Confusing. You start by saying “it is clear what the hash tag says” but then follow it up with an argument (and not a totally invalid one) that the meaning of “believe” is different based on how the listener interprets it. I may be wrong but this feels to me like this is contrariness in search of rationalization, and is wandering off into pedanticism.

I think the point is simpler: our society’s immediate reaction to an accusation of sexual assault shouldn’t be “let’s see the proof” and all the usual clap-trap blaming the victim, but rather something more sympathetic and understanding, and a recognition of the many studies showing false accusations are the exception and not the norm. Our justice system continues to fail sexual assault victims. And I don’t think it has much to do with people being confused over what “believe” means.