This is one of the most balanced presentations I have read, on the multiple societal and personal dilemmas surrounding sexual crimes.
Only a little bit tongue-in-cheek in saying this, it occurs to me that you are privileged to write some of the unpopular things you have said here, because you are not male. In my own attempts to have some meaningful and productive discussions publicly on these topics, I tend to be sort of de-credentialed in the early going because, what does any man have to bring to this, or what right does he have, to try?
I’m going to ask a favor, on something I have been thinking about nearly nonstop for days now during my work day and here at the keyboard. I’d like to ask you to read a case file, and if any part of it is already familiar to you or you think it is, try and set that aside and just see it through the eyes I see as being the outward lenses of a mind that could have written the above essay: fair, unshrinking, without cliches and movement slogans, and as scholarly as any vulnerable, imperfect human being can be.
If you’re willing, and further to take me at face value that if I do have any predispositions myself already because of the historic significance of the case, that the reason I am continuing to pursue this is to put those subjective notions in their place, and quest onward to see if I really can figure out what it all means. Your article here, suggests this might be possible.
If you take me up on it, maybe a conversation later on how to analyze and learn from the case might benefit us both?