It is generally known that the adage
when pertaining to the law when someone is accused or arrested is that the
person is innocent until proven guilty. It is the fundamental principle that,
no matter how guilty the person is, even though any obvious evidence, they are innocent
until proven guilty when a court passes judgment. This goes for everything, except in matters of sex.
In all instances regarding sex, the
person is guilty unless proven innocent. The list is endless. Three examples come
to mind immediately: President Bill Clinton with Monica Lewinsky, Prince Andrew
with an underage girl, and Bill Cosby with numerous women.
The ‘guilty until proven innocent’ belief
is so pervasive in our society that periodicals don’t stop printing their
opinions on the matter, every celebrity must give their view, every comic must
make jokes at the accused’s expense, etc., etc., etc.
But why is this stance taken on this
subject?
Is it the fascination about sex? Is
it that a famous person could have done something against societal mores? Is it
that sex is usually what people love to do, they don’t talk about out in the
open, but to hear about it concerning a celebrity makes us feel uncomfortable?
I really do not know. What I do know
is that the axiom that the aphorism is backwards. It’s morally wrong. Anyone is
in the place of being accused should not be held to ridicule until they are
proven to have committed the crime.
No comments:
Post a Comment