Why Melanie Martinez is guilty, and why it matters- a thread. (TW: RAPE, SEXUAL ASSAULT, MENTAL ILLNESS) (LONG)

Recently, I was reminded of the existence of Melanie Martinez. She just released a new album and a movie to accompany it, and her fans have been enthusiastic in their love of both the music and the hr and a half long video. It made me feel physically sick.

In December of 2017, Timothy Heller (T) came forward and tweeted a statement saying that when her and Melanie (M) were at a sleepover, they got high, and M molested and then raped her. At first, she was met with overwhelming support.

Soon after though, M's fans came out in droves attacking her, calling her a liar and a fame-hungry whore, demanding she admit to lying. M responded in a statement first saying T "never said no to what we chose to do together."

This confirms from M herself that sex of some kind did in fact take place as T has said it, just that M has a fundamental misunderstanding of consent. Consent is exclusively enthusiastic and verbal permission, and 'not saying no' is in no way part of that.

M claiming that T "never said no" also aligns quite well with T's accusation, saying that she said no repeatedly but M continued her advances until T gave up. She said in a statement that M had "broken her down"- a common type of rape where the rapist repeatedly ignores

pleas to stop until their victim gives up. After this, M's fans decided to tear into every detail of T's story and tear to shreds any minor inconsistency, claiming this was evidence she was lying, their three major criticisms being that:

1) T stayed friends with M after the assault (and T didn't come forward until much later with her accusations) and 2) Melanie was in new york when T alleges the event took place. These are not legitimate reasons to call an accusation false, and I'll tell you exactly why.

1) I have had conversations with friends who were recounting sexual experiences and watching in real-time as they realized it was actually assault. Meaning, they didn't fully comprehend until after the fact exactly what had happened to them.

according to the national domestic violence hotline, one of the main reasons victims stay with their abusers is love. "So often, the victim feels love for their abusive partner [...] They may only want the violence to stop, not for the relationship to end entirely."

T said in a statement that she was in denial. "I also loved her. It really hurts when people you love betray you."

2) it wasn't just that T didn't remember the timeline exactly correctly, but that according to some she had recounted the events too vividly, that she should be too traumatised to be able to talk in such great detail about it. These are too conflicting ideas- both that her story

at times didn't add up, and that it had too much adding up. According to http://mayoclinic.org  (as well as many other sites and studies), trauma drastically affects memory. specifically, they remember vivid details of the assault itself, but not the details surrounding it

"People who are sexually assaulted more often remember the main traumatizing encounter itself across time because the attack is embedded in their memory. But other details or specific facts about that experience may not be as well encoded in memory, so that information can be-

-very difficult and sometimes impossible to accurately recall years later." Not only does it make sense that T would remember the event itself more vividly than the specific timeline, it's scientifically proven. it had been at least two years since the events T was recounting

took place. For the latter- everyone experiences trauma differently. Some people are able to talk about it more openly than others. Trauma affecting memory aside- how perfectly can you recall the date of something that happened two years ago?

another thing I see often is people claiming that T admitted to lying about her accusations. However, in my research, I could find no evidence of this. I could only find a statement from heller where she said:

"I do NOT regret speaking up [...] Just because this is hard, doesnt mean it wasnt the right thing to do." I can't find a single source of her "admitting to having lied". However, even if she did, that would not invalidate her story to me.

Somewhere between 2-10% of rape accusations are false. It's hard to get real #s bc false accusations are very loosely defined. This is because often, victims will recant their statements legally due to public backlash or a failing judicial system, that doesnt mean they arent true

It wouldn't be a suprise if T did this due to the massive hate and attacks she received online from M's fans, who were encouraged to do so by her when she said praised them for trying to debunk a timeline that she herself had already confirmed.

You may be wondering: who cares? this happened two years ago, it's old news, why bring it back up now? Well, it's been bothering me for days, gnawing at my stomach, making me feel sick. I couldn't figure out why, until recently.

I have never, in all the accusations I have witnessed, seen so many people so violently defend and support someone who admitted to their crime. every reason I heard for "debunking' T was something either completely innacurate or totally anecdotal. I have never, EVER seen

such disregard for a victim because of such baseless rebuttals, when the assailant themselves had basically admitted to the act. I think most of all though, it bothered me that all these people who defended her claimed to be feminists.

It also brings into question things about our culture and ourselves: why is there still such overwhelming support only for the only female celebrity accused of sexual assault, and not all the men?

I know no M stans are going to change their mind, as they're violently loyal to her. But I hope it makes someone think the next time someone comes forward and accuses someone you enjoy, or someone you wouldn't expect, and reevaluate exactly how that affects your judgment.