In addition to the pathetic characteristics of necessity and emergency in sex hysteria I’ve described in the past, a peculiar aspect of hysterical thinking is to focus on a relatively minor sin or moral transgression, while ignoring other and worse injuries and more serious crimes.
When a person in the grip of sex hysteria learns an accusation of child sex abuse may be untrue, she is not shocked or worried that an innocent person may be victimized by a false accusation of a supposed crime that may have never taken place. Rather, the hysterical crusader is furious that the accused defends himself!
When there is objective evidence that a sex crime actually occurred, such as a video of the crime in progress, or multiple eyewitnesses whose credibility is unquestionable, or medical evidence that is so clear it cannot be interpreted in any other way, then any denial by the accused would certainly be outrageous.
But when there is no objective evidence whatsoever, quite the contrary there is abundant proof that the accuser was coached, changed her story multiple times, contradicted previous statements, recanted later, evidence was falsified, where can there possibly be any rational basis for emotional fury upon hearing the accused assert his innocence?
Are false accusations simply impossible? They are certainly not impossible. Are false accusations extremely rare? Not necessarily. So where is the rational basis for such rock-solid certainly that sex hysterics are so proud to express?
The statistical facts are that the vast majority of child deaths and serious injuries in childhood are due to physical abuse and neglect, not sex crimes, so where is the concern over children frequently riding in motor vehicles without adequate restraint, or other common life-threatening behavior we may see around us every day?
Sexhysteria's Blog 