not by assets but by time she's left with nothing tangible out of the marriage and so the property settlement balances the books there

 

[sledger]

from what i understand and sledger could correct me on this, the former is true the latter is definitely not

yeah I think so - certainly in respect of the former anyway, not so sure about the latter, not really my area

 

[RossTaylorsBox]

Absolutely love when peeps with no background in legal matters explain stuff to the forum with one of the highest lawyer: poster ratios.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Absolutely love when peeps with no background in legal matters explain stuff to the forum with one of the highest lawyer: poster ratios.

I like to think they learned something today

 

[StephenZA]

I'm not intending to portray the narrative you think I am

I do however think it's important to keep an open mind, and not assume someone is guilty or not-guilty based on things like gender or fame. And no one deserves to be treated as guilty, or lose their livelihood, based purely on an accusation.

I don't think that you specifically are portraying a narrative... I do however think that this narrative exists. But why does it exist and is it something that should be giving lots of air to and the same sort of credence as the problems regards ***ual violence and misogyny.

Firstly society is very aware of the problems regarding ensuring justice does not punish the innocents, it is something that is constantly considered and built into most modern law systems and constantly discussed. Secondly, all the people talking about gender based violence, ***ual assault and misogyny as real fundamental problems within society are fully aware of what could possibly happen regards innocents being accused. But quite correctly point out that the systems already caters for that but does not actual deal with the more urgent problems of the gender based violence and ***ual assault, which is far more prevalent and a bigger problem.

Finally, the whole argument and narrative regarding 'innocent' men, is largely a slippery slope and appeal to emotion fallacy... i.e. if we start tackling these very serious problems then all this could happen, and any of us could be next! And that is just nonsense.

 

[StephenZA]

I will just chuck in a personal anecdote here that I was involved in a case similar to some things mentioned prior in this thread during college.

A friend of mine ended up heading off with a girl we all knew one night at a pub, both quite intoxicated, me and my mates all saw them kissing at the pub and then it was brought up by some ofthem when they next saw him. the very next day though the girl was talking to me (not sure why exactly, we weren’t previously close and not afterwards either) talking about her experience and how she was really embarrassed she had ended up with that particular guy out of everyone. A couple of weeks later she had made an official complaint to the university (we were all living on campus at the time) and I got called in as a witness which was extremely fun.

Obviously I look at each individual case I hear about separately and judge it only based on its own merits but this experience with changing stories and the consequences (my friend was found not guilty of any wrongdoing but left the campus and university to a different state anyway because rumors about the case and what had happened spread and made it almost impossible for him to stay there) made me very wary in cases like this and sympathetic to people claiming to be falsely accused. Then again of course I know there are people who will just throw that out there and try to use it as an excuse to get away with awful things.

I really hate seeing these cases pop up at all especially when it turns into this he said she said.

I can understand all of this, but at the same time I don't like the society that accepted this behaviour as normal and acceptable. I have literally had a friend in the same sort of situation, who when this happened to him, I grabbed him by the arm and said not tonight both of you are too drunk... now he is a very good friend and I could do that with him. But would it not be a better society if I could easily tell my friend, maybe wait when you and she are not so drunk. But most people will still think that I 'blocked' him from somethin he was entitled too... or just gonna have a bit of fun.

How long has it taken us to say, no I`m not gonna give you keys back and let you drive because you are not making the best decisions right now and could result in tragedy.

 

[Coronis]

I can understand all of this, but at the same time I don't like the society that accepted this behaviour as normal and acceptable. I have literally had a friend in the same sort of situation, who when this happened to him, I grabbed him by the arm and said not tonight both of you are too drunk... now he is a very good friend and I could do that with him. But would it not be a better society if I could easily tell my friend, maybe wait when you and she are not so drunk. But most people will still think that I 'blocked' him from somethin he was entitled too... or just gonna have a bit of fun.

How long has it taken us to say, no I`m not gonna give you keys back and let you drive because you are not making the best decisions right now and could result in tragedy.

Yes ideally that would be much better, but sadly for all of us thats not the reality we live with atm. I suppose all we can do now is try to push for and support the change we want to see in the world for future generations, but as you say, even something like actually preventing someone from driving drunk took far longer to be normalized than one would hope.

 

[vicleggie]

You're telling me that women aren't favoured in child custody cases? **** this would take a bit of convincing

Lol hilarious how bluepilled people on here are. You're not even saying anything that mindblowing and they are treating you as if you are way out there.

Must all be a bunch of Anglosphere boomers/Gen X with very little self-awareness about how different the culture was when they were young men, versus how it is today. If they were 20 years old in this age, they'd hate it. But instead they like to lecture

 

[RossTaylorsBox]

"bluepilled"