What do you think?
Rate this book
Credible: Why We Doubt Accusers and Protect Abusers
In this landmark book, a former prosecutor, legal expert, and leading authority on sexual violence examines why we are primed to disbelieve allegations of sexual abuse—and how we can transform a culture and a legal system structured to dismiss accusers
Sexual misconduct accusations spark competing her word against his. How do we decide who is telling the truth? The answer comes down to credibility. But as this eye-opening book reveals, invisible forces warp the credibility judgments of even the well- intentioned among us. We are all shaped by a set of false assumptions and hidden biases embedded in our culture, our legal system, and our psyches.
In Credible, Deborah Tuerkheimer provides a much-needed framework to explain how we perceive credibility, why our perceptions are distorted, and why these distortions harm survivors. Social hierarchies and inequalities foster doubt that is commonplace and predictable, resulting in what Tuerkheimer calls the “credibility discount”—our dismissal of claims by certain kinds of speakers—primarily women, and especially those who are more marginalized.
The #MeToo movement has exposed how victims have been badly served by a system that is designed not to protect them, but instead to protect the status quo. Credibility lies at the heart of this system. Drawing on case studies, moving first-hand accounts, science, and the law, Tuerkheimer identifies widespread patterns and their causes, analyzes the role of power, and examines the close, reciprocal relationship between culture and law—guiding us toward accurate credibility judgments and equitable treatment of those whose suffering has long been disregarded.
#MeToo has touched off a massive reckoning. To achieve lasting progress, we must shift our approach to belief. Credible helps us forge a path forward to ensuring justice for the countless individuals affected by sexual misconduct.
Sexual misconduct accusations spark competing her word against his. How do we decide who is telling the truth? The answer comes down to credibility. But as this eye-opening book reveals, invisible forces warp the credibility judgments of even the well- intentioned among us. We are all shaped by a set of false assumptions and hidden biases embedded in our culture, our legal system, and our psyches.
In Credible, Deborah Tuerkheimer provides a much-needed framework to explain how we perceive credibility, why our perceptions are distorted, and why these distortions harm survivors. Social hierarchies and inequalities foster doubt that is commonplace and predictable, resulting in what Tuerkheimer calls the “credibility discount”—our dismissal of claims by certain kinds of speakers—primarily women, and especially those who are more marginalized.
The #MeToo movement has exposed how victims have been badly served by a system that is designed not to protect them, but instead to protect the status quo. Credibility lies at the heart of this system. Drawing on case studies, moving first-hand accounts, science, and the law, Tuerkheimer identifies widespread patterns and their causes, analyzes the role of power, and examines the close, reciprocal relationship between culture and law—guiding us toward accurate credibility judgments and equitable treatment of those whose suffering has long been disregarded.
#MeToo has touched off a massive reckoning. To achieve lasting progress, we must shift our approach to belief. Credible helps us forge a path forward to ensuring justice for the countless individuals affected by sexual misconduct.
320 pages, Kindle Edition
First published October 5, 2021
66 people are currently reading
3237 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 89 reviews
December 29, 2021
This is one of those books where I’m sad - it’s sad - that the book even has to exist at all, not only because the behaviors it explains exist, but also because these behaviors the book explains still, inexplicably, need to be explained and yet still continue to exist even having been repeatedly explained.
In other words: this is one of those books in which there is an inherent extra layer of sadness for me knowing that the people who truly most need to read and synthesize and apply the information in the book will likely not do so, while for the people who will most likely read the book, the information contained within will probably already be well known and understood.
That being said, it is a solid and linear, coherent and cogent, well-laid out, straightforward and substantiated argument demonstrating how systemic victim-blaming and inequitable power dynamics play out in the criminal justice and legal system and other institutions to harm survivors of interpersonal violence and exploitation and enable and excuse those who commit these acts of violence. In short, it explicates how and why the mechanics and semantics of victim-blaming actually work so well, and this is borne out by my own experience of many years working with survivors of domestic violence, sexual assault, and stalking and witnessing the treatment they endured in court and elsewhere. It would be an essential book for any library as well as a good resource for the toolbox of any survivor, advocate, and ally.
In other words: this is one of those books in which there is an inherent extra layer of sadness for me knowing that the people who truly most need to read and synthesize and apply the information in the book will likely not do so, while for the people who will most likely read the book, the information contained within will probably already be well known and understood.
That being said, it is a solid and linear, coherent and cogent, well-laid out, straightforward and substantiated argument demonstrating how systemic victim-blaming and inequitable power dynamics play out in the criminal justice and legal system and other institutions to harm survivors of interpersonal violence and exploitation and enable and excuse those who commit these acts of violence. In short, it explicates how and why the mechanics and semantics of victim-blaming actually work so well, and this is borne out by my own experience of many years working with survivors of domestic violence, sexual assault, and stalking and witnessing the treatment they endured in court and elsewhere. It would be an essential book for any library as well as a good resource for the toolbox of any survivor, advocate, and ally.
April 30, 2021
This book was received as an ARC from Harper Wave and Harper Business - Harper Wave in exchange for an honest review. Opinions and thoughts expressed in this review are completely my own.
Wow this book was really deep and eye-opening and a lot of important information was presented to really think about. We have had a lot of popularity with research on the #metoo movement and I appreciate how Deborah Tuerkheimer holds nothing back and gives it to you straight. I've heard from our patrons the shock and horror of the Surviving R. Kelly and the intensity really was heartbreaking. What is even more horrifying is that our justice system relies on one thing and that is credibility. The more power you have, the more credible you are and that was the case for Harvey Weinstein and R. Kelly. Now with the help of the #metoo movement, there is more awareness out there to give everyone a fighting chance and fight for sexual harassment. This book will definitely help change the system and change the world.
We will consider adding this title to our Self Help collection at our library. That is why we give this book 5 stars.
Wow this book was really deep and eye-opening and a lot of important information was presented to really think about. We have had a lot of popularity with research on the #metoo movement and I appreciate how Deborah Tuerkheimer holds nothing back and gives it to you straight. I've heard from our patrons the shock and horror of the Surviving R. Kelly and the intensity really was heartbreaking. What is even more horrifying is that our justice system relies on one thing and that is credibility. The more power you have, the more credible you are and that was the case for Harvey Weinstein and R. Kelly. Now with the help of the #metoo movement, there is more awareness out there to give everyone a fighting chance and fight for sexual harassment. This book will definitely help change the system and change the world.
We will consider adding this title to our Self Help collection at our library. That is why we give this book 5 stars.
November 23, 2021
Credible is an incredibly important book. Author Deborah Tuerkheimer has put together a comprehensive and cohesive guide to how the system is failing women who are subjected to sexual violence.
A warning - this book will make the reader incredibly angry; it is filled with stories of how survivors of rape and sexual assault are made to feel as if they are responsible for their attack. Tuerkheimer covers rape myths, such as “the stranger rape paradigm”, a misguided assumption that most rapes are commited by strangers. She also goes into great detail on how victims’ sexual history can be used as a weapon against them in any kind of rape trial.
But there is some hope; there is a particularly moving story of the fantastic work attorney sujatha baliga is doing with restorative justice, a form of reconciliation through mediation and rehabilitation. There are also stories within the book of how victims find a way to move on from their attack.
I found this book to be incredibly insightful and educational. It is staggering how little support there is for rape victims. A conviction, or any form of validation for the survivor, only occurs within the minority of cases. Thousands of rape kits are left untested, and woman are often dismissed by the institutions they are supposed to trust.
For me, the key point Tuerkheimer drove home is that people have to listen to victims. There are so many assumptions when it comes to an emotionally charged crime such as rape, that people sometimes just don’t know how to deal with it. To paraphrase Tuerkheimer’s work, people have certain ideas about how the world is, and anything that shakes that belief can be difficult to deal with.
I could go on for days about Credible. Everyone needs to read this book.
A warning - this book will make the reader incredibly angry; it is filled with stories of how survivors of rape and sexual assault are made to feel as if they are responsible for their attack. Tuerkheimer covers rape myths, such as “the stranger rape paradigm”, a misguided assumption that most rapes are commited by strangers. She also goes into great detail on how victims’ sexual history can be used as a weapon against them in any kind of rape trial.
But there is some hope; there is a particularly moving story of the fantastic work attorney sujatha baliga is doing with restorative justice, a form of reconciliation through mediation and rehabilitation. There are also stories within the book of how victims find a way to move on from their attack.
I found this book to be incredibly insightful and educational. It is staggering how little support there is for rape victims. A conviction, or any form of validation for the survivor, only occurs within the minority of cases. Thousands of rape kits are left untested, and woman are often dismissed by the institutions they are supposed to trust.
For me, the key point Tuerkheimer drove home is that people have to listen to victims. There are so many assumptions when it comes to an emotionally charged crime such as rape, that people sometimes just don’t know how to deal with it. To paraphrase Tuerkheimer’s work, people have certain ideas about how the world is, and anything that shakes that belief can be difficult to deal with.
I could go on for days about Credible. Everyone needs to read this book.
January 17, 2022
As a survivor, this book was incredibly healing for me.
It also helped me understand why the concept of "Restorative Justice" for rape is so triggering and and feels like a shaming gut punch: it supports the idea that rapists should be treated more leniently than other violent offenders, and reinforces the idea that female humanity is less important than male humanity.
That's exactly the message the rapist sends to his victims, and supporters of "Restorative" Justice for rape take the rapist's side in delivering that message.
This book taught me that I am not a "bad" woman for being a "Carceral Feminist" (I actually made myself a bumper sticker that says Proud Carceral Feminist for my car).
WOMEN'S LIVES MATTER!
And rape is every bit as serious a Human Rights Violation as police violence against marginalized communities.
No more excuses.
No more regressive gender roles.
No more misogynoir, where Black women are required to sacrifice their own humanity to protect Black men (most Black men do not want or need such "protection").
Women will never have the freedom to live as complete human beings - or citizens - as long as men can rape us with criminal impunity.
This book helped me to understand how healing the punishment of sex offenders can be, and that I am not a bad person for desiring that punishment.
I recommend this book to every survivor who questions her right to justice.
It also helped me understand why the concept of "Restorative Justice" for rape is so triggering and and feels like a shaming gut punch: it supports the idea that rapists should be treated more leniently than other violent offenders, and reinforces the idea that female humanity is less important than male humanity.
That's exactly the message the rapist sends to his victims, and supporters of "Restorative" Justice for rape take the rapist's side in delivering that message.
This book taught me that I am not a "bad" woman for being a "Carceral Feminist" (I actually made myself a bumper sticker that says Proud Carceral Feminist for my car).
WOMEN'S LIVES MATTER!
And rape is every bit as serious a Human Rights Violation as police violence against marginalized communities.
No more excuses.
No more regressive gender roles.
No more misogynoir, where Black women are required to sacrifice their own humanity to protect Black men (most Black men do not want or need such "protection").
Women will never have the freedom to live as complete human beings - or citizens - as long as men can rape us with criminal impunity.
This book helped me to understand how healing the punishment of sex offenders can be, and that I am not a bad person for desiring that punishment.
I recommend this book to every survivor who questions her right to justice.
December 31, 2024
So much truth and to know how flawed our judicial system still is is sickening. We can do better as a country.
November 21, 2021
I put down another book to start this one and yeah this book was equally intense but I was able to finish it.
If a word could sum up my experience it would be Whoa!
Tuerkheimer is an attorney and uses concise language to explain why survivors/victims have an uphill battle to find the support they need after they are violated.
The short version is that disbelief is the default. She moves to making a compelling case that we are socialized to feel bad for the rich and powerful (yuck but the eg is their lives shouldn't be ruined Bili Cosby and his elk) and the law is setup to make the victim take responsibility for abuser's behavior (why did you put yourself in the position to be raped).
Like I said whoa!
The longer version is Tuerkheimer frames the book as victims have to fit or be able to navigate the credibility complex which is dedicated by culture (norms, values) and the law (evidence/investigation of assault). In both cases women and victims are at a disadvantage. The system is setup to intentionally revictimized and protects the abused, especially if you the accusser is from a marginalized identity. There is an example where Tuerkheimer suggested that attorneys deploy the good man/guy strategize to scale for exoneration eg. I know John and he's good a person there's no way he could be a rapist. It's easy to then cast a harlot, Jezebel, gold digger narrative. The key though, is that rape over the decades has been narrowly framed as an act that happens with strangers in the dark or some angry monster so anything outside of this realm can be easily unbelievable. Though, IF you believe the victim you have to be called to action, which as Tuerkheimer points out many people do NOT because it's a threat to your safety (how you view rape, your interactions with the abuser, etc.).
I think the framing of using rich powerful men coupled with everyday normal abusers provided eerily similarities and as Tuerkheimer puts it rape/sexual is one of the easiest violations to get away with or dismiss:
-victim blaming
-slut shaming
-shifting blame (from the accused to the accuser)
-viewing women often as an unreliable and/or untrustworthy narrator
-expectations of response during and after the assault
-memory of the event
-he said/she said response
-an extraordinary amount of corroboration
and mostly painfully obvious men's entitlement to have sex with women (insert angry emoji)
Tuerkheimer's application of institutional betrayal (Freyd, 2013) really adds teeth to her argument and I think for a more critical analysis particularly related to WoC I would recommend reading Jennifer M. Gomez's work on cultural betrayal https://jmgomez.org/cultural-betrayal....
A couple of things you should be aware of before reading this book Tuerkheimer uses language like slaves instead of enslaved when talking about slavery. It's not current language and definitely felt like an outdated take for a book written in 2021. Also, she describes the assaults of all of her victims graphically. I had to take several breaks, but I think it was an intentional decision to remind the reader of how traumatizing the assault can be. Lastly, there are no real recommendations on how to uncouple yourself from automatically disbelieving, which I thought was a missed opportunity. Though, I don't think there's anything you can recommend other than BELIEVE women/survivors. She does reference restorative justice but that seems like it can be again very stressful to the victim which Tuerkheimer points out. Tuerkheimer does indicate the best way to help victims survive is to validate their experience.
Yeah, it's a powerful read, I have about 6 pages of notes.
CW/N: descriptions of rape on page, legal system not supporting victims (victim blaming, botching investigations, not testing rape kits), intrusive investigations to discredit rape allegations, men getting away with rape, community members being welcomed even with the knowledge of abuse
I received a libro.fm credit in exchange for an honest review from HarperAudio.
If a word could sum up my experience it would be Whoa!
Tuerkheimer is an attorney and uses concise language to explain why survivors/victims have an uphill battle to find the support they need after they are violated.
The short version is that disbelief is the default. She moves to making a compelling case that we are socialized to feel bad for the rich and powerful (yuck but the eg is their lives shouldn't be ruined Bili Cosby and his elk) and the law is setup to make the victim take responsibility for abuser's behavior (why did you put yourself in the position to be raped).
Like I said whoa!
The longer version is Tuerkheimer frames the book as victims have to fit or be able to navigate the credibility complex which is dedicated by culture (norms, values) and the law (evidence/investigation of assault). In both cases women and victims are at a disadvantage. The system is setup to intentionally revictimized and protects the abused, especially if you the accusser is from a marginalized identity. There is an example where Tuerkheimer suggested that attorneys deploy the good man/guy strategize to scale for exoneration eg. I know John and he's good a person there's no way he could be a rapist. It's easy to then cast a harlot, Jezebel, gold digger narrative. The key though, is that rape over the decades has been narrowly framed as an act that happens with strangers in the dark or some angry monster so anything outside of this realm can be easily unbelievable. Though, IF you believe the victim you have to be called to action, which as Tuerkheimer points out many people do NOT because it's a threat to your safety (how you view rape, your interactions with the abuser, etc.).
I think the framing of using rich powerful men coupled with everyday normal abusers provided eerily similarities and as Tuerkheimer puts it rape/sexual is one of the easiest violations to get away with or dismiss:
-victim blaming
-slut shaming
-shifting blame (from the accused to the accuser)
-viewing women often as an unreliable and/or untrustworthy narrator
-expectations of response during and after the assault
-memory of the event
-he said/she said response
-an extraordinary amount of corroboration
and mostly painfully obvious men's entitlement to have sex with women (insert angry emoji)
Tuerkheimer's application of institutional betrayal (Freyd, 2013) really adds teeth to her argument and I think for a more critical analysis particularly related to WoC I would recommend reading Jennifer M. Gomez's work on cultural betrayal https://jmgomez.org/cultural-betrayal....
A couple of things you should be aware of before reading this book Tuerkheimer uses language like slaves instead of enslaved when talking about slavery. It's not current language and definitely felt like an outdated take for a book written in 2021. Also, she describes the assaults of all of her victims graphically. I had to take several breaks, but I think it was an intentional decision to remind the reader of how traumatizing the assault can be. Lastly, there are no real recommendations on how to uncouple yourself from automatically disbelieving, which I thought was a missed opportunity. Though, I don't think there's anything you can recommend other than BELIEVE women/survivors. She does reference restorative justice but that seems like it can be again very stressful to the victim which Tuerkheimer points out. Tuerkheimer does indicate the best way to help victims survive is to validate their experience.
Yeah, it's a powerful read, I have about 6 pages of notes.
CW/N: descriptions of rape on page, legal system not supporting victims (victim blaming, botching investigations, not testing rape kits), intrusive investigations to discredit rape allegations, men getting away with rape, community members being welcomed even with the knowledge of abuse
I received a libro.fm credit in exchange for an honest review from HarperAudio.
March 3, 2022
Another great library find! Deborah Tuerkkheimer, an attorney and legal scholar, develops a well conceived framework of credibility for analyzing our culture's approach and considerations of sexual assault broadly, but more specifically the gendered assault of women by men. Credible does an excellent job at not only succinctly conveying the systematic and emotional hardship of sexual assault survivors, but at compellingly demonstrating how this disregard for women's safety and wellbeing is/has been historically baked into our law and our routine understanding of how to handle sexual violence.
This book is an excellent reminder that misogyny and patriarchy are not mere ideas in people's heads, but rather tangible forces that act on women with impunity, all while being served by institutions and peoples across the gender binary.
This book is an excellent reminder that misogyny and patriarchy are not mere ideas in people's heads, but rather tangible forces that act on women with impunity, all while being served by institutions and peoples across the gender binary.
November 14, 2021
The idea that we, as a society, doubt accusers and protect perpetrators of sexual abuse, assault, and harassment is not revelatory. Many women could tell you that already. The value of Deborah Tuerkheimer's book is not that she makes a new point; it's that she explores how it happens, both in the legal structures and psychological biases that underpin it.
The book isn't terribly long—only about 230pp of text—and it moves briskly through its points, illustrated through multiple examples (often enraging). We have biases about who is a "good victim," and how they should behave. Worryingly, those who have power over the situation, such as police, believe these falsehoods. Studies show that 2–8% of assault complaints are false allegations, and they're more likely to be "stranger in an alley" rapes than acquaintance, as is often assumed. Police assume that about 30% of rape allegations are false. They also believe in the righteous victim trope, judging the victims for their conduct and shifting blame from perpetrator to victim. They refuse to investigate rapes, and classify them as "unfounded."
The law underpins our distrust of victims. The 1962 model penal code has a three pronged rule for rape and sexual assault: 1) it must be corroborated by outside evidence (a woman cannot be trusted about her own rape); 2) rape must be promptly reported; 3) juries should be given cautionary instructions to take a victim's testimony with extra suspicions. In addition, some states differentiate between voluntary and involuntary intoxication: If a woman drank of her own will, her rapist is not responsible. In sexual harassment law, non economic damage caps haven't changed since 1991 (discouraging attorneys from taking on cases involving lower wage women), and there are tests for how pervasive harassment has to be. Popular opinion often holds that sexual harassment bans all joking in the workplace, but the reverse is true: verbal abuse is excused as joking, and the courts allow it.
Tuerkheimer takes us systematically through the steps by which accusers (largely women) are devalued (and learn to devalue themselves) while the needs and feelings of perpetrators (largely men) are upheld. (The exception being white women assaulted by Black men, where racial prejudice trumps sexism.) She's also careful to explore how race impacts Black women in particular as victims: they are doubly victimized because of both their race and gender. They are ignored (as in the R. Kelly case), hyper sexualized, and more subject to sexual violence.
There's also an interesting chapter about what victims actually want out of the process. What they want, generally, is validation and vindication: for their claims to be acknowledged as true, and to be supported. Punishment, for many victims, is about showing that their assault mattered, and what that means varies. For Rachel Denhollander, it mattered that Larry Nasser get the maximum sentence, to show that the lives of his victims had meaning. On the flip side, Brock Turner's lenient sentence was offensive not because jail is intrinsically good, but because the process showed that the primary concern was his comfort and future, and not the life of Chanel Miller. The potential and pitfalls of restorative justice, as well as traditional criminal justice, are explored, and while restorative approaches can have good outcomes, Tuerkheimer makes the good point that when a perpetrator participates to avoid punishment, and an institution wants to avoid legal processes, it may not take the needs of the victim into account. Moreover, when the parties are not equal—as they are not in sexual assault—the process may simply replicate social prejudices.
This book isn't revolutionary, but it's very well and clearly written.
The book isn't terribly long—only about 230pp of text—and it moves briskly through its points, illustrated through multiple examples (often enraging). We have biases about who is a "good victim," and how they should behave. Worryingly, those who have power over the situation, such as police, believe these falsehoods. Studies show that 2–8% of assault complaints are false allegations, and they're more likely to be "stranger in an alley" rapes than acquaintance, as is often assumed. Police assume that about 30% of rape allegations are false. They also believe in the righteous victim trope, judging the victims for their conduct and shifting blame from perpetrator to victim. They refuse to investigate rapes, and classify them as "unfounded."
The law underpins our distrust of victims. The 1962 model penal code has a three pronged rule for rape and sexual assault: 1) it must be corroborated by outside evidence (a woman cannot be trusted about her own rape); 2) rape must be promptly reported; 3) juries should be given cautionary instructions to take a victim's testimony with extra suspicions. In addition, some states differentiate between voluntary and involuntary intoxication: If a woman drank of her own will, her rapist is not responsible. In sexual harassment law, non economic damage caps haven't changed since 1991 (discouraging attorneys from taking on cases involving lower wage women), and there are tests for how pervasive harassment has to be. Popular opinion often holds that sexual harassment bans all joking in the workplace, but the reverse is true: verbal abuse is excused as joking, and the courts allow it.
Tuerkheimer takes us systematically through the steps by which accusers (largely women) are devalued (and learn to devalue themselves) while the needs and feelings of perpetrators (largely men) are upheld. (The exception being white women assaulted by Black men, where racial prejudice trumps sexism.) She's also careful to explore how race impacts Black women in particular as victims: they are doubly victimized because of both their race and gender. They are ignored (as in the R. Kelly case), hyper sexualized, and more subject to sexual violence.
There's also an interesting chapter about what victims actually want out of the process. What they want, generally, is validation and vindication: for their claims to be acknowledged as true, and to be supported. Punishment, for many victims, is about showing that their assault mattered, and what that means varies. For Rachel Denhollander, it mattered that Larry Nasser get the maximum sentence, to show that the lives of his victims had meaning. On the flip side, Brock Turner's lenient sentence was offensive not because jail is intrinsically good, but because the process showed that the primary concern was his comfort and future, and not the life of Chanel Miller. The potential and pitfalls of restorative justice, as well as traditional criminal justice, are explored, and while restorative approaches can have good outcomes, Tuerkheimer makes the good point that when a perpetrator participates to avoid punishment, and an institution wants to avoid legal processes, it may not take the needs of the victim into account. Moreover, when the parties are not equal—as they are not in sexual assault—the process may simply replicate social prejudices.
This book isn't revolutionary, but it's very well and clearly written.
January 5, 2022
A thorough intersectional feminist legal analysis of how the “credibility complex” leads to us to disbelieve sexual violence survivors and prioritize their abusers.
As a legal scholar, Tuerkheimer emphasizes legal responses to sexual violence. She also primarily discusses sexual assault and harassment and does not discuss intimate partner violence much at all. Nonetheless, her analysis is welcome, if not new to those familiar with feminist arguments about gender inequality in our societal response to sexual abuse.
Tuerkheimer’s strong feminist analysis is a welcome corrective both to mainstream patriarchy and the growing chorus of voices critiquing so-called “Carceral feminism.” She reminds us that the legal system remains deeply sexist and skeptical of survivors of sexual violence. The system is still stacked against accusers and toward abusers. Legal sanctions are often less about punishment per se than social acknowledgement of harm done. And restorative justice only works in a small percentage of cases. These are all helpful reminders that this of us skeptical of the criminal justice system as a response to sexual violence would do well to keep in mind.
As a legal scholar, Tuerkheimer emphasizes legal responses to sexual violence. She also primarily discusses sexual assault and harassment and does not discuss intimate partner violence much at all. Nonetheless, her analysis is welcome, if not new to those familiar with feminist arguments about gender inequality in our societal response to sexual abuse.
Tuerkheimer’s strong feminist analysis is a welcome corrective both to mainstream patriarchy and the growing chorus of voices critiquing so-called “Carceral feminism.” She reminds us that the legal system remains deeply sexist and skeptical of survivors of sexual violence. The system is still stacked against accusers and toward abusers. Legal sanctions are often less about punishment per se than social acknowledgement of harm done. And restorative justice only works in a small percentage of cases. These are all helpful reminders that this of us skeptical of the criminal justice system as a response to sexual violence would do well to keep in mind.
April 18, 2022
It wasn't easy to finish. I almost gave up - and it wasn't because of the language, or the writing, but because of the content. It makes you uncomfortable because, deep down inside, you know whatever it argues is true - and it's depressing (and embarrassing as a male).
November 2, 2021
What an eye opener!
November 23, 2021
This was a hard one to read. I learned a ton about sexual assault, survivors, litigation, and campus adjudication.
January 28, 2022
***Trigger Warning: (mentions of sexual abuse and rape)***
"We begin the work of cultural transformation the moment we respond fairly to a single allegation of abuse." ~Deborah Tuerkheimer
'Credible: Why We Doubt Accusers and Protect Abusers' is an incredibly important book that discusses rape culture and the credibility complex that inhibits true justice when survivors come forward to accuse abusers and rapists. Tuerkheimer draws examples from the MeToo movement to the Jeffrey Epstein trial to the shaking of the gymnastics world in the fight against Larry Nassar and the stories of victims of little to unknown cases. Misogyny, racism, and the white capitalist patriarchy play huge roles in why so often victims are blamed and shamed while rapists are portrayed as victims of uncontrollable needs and urges provoked by the victim 'asking for it'. Deborah discusses the further struggles women of color, immigrants, members of the lgbtq+ community, and victims of lower socioeconomic status face while trying to seek justice for the dehumanizing violations they've faced while existing at multiple marginalized intersectionalities. This book is pivotal and an important social commentary piece on what society can do to create real change as well as help prevent further trauma to survivors and create true reformative justice.
As a warning this book does go into graphic detail about victims' rapes.
"We begin the work of cultural transformation the moment we respond fairly to a single allegation of abuse." ~Deborah Tuerkheimer
'Credible: Why We Doubt Accusers and Protect Abusers' is an incredibly important book that discusses rape culture and the credibility complex that inhibits true justice when survivors come forward to accuse abusers and rapists. Tuerkheimer draws examples from the MeToo movement to the Jeffrey Epstein trial to the shaking of the gymnastics world in the fight against Larry Nassar and the stories of victims of little to unknown cases. Misogyny, racism, and the white capitalist patriarchy play huge roles in why so often victims are blamed and shamed while rapists are portrayed as victims of uncontrollable needs and urges provoked by the victim 'asking for it'. Deborah discusses the further struggles women of color, immigrants, members of the lgbtq+ community, and victims of lower socioeconomic status face while trying to seek justice for the dehumanizing violations they've faced while existing at multiple marginalized intersectionalities. This book is pivotal and an important social commentary piece on what society can do to create real change as well as help prevent further trauma to survivors and create true reformative justice.
As a warning this book does go into graphic detail about victims' rapes.
December 22, 2021
“A culture that routinely downgrades the worth of victims in relation to perpetrators is a culture that muzzles accusations of abuse.”
This was a very powerful and informative read analyzing what influences the credibility we give sexual assault/harassment victims and perpetrators. It was written by a law professor/former prosecutor and uses elements of the law, sociology, psychology, and real stories.
Notable areas/terms discussed:
⚖️ Credibility complex/discount
⚖️ Intersectionality between race, class, immigration status
⚖️ Police mishandling
⚖️ Misconceptions of sexual assault
⚖️ Collective gaslighting
⚖️ Famous cases covered include Channel Miller and the victims of Weinstein, Nassar, Epstein, R Kelly, VA’s Lt. Gov
This is such an important read to expand our views on sexual assault/harassment and learn how to properly treat victims. As a law student who will be working in criminal prosecution, I learned a lot. Read this if you like SVU, Know My Name, Catch and Kill.
Thank you to Harper Wave for sending me a gifted copy! The spine and cover are gorgeous.
“We begin the work of cultural transformation the moment we respond fairly to a single allegation of abuse.”
⚠️: Sexual assault/harassment, rape, sexual violence
This was a very powerful and informative read analyzing what influences the credibility we give sexual assault/harassment victims and perpetrators. It was written by a law professor/former prosecutor and uses elements of the law, sociology, psychology, and real stories.
Notable areas/terms discussed:
⚖️ Credibility complex/discount
⚖️ Intersectionality between race, class, immigration status
⚖️ Police mishandling
⚖️ Misconceptions of sexual assault
⚖️ Collective gaslighting
⚖️ Famous cases covered include Channel Miller and the victims of Weinstein, Nassar, Epstein, R Kelly, VA’s Lt. Gov
This is such an important read to expand our views on sexual assault/harassment and learn how to properly treat victims. As a law student who will be working in criminal prosecution, I learned a lot. Read this if you like SVU, Know My Name, Catch and Kill.
Thank you to Harper Wave for sending me a gifted copy! The spine and cover are gorgeous.
“We begin the work of cultural transformation the moment we respond fairly to a single allegation of abuse.”
⚠️: Sexual assault/harassment, rape, sexual violence
August 14, 2023
Everyone needs to read this book. Whenever someone accuses someone else of assault, there’s doubt about whether it happened, it was wrong and that it matters. This book gets to the heart of why we deem abusers to be more credible than accusers (the innate drive to maintain status quo, the perfect victim and monster abuser archetypes etc.) and also outlines specific legal changes to be made in criminal and civil court to better support survivors. I want to shove this down the throats of everyone who has ever questioned the truth of an accuser’s testament of what happened to them. In lieu of any gifts ever again, I want everyone in my life to read this book front to back.
December 11, 2021
"If we are to meaningfully alter the ways our laws are enforced, our culture itself must evolve"
I've been looking for a title to get me hyped up about criminal justice topics again, and this did the job. The author does a very good job of exploring all of the different aspects of how our communities, government agencies, jobs, and peers all affect our willingness to believe sexual assault victims. There are stories from survivors both recounting the assault as well as in most cases the "second assault" that can take place when you are not support, believed, or seen to matter by those that you disclose to. This title definitely gives a measure of much needed insight into how society tends to tackle the topic of sexual assault and the myriad of ways that we need to change ourselves as well as our legal system in order to better protect victims.
I've been looking for a title to get me hyped up about criminal justice topics again, and this did the job. The author does a very good job of exploring all of the different aspects of how our communities, government agencies, jobs, and peers all affect our willingness to believe sexual assault victims. There are stories from survivors both recounting the assault as well as in most cases the "second assault" that can take place when you are not support, believed, or seen to matter by those that you disclose to. This title definitely gives a measure of much needed insight into how society tends to tackle the topic of sexual assault and the myriad of ways that we need to change ourselves as well as our legal system in order to better protect victims.
April 9, 2024
What a tragically honest book. The content is heavy and the stories are difficult to read. But the reality is, we have a systemic problem in which victims of sexual assault are held down for the sake of protecting abusers. I would recommend along with this that you pickup Shout, Bodies on the Line, Entitled and Invisible Women if you want to read more in this space and covering women's rights and sexual assault.
January 9, 2023
Resonates well with my experiences, but also opens my eyes to what I haven't understood or noticed. What I'm left wondering is how Canada's legal system compares to the U.S.'s; that we have the same cultural tendencies to discredit, blame, and disregard accusers is undoubtedly a fair analysis. And while this book doesn't engage much with religious institutions and communities, we can most certainly learn from its observations of how power and credibility influence our judgments.
September 20, 2022
Interesting and infuriating.
May 7, 2022
Possibly the most depressing book I’ve ever read. Such an important read. While theoretically I understand the reasons behind the systems that lead us, as a society, to practically always discount the experiences of women who have been sexually harassed or assaulted, it’s so hard to accept as reality.
I like that the author systematically lays out an explanation of the different reasons that these claims are not considered credible and (at the end) suggests an alternative framework. I don’t like the number of publicly available examples she can list and use to illustrate her points. I don’t like how all these examples ring too true.
I like that the author systematically lays out an explanation of the different reasons that these claims are not considered credible and (at the end) suggests an alternative framework. I don’t like the number of publicly available examples she can list and use to illustrate her points. I don’t like how all these examples ring too true.
April 14, 2023
Wow. Tuerkheimer brilliantly explains the way our justice system and culture believes the account of abusers over survivors. Intertwined with true stories, she uncovers the damage that occurs when the friends and family disbelieve those who are violated. Dismissal leads to more trauma, causing survivors to believe that what happened doesn't matter and/or didn't happen.
Very relevant and important message here. Much more to unpack. And I think I'll take a month break from books dealing with trauma. 😅
Very relevant and important message here. Much more to unpack. And I think I'll take a month break from books dealing with trauma. 😅
November 2, 2025
TW: R*pe
Credible is a really fantastic book, but it smells to high heaven of illegal publication pipelines. A book that even floats the concept that Weinstein is a 10 and his victim is a 0, even in terms of power which incels view beauty to be (if that were true nobody beautiful would ever be homeless, even though homeless is the opposite of homely) really is very confused. Also being like “I need money” incentivizes the need, as opposite to the synergy, economy. Ultimately someone is being drained unsustainably somewhere in there. That can never be ethical ultimately. In either case, if this is the case and illegal investigations into victims (Tucson, Minnesota—I have never lived in Minnesota, just have a Minnesota phone number, San Francisco, Washington, then Missoula), and I mean ILLEGAL investigations aren’t going anywhere so are instead sold are being used in an illegal publication pipeline, I need this exposed and investigated. You should not be talking about victim compensation in your book while knowing you have paid all these illegal investigation victims $0. It’s like someone who repeatedly calls the police with false accusations of prostitution because they themselves did not get sexual access to the person. They cannot do that as many times as they want, and the abnormal hate on such a person for that female victim is usually cause for institutionalization.
This publication pipeline thing has to stop. It’s not a smooth move. It’s not a compromise when the victims were still not involved. It’s not an evil but genius way to make money. It needs to go. It needs to be investigated. I can’t investigate all these horrifying things by myself.
In either case, if it had not stunk to high heaven of this, I would have given it four stars. Instead I am giving it three. This really stinks to high heaven of illegal Weinstein (he’s with Israel, the Zionists I believe) trying to monetize the situation of a pro-Palestine supporter to “profit” in illegal data to publication pipelines. Freedom by Angela Merkel no less showed signs of this too. This is not ok. The victims need to be compensated. This is not a money-making enterprise. No narrative will rationalize this and make it better. Data is not on a publication pipeline like gasoline. This is not the lesser of two evils, and if it is going to fund a mismanaged war that is even worse. This has been going on way too long. If I didn’t know better, Poland and Ukraine saying no to Nord Stream 1 and Nord Stream 2 is getting them targetted essentially for “get out of the way” exterminationism. This is a no. If that’s Deutsche, you investigate Deutsche. Deutsche needs to stop saying they’re doing things for their own financial wellbeing that then come back and destroy the entire international economic system. They clearly do not have the comprehension. This ceased to be ok or ethical a long time ago. You can stand there and try to convince yourself it’s ethical all day, it doesn’t make it ethical. Deutsche is not Merkel. You can love Germany for Merkel, and absolutely want to vomit at Deutsche. Deutsche gave Merkel a hard time getting a bailout for the very country after which it is named. Since. When. And yet, they have disparate arms in near schizophrenic self-contradiction that continue to fund Trump. They have unreasonable hate that fails to take criticism with any grace and ultimately their decisions have led to this worldwide ongoing catastrophe, where Covid-19 was clearly behind much of Trump’s collapsing cholesterol style economic world flunking.
Another thing is;
When a black man is charged with rape even when a white woman didn’t come forward about it there are two possibilities
A) She was legitimately not raped and wanted to correct the record. He did not deserve it. He got enthusiastic, mutual consent. If he tries to rationalize later any act that went wrong in a way that is violating of her agency, it is possible that rape dynamics were at play but it is still the decision of the victim to exonerate. The continued efforts to act above her and make the decision for her say everything about projective identification by a white rapist who doesn’t respect her agency and decisionmaking, and would likely rape her himself if he felt her no was too obstructive to his sexual motives.
B) She felt pressured due to his identity to not report the rape and was actually raped. There is a lot of this pressure out there. As the book states, “lynching” was used to get black women—usually the first to come to the aid of black men—to not report. Mostly everybody acknowledged that as absurd. He deserved it.
If you do not respect when it is A, you are the real rapist in the room. You don’t respect her ability to evaluate and judge the situation for herself. You are desperate for your narrative. If you do respect when it is A, but not when it is B, you are benevolently racist. If you respect both when reported by separate sovereign agents in at least similar situations, you are genuinely aligned with their agency and are not involved with the dynamics of rape. Nobody gets to decide if someone was raped except the victim. If they don’t feel ready to come forward, it can be either A or B. You need to listen to them about what they say. The rest sounds like sexual possession that is undue and can’t accept the outcome. That’s a no. Overt KKK homophilia is too stunted from an intelligence perspective to be anywhere near here. The obsession with black men even potentially raping white women is so pathetic it is just embarrassing. But when it happens, it should be believed without further taxing the victim when it happens in a way that is clearly devoid of possessive delusions based on feelings of being unable to compete sexually or feelings of economic devaluation suggesting the person legitimately views the individual as property or real estate. That’s also a no.
Running an investigation on a victim, monetizing and providing no victim compensation is a needs based economy and you should NOT speak on victim compensation in your book if you have done this knowledgeably and voluntarily. You are triply raping the victim. If they know the individual felt raped on the stand and recreate the dynamics that made them feel that way, or know that the victim cut their hair under certain circumstances and then try to recreate the circumstances that made that happen, they need to be investigated and removed for some sort of impulse disorder that precludes them from being able to work with this material. That may repetitions just needs to go.
Similarly, the fact such an exam was medical but then had no gloves is just a no. Who even makes that argument but a fraud. (pg. 91)
“Don’t mix alcohol and beauty” is just a no, when other people have a cover up that the person wasn’t even attractive enough to be believed. You can’t have both. And when they say this, they mean one drink, and it’s her fault for being beautiful. The only person that would normalize this argument is someone with an impulse control disorder who immediately already evaluates that they’re not going to have any control over themselves so immediately puts it on the victim. Such a person needs a caregiver, a paid caregiver, not a partner. Can you believe that? People really disgusting enough to devalue and attack the person's looks as part of the premeditation of rape. A repulsive form of insurance. "Who would rape you anyway?" then the police officer won't let you have one drink because "Don't mix alcohol with beauty." I just can't. It's just rape on a whole other dimension.
It reminds me of what was said about Gates in terms of coercive control in the abuse of his wife in the divorce. Oh, you don't want to fix your car door? Let me bust in where you put your screw that makes it driveable so you can't drive it so you're forced to fix it. Oh you taught yourself and fixed it yourself? I'll destroy the whole car. I'll call the police on you. Then it's someone you've NEVER. EVEN. PARTNERED. WITH. ONE. TIME. This person CLEARLY does not respect their agency and is trying to force their actions. Their calculations on savings are from a white male perspective that clearly has never had a domestic violence white male like themselves watching every move making horrific agency-destroying coercive control behaviors like that. Oh, you don't want to get yourself a new coat or you got that coat or that book for free? Oh, I'll make you pay for it. I'll stab it so you're forced to get a new one because you shouldn't get a coat like that for that price. They're this disgusting. They're this repulsive. Don't. Underestimate. How. Ugly. The trafficker energy. Is. Even if they look good, even if they spend millions on plastic surgery, they are fundamentally on the most repulsive energy you will ever see. They are more than capable of that. That is a no. That is clear contempt for that person's agency. It's a no. Coercive control's got to go. You've got to f*ck off now. Bye bye.
Hysteria is often a response to rape. It can be low key or high key. I feel like Merkel’s response to Bush’s ongoing harassment was not only trying to convince herself but also a lowkey hysteric response to how she couldn’t stop it. Like Terence Tao spending lots of time trying to convince himself his out of control violation of certain people’s data is ethical, Merkel spends a lot of time in her book Freedom saying that people didn’t really know the dynamics between her and Bush and that it was ok and it didn’t really bother her. This does huge damage to people in similar situations, if not the exact same situation, who actually meant it. She undermined other women doing this. I am trying to feel better about it by floating it might be a pseudohysterical response. But betraying other women is not ok, which there is already a slight unpleasant whiff of when she struggles to say she's feminist. Same with how she treats Ivanka with contempt. People say it's a German thing, to view beautiful people as ways to make money pushing the stereotype of "German infertility" where they see beauty and just think "EXPLOIT" instead of respect and cherish, but I don't know. I don't think it is necessarily.
They seem like one and the same type of dynamic, a pseudohysterical attempt to publicly convince themselves primarily.
Those who return to work seem undamaged so they get a larger paycheck. I really appreciate that Turkheimer agrees that this shows all the signs that they went back to work because they had to, not because they wanted to.
“Many knew, and few did anything to stop him.” with R. Kelly is the real issue. While people just sit back, they vote implicitly that their worst self is actually behind what happened here. That should never be forgotten, and it should be removed.
“Dragging” was also used. This is usually a vocabulary word for war crimes. That anybody would even describe someone turning to them for help and justice with being met with a war crime speaks on true repulsiveness. Pg. 180
Constant betrayal by loved ones is especially hard for people where normality has been successfully upheld and preserved to accept. The “subnormal family” has a reality to it that the mind used to normality really struggles to adapt to, often taxing the victim when they aren’t able to hold onto the comprehension and try to the normative response again, that friends and family should act a certain way. But then they are met with the evidence they don’t. That’s subnormality. It is below, not different, than the norm. pg. 181
They also describe how Lyft was involved with torture. They knew that the woman was doing everything right and was even studying how to be believed by the Trust and Safety team, and yet they didn’t. They didn’t just to do it. That is truly disgusting. It needs to be put out of its misery. Pg. 201
It is true that these things continue until the abused is vindicated. When they aren’t and are run through the system, there is usually one thing at play; extreme envy. Do not doubt the capacity for abnormal and disturbing extreme envy in the immediate family. Sometimes they will even admit it. That’s more towards the “constant betrayal as subnormality” point. The usual family bonding infrastructure, such as love, serotonin, and oxytocin, has fallen to a pathological, abnormal and monstrous extreme envy found on the subnormal family. The family essentially can’t carry water. “While her abuser was never apprehended, this wasn’t because she was distrusted or faulted or disregarded. The collective response validated and vindicated her, so that Hogshead-Makar could heal.” pg. 206.
“If you take my pen and say you are sorry, but don’t give me the pen back, nothing has happened.” pg. 209. This is what I’m saying about the publication pipeline when the actual book is really and actually going to speak about victim compensation on all that.
Rapists or assailants may also interpret trying to punish the woman more than the man as the man being too good looking to be charged. It is usually the opposite case. That’s how you get these Weinstein 10, Victim 0 deranged comments, even if they meant political power. These lunatics conflate political power with beauty. Ask any femcel, they will say xyz is more powerful that abc because of beauty. When in fact it is money that has more to do with it. People will call anybody with enough money beautiful; someone without it, you’d have to actually be that way.
Overall, I really can’t afford to give this book two stars for the surrounding conditions in which it came about, and if they hadn’t existed, I might have given it a five stars. Everything it said was right, but it did it in a tit-for-tat kind of way that evaded consent that has to stop. It smelled of monetizing illegal investigations into victims coming forward. This has to stop. It needs to be investigated. I can’t keep investigating by myself. They cannot speak on victim compensation, doubly raping the victim, and then do it themselves, only to claim a needs based economy. Let me guess; two teenagers. That’s a needs based economy. This has to stop. This is not how you run a long term functioning and successful economy. Every person that engages in an act like that is at least a little bit responsible for the ongoing crash and burn here.
The whole thing just smelled like impulse control disorder and it stinks to high heaven of a publication pipelines. It needs. To. Stop. I need the forces behind this to get it under control and if they can’t to step down. Weinstein investigations and monetizing them to Israel pipelines often given data by Chinese illegal Bitcoin mining operations are often the culprits. This needs to stop. It is all impulse control disorder.
This book is WORTH READING. However, the conditions it came about in need to be investigated. I assume all that happened here will be rationalized as most people who don’t have it tend to do.
Read the book, but investigate the conditions about which it came about. It stinks to high heaven. Don’t accept fake or half-assed investigators.
I really can’t afford to give this two stars given the content, nor can I afford to give it five. Four I can’t do because that’s more so its merit on the content but then the conditions bring it down to three.
It’s worth reading, but this has to stop. They are literally undermining and making a mockery of the whole argument just from compulsive abuse and misogyny; because they’re addicted to it and used to it. It just has to stop. Such a person doesn’t even basically have it. It just has. To. Stop.
The sofia and baliga thing is just pathetic. It's just. Absolutely. F*cking. Pathetic. Make. It. Stop. People don't come forward because they didn't know how they ultimately felt. But the "race to the victim" position Olympics is just. vomit. Just. vomit. The rape as beauty narrative, that all the beautiful just get rape and how being beautiful means it's inevitable is. just. vomit. Even if it's true, make it stop, don't make it a token to be shared among your friends. I do EVERYTHING to make it stop. Make it stop. This is hands down the most absolutely. f*cking. pathetic. thing I have ever seen. I mean it. I'm not trying to be mean. Make. It. Stop.
"Voluntary intoxication". Even if you're a minor. Make. It. Stop. They will literally push you out until bars are the only place you can go if you don't put out. Make. It. Stop. Do not underestimate the trafficker trash sh*t.
Even the police's advice that they agree to a date with the victim and see if they can get him to do it again is just. Vomit. Literal revictimization. I don't care if the victim is willing to do it.
Rape does not mean you're beautiful.
Beauty doesn't mean you're powerful.
Power is not beauty.
Money is power.
Money happens by data pipelines like this, that are straight up on pure rape dynamics.
That has nothing to do with beauty, and rape has nothing to do with it either. Beauty contests aren't won because you're raped enough times. I wouldn't wish rape on my worst enemy. True rape.
Make. It. Stop.
Credible is a really fantastic book, but it smells to high heaven of illegal publication pipelines. A book that even floats the concept that Weinstein is a 10 and his victim is a 0, even in terms of power which incels view beauty to be (if that were true nobody beautiful would ever be homeless, even though homeless is the opposite of homely) really is very confused. Also being like “I need money” incentivizes the need, as opposite to the synergy, economy. Ultimately someone is being drained unsustainably somewhere in there. That can never be ethical ultimately. In either case, if this is the case and illegal investigations into victims (Tucson, Minnesota—I have never lived in Minnesota, just have a Minnesota phone number, San Francisco, Washington, then Missoula), and I mean ILLEGAL investigations aren’t going anywhere so are instead sold are being used in an illegal publication pipeline, I need this exposed and investigated. You should not be talking about victim compensation in your book while knowing you have paid all these illegal investigation victims $0. It’s like someone who repeatedly calls the police with false accusations of prostitution because they themselves did not get sexual access to the person. They cannot do that as many times as they want, and the abnormal hate on such a person for that female victim is usually cause for institutionalization.
This publication pipeline thing has to stop. It’s not a smooth move. It’s not a compromise when the victims were still not involved. It’s not an evil but genius way to make money. It needs to go. It needs to be investigated. I can’t investigate all these horrifying things by myself.
In either case, if it had not stunk to high heaven of this, I would have given it four stars. Instead I am giving it three. This really stinks to high heaven of illegal Weinstein (he’s with Israel, the Zionists I believe) trying to monetize the situation of a pro-Palestine supporter to “profit” in illegal data to publication pipelines. Freedom by Angela Merkel no less showed signs of this too. This is not ok. The victims need to be compensated. This is not a money-making enterprise. No narrative will rationalize this and make it better. Data is not on a publication pipeline like gasoline. This is not the lesser of two evils, and if it is going to fund a mismanaged war that is even worse. This has been going on way too long. If I didn’t know better, Poland and Ukraine saying no to Nord Stream 1 and Nord Stream 2 is getting them targetted essentially for “get out of the way” exterminationism. This is a no. If that’s Deutsche, you investigate Deutsche. Deutsche needs to stop saying they’re doing things for their own financial wellbeing that then come back and destroy the entire international economic system. They clearly do not have the comprehension. This ceased to be ok or ethical a long time ago. You can stand there and try to convince yourself it’s ethical all day, it doesn’t make it ethical. Deutsche is not Merkel. You can love Germany for Merkel, and absolutely want to vomit at Deutsche. Deutsche gave Merkel a hard time getting a bailout for the very country after which it is named. Since. When. And yet, they have disparate arms in near schizophrenic self-contradiction that continue to fund Trump. They have unreasonable hate that fails to take criticism with any grace and ultimately their decisions have led to this worldwide ongoing catastrophe, where Covid-19 was clearly behind much of Trump’s collapsing cholesterol style economic world flunking.
Another thing is;
When a black man is charged with rape even when a white woman didn’t come forward about it there are two possibilities
A) She was legitimately not raped and wanted to correct the record. He did not deserve it. He got enthusiastic, mutual consent. If he tries to rationalize later any act that went wrong in a way that is violating of her agency, it is possible that rape dynamics were at play but it is still the decision of the victim to exonerate. The continued efforts to act above her and make the decision for her say everything about projective identification by a white rapist who doesn’t respect her agency and decisionmaking, and would likely rape her himself if he felt her no was too obstructive to his sexual motives.
B) She felt pressured due to his identity to not report the rape and was actually raped. There is a lot of this pressure out there. As the book states, “lynching” was used to get black women—usually the first to come to the aid of black men—to not report. Mostly everybody acknowledged that as absurd. He deserved it.
If you do not respect when it is A, you are the real rapist in the room. You don’t respect her ability to evaluate and judge the situation for herself. You are desperate for your narrative. If you do respect when it is A, but not when it is B, you are benevolently racist. If you respect both when reported by separate sovereign agents in at least similar situations, you are genuinely aligned with their agency and are not involved with the dynamics of rape. Nobody gets to decide if someone was raped except the victim. If they don’t feel ready to come forward, it can be either A or B. You need to listen to them about what they say. The rest sounds like sexual possession that is undue and can’t accept the outcome. That’s a no. Overt KKK homophilia is too stunted from an intelligence perspective to be anywhere near here. The obsession with black men even potentially raping white women is so pathetic it is just embarrassing. But when it happens, it should be believed without further taxing the victim when it happens in a way that is clearly devoid of possessive delusions based on feelings of being unable to compete sexually or feelings of economic devaluation suggesting the person legitimately views the individual as property or real estate. That’s also a no.
Running an investigation on a victim, monetizing and providing no victim compensation is a needs based economy and you should NOT speak on victim compensation in your book if you have done this knowledgeably and voluntarily. You are triply raping the victim. If they know the individual felt raped on the stand and recreate the dynamics that made them feel that way, or know that the victim cut their hair under certain circumstances and then try to recreate the circumstances that made that happen, they need to be investigated and removed for some sort of impulse disorder that precludes them from being able to work with this material. That may repetitions just needs to go.
Similarly, the fact such an exam was medical but then had no gloves is just a no. Who even makes that argument but a fraud. (pg. 91)
“Don’t mix alcohol and beauty” is just a no, when other people have a cover up that the person wasn’t even attractive enough to be believed. You can’t have both. And when they say this, they mean one drink, and it’s her fault for being beautiful. The only person that would normalize this argument is someone with an impulse control disorder who immediately already evaluates that they’re not going to have any control over themselves so immediately puts it on the victim. Such a person needs a caregiver, a paid caregiver, not a partner. Can you believe that? People really disgusting enough to devalue and attack the person's looks as part of the premeditation of rape. A repulsive form of insurance. "Who would rape you anyway?" then the police officer won't let you have one drink because "Don't mix alcohol with beauty." I just can't. It's just rape on a whole other dimension.
It reminds me of what was said about Gates in terms of coercive control in the abuse of his wife in the divorce. Oh, you don't want to fix your car door? Let me bust in where you put your screw that makes it driveable so you can't drive it so you're forced to fix it. Oh you taught yourself and fixed it yourself? I'll destroy the whole car. I'll call the police on you. Then it's someone you've NEVER. EVEN. PARTNERED. WITH. ONE. TIME. This person CLEARLY does not respect their agency and is trying to force their actions. Their calculations on savings are from a white male perspective that clearly has never had a domestic violence white male like themselves watching every move making horrific agency-destroying coercive control behaviors like that. Oh, you don't want to get yourself a new coat or you got that coat or that book for free? Oh, I'll make you pay for it. I'll stab it so you're forced to get a new one because you shouldn't get a coat like that for that price. They're this disgusting. They're this repulsive. Don't. Underestimate. How. Ugly. The trafficker energy. Is. Even if they look good, even if they spend millions on plastic surgery, they are fundamentally on the most repulsive energy you will ever see. They are more than capable of that. That is a no. That is clear contempt for that person's agency. It's a no. Coercive control's got to go. You've got to f*ck off now. Bye bye.
Hysteria is often a response to rape. It can be low key or high key. I feel like Merkel’s response to Bush’s ongoing harassment was not only trying to convince herself but also a lowkey hysteric response to how she couldn’t stop it. Like Terence Tao spending lots of time trying to convince himself his out of control violation of certain people’s data is ethical, Merkel spends a lot of time in her book Freedom saying that people didn’t really know the dynamics between her and Bush and that it was ok and it didn’t really bother her. This does huge damage to people in similar situations, if not the exact same situation, who actually meant it. She undermined other women doing this. I am trying to feel better about it by floating it might be a pseudohysterical response. But betraying other women is not ok, which there is already a slight unpleasant whiff of when she struggles to say she's feminist. Same with how she treats Ivanka with contempt. People say it's a German thing, to view beautiful people as ways to make money pushing the stereotype of "German infertility" where they see beauty and just think "EXPLOIT" instead of respect and cherish, but I don't know. I don't think it is necessarily.
They seem like one and the same type of dynamic, a pseudohysterical attempt to publicly convince themselves primarily.
Those who return to work seem undamaged so they get a larger paycheck. I really appreciate that Turkheimer agrees that this shows all the signs that they went back to work because they had to, not because they wanted to.
“Many knew, and few did anything to stop him.” with R. Kelly is the real issue. While people just sit back, they vote implicitly that their worst self is actually behind what happened here. That should never be forgotten, and it should be removed.
“Dragging” was also used. This is usually a vocabulary word for war crimes. That anybody would even describe someone turning to them for help and justice with being met with a war crime speaks on true repulsiveness. Pg. 180
Constant betrayal by loved ones is especially hard for people where normality has been successfully upheld and preserved to accept. The “subnormal family” has a reality to it that the mind used to normality really struggles to adapt to, often taxing the victim when they aren’t able to hold onto the comprehension and try to the normative response again, that friends and family should act a certain way. But then they are met with the evidence they don’t. That’s subnormality. It is below, not different, than the norm. pg. 181
They also describe how Lyft was involved with torture. They knew that the woman was doing everything right and was even studying how to be believed by the Trust and Safety team, and yet they didn’t. They didn’t just to do it. That is truly disgusting. It needs to be put out of its misery. Pg. 201
It is true that these things continue until the abused is vindicated. When they aren’t and are run through the system, there is usually one thing at play; extreme envy. Do not doubt the capacity for abnormal and disturbing extreme envy in the immediate family. Sometimes they will even admit it. That’s more towards the “constant betrayal as subnormality” point. The usual family bonding infrastructure, such as love, serotonin, and oxytocin, has fallen to a pathological, abnormal and monstrous extreme envy found on the subnormal family. The family essentially can’t carry water. “While her abuser was never apprehended, this wasn’t because she was distrusted or faulted or disregarded. The collective response validated and vindicated her, so that Hogshead-Makar could heal.” pg. 206.
“If you take my pen and say you are sorry, but don’t give me the pen back, nothing has happened.” pg. 209. This is what I’m saying about the publication pipeline when the actual book is really and actually going to speak about victim compensation on all that.
Rapists or assailants may also interpret trying to punish the woman more than the man as the man being too good looking to be charged. It is usually the opposite case. That’s how you get these Weinstein 10, Victim 0 deranged comments, even if they meant political power. These lunatics conflate political power with beauty. Ask any femcel, they will say xyz is more powerful that abc because of beauty. When in fact it is money that has more to do with it. People will call anybody with enough money beautiful; someone without it, you’d have to actually be that way.
Overall, I really can’t afford to give this book two stars for the surrounding conditions in which it came about, and if they hadn’t existed, I might have given it a five stars. Everything it said was right, but it did it in a tit-for-tat kind of way that evaded consent that has to stop. It smelled of monetizing illegal investigations into victims coming forward. This has to stop. It needs to be investigated. I can’t keep investigating by myself. They cannot speak on victim compensation, doubly raping the victim, and then do it themselves, only to claim a needs based economy. Let me guess; two teenagers. That’s a needs based economy. This has to stop. This is not how you run a long term functioning and successful economy. Every person that engages in an act like that is at least a little bit responsible for the ongoing crash and burn here.
The whole thing just smelled like impulse control disorder and it stinks to high heaven of a publication pipelines. It needs. To. Stop. I need the forces behind this to get it under control and if they can’t to step down. Weinstein investigations and monetizing them to Israel pipelines often given data by Chinese illegal Bitcoin mining operations are often the culprits. This needs to stop. It is all impulse control disorder.
This book is WORTH READING. However, the conditions it came about in need to be investigated. I assume all that happened here will be rationalized as most people who don’t have it tend to do.
Read the book, but investigate the conditions about which it came about. It stinks to high heaven. Don’t accept fake or half-assed investigators.
I really can’t afford to give this two stars given the content, nor can I afford to give it five. Four I can’t do because that’s more so its merit on the content but then the conditions bring it down to three.
It’s worth reading, but this has to stop. They are literally undermining and making a mockery of the whole argument just from compulsive abuse and misogyny; because they’re addicted to it and used to it. It just has to stop. Such a person doesn’t even basically have it. It just has. To. Stop.
The sofia and baliga thing is just pathetic. It's just. Absolutely. F*cking. Pathetic. Make. It. Stop. People don't come forward because they didn't know how they ultimately felt. But the "race to the victim" position Olympics is just. vomit. Just. vomit. The rape as beauty narrative, that all the beautiful just get rape and how being beautiful means it's inevitable is. just. vomit. Even if it's true, make it stop, don't make it a token to be shared among your friends. I do EVERYTHING to make it stop. Make it stop. This is hands down the most absolutely. f*cking. pathetic. thing I have ever seen. I mean it. I'm not trying to be mean. Make. It. Stop.
"Voluntary intoxication". Even if you're a minor. Make. It. Stop. They will literally push you out until bars are the only place you can go if you don't put out. Make. It. Stop. Do not underestimate the trafficker trash sh*t.
Even the police's advice that they agree to a date with the victim and see if they can get him to do it again is just. Vomit. Literal revictimization. I don't care if the victim is willing to do it.
Rape does not mean you're beautiful.
Beauty doesn't mean you're powerful.
Power is not beauty.
Money is power.
Money happens by data pipelines like this, that are straight up on pure rape dynamics.
That has nothing to do with beauty, and rape has nothing to do with it either. Beauty contests aren't won because you're raped enough times. I wouldn't wish rape on my worst enemy. True rape.
Make. It. Stop.
March 31, 2025
As a woman, I’m not surprised about any of this, but I really appreciate the research and stats that went into this book. The system does not believe women!!
November 9, 2021
This review is based on an ARC received from the publisher and NetGalley. The book is primarily comprised of the author giving examples of sexual assaults that have occurred and describing the impact this had on the victim, including not only the assault itself, but how other people (friends, family, police, courts, co-workers, etc) reacted and how all of these responses (when negative) can further victimize someone. These examples are further used by the author to illustrate how power and other dynamics affect whether we confer credibility to the accuser or the abuser when sexual assault allegations occur, and by connection, to whom we attach value. Ms. Tuerkheimer breaks down how our biases and outdated norms and laws prejudice people and the law against sexual assault victims, along with why so many people react to sexual assaults with disbelief.
The book is very readable and accessible to people who are not familiar with the specifics of the criminal justice system. The author does reference academic research, but these references flow easily with the text and are not weighed down by jargon. It is a book that will (and should) make you angry, since a number of situations are explained in detail how sexual assault victims have been painfully failed by the rest of us. I would highly recommend it to anyone who wants to know more about the barriers that we as a society and culture have put in place that prevent us from responding effectively to sexual assault in our communities.
The book is very readable and accessible to people who are not familiar with the specifics of the criminal justice system. The author does reference academic research, but these references flow easily with the text and are not weighed down by jargon. It is a book that will (and should) make you angry, since a number of situations are explained in detail how sexual assault victims have been painfully failed by the rest of us. I would highly recommend it to anyone who wants to know more about the barriers that we as a society and culture have put in place that prevent us from responding effectively to sexual assault in our communities.
January 11, 2022
Credible is a very important book. It goes through many stories of victims of sexual assault, harassment, and rape, and talks about a variety of ways in which victims are discredited, doubted, shamed, and re-victimized after coming forward with an allegation of sexual abuse. It goes through ways in which the system fails people who aren't their ideal "perfect victim."
Many women spend so much time suffering in situations out of fear of not being believed, fear of losing a job, fear of how they will be perceived or treated after speaking up and having blame shifted onto them. Women are regularly held responsible for controlling men's sexual urges. Misconduct becomes the fault of the victim, rather than the abuser.
We really do need to find solutions to provide safe spaces for victims to come forward. This was a tough read, made me upset, and was triggering, but it is an eye-opener.
For an allegation to be deemed credible, we must also believe that the conduct it describes is blameworthy, and that it's worthy of our concern.
Consider that a person who comes forward with an allegation of abuse makes a trio of claims: This happened. It was wrong. It matters. Each claim is crucial. If any one of them is rejected, whether by a loved one or by an official responder, the accuser will be dismissed.
The listener may decide that the alleged conduct didn't happen. Or that it wasn't the fault of the accused, but the fault of the accuser. Or that it wasn't harmful enough to warrant concern. Regardless, the outcome is the same. The listener isn't convinced, and the status quo is preserved. Unless all parts of the allegation—it happened, it's wrong, it matters—are accepted, the allegation will be dismissed as untrue, unworthy of blame, or unimportant. These three discounting mechanisms can overlap, and they often blur together—but each on its own is enough to sink an allegation.
Many women spend so much time suffering in situations out of fear of not being believed, fear of losing a job, fear of how they will be perceived or treated after speaking up and having blame shifted onto them. Women are regularly held responsible for controlling men's sexual urges. Misconduct becomes the fault of the victim, rather than the abuser.
We really do need to find solutions to provide safe spaces for victims to come forward. This was a tough read, made me upset, and was triggering, but it is an eye-opener.
January 12, 2022
I’ve been incredibly fortunate in life to have friends and colleagues who have challenged, expanded, and changed my assumptions and world views. No one holds a higher spot on that list than my law school flatmate Deb Tuerkheimer. CREDIBLE is the culmination of more than two decades’ work on violence against women, first as a prosecutor in Manhattan and through years as an activist, advocate, and academic. Her book is a detailed and nuanced examination of how our system treats and largely fails victims/survivors of sexual assault and harassment. This is an absolute must-read for everyone working toward a more equitable world for all sexes and genders.
January 28, 2022
Required reading.
November 8, 2022
I heard the author interviewed on a law podcast, and was compelled to get this book. It's terrific; zeroing in on sexual assault and sexual harassment, she argues that cultural beliefs and stereotypes end up significantly influencing our beliefs around who is believable/trustable when they make allegations. Unsurprisingly, women (especially women of color, poor women, immigrants) are consistently seen as unreliable or untrustworthy, and men (esp white men) are seen as reliable. This, Tuerkheimer argues with lots of evidence, impacts every step of how we deal with these issues, both on the immediate level (how friends and family members respond to accusers) and throughout the reporting/investigating/adjudicating process, when it happens. The book is most depressing when she documents some of the hair-raising discrepancies in law enforcement (like how common it is for assault claims made to police to be closed almost immediately on judgments of no credibility, despite, say, rape kits that go untested). She's particularly powerful in her assessment of the kinds of damages that are specific to the lack of taking accusers seriously (she quotes many survivors as describing this as a "second assault," and cataloging the sense of institutional betrayal accusers feel when schools or workplaces dismiss or undermine them). And she does a good job in general of weaving together her argument and evidence in ways that will engage and educate a general audience, but be useful for scholars or advocates.
Three things that held me back from a 5-star rating, even though I absolutely found the book quite helpful: 1) the "solutions" chapter was kind of thin, particularly for things that would help institutions. Restorative justice is her main suggestion here, but she almost immediately throws cold water on this solution for institutions as soon as she raises it. (This could also be a job for a different kind of scholar; Tuerkheimer is a law professor, but I'm not sure she works in policy in general.) 2) While she is generally very good at addressing the kinds of credibility gaps that exist across racial and class differences, there was very little on how this can negatively effect men of color who are accused of assault--one brief discussion, but it seemed like something that needed some wrestling with in the text. 3) As a philosophy professor, I was delighted to see lots of the relevant philosophers mentioned here in the text, but surprised that the main philosopher behind credibility excess and deficit, Miranda Fricker, didn't get a mention. (*Epistemic Injustice* is her book that really started off a lot of thinking about credibility as an ethical/justice issue, from philosophers.) Just an odd lacuna in what was otherwise a very well-sourced and -argued book.
Three things that held me back from a 5-star rating, even though I absolutely found the book quite helpful: 1) the "solutions" chapter was kind of thin, particularly for things that would help institutions. Restorative justice is her main suggestion here, but she almost immediately throws cold water on this solution for institutions as soon as she raises it. (This could also be a job for a different kind of scholar; Tuerkheimer is a law professor, but I'm not sure she works in policy in general.) 2) While she is generally very good at addressing the kinds of credibility gaps that exist across racial and class differences, there was very little on how this can negatively effect men of color who are accused of assault--one brief discussion, but it seemed like something that needed some wrestling with in the text. 3) As a philosophy professor, I was delighted to see lots of the relevant philosophers mentioned here in the text, but surprised that the main philosopher behind credibility excess and deficit, Miranda Fricker, didn't get a mention. (*Epistemic Injustice* is her book that really started off a lot of thinking about credibility as an ethical/justice issue, from philosophers.) Just an odd lacuna in what was otherwise a very well-sourced and -argued book.
January 9, 2022
I'm listing this book as one of the most IMPORTANT reads of today. Please pick this one up and read it, whether you're a victim of sexual assault, or whether you know someone who has been assaulted. Sadly, that pretty much should cover everyone who exists. "Most sexual misconduct goes unaddressed, leaving intact the hierarchies that enable it."
Credible takes a look at sexual assault, in our history and through today, and aims to answer why so many accusers are doubted, and why so many abusers are overlooked or believed without question. Tuerkheimer uses examples from as far back as the 1800s to the current #MeToo movement to show how law has or has not changed, and what women are up against when making claims against strangers, someone they know, even their husbands.
At its core is our culture. "None of us can transcend cultural norms or avoid their imprint on our inner workings." Dismissal is our default. We look for ways to discount someone's credibility at every turn.
When someone comes forward about sexual misconduct, they are telling us 3 things: This happened. It was wrong. It matters. And in order for the claim to be accepted, people must be convinced of all three elements.
Tuerkheimer examines how credibility discounting breaks unevenly against marginalized, subordinated, and vulnerable groups like black women and girls, trans, LGBTQ, class, employment, sexual history. It all matters when it comes to judging credibility. We distrust, blame, or disregard.
Because of our culture and the way we judge credibility, victims of sexual misconduct often feel they are assaulted twice; first by the abuser, and second by the people they believed would help them. When even our closest friends and family don't believe that it mattered, that it happened, or that it was wrong, victims can feel betrayed a second time, and often that betrayal feels more painful than the initial assault.
The care gap: "the suffering of an abuser who could face accountability for his misdeeds matters far more than the suffering of his victim." As long as we believe this, we will continue to reinsure victims and uphold the idea that powerful men are more valuable than anyone else.
If you are the victim of sexual abuse, this book may bring about some explanation, as your credibility relies on an old and outdated system of beliefs that still prevails to this day, deeming your worth as less than. You are not less than.
Please know that what happened to you mattered.
And if you are on the other side, if you have judged someone for their experience of abuse - cultural transformation starts with you. Our culture must evolve.
Credible takes a look at sexual assault, in our history and through today, and aims to answer why so many accusers are doubted, and why so many abusers are overlooked or believed without question. Tuerkheimer uses examples from as far back as the 1800s to the current #MeToo movement to show how law has or has not changed, and what women are up against when making claims against strangers, someone they know, even their husbands.
At its core is our culture. "None of us can transcend cultural norms or avoid their imprint on our inner workings." Dismissal is our default. We look for ways to discount someone's credibility at every turn.
When someone comes forward about sexual misconduct, they are telling us 3 things: This happened. It was wrong. It matters. And in order for the claim to be accepted, people must be convinced of all three elements.
Tuerkheimer examines how credibility discounting breaks unevenly against marginalized, subordinated, and vulnerable groups like black women and girls, trans, LGBTQ, class, employment, sexual history. It all matters when it comes to judging credibility. We distrust, blame, or disregard.
Because of our culture and the way we judge credibility, victims of sexual misconduct often feel they are assaulted twice; first by the abuser, and second by the people they believed would help them. When even our closest friends and family don't believe that it mattered, that it happened, or that it was wrong, victims can feel betrayed a second time, and often that betrayal feels more painful than the initial assault.
The care gap: "the suffering of an abuser who could face accountability for his misdeeds matters far more than the suffering of his victim." As long as we believe this, we will continue to reinsure victims and uphold the idea that powerful men are more valuable than anyone else.
If you are the victim of sexual abuse, this book may bring about some explanation, as your credibility relies on an old and outdated system of beliefs that still prevails to this day, deeming your worth as less than. You are not less than.
Please know that what happened to you mattered.
And if you are on the other side, if you have judged someone for their experience of abuse - cultural transformation starts with you. Our culture must evolve.
March 25, 2023
Such a difficult but important book about bias against victims/ survivors of sexual harassment and assault. The bias is extreme from family and friends to police and the legal system all geared to protect the abusers because it is just easier to side with the already powerful. She lived, does it really matter, which is of course valuing the abuser over the accuser. This book made me so angry while reading it.
Tuerkheimer did an amazing job with her research into the legal history and well as the psychology and enmeshed societal norms of a perfect victim. Response to trauma comes in many forms and yet many police forces refuse to investigate if the response isn't as they prefer. Choosing to have an alcoholic drink is not consent to be harassed or assaulted, neither is clothing choice, how one reacted in the moment or leaving one's home or not. Assault is often about power and doubts just reinforce that power dynamic. It is dreadful how much work is put on women to not be harassed rather than working on men to control their impulses.
One key take away for me to be very mindful of my response to anyone sharing their story. I hear you, I believe you and how can I support you.
Tuerkheimer did an amazing job with her research into the legal history and well as the psychology and enmeshed societal norms of a perfect victim. Response to trauma comes in many forms and yet many police forces refuse to investigate if the response isn't as they prefer. Choosing to have an alcoholic drink is not consent to be harassed or assaulted, neither is clothing choice, how one reacted in the moment or leaving one's home or not. Assault is often about power and doubts just reinforce that power dynamic. It is dreadful how much work is put on women to not be harassed rather than working on men to control their impulses.
One key take away for me to be very mindful of my response to anyone sharing their story. I hear you, I believe you and how can I support you.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 89 reviews