Seen a couple who've said they think he's a scumbag regardless of the verdict, and one who said he's guilty because innocent people don't get accused. Rest are mostly just pointing out that not guilty is not the same as innocent, in response to people thinking otherwise and/or are on about women lying or whatever.Maybe or maybe not, I personally don't have a positive or negative view of Mendy. I don't think you'd find any post of mine endorsing or praising him for what he did. What I think you are mistaking for visceral bias is me taking a more neutral stance.
The posters I've generally replied to are clearly (whether via "visceral bias") judging him through a pre-determined negative or he's guilty/not innocent lense. Even your post is judging him through his lifestyle that you don't agree with. If I was going to the opposite end of the spectrum (whether via "visceral bias") I would endorse his lifestyle and praise it, which I'm not doing. I just understand that there are all sorts of lifestyles that all genders enjoy and as long as there is consent then all those lifestyles are fine with me.
The issue ive seen in this thread is that there are a set of posters that are so emotionally invested in this case and the thought that Mendy is still guilty or "not innocent" that a fairly neutral stance like mine (which is that the court found him not guilty amd the evidence released supported that) to them seems to be an endorsement. Which is not the case. I just don't believe someone should be judged for their lifestyle if it isn't harming others, which based on the findings of the court, his lifestyle (so far) hasn't been proven to.
Don't think I've seen anyone who seems to be emotionally invested in him being guilty. I have seen a few who seem to be very invested in him being innocent and trying to shut down discussion with "presumption of innocenece" and such.