Well, the original post implied that every non-convicted person accused of sexual assault and whose identity was publicized was a “victim.” By that definition Weinstein would be a victim. And so would R Kelly. Actual guilt or innocence was irrelevant to this inane argument.
Most sexual assaults are never reported, and in cases where charges are actually filed, the overwhelming majority of the true victims are the women.
Its just tone-deaf to argue that the persons charged are the “victims.” Do false accusations happen? Yes. Do most false accusations result in charges actually being filed? No. Does it happen? Sure. But not frequently. Prosecutors don’t like to lose, and most won’t charge sexual assault based just on an accusation with no corroborating evidence.
I’ve had relatives on both sides of the issue. One male relative falsely accused (but never charged, as the police investigators did their job correctly), and female relatives sexually assaulted by fucking pedophiles. Although the male relative’s reputation took a short-term hit, he is fine and had no lasting consequences. But the harm to the girls was much more traumatic and permanent; they will suffer from PTSD, depression, and mental health problems for the rest of their lives. So to call the “accused” defendant in a sexual assault case a “victim” is essentially to demean every single woman who has ever been the victim of a sexual assault. Which is a whole lot of women.