http://www.nydailynews.com/life-style/columbia-mattress-student-draws-attention-anti-rape-movement-article-1.1948842
QuoteThe mattress is spreading to the masses.
Following in the footsteps of Columbia University senior Emma Sulkowicz, students from universities around the country are picking up mattresses to take a stand against sexual assault on college campuses.
Sulkowicz has vowed to drag her dorm room mattress around campus until the school expels her alleged rapist. The act is part of a performance art piece she is calling "Carry That Weight/Mattress Performance."
Her story, along with the image of Sulkowicz holding the standard, blue, extra-long twin mattress, has gone viral since classes started up again at Columbia.
She has also helped shine a brighter light on the national anti-sexual assault movement.
A powerful photo of Sulkowicz was featured on the cover of New York magazine's Sept. 22 issue. The headline reads "A Very Different Kind of Sexual Revolution on Campus."
The article, "Meet the College Women Who Are Starting a Revolution Against Campus Sexual Assault," details Sulkowicz' story and those of others who are trying to make a difference, both at Columbia and in other places.
"(By) pointing a finger not only at assailants but also the American university ... these survivors have built the most effective, organized anti-rape movement since the late '70s," Vanessa Grigoriadis writes in the article.
Sulkowicz' performance piece in particular appears to have struck a chord with other college students.
The "Carrying the Weight Together" Facebook group includes photos of people holding up mattresses and showing solidarity.
These "collective carry" events have taken place at multiple schools, including Centenary College in Louisiana, Dickinson College in Pennsylvania and Arizona State University. More are planned for the future, including one at Columbia's "Take Back the Night" event on Wednesday.
Thousands of college women are sexually assaulted every year — the "one in five" statistic is often cited — and many do not report the incidents.
Those who do come forward with their claims don't always know if administrators or other officials will even go through the proper protocol.
In fact, the Department of Education is currently investigating dozens of colleges and universities for the way they handled sexual assault cases and complaints.
The White House has also gotten involved. President Obama recently launched the "It's On Us" campaign, which encourages individuals to do their part to prevent rape.
"It is on all of us to reject the quiet tolerance of sexual assault and to refuse to accept what's unacceptable," he said.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fstatic1.nydailynews.com%2Fpolopoly_fs%2F1.1948839.1411426482%21%2Fimg%2FhttpImage%2Fimage.jpg_gen%2Fderivatives%2Farticle_970%2Fassault23n-3-web.jpg&hash=4ba23946e0d7f956f459ba69697ae486539f4023)
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fstatic2.nydailynews.com%2Fpolopoly_fs%2F1.1948840.1411426483%21%2Fimg%2FhttpImage%2Fimage.jpg_gen%2Fderivatives%2Farticle_970%2Fassault23n-2-web.jpg&hash=1ed7c3d8bace1a89191cf79c910bf4844a708626)
The mattress removes any doubt in my mind that she was raped.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on September 24, 2014, 08:50:16 AM
The mattress removes any doubt in my mind that she was raped.
Terrible but I couldn't help laugh. :lol: -_-
Quote from: garbon on September 24, 2014, 08:53:54 AM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on September 24, 2014, 08:50:16 AM
The mattress removes any doubt in my mind that she was raped.
Terrible but I couldn't help laugh. :lol: -_-
Elaborate.
Was it a chortle, a guffaw, a snicker, a giggle?
Alledged rapist are barred from having an education?
Quote from: Admiral Yi on September 24, 2014, 08:50:16 AM
The mattress removes any doubt in my mind that she was raped.
And the important thing in this case, of course, is whether you believe she was raped.
Quote from: Jacob on September 24, 2014, 09:54:51 AM
And the important thing in this case, of course, is whether you believe she was raped.
Oh no. Clearly the most important thing in this case is that a New Yorker writer thinks it is a totally badass thing to do.
QuoteThe act is part of a performance art piece she is calling "Carry That Weight/Mattress Performance."
(https://mrsawyersopus.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/jesus_carrying_cross-720248.jpg)
Smart girl, her visual arts teacher can't help but give her top marks or else be considered a rape apologist. :)
Quote from: Jacob on September 24, 2014, 09:54:51 AM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on September 24, 2014, 08:50:16 AM
The mattress removes any doubt in my mind that she was raped.
And the important thing in this case, of course, is whether you believe she was raped.
I suppose it is easier to just trivialize the issue. Makes it easier to ignore. Of course, oddly enough that is what her performance art piece is about / has garnered more attention.
There does seem to be increasing pressure for universities to "do more" to combat and punish alleged rape. I'm not sure what more can be done though unless they want to strip away due process rights for anyone accused of rape.
Quote from: derspiess on September 24, 2014, 10:14:37 AM
There does seem to be increasing pressure for universities to "do more" to combat and punish alleged rape. I'm not sure what more can be done though unless they want to strip away due process rights for anyone accused of rape.
I don't know - I mean I read that noted article in New York magazine and it had tales of university staff saying a lot of things that indicated they weren't putting much of a priority on it.
"She says one of the three judges even asked whether Paul used lubricant, commenting, 'I don't know how it's possible to have anal sex without lubrication first.'"
"Rape is like football. If you look back on the game, and you're the quarterback..is there anything you would have done differently?"
Besides, considering the mentioned figure that 1 in 5 female students will be sexually assaulted while at university, seems like something should probably be done.
Quote from: garbon on September 24, 2014, 10:22:23 AMBesides, considering the mentioned figure that 1 in 5 female students will be sexually assaulted while at university, seems like something should probably be done.
Well if that Congolese war zone rape figure was even remotely plausible then a military intervention by UN peacekeepers with strong logistics and air support is what would be needed on campuses. What parent in their right mind would send a daughter to university if this was the case and not an example of mass hysteria?
Quote from: garbon on September 24, 2014, 10:22:23 AM
Quote from: derspiess on September 24, 2014, 10:14:37 AM
There does seem to be increasing pressure for universities to "do more" to combat and punish alleged rape. I'm not sure what more can be done though unless they want to strip away due process rights for anyone accused of rape.
I don't know - I mean I read that noted article in New York magazine and it had tales of university staff saying a lot of things that indicated they weren't putting much of a priority on it.
"She says one of the three judges even asked whether Paul used lubricant, commenting, 'I don't know how it's possible to have anal sex without lubrication first.'"
"Rape is like football. If you look back on the game, and you're the quarterback..is there anything you would have done differently?"
Besides, considering the mentioned figure that 1 in 5 female students will be sexually assaulted while at university, seems like something should probably be done.
Yes, but should it be done by university staff - who have expertise in teaching students and academic discipline, but not necessarily in criminal law - or the police and courts?
I'm not sure I understand the rationale for why the universities ought to become
de facto courts for criminal complaints involving students. I understand that the "ask" in this particular protest is for expelling a student based on an allegation of rape that has not yet been proven, essentially because of public pressure built up by her protest. Why is this a good idea?
Quote from: Legbiter on September 24, 2014, 10:31:56 AM
Quote from: garbon on September 24, 2014, 10:22:23 AMBesides, considering the mentioned figure that 1 in 5 female students will be sexually assaulted while at university, seems like something should probably be done.
Well if that Congolese war zone rape figure was even remotely plausible then a military intervention by UN peacekeepers with strong logistics and air support is what would be needed on campuses. What parent in their right mind would send a daughter to university if this was the case and not an example of mass hysteria?
Off hand, I can think of several friends who were sexually assaulted during their time at university.
Quote from: Malthus on September 24, 2014, 10:32:54 AM
Yes, but should it be done by university staff - who have expertise in teaching students and academic discipline, but not necessarily in criminal law - or the police and courts?
To be honest, I'm not sure - though I think that is how it has been devised by universities. After all, historically, it has made it easier for them to keep the message on this.
Quote from: Malthus on September 24, 2014, 10:32:54 AMI'm not sure I understand the rationale for why the universities ought to become de facto courts for criminal complaints involving students. I understand that the "ask" in this particular protest is for expelling a student based on an allegation of rape that has not yet been proven, essentially because of public pressure built up by her protest. Why is this a good idea?
Better question is why have they become. After all, her ask stems from the fact that a Columbia University panel of 3 "judges" found that there wasn't merit to her allegations (or those of two other female students with complaints about Paul) and nothing further happened.
Quote from: Malthus on September 24, 2014, 10:32:54 AMYes, but should it be done by university staff - who have expertise in teaching students and academic discipline, but not necessarily in criminal law - or the police and courts?
I guess that it has to be taken into account that American universities do have their own police corps in their campuses.
Quote from: garbon on September 24, 2014, 10:34:27 AMOff hand, I can think of several friends who were sexually assaulted during their time at university
Yes, obviously you hung out with the cool crowd in college. :wacko:
I am shocked that American universities protect rapists. Penn State hasn't been closed AFAIK.
Quote from: garbon on September 24, 2014, 10:34:27 AM
Off hand, I can think of several friends who were sexually assaulted during their time at university.
I would be interested in learning more. Are you willing to share details?
I know exactly one woman that could be considered to have been sexually assaulted at university. She got wasted at a frat party and was passed around.
Quote from: Malthus on September 24, 2014, 10:32:54 AM
Quote from: garbon on September 24, 2014, 10:22:23 AM
Quote from: derspiess on September 24, 2014, 10:14:37 AM
There does seem to be increasing pressure for universities to "do more" to combat and punish alleged rape. I'm not sure what more can be done though unless they want to strip away due process rights for anyone accused of rape.
I don't know - I mean I read that noted article in New York magazine and it had tales of university staff saying a lot of things that indicated they weren't putting much of a priority on it.
"She says one of the three judges even asked whether Paul used lubricant, commenting, 'I don't know how it's possible to have anal sex without lubrication first.'"
"Rape is like football. If you look back on the game, and you're the quarterback..is there anything you would have done differently?"
Besides, considering the mentioned figure that 1 in 5 female students will be sexually assaulted while at university, seems like something should probably be done.
Yes, but should it be done by university staff - who have expertise in teaching students and academic discipline, but not necessarily in criminal law - or the police and courts?
I'm not sure I understand the rationale for why the universities ought to become de facto courts for criminal complaints involving students. I understand that the "ask" in this particular protest is for expelling a student based on an allegation of rape that has not yet been proven, essentially because of public pressure built up by her protest. Why is this a good idea?
Because universities regularly are involved in disciplining their students, and they are not bound by the same standards and thresholds of a criminal court.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on September 24, 2014, 10:47:06 AM
Quote from: garbon on September 24, 2014, 10:34:27 AM
Off hand, I can think of several friends who were sexually assaulted during their time at university.
I would be interested in learning more. Are you willing to share details?
I know exactly one woman that could be considered to have been sexually assaulted at university. She got wasted at a frat party and was passed around.
"considered" to have been sexually assaulted? That sounds like the very definition.
Quote from: garbon on September 24, 2014, 10:34:27 AM
Off hand, I can think of several friends who were sexually assaulted during their time at university.
How is sexual assault being defined here? When I was in college some unattractive drunk girl grabbed my ass at a frat party-- that's technically sexual assault, isn't it?
Quote from: derspiess on September 24, 2014, 10:53:37 AM
Quote from: garbon on September 24, 2014, 10:34:27 AM
Off hand, I can think of several friends who were sexually assaulted during their time at university.
How is sexual assault being defined here? When I was in college some unattractive drunk girl grabbed my ass at a frat party-- that's technically sexual assault, isn't it?
Yes.
Should have carried the pants you wore that night on a pole wherever you went until justice was done.
Quote from: Barrister on September 24, 2014, 10:52:03 AM
Quote from: Malthus on September 24, 2014, 10:32:54 AM
Quote from: garbon on September 24, 2014, 10:22:23 AM
Quote from: derspiess on September 24, 2014, 10:14:37 AM
There does seem to be increasing pressure for universities to "do more" to combat and punish alleged rape. I'm not sure what more can be done though unless they want to strip away due process rights for anyone accused of rape.
I don't know - I mean I read that noted article in New York magazine and it had tales of university staff saying a lot of things that indicated they weren't putting much of a priority on it.
"She says one of the three judges even asked whether Paul used lubricant, commenting, 'I don't know how it's possible to have anal sex without lubrication first.'"
"Rape is like football. If you look back on the game, and you're the quarterback..is there anything you would have done differently?"
Besides, considering the mentioned figure that 1 in 5 female students will be sexually assaulted while at university, seems like something should probably be done.
Yes, but should it be done by university staff - who have expertise in teaching students and academic discipline, but not necessarily in criminal law - or the police and courts?
I'm not sure I understand the rationale for why the universities ought to become de facto courts for criminal complaints involving students. I understand that the "ask" in this particular protest is for expelling a student based on an allegation of rape that has not yet been proven, essentially because of public pressure built up by her protest. Why is this a good idea?
Because universities regularly are involved in disciplining their students, and they are not bound by the same standards and thresholds of a criminal court.
Seems that is the problem. They should stick to "disciplining" students over purely academic matters, and leave criminal matters to the courts.
It strikes me at least of creating all sorts of problems to in effect "try" someone of a serious crime in what amounts to an administrative hearing.
Quote from: Barrister on September 24, 2014, 10:53:02 AM
"considered" to have been sexually assaulted? That sounds like the very definition.
I sort of wanted to avoid rehashing this old argument. I know that by the modern definition a drunk person is unable to give consent. I've had sex while drunk and/or stoned. Does that mean I've been assaulted? I think that's silly.
Should cold-fishing a passed out girl be considered assault? Sure.
Can drunk women want to have sex too? Of course.
The gaol must flow. Innocence? Not a consideration.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on September 24, 2014, 09:57:35 AM
Quote from: Jacob on September 24, 2014, 09:54:51 AM
And the important thing in this case, of course, is whether you believe she was raped.
Oh no. Clearly the most important thing in this case is that a New Yorker writer thinks it is a totally badass thing to do.
New York Magazine, Yi, please. That's like a
Washington Post /
Washington Times level of difference, in a different realm of course.
My bad.
Quote from: garbon on September 24, 2014, 10:22:23 AM
Besides, considering the mentioned figure that 1 in 5 female students will be sexually assaulted while at university, seems like something should probably be done.
Problem is that sexual assault has now been defined broadly enough to trivialize the matter, though. How many of those sexual assaults were rape rapes?
Quote from: Legbiter on September 24, 2014, 10:39:32 AM
Quote from: garbon on September 24, 2014, 10:34:27 AMOff hand, I can think of several friends who were sexually assaulted during their time at university
Yes, obviously you hung out with the cool crowd in college. :wacko:
:huh:
Quote from: derspiess on September 24, 2014, 10:53:37 AM
Quote from: garbon on September 24, 2014, 10:34:27 AM
Off hand, I can think of several friends who were sexually assaulted during their time at university.
How is sexual assault being defined here? When I was in college some unattractive drunk girl grabbed my ass at a frat party-- that's technically sexual assault, isn't it?
Rape and one of the girls woke up with a stranger in her bed (she hadn't gone out that night so no it wasn't someone she picked up at a party).
I've given you fuckers the solution, and you rejected it. Why should anyone bother doing anything?
Quote from: Admiral Yi on September 24, 2014, 11:00:32 AM
Quote from: Barrister on September 24, 2014, 10:53:02 AM
"considered" to have been sexually assaulted? That sounds like the very definition.
I sort of wanted to avoid rehashing this old argument. I know that by the modern definition a drunk person is unable to give consent. I've had sex while drunk and/or stoned. Does that mean I've been assaulted? I think that's silly.
Should cold-fishing a passed out girl be considered assault? Sure.
Can drunk women want to have sex too? Of course.
Well I guess it depends on whether or not the woman you know wanted to be passed around. If she did then no, not rape.
Quote from: Capetan Mihali on September 24, 2014, 11:05:59 AM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on September 24, 2014, 09:57:35 AM
Quote from: Jacob on September 24, 2014, 09:54:51 AM
And the important thing in this case, of course, is whether you believe she was raped.
Oh no. Clearly the most important thing in this case is that a New Yorker writer thinks it is a totally badass thing to do.
New York Magazine, Yi, please. That's like a Washington Post / Washington Times level of difference, in a different realm of course.
I'd written a post that the New Yorker is very different* from NY Daily News and New York Magazine but decided to let it go. -_-
*for one the latter two generally have something enjoyable to read.
For those doubting the "1 in 5" stat, here's a CDC fact sheet that sources those numbers back to some academic journals.
http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/sv-datasheet-a.pdf
Quote from: garbon on September 24, 2014, 11:28:26 AM
Well I guess it depends on whether or not the woman you know wanted to be passed around. If she did then no, not rape.
It doesn't depend on it. Once a person is drunk, they are not adult humans anymore, and have no wants or desires.
Yay, I'm the 5.3. :mellow:
edit: actually I guess the 5.8 stat fits better.
Quote from: DGuller on September 24, 2014, 11:32:05 AM
Quote from: garbon on September 24, 2014, 11:28:26 AM
Well I guess it depends on whether or not the woman you know wanted to be passed around. If she did then no, not rape.
It doesn't depend on it. Once a person is drunk, they are not adult humans anymore, and have no wants or desires.
I don't think that's true. Can you have a rape without a rape victim?
Quote from: Barrister on September 24, 2014, 11:31:05 AM
For those doubting the "1 in 5" stat, here's a CDC fact sheet that sources those numbers back to some academic journals.
http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/sv-datasheet-a.pdf
I don't doubt the "sexual assault" stat. I just have doubts as to what "sexual assault" means.
Quote from: DGuller on September 24, 2014, 11:33:40 AM
Quote from: Barrister on September 24, 2014, 11:31:05 AM
For those doubting the "1 in 5" stat, here's a CDC fact sheet that sources those numbers back to some academic journals.
http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/sv-datasheet-a.pdf
I don't doubt the "sexual assault" stat. I just have doubts as to what "sexual assault" means.
But there's a separate statistic that says onein five women report being raped in their lifetime, not merely sexually assaulted.
Quote from: Barrister on September 24, 2014, 11:37:13 AM
Quote from: DGuller on September 24, 2014, 11:33:40 AM
Quote from: Barrister on September 24, 2014, 11:31:05 AM
For those doubting the "1 in 5" stat, here's a CDC fact sheet that sources those numbers back to some academic journals.
http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/sv-datasheet-a.pdf
I don't doubt the "sexual assault" stat. I just have doubts as to what "sexual assault" means.
But there's a separate statistic that says onein five women report being raped in their lifetime, not merely sexually assaulted.
At any rate, it seems clear that the level is fairly high.
She is spending her time in uni productively. She can get a column out of this.
Quote from: Barrister on September 24, 2014, 11:37:13 AM
But there's a separate statistic that says onein five women report being raped in their lifetime, not merely sexually assaulted.
Lifetime spans more than 4 years in college.
Quote from: DGuller on September 24, 2014, 11:44:10 AM
Quote from: Barrister on September 24, 2014, 11:37:13 AM
But there's a separate statistic that says onein five women report being raped in their lifetime, not merely sexually assaulted.
Lifetime spans more than 4 years in college.
No kidding.
Quote from: derspiess on September 24, 2014, 10:14:37 AM
There does seem to be increasing pressure for universities to "do more" to combat and punish alleged rape. I'm not sure what more can be done though unless they want to strip away due process rights for anyone accused of rape.
For starters, how about stop playing games with incidents subject to CLERY Act reporting requirements, since we dont want to scare off Brittany's and Christian's parents from sending them and their out-of-state tuition to our school with real statistics.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on September 24, 2014, 12:09:57 PM
Quote from: derspiess on September 24, 2014, 10:14:37 AM
There does seem to be increasing pressure for universities to "do more" to combat and punish alleged rape. I'm not sure what more can be done though unless they want to strip away due process rights for anyone accused of rape.
For starters, how about stop playing games with incidents subject to CLERY Act reporting requirements, since we dont want to scare off Brittany's and Christian's parents from sending them and their out-of-state tuition to our school with real statistics.
Yeah I recall Stanford getting bashed by students for downplaying suicide figures / its overall response to a string of incidents one year.
Quote from: garbon on September 24, 2014, 12:13:08 PM
Yeah I recall Stanford getting bashed by students for downplaying suicide figures / its overall response to a string of incidents one year.
The students hung themselves before they moved to campus. :mad:
Quote from: DGuller on September 24, 2014, 12:15:34 PM
Quote from: garbon on September 24, 2014, 12:13:08 PM
Yeah I recall Stanford getting bashed by students for downplaying suicide figures / its overall response to a string of incidents one year.
The students hung themselves before they moved to campus. :mad:
A quick search reveals that the administration has not gotten any better on the matter since I graduated. :(
Quote from: Malthus on September 24, 2014, 11:00:14 AMSeems that is the problem. They should stick to "disciplining" students over purely academic matters, and leave criminal matters to the courts.
It strikes me at least of creating all sorts of problems to in effect "try" someone of a serious crime in what amounts to an administrative hearing.
Looked at this a little more closely. That college panel/kangaroo court didn't buy her story. She's FWB with her fellow student, he allegedly sticks it in her ass one time they're having sex and stops calling, she suddenly discovers she's a rape victim and turns the whole thing into her thesis project.
Also, she's evidently enlisted help with the actual mattress carrying/attention whoring:
http://columbiaspectator.com/spectrum/2014/09/10/students-help-emma-sulkowicz-carry-mattress-class-first-collective-carry#.VBGo3yLVc2x.twitter (http://columbiaspectator.com/spectrum/2014/09/10/students-help-emma-sulkowicz-carry-mattress-class-first-collective-carry#.VBGo3yLVc2x.twitter)
QuoteAccording to the rules of her performance art piece, Sulkowicz is not allowed to ask for help to carry the mattress, though she can accept help if someone offers it to her.
...SNIP...
"As students, I like the fact that we can step up and share the weight with her—that she doesn't have to do this all alone," Bridgette Tolbert, CC '18, said.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcolumbiaspectator.com%2Fsites%2Fdefault%2Ffiles%2F7-2.jpg&hash=d48a21a46d06f92fc6aa0e32e6ee45cf0ff818b4)
Observe Queen Bee basking in the adoration of her subjects. Note the hopeful White Knight on the left. :lmfao:
The whole thing is very funny except crazy chicks like this can ruin lives plus whatever scorn I feel towards her probably pales in comparison to what real rape victims must be feeling when they see malignant shit like this.
Quote from: gA quick search reveals that the administration has not gotten any better on the matter since I graduated.
Why should they? They're Stanford. Who would fail to consent to sex with a Stanford student? No one. QED.
:lol:
That guy.... No chance. Has to learn to take control, be confident and not accept no for an answer!
...
Wait....
Quote from: Legbiter on September 24, 2014, 12:19:31 PM
Looked at this a little more closely. That college panel/kangaroo court didn't buy her story. She's FWB with her fellow student, he allegedly sticks it in her ass one time they're having sex and stops calling, she suddenly discovers she's a rape victim and turns the whole thing into her thesis project.
:lol:
You are ridiculous.
Quote from: Ideologue on September 24, 2014, 12:21:32 PM
Quote from: gA quick search reveals that the administration has not gotten any better on the matter since I graduated.
Why should they? They're Stanford. Who would fail to consent to sex with a Stanford student? No one. QED.
I was mentioning suicide but err...is this one of those not funny jokes? :(
So where's the defamation lawsuit? Not one? Interesting.
Quote from: garbon on September 24, 2014, 12:24:38 PM
Quote from: Ideologue on September 24, 2014, 12:21:32 PM
Quote from: gA quick search reveals that the administration has not gotten any better on the matter since I graduated.
Why should they? They're Stanford. Who would fail to consent to sex with a Stanford student? No one. QED.
I was mentioning suicide but err...is this one of those not funny jokes? :(
100% misreading. I'm bleary today. My bad.
Did she at least clean that mattress?
Quote from: Malthus on September 24, 2014, 11:00:14 AM
Seems that is the problem. They should stick to "disciplining" students over purely academic matters, and leave criminal matters to the courts.
It strikes me at least of creating all sorts of problems to in effect "try" someone of a serious crime in what amounts to an administrative hearing.
The legal system has its methods of dealing with things like this, and didn't find sufficient evidence to prosecute.
The school is legally obliged by Title IX of the US Code to provide an educational atmosphere as free as possible of hostile sexual relations and fear. Students acts that fall short of criminal behavior can still create an unacceptable hostile atmosphere for women. Title IX requires the universities to combat such non-criminal-but-still-hostile behavior, up to and including dismissing students who have been administratively judged to have violated the student code of conduct by impermissible sexual behavior.
It is always easy to dismiss non-criminal behavior as nobody's business, but that isn't true even theoretically.
Quote from: Malthus on September 24, 2014, 11:00:14 AM
Seems that is the problem. They should stick to "disciplining" students over purely academic matters, and leave criminal matters to the courts.
While I generally agree with some of your concerns, I am not sure this is actually the case - "civilian" institutions (such as universities, corporations etc.) do regularly discipline their students, employees etc. over inappropriate behaviour that is not criminal per se and has nothing to do with their academic or professional performance.
Quote from: grumbler on September 24, 2014, 02:28:41 PM
Quote from: Malthus on September 24, 2014, 11:00:14 AM
Seems that is the problem. They should stick to "disciplining" students over purely academic matters, and leave criminal matters to the courts.
It strikes me at least of creating all sorts of problems to in effect "try" someone of a serious crime in what amounts to an administrative hearing.
The legal system has its methods of dealing with things like this, and didn't find sufficient evidence to prosecute.
The school is legally obliged by Title IX of the US Code to provide an educational atmosphere as free as possible of hostile sexual relations and fear. Students acts that fall short of criminal behavior can still create an unacceptable hostile atmosphere for women. Title IX requires the universities to combat such non-criminal-but-still-hostile behavior, up to and including dismissing students who have been administratively judged to have violated the student code of conduct by impermissible sexual behavior.
It is always easy to dismiss non-criminal behavior as nobody's business, but that isn't true even theoretically.
Jesus. I posted pretty much the same argument as grumbler.
Quote from: grumbler on September 24, 2014, 02:28:41 PM
Quote from: Malthus on September 24, 2014, 11:00:14 AM
Seems that is the problem. They should stick to "disciplining" students over purely academic matters, and leave criminal matters to the courts.
It strikes me at least of creating all sorts of problems to in effect "try" someone of a serious crime in what amounts to an administrative hearing.
The legal system has its methods of dealing with things like this, and didn't find sufficient evidence to prosecute.
The school is legally obliged by Title IX of the US Code to provide an educational atmosphere as free as possible of hostile sexual relations and fear. Students acts that fall short of criminal behavior can still create an unacceptable hostile atmosphere for women. Title IX requires the universities to combat such non-criminal-but-still-hostile behavior, up to and including dismissing students who have been administratively judged to have violated the student code of conduct by impermissible sexual behavior.
It is always easy to dismiss non-criminal behavior as nobody's business, but that isn't true even theoretically.
The allegation in this particular case is that he partly throttled and raped her, in her room. Either he did it or he didn't - that is, either he committed an undoubtedly criminal act, or he did not. I do not understand that, in this case, the alleged perpetrator is alleged to have committed any "acts that fall short of criminal behavior" that nonetheless "still create an unacceptable hostile atmosphere for women".
The concern here is not about the universities disciplining students over acts of harrassment to ensure an "educational atmosphere as free as possible of hostile sexual relations and fear", but about the universities being an alternative forum to the courts for prosecuting charges of rape. This strikes me as a bad idea, bound to lead to all sorts of problems for everyone concerned. For one, the sketchiness of the iniversities' expertise in holding what amounts to a criminal trial will leave the party that loses feeling that justice has not been done - as is undoubtedly the case here.
There may certainly be a place for university discipline to fill that gap between the 'outright criminal' and the 'harmful to an educational atmosphere' - but this is not an example of that.
Quote from: Martinus on September 24, 2014, 02:43:02 PM
Jesus. I posted pretty much the same argument as grumbler.
See my answer to Grumbler.
To elaborate: in my opinion at least, administrative tribunals ought to hand over allegations of undoubted criminal acts (rape, murder, etc) to the police and courts. If the allegation is of a lesser, non-criminal nature, such as harrassment that creates a 'hostile atmosphere', then they play a reasonable role in dealing with that.
Can he counterclaim that she's making school a hostile environment for him? He wasn't convicted of rape
Quote from: HVC on September 24, 2014, 02:58:37 PM
Can he counterclaim that she's making school a hostile environment for him? He wasn't convicted of rape
Maybe for vaginal sex. Not after fucking her in the ass.
Quote from: HVC on September 24, 2014, 02:58:37 PM
Can he counterclaim that she's making school a hostile environment for him? He wasn't convicted of rape
No, he's supposed to just deal with it I guess.
Quote from: Malthus on September 24, 2014, 02:54:01 PM
Quote from: Martinus on September 24, 2014, 02:43:02 PM
Jesus. I posted pretty much the same argument as grumbler.
See my answer to Grumbler.
To elaborate: in my opinion at least, administrative tribunals ought to hand over allegations of undoubted criminal acts (rape, murder, etc) to the police and courts. If the allegation is of a lesser, non-criminal nature, such as harrassment that creates a 'hostile atmosphere', then they play a reasonable role in dealing with that.
FWIW in a security-minded workplace it doesn't take a conviction to get kicked the fuck out of there for a criminal incident. But one consideration is of course that unlike some companies unis are generally clueless and shouldn't wield too much power.
Quote from: Malthus on September 24, 2014, 02:52:40 PM
The allegation in this particular case is that he partly throttled and raped her, in her room. Either he did it or he didn't - that is, either he committed an undoubtedly criminal act, or he did not. I do not understand that, in this case, the alleged perpetrator is alleged to have committed any "acts that fall short of criminal behavior" that nonetheless "still create an unacceptable hostile atmosphere for women".
You obviously know far more details on the administrative hearing than I, but the schools are required by law to investigate allegations of sexual misconduct, even those that fall short of criminal behavior or cannot be prosecuted. The university carried out its mandated investigation and apparently concluded that the preponderance of evidence was that no such misconduct occurred.
You can argue that the mandate to investigate is over-stated, but that's the current law. Schools similarly investigate other cases of misconduct, too: cheating, stealing, bullying, lying... all kids of stuff that are not necessarily criminal or, if criminal, are not prosecuted by the legal system.
QuoteThe concern here is not about the universities disciplining students over acts of harrassment to ensure an "educational atmosphere as free as possible of hostile sexual relations and fear", but about the universities being an alternative forum to the courts for prosecuting charges of rape. This strikes me as a bad idea, bound to lead to all sorts of problems for everyone concerned. For one, the sketchiness of the iniversities' expertise in holding what amounts to a criminal trial will leave the party that loses feeling that justice has not been done - as is undoubtedly the case here.
Except that it's not a criminal trial and carried no criminal sanctions. The American Bar Association has similar procedures for violations of its code of conduct, and I'm sure other organizations (AMA, etc) have similar procedures, too.
QuoteThere may certainly be a place for university discipline to fill that gap between the 'outright criminal' and the 'harmful to an educational atmosphere' - but this is not an example of that.
You are certainly entitled to that opinion, and I agree that it can be carried too far, but this is not an example of that.
Quote from: HVC on September 24, 2014, 02:58:37 PM
Can he counterclaim that she's making school a hostile environment for him? He wasn't convicted of rape
He wasn't even found guilty of misconduct. I am willing to bet that she is, in fact, in violation of the student conduct codes. I doubt that he wants more publicity in the case, though.
Quote from: grumbler on September 24, 2014, 03:22:59 PM
Quote from: Malthus on September 24, 2014, 02:52:40 PM
The allegation in this particular case is that he partly throttled and raped her, in her room. Either he did it or he didn't - that is, either he committed an undoubtedly criminal act, or he did not. I do not understand that, in this case, the alleged perpetrator is alleged to have committed any "acts that fall short of criminal behavior" that nonetheless "still create an unacceptable hostile atmosphere for women".
You obviously know far more details on the administrative hearing than I, but the schools are required by law to investigate allegations of sexual misconduct, even those that fall short of criminal behavior or cannot be prosecuted. The university carried out its mandated investigation and apparently concluded that the preponderance of evidence was that no such misconduct occurred.
You can argue that the mandate to instigate is over-stated, but that's the current law. Schools similarly investigate other cases of misconduct, too: cheating, stealing, bullying, lying... all kids of stuff that are not necessarily criminal or, if criminal, are not prosecuted by the legal system.
QuoteThe concern here is not about the universities disciplining students over acts of harrassment to ensure an "educational atmosphere as free as possible of hostile sexual relations and fear", but about the universities being an alternative forum to the courts for prosecuting charges of rape. This strikes me as a bad idea, bound to lead to all sorts of problems for everyone concerned. For one, the sketchiness of the iniversities' expertise in holding what amounts to a criminal trial will leave the party that loses feeling that justice has not been done - as is undoubtedly the case here.
Except that it's not a criminal trial and carried no criminal sanctions. The American Bar Association has similar procedures for violations of its code of conduct, and I'm sure other organizations (AMA, etc) have similar procedures, too.
QuoteThere may certainly be a place for university discipline to fill that gap between the 'outright criminal' and the 'harmful to an educational atmosphere' - but this is not an example of that.
You are certainly entitled to that opinion, and I agree that it can be carried too far, but this is not an example of that.
I think you are missing my point (or I am not stating it with sufficient clarity).
I am not saying that the allegation in this case "fell short of criminal behavior or cannot be prosecuted". On the contrary. The allegation was extremely serious and was, without a doubt, one that concerned "criminal behaviour" and that "could be prosecuted". And so it should have been - in the criminal courts, after a police investigation.
To use another example: if a student came to the university discipline committee and complained that his roommate had committed a murder, should the administrators:
(1) hold an administrative hearing, to determine whether the roommate had, in point of fact, committed an offence against the student code worthy of having them expelled, or
(2) call the cops to investigate the alleged crime of murder, given that the cops have stuff like trained investigators and forensics, and so are in a better position to determine whether a murder has occured than some administrators working for a university?
To my mind, it makes no sense to choose option (1). Same with this particular case in the OP.
Quote from: grumbler on September 24, 2014, 03:29:52 PM
Quote from: HVC on September 24, 2014, 02:58:37 PM
Can he counterclaim that she's making school a hostile environment for him? He wasn't convicted of rape
He wasn't even found guilty of misconduct. I am willing to bet that she is, in fact, in violation of the student conduct codes. I doubt that he wants more publicity in the case, though.
Yeah article suggests that Paul has been hiding out.
Article did mention that it cases where male students were found guilty of misconduct that several have now been suing stating that their civil rights have been violated.
Quote from: Malthus on September 24, 2014, 03:35:04 PM
I think you are missing my point (or I am not stating it with sufficient clarity).
I am not saying that the allegation in this case "fell short of criminal behavior or cannot be prosecuted". On the contrary. The allegation was extremely serious and was, without a doubt, one that concerned "criminal behaviour" and that "could be prosecuted". And so it should have been - in the criminal courts, after a police investigation.
To use another example: if a student came to the university discipline committee and complained that his roommate had committed a murder, should the administrators:
(1) hold an administrative hearing, to determine whether the roommate had, in point of fact, committed an offence against the student code worthy of having them expelled, or
(2) call the cops to investigate the alleged crime of murder, given that the cops have stuff like trained investigators and forensics, and so are in a better position to determine whether a murder has occured than some administrators working for a university?
To my mind, it makes no sense to choose option (1). Same with this particular case in the OP.
Ah. I didn't know that the student went directly to the university disciplinary committee and that the committee decided not to notify the cops. That was certainly wrong, and not in accordance with the law or university policies.
Where are you getting your excellent and interesting info? None of it is in any version of the story I have heard. Inside sources?
Quote from: grumbler on September 24, 2014, 03:45:23 PM
Quote from: Malthus on September 24, 2014, 03:35:04 PM
I think you are missing my point (or I am not stating it with sufficient clarity).
I am not saying that the allegation in this case "fell short of criminal behavior or cannot be prosecuted". On the contrary. The allegation was extremely serious and was, without a doubt, one that concerned "criminal behaviour" and that "could be prosecuted". And so it should have been - in the criminal courts, after a police investigation.
To use another example: if a student came to the university discipline committee and complained that his roommate had committed a murder, should the administrators:
(1) hold an administrative hearing, to determine whether the roommate had, in point of fact, committed an offence against the student code worthy of having them expelled, or
(2) call the cops to investigate the alleged crime of murder, given that the cops have stuff like trained investigators and forensics, and so are in a better position to determine whether a murder has occured than some administrators working for a university?
To my mind, it makes no sense to choose option (1). Same with this particular case in the OP.
Ah. I didn't know that the student went directly to the university disciplinary committee and that the committee decided not to notify the cops. That was certainly wrong, and not in accordance with the law or university policies.
Where are you getting your excellent and interesting info? None of it is in any version of the story I have heard. Inside sources?
It may have been my fault / I admittedly don't know much on exactly how these matters are handled. -_-
Apparently she decided not to go to the cops, stating that it would be a waste of her time.
Quote from: derspiess on September 24, 2014, 03:48:34 PM
Apparently she decided not to go to the cops, stating that it would be a waste of her time.
Actually here's what she said:
http://nymag.com/thecut/2014/09/columbia-emma-sulkowicz-mattress-rape-performance-interview.html
QuoteThe last time we spoke you said you had filed a report with the NYPD and they were starting to investigate. What is the status of that?
It got transferred to the district attorney's office, and I decided I didn't want to pursue it any further because they told it me it would take nine months to a year to actually go to court, which would be after I graduated and probably wanting to erase all of my memories of Columbia from my brain anyway, so I decided not to pursue it.
Did the police seem to think there was a case there to pursue?
Yeah, they were going to contact the other women who reported against him, and they would have subpoenaed the information from the university files.
You were also hoping to file a complaint with the police regarding how you were treated. What happened with that?
I was contacted by an investigator who was really, really annoying to work with. He would call me randomly, and make me repeat everything that happened. He kept telling me I had to come into the station, and obviously I don't want to deal with the police any more right now. It's so disorganized, and it's really upsetting to work with them at all.
So, she decided to drop criminal charges because the policeman was "annoying" and called her a lot? Sorry but she does not sound very credible.
Quote from: Martinus on September 24, 2014, 03:55:04 PM
So, she decided to drop criminal charges because the policeman was "annoying" and called her a lot? Sorry but she does not sound very credible.
Yeah because after being raped, one should then plan to send the next year or so of one's life dealing with police in a fight for justice that might never come.
At any rate, I don't really think Ms. Mattress Girl and her rape or not rape is the key issue here. I think all of this - as stated clearly with the piece - is to raise more awareness of an ongoing problem on university campuses. I mean if you look at many of the posts in this thread there is a lot of stated disbelief that this is really an ongoing issue and a huge dose of the supposition that girls are blowing things out of proportion.
Quote from: garbon on September 24, 2014, 03:56:28 PM
Quote from: Martinus on September 24, 2014, 03:55:04 PM
So, she decided to drop criminal charges because the policeman was "annoying" and called her a lot? Sorry but she does not sound very credible.
Yeah because after being raped, one should then plan to send the next year or so of one's life dealing with police in a fight for justice that might never come.
I'm not against that point of view in all cases, but in this case the victim is giving media interviews and carrying a mattress around campus.
Quote from: garbon on September 24, 2014, 03:56:28 PM
Yeah because after being raped, one should then plan to send the next year or so of one's life dealing with police in a fight for justice that might never come.
It's not clear to me that she would have had to spend any time doing anything, just that the case would have taken time to come to trial.
QuoteAt any rate, I don't really think Ms. Mattress Girl and her rape or not rape is the key issue here. I think all of this - as stated clearly with the piece - is to raise more awareness of an ongoing problem on university campuses. I mean if you look at many of the posts in this thread there is a lot of stated disbelief that this is really an ongoing issue and a huge dose of the supposition that girls are blowing things out of proportion.
If this girl's intention is to make people take accusations of campus rape seriously, she's doing a piss poor job.
Quote from: grumbler on September 24, 2014, 03:45:23 PM
Quote from: Malthus on September 24, 2014, 03:35:04 PM
I think you are missing my point (or I am not stating it with sufficient clarity).
I am not saying that the allegation in this case "fell short of criminal behavior or cannot be prosecuted". On the contrary. The allegation was extremely serious and was, without a doubt, one that concerned "criminal behaviour" and that "could be prosecuted". And so it should have been - in the criminal courts, after a police investigation.
To use another example: if a student came to the university discipline committee and complained that his roommate had committed a murder, should the administrators:
(1) hold an administrative hearing, to determine whether the roommate had, in point of fact, committed an offence against the student code worthy of having them expelled, or
(2) call the cops to investigate the alleged crime of murder, given that the cops have stuff like trained investigators and forensics, and so are in a better position to determine whether a murder has occured than some administrators working for a university?
To my mind, it makes no sense to choose option (1). Same with this particular case in the OP.
Ah. I didn't know that the student went directly to the university disciplinary committee and that the committee decided not to notify the cops. That was certainly wrong, and not in accordance with the law or university policies.
Where are you getting your excellent and interesting info? None of it is in any version of the story I have heard. Inside sources?
I don't think the sequence of events is in any way controversial.
She brought a compaint before the university discipline committee. It was rejected. She then went public with her allegations. This gained lots of publicity, and many asked why she did not go to the police. Responding to this pressure, she then went to the police (months after her discipline complaint was rejected, and now years after the alleged event). She was dissatisfied with the police investigation that ensued. She found their questioning rude and abusive. So she then withdrew her complaint - I assume, but do not know, this scotched their investigation.
http://america.aljazeera.com/watch/shows/america-tonight/articles/2014/5/19/why-college-rapevictimsdonatgotothepolice.html
http://nymag.com/thecut/2014/09/columbia-emma-sulkowicz-mattress-rape-performance-interview.html
Quote from: garbon on September 24, 2014, 03:59:10 PM
At any rate, I don't really think Ms. Mattress Girl and her rape or not rape is the key issue here. I think all of this - as stated clearly with the piece - is to raise more awareness of an ongoing problem on university campuses. I mean if you look at many of the posts in this thread there is a lot of stated disbelief that this is really an ongoing issue and a huge dose of the supposition that girls are blowing things out of proportion.
That is a problem. But then we have this silly notion called presumption of innocence, too.
Quote from: garbon on September 24, 2014, 03:52:24 PM
Quote from: derspiess on September 24, 2014, 03:48:34 PM
Apparently she decided not to go to the cops, stating that it would be a waste of her time.
Actually here's what she said:
http://nymag.com/thecut/2014/09/columbia-emma-sulkowicz-mattress-rape-performance-interview.html
QuoteThe last time we spoke you said you had filed a report with the NYPD and they were starting to investigate. What is the status of that?
It got transferred to the district attorney's office, and I decided I didn't want to pursue it any further because they told it me it would take nine months to a year to actually go to court, which would be after I graduated and probably wanting to erase all of my memories of Columbia from my brain anyway, so I decided not to pursue it.
Did the police seem to think there was a case there to pursue?
Yeah, they were going to contact the other women who reported against him, and they would have subpoenaed the information from the university files.
You were also hoping to file a complaint with the police regarding how you were treated. What happened with that?
I was contacted by an investigator who was really, really annoying to work with. He would call me randomly, and make me repeat everything that happened. He kept telling me I had to come into the station, and obviously I don't want to deal with the police any more right now. It's so disorganized, and it's really upsetting to work with them at all.
Harumph. This is where she just lost me.
Look, wanting to "put something behind you" is fine, and I can understand that sentiment. I can also understand the "wanting justice to be done" sentiment - obviously I'm a big fan. But you can't have them both. And you can't complain that justice isn't being done if you won't give a formal statement to police.
Quote from: garbon on September 24, 2014, 03:59:10 PM
At any rate, I don't really think Ms. Mattress Girl and her rape or not rape is the key issue here. I think all of this - as stated clearly with the piece - is to raise more awareness of an ongoing problem on university campuses. I mean if you look at many of the posts in this thread there is a lot of stated disbelief that this is really an ongoing issue and a huge dose of the supposition that girls are blowing things out of proportion.
That sounds like the rationale for excusing staged/false hate crimes on campus.
Quote from: Martinus on September 24, 2014, 03:55:04 PM
So, she decided to drop criminal charges because the policeman was "annoying" and called her a lot? Sorry but she does not sound very credible.
I would have thought it a lot more annoying if the cops
weren't pursuing the matter aggressively.
Quote from: Barrister on September 24, 2014, 04:03:15 PM
Harumph. This is where she just lost me.
Look, wanting to "put something behind you" is fine, and I can understand that sentiment. I can also understand the "wanting justice to be done" sentiment - obviously I'm a big fan. But you can't have them both. And you can't complain that justice isn't being done if you won't give a formal statement to police.
Same.
Quote from: derspiess on September 24, 2014, 04:03:43 PM
Quote from: garbon on September 24, 2014, 03:59:10 PM
At any rate, I don't really think Ms. Mattress Girl and her rape or not rape is the key issue here. I think all of this - as stated clearly with the piece - is to raise more awareness of an ongoing problem on university campuses. I mean if you look at many of the posts in this thread there is a lot of stated disbelief that this is really an ongoing issue and a huge dose of the supposition that girls are blowing things out of proportion.
That sounds like the rationale for excusing staged/false hate crimes on campus.
:huh:
Also are staged/false hate crimes super common?
Quote from: Martinus on September 24, 2014, 04:02:03 PM
Quote from: garbon on September 24, 2014, 03:59:10 PM
At any rate, I don't really think Ms. Mattress Girl and her rape or not rape is the key issue here. I think all of this - as stated clearly with the piece - is to raise more awareness of an ongoing problem on university campuses. I mean if you look at many of the posts in this thread there is a lot of stated disbelief that this is really an ongoing issue and a huge dose of the supposition that girls are blowing things out of proportion.
That is a problem. But then we have this silly notion called presumption of innocence, too.
ok? :unsure:
Quote from: Barrister on September 24, 2014, 04:03:15 PM
Look, wanting to "put something behind you" is fine, and I can understand that sentiment. I can also understand the "wanting justice to be done" sentiment - obviously I'm a big fan. But you can't have them both. And you can't complain that justice isn't being done if you won't give a formal statement to police.
Agreed but then of course she's an aggrandizing little shit as she's doing a performance piece. In fact, when I first looked at cover of magazine, I was like what is this bitch doing. :D
Quote from: garbon on September 24, 2014, 04:07:37 PM
Quote from: Martinus on September 24, 2014, 04:02:03 PM
Quote from: garbon on September 24, 2014, 03:59:10 PM
At any rate, I don't really think Ms. Mattress Girl and her rape or not rape is the key issue here. I think all of this - as stated clearly with the piece - is to raise more awareness of an ongoing problem on university campuses. I mean if you look at many of the posts in this thread there is a lot of stated disbelief that this is really an ongoing issue and a huge dose of the supposition that girls are blowing things out of proportion.
That is a problem. But then we have this silly notion called presumption of innocence, too.
ok? :unsure:
She is not just raising awareness, she also wants a specific guy expelled. Has it crossed your mind that he might be innocent?
Quote from: Martinus on September 24, 2014, 04:09:06 PM
Quote from: garbon on September 24, 2014, 04:07:37 PM
Quote from: Martinus on September 24, 2014, 04:02:03 PM
Quote from: garbon on September 24, 2014, 03:59:10 PM
At any rate, I don't really think Ms. Mattress Girl and her rape or not rape is the key issue here. I think all of this - as stated clearly with the piece - is to raise more awareness of an ongoing problem on university campuses. I mean if you look at many of the posts in this thread there is a lot of stated disbelief that this is really an ongoing issue and a huge dose of the supposition that girls are blowing things out of proportion.
That is a problem. But then we have this silly notion called presumption of innocence, too.
ok? :unsure:
She is not just raising awareness, she also wants a specific guy expelled. Has it crossed your mind that he might be innocent?
No.
Quote from: garbon on September 24, 2014, 04:07:00 PM
Quote from: derspiess on September 24, 2014, 04:03:43 PM
Quote from: garbon on September 24, 2014, 03:59:10 PM
At any rate, I don't really think Ms. Mattress Girl and her rape or not rape is the key issue here. I think all of this - as stated clearly with the piece - is to raise more awareness of an ongoing problem on university campuses. I mean if you look at many of the posts in this thread there is a lot of stated disbelief that this is really an ongoing issue and a huge dose of the supposition that girls are blowing things out of proportion.
That sounds like the rationale for excusing staged/false hate crimes on campus.
:huh:
Also are staged/false hate crimes super common?
Several have made the news in the past few years. Here's the most recent: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/09/05/sweet-briar-college-race-_n_5773412.html
Quote from: garbon on September 24, 2014, 03:59:10 PM
At any rate, I don't really think Ms. Mattress Girl and her rape or not rape is the key issue here. I think all of this - as stated clearly with the piece - is to raise more awareness of an ongoing problem on university campuses. I mean if you look at many of the posts in this thread there is a lot of stated disbelief that this is really an ongoing issue and a huge dose of the supposition that girls are blowing things out of proportion.
The problem is that, while I fully believe that rape on campus is in fact a huge problem, the more I read about Ms. Mattress Girl the less credible her individual case appears; in effect, she's doing her stated cause more harm than good (for those who bother to read about the facts of her particular case).
In particular, it is difficult to believe that someone so devoted to her cause as to carry a mattress about everywhere in order to get the alleged perp expelled, simply can't be bothered with such details as police procedures and interviews.
Quote from: Barrister on September 24, 2014, 04:03:15 PM
Look, wanting to "put something behind you" is fine, and I can understand that sentiment. I can also understand the "wanting justice to be done" sentiment - obviously I'm a big fan. But you can't have them both. And you can't complain that justice isn't being done if you won't give a formal statement to police.
Yep. I had heard about the mattress carrying thing but for some reason I thought she was protesting the system or something. Turns out she didn't follow up. Strange position for an activist to take.
Slacktivism in action.
Quote from: Malthus on September 24, 2014, 04:12:55 PM
The problem is that, while I fully believe that rape on campus is in fact a huge problem, the more I read about Ms. Mattress Girl the less credible her individual case appears; in effect, she's doing her stated cause more harm than good (for those who bother to read about the facts of her particular case).
In particular, it is difficult to believe that someone so devoted to her cause as to carry a mattress about everywhere in order to get the alleged perp expelled, simply can't be bothered with such details as police procedures and interviews.
I agree with this except the bizarre notion she is doing her cause harm. This is being talked about everywhere, she is making a difference in drawing attention to this issue. Most people couldn't give two shits about her particular case. If you look at just her case she is kind of an asshole, but on an activism standpoint she is making a big difference. I guess that is how it goes.
Quote from: Martinus on September 24, 2014, 04:09:06 PM
Quote from: garbon on September 24, 2014, 04:07:37 PM
Quote from: Martinus on September 24, 2014, 04:02:03 PM
Quote from: garbon on September 24, 2014, 03:59:10 PM
At any rate, I don't really think Ms. Mattress Girl and her rape or not rape is the key issue here. I think all of this - as stated clearly with the piece - is to raise more awareness of an ongoing problem on university campuses. I mean if you look at many of the posts in this thread there is a lot of stated disbelief that this is really an ongoing issue and a huge dose of the supposition that girls are blowing things out of proportion.
That is a problem. But then we have this silly notion called presumption of innocence, too.
ok? :unsure:
She is not just raising awareness, she also wants a specific guy expelled. Has it crossed your mind that he might be innocent?
Sure, maybe? I don't really see what that has to do with anything as I don't recall posting anything about how that particular guy needs to get punished.
Quote from: Valmy on September 24, 2014, 04:15:28 PM
Quote from: Malthus on September 24, 2014, 04:12:55 PM
The problem is that, while I fully believe that rape on campus is in fact a huge problem, the more I read about Ms. Mattress Girl the less credible her individual case appears; in effect, she's doing her stated cause more harm than good (for those who bother to read about the facts of her particular case).
In particular, it is difficult to believe that someone so devoted to her cause as to carry a mattress about everywhere in order to get the alleged perp expelled, simply can't be bothered with such details as police procedures and interviews.
I agree with this except the bizarre notion she is doing her cause harm. This is being talked about everywhere, she is making a difference in drawing attention to this issue. Most people couldn't give two shits about her particular case. If you look at just her case she is kind of an asshole, but on an activism standpoint she is making a big difference. I guess that is how it goes.
Yep, that's exactly my thinking.
Quote from: Valmy on September 24, 2014, 04:13:22 PM
Quote from: Barrister on September 24, 2014, 04:03:15 PM
Look, wanting to "put something behind you" is fine, and I can understand that sentiment. I can also understand the "wanting justice to be done" sentiment - obviously I'm a big fan. But you can't have them both. And you can't complain that justice isn't being done if you won't give a formal statement to police.
Yep. I had heard about the mattress carrying thing but for some reason I thought she was protesting the system or something. Turns out she didn't follow up. Strange position for an activist to take.
I guess she's just protesting that the university cleared her rapist.
Quote from: Habbaku on September 24, 2014, 04:15:08 PM
Slacktivism in action.
It's a turbocharged form of female attention-whoring amplified by social media and aided and abetted by the campus rape hysteria. After some time has passed this will all be looked upon like the satanic ritual abuse panic back in the 80's. :hmm:
Quote from: Malthus on September 24, 2014, 04:01:29 PM
Quote from: grumbler on September 24, 2014, 03:45:23 PM
Quote from: Malthus on September 24, 2014, 03:35:04 PM
I think you are missing my point (or I am not stating it with sufficient clarity).
I am not saying that the allegation in this case "fell short of criminal behavior or cannot be prosecuted". On the contrary. The allegation was extremely serious and was, without a doubt, one that concerned "criminal behaviour" and that "could be prosecuted". And so it should have been - in the criminal courts, after a police investigation.
To use another example: if a student came to the university discipline committee and complained that his roommate had committed a murder, should the administrators:
(1) hold an administrative hearing, to determine whether the roommate had, in point of fact, committed an offence against the student code worthy of having them expelled, or
(2) call the cops to investigate the alleged crime of murder, given that the cops have stuff like trained investigators and forensics, and so are in a better position to determine whether a murder has occured than some administrators working for a university?
To my mind, it makes no sense to choose option (1). Same with this particular case in the OP.
Ah. I didn't know that the student went directly to the university disciplinary committee and that the committee decided not to notify the cops. That was certainly wrong, and not in accordance with the law or university policies.
Where are you getting your excellent and interesting info? None of it is in any version of the story I have heard. Inside sources?
I don't think the sequence of events is in any way controversial.
She brought a compaint before the university discipline committee. It was rejected. She then went public with her allegations. This gained lots of publicity, and many asked why she did not go to the police. Responding to this pressure, she then went to the police (months after her discipline complaint was rejected, and now years after the alleged event). She was dissatisfied with the police investigation that ensued. She found their questioning rude and abusive. So she then withdrew her complaint - I assume, but do not know, this scotched their investigation.
http://america.aljazeera.com/watch/shows/america-tonight/articles/2014/5/19/why-college-rapevictimsdonatgotothepolice.html
http://nymag.com/thecut/2014/09/columbia-emma-sulkowicz-mattress-rape-performance-interview.html
Sounds to me l;ike the sequence of events was
(1) the incident occurs. She doesn't consider it worth going to the police or anyone else about.
(2) over a year later, she hears that the guy is a jerk. She reports her experience to some school authorities (surely not the disciplinary panel; they would only meet to hear the case). Your presumption here that the authority at school didn't ask her to report it to the police seems to be unwarranted; such an authority would probably have to encourage her to report the incident to the police; it's the law. In any case, the police are out; the only ability the school authority has is to report it as a student conduct violation
(3) the disciplinary process grinds through the investigation and the hearing. The disciplinary panel hears the two sides out, and rules that the guy's version of the story is more credible, and so rules, She appeals, and loses. She beings her protest.
(4) Months later, she goes to the police. She is dissatisfied with the investigation, and so withdraws her cooperation. the police investigation ends.
Nothing here seems like the university usurping any criminal justice system powers or prerogatives. This case could have been pursued by the criminal justice system, but the woman decided not to pursue that route. The best she could hope for is to get him kicked out of the school by the disciplinary committee, but that didn't happen.
As an aside, the school, and everyone associated with it, is required by law to protect the privacy of those accused of misconduct but not found guilty of any violation short of one that get the perp kicked out of school. They cannot comment on the case. So, we are just hearing one side of this.
The problem of campus rape is very real and very serious. One can argue that a procedure which uses preponderance of evidence, rather than a higher standard of proof, is going to result in some false convictions, but that's the standard used in civil trials (which this system resembles far more than it does a criminal trial) and it arguably will result in safer campuses.
However, cases like this one (where the woman refuses to accept the results of the process), and the Duke Lacrosse debacle, only retard progress towards making campuses safer, by promoting the idea that there are a lot of false accusations of rape floating around.
Quote from: grumbler on September 24, 2014, 04:22:59 PM
However, cases like this one (where the woman refuses to accept the results of the process), and the Duke Lacrosse debacle, only retard progress towards making campuses safer, by promoting the idea that there are a lot of false accusations of rape floating around.
I've a minor quibble regarding the bit in bold. If someone was raped and process ended with rapist getting away with it, are they expected to accept the results of the process?
Quote from: derspiess on September 24, 2014, 04:11:39 PM
Quote from: garbon on September 24, 2014, 04:07:00 PM
Quote from: derspiess on September 24, 2014, 04:03:43 PM
Quote from: garbon on September 24, 2014, 03:59:10 PM
At any rate, I don't really think Ms. Mattress Girl and her rape or not rape is the key issue here. I think all of this - as stated clearly with the piece - is to raise more awareness of an ongoing problem on university campuses. I mean if you look at many of the posts in this thread there is a lot of stated disbelief that this is really an ongoing issue and a huge dose of the supposition that girls are blowing things out of proportion.
That sounds like the rationale for excusing staged/false hate crimes on campus.
:huh:
Also are staged/false hate crimes super common?
Several have made the news in the past few years. Here's the most recent: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/09/05/sweet-briar-college-race-_n_5773412.html
I'm still not really sure what this has to do with anything.
Quote from: garbon on September 24, 2014, 04:25:37 PM
I've a minor quibble regarding the bit in bold. If someone was raped and process ended with rapist getting away with it, are they expected to accept the results of the process?
Yes. That's part of the rule of law. One cannot only accept the rulings that one agrees with. Vigilantiism is frowned upon.
Quote from: grumbler on September 24, 2014, 04:28:18 PM
Quote from: garbon on September 24, 2014, 04:25:37 PM
I've a minor quibble regarding the bit in bold. If someone was raped and process ended with rapist getting away with it, are they expected to accept the results of the process?
Yes. That's part of the rule of law. One cannot only accept the rulings that one agrees with. Vigilantiism is frowned upon.
Oh well that's a whole different thing entirely. Where's this vigilantism bit coming from? It is possible to not accept the result of a process and yet not become a vigilante, no?
Quote from: Legbiter on September 24, 2014, 04:22:03 PM
Quote from: Habbaku on September 24, 2014, 04:15:08 PM
Slacktivism in action.
It's a turbocharged form of female attention-whoring amplified by social media and aided and abetted by the campus rape hysteria. After some time has passed this will all be looked upon like the satanic ritual abuse panic back in the 80's. :hmm:
Wait you post on languish and hang on the internet and you think attenton whoring is a female thing? :lol:
And no, rape actually happens on college campuses.
Quote from: grumbler on September 24, 2014, 04:28:18 PM
Quote from: garbon on September 24, 2014, 04:25:37 PM
I've a minor quibble regarding the bit in bold. If someone was raped and process ended with rapist getting away with it, are they expected to accept the results of the process?
Yes. That's part of the rule of law. One cannot only accept the rulings that one agrees with. Vigilantiism is frowned upon.
The rule of law includes activism to influence the lawmakers to change the laws.
Quote from: Valmy on September 24, 2014, 04:33:50 PM
The rule of law includes activism to influence the lawmakers to change the laws.
She's not doing that.
Quote from: Valmy on September 24, 2014, 04:31:20 PM
And no rape actually happens on college campuses.
:hmm:
Quote from: Habbaku on September 24, 2014, 04:36:28 PM
Quote from: Valmy on September 24, 2014, 04:31:20 PM
And no rape actually happens on college campuses.
:hmm:
Missed a comma there :blush:
That is a common problem of mine.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on September 24, 2014, 04:35:42 PM
Quote from: Valmy on September 24, 2014, 04:33:50 PM
The rule of law includes activism to influence the lawmakers to change the laws.
She's not doing that.
Why else would she be carrying a mattress around campus? Well ok she is getting a grade for some bullshit art project....but still stuff like this is done to influence people's opinions.
You're like a comma chameleon.
Quote from: Valmy on September 24, 2014, 04:40:19 PM
but still stuff like this is done to influence people's opinions.
She's influenced a few opinions here :D
Quote from: derspiess on September 24, 2014, 04:43:12 PM
Quote from: Valmy on September 24, 2014, 04:40:19 PM
but still stuff like this is done to influence people's opinions.
She's influenced a few opinions here :D
I doubt it. We very rarely change our opinions here :P
Quote from: Valmy on September 24, 2014, 04:44:07 PM
Quote from: derspiess on September 24, 2014, 04:43:12 PM
Quote from: Valmy on September 24, 2014, 04:40:19 PM
but still stuff like this is done to influence people's opinions.
She's influenced a few opinions here :D
I doubt it. We very rarely change our opinions here :P
Yeah. I knew, even before I'd looked into her circumstances more, the sort of reception this article would have when I posted it. :D
Actually one thing missing is commentary on her looks.
Quote from: Valmy on September 24, 2014, 04:15:28 PM
Quote from: Malthus on September 24, 2014, 04:12:55 PM
The problem is that, while I fully believe that rape on campus is in fact a huge problem, the more I read about Ms. Mattress Girl the less credible her individual case appears; in effect, she's doing her stated cause more harm than good (for those who bother to read about the facts of her particular case).
In particular, it is difficult to believe that someone so devoted to her cause as to carry a mattress about everywhere in order to get the alleged perp expelled, simply can't be bothered with such details as police procedures and interviews.
I agree with this except the bizarre notion she is doing her cause harm. This is being talked about everywhere, she is making a difference in drawing attention to this issue. Most people couldn't give two shits about her particular case. If you look at just her case she is kind of an asshole, but on an activism standpoint she is making a big difference. I guess that is how it goes.
I don't get it. You say "This is being talked about everywhere" in the same post as you say "Most people couldn't give two shits about her particular case". I disagree: her case is "talked about" exactly because her particular case is interesting--particularly, her bizzare form of protest.
If it turns out that she flat-out made it up (which is certainly looking possible given her lack of care about pursuing the guy with a police investigation), how could that *not* feed into the narrative (which is I agree false) that there are lots and lots of false, defamatory accusations out there, and in effect *harm* the cause?
Quote from: garbon on September 24, 2014, 04:54:02 PM
Actually one thing missing is commentary on her looks.
That would be in bad taste.
Quote from: Valmy on September 24, 2014, 04:40:19 PM
Why else would she be carrying a mattress around campus? Well ok she is getting a grade for some bullshit art project....but still stuff like this is done to influence people's opinions.
I can think of a number of legitimate reasons and quite a few bullshit reasons she would be carrying a mattress around campus. But she hasn't expressed a single criticism of the rape statutes as they are written.
grabon: she has nice legs.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on September 24, 2014, 05:08:58 PM
Quote from: Valmy on September 24, 2014, 04:40:19 PM
Why else would she be carrying a mattress around campus? Well ok she is getting a grade for some bullshit art project....but still stuff like this is done to influence people's opinions.
I can think of a number of legitimate reasons and quite a few bullshit reasons she would be carrying a mattress around campus. But she hasn't expressed a single criticism of the rape statutes as they are written.
grabon: she has nice legs.
According to her interview, her biggest complaint is that the University won't reopen her case and come to the "correct" verdict.
She still thinks that university complaints are the way to go, rather than the cops - because they are more likely to have "progressive" people. Not sure how that squares with them rejecting her complaint.
QuoteIn my case, the biggest problem is there is no retroactive motion to open closed cases and to get our rapists off campus, which would be admitting that they've done wrong, which is what they need to do right now.
Do you think that the college is capable of handling these cases?
I do. The police don't seem very well equipped either. It is going to take an administration that is willing to admit that they have done wrong, and make real tangible changes. I think administrations are actually in a better place to make these changes than the police right now.
How so?
I feel like it would take that much longer for [the police to] change, but the universities are filled with people who are progressive thinkers, and who can come up with creative strategies to solve these problems. We have so many intelligent students who think about and care about this issue way more than any of the administration.
Quote from: Valmy on September 24, 2014, 04:40:19 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on September 24, 2014, 04:35:42 PM
Quote from: Valmy on September 24, 2014, 04:33:50 PM
The rule of law includes activism to influence the lawmakers to change the laws.
She's not doing that.
Why else would she be carrying a mattress around campus? Well ok she is getting a grade for some bullshit art project....but still stuff like this is done to influence people's opinions.
I don't think that the mere accusation of wrongdoing is ever going to be enough to jail or expel a student, no matter how many opinions she changes.
Quote from: Neil on September 24, 2014, 05:17:31 PM
I don't think that the mere accusation of wrongdoing is ever going to be enough to jail or expel a student, no matter how many opinions she changes.
Yep. That is why I think it is mostly an activist thing. Well and a grade thing.
I've read horror stories about Universities handling violent crime in house instead of encouraging students to go to the cops.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on September 24, 2014, 05:08:58 PM
she has nice legs.
She isn't that cute, but she is okay. Not worth a ton of effort, but say she was carrying a mattress around with her....
Quote from: alfred russel on September 24, 2014, 05:41:37 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on September 24, 2014, 05:08:58 PM
she has nice legs.
She isn't that cute, but she is okay. Not worth a ton of effort, but say she was carrying a mattress around with her....
Forget her, I'd grab the mattress and send pics to her of the mattress living it up in various locations around the world. :cool:
Quote from: Valmy on September 24, 2014, 04:40:19 PM
Why else would she be carrying a mattress around campus? Well ok she is getting a grade for some bullshit art project....but still stuff like this is done to influence people's opinions.
She doesn't want the law changed, just the verdict. Its a form of blackmail. It seems to me she's trying to "shame" the university into abandoning its procedurally-derived result and impose an expulsion by fiat.
As an aside, she is a shitty ad for the value of a Colombia education. She is arguing for either an infinite process of appealing to reverse every decision that one of the involved parties does not like or else she is arguing that she deserves a special rule just for her.
Quote from: Legbiter on September 24, 2014, 06:07:49 PM
Quote from: alfred russel on September 24, 2014, 05:41:37 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on September 24, 2014, 05:08:58 PM
she has nice legs.
She isn't that cute, but she is okay. Not worth a ton of effort, but say she was carrying a mattress around with her....
Forget her, I'd grab the mattress and send pics to her of the mattress living it up in various locations around the world. :cool:
That would only work in her favor. She'd get more attention for herself, campus activists would hold candlelight vigils for the mattress, and she might even receive a call from the President. Not to mention the #bringbackourmattresses hashtag.
She's not after anything logical except maybe an easy grade and SJW attention. It's all about the drama and me me me.
Looking at the bright side, I'm sure that after this process she'll be strong enough to repel any future rape attempt.
Quote from: grumbler on September 24, 2014, 06:15:07 PM
As an aside, she is a shitty ad for the value of a Colombia education. She is arguing for either an infinite process of appealing to reverse every decision that one of the involved parties does not like or else she is arguing that she deserves a special rule just for her.
:D
"Now Lisa, if things don't go your way, just keep complaining and complaining until your dreams come true."(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg4.wikia.nocookie.net%2F__cb20080331174725%2Fsimpsons%2Fimages%2F4%2F4d%2FBill_Clinton2.jpg&hash=b276aac7e5f9eb95694b92d61a7abc0dbdee650a)
Quote from: Admiral Yi on September 24, 2014, 11:00:32 AM
I sort of wanted to avoid rehashing this old argument. I know that by the modern definition a drunk person is unable to give consent. I've had sex while drunk and/or stoned. Does that mean I've been assaulted? I think that's silly.
Should cold-fishing a passed out girl be considered assault? Sure.
Can drunk women want to have sex too? Of course.
Imho, the difference is between drunk and totally passed out.
A girl gets drunk, has unprotected sex, wakes up the morning after, doesn't like the guy and decides to call it rape because she wasn't entirely herself. Imho, that is not rape. That is not an excuse to get yourself out of a bad situation, just like "I was drunk" is not an excuse for smoking crack or driving your car and hitting something/someone. Except in Toronto, maybe, but that's another story ;)
However, if a girl gets drunk/stoned to the point she's passed out, even if that is self induced, that is rape to me. She clearly can't give consent in that case.
And those girls taking GHB before going out, because it's cool and cheaper than drinking a lot... I think they deserved what they got.
That being said, I don't know enough about the case to know if it was a rape or not.
**
On the other subject: University intervention. If a rape happenned at a work place, would the employer fire the employee? I think so. Why should it be different for a university? Maybe clarify the policies of the campus: if you're accused of commiting a criminal act on campus, you are suspended from school.
If the crime was vandalizing the science faculty, I'm pretty sure the university would expel the studend. Why should it be different for crimes against people?
Quote from: garbon on September 24, 2014, 04:31:00 PM
Quote from: grumbler on September 24, 2014, 04:28:18 PM
Quote from: garbon on September 24, 2014, 04:25:37 PM
I've a minor quibble regarding the bit in bold. If someone was raped and process ended with rapist getting away with it, are they expected to accept the results of the process?
Yes. That's part of the rule of law. One cannot only accept the rulings that one agrees with. Vigilantiism is frowned upon.
Oh well that's a whole different thing entirely. Where's this vigilantism bit coming from? It is possible to not accept the result of a process and yet not become a vigilante, no?
Actually, not so much. You have to accept that they are walking around free and unpunished. If you try to do anything about it you are likely to be committing a crime. You really shouldn't be stalking them, or harassing them, or refusing them service or attacking them or whatever.
Quote from: DGuller on September 24, 2014, 11:32:05 AM
Quote from: garbon on September 24, 2014, 11:28:26 AM
Well I guess it depends on whether or not the woman you know wanted to be passed around. If she did then no, not rape.
It doesn't depend on it. Once a person is drunk, they are not adult humans anymore, and have no wants or desires.
You drink. A lot. You drive. You have an accident. You killed someone.
Not guilty of any crime other than driving drunk because you had not the desire to kill?
You drink windshield washer fluid. You kill your 2 kids with a knife.
Not guilty because you weren't yourself?
You smoke pot. You kill your roommate because you think he's a demon.
Not guilty because you weren't yourself?
Quote from: garbon on September 24, 2014, 04:54:02 PM
Actually one thing missing is commentary on her looks.
needs implants.
Quote from: Razgovory on September 24, 2014, 06:54:07 PM
Quote from: garbon on September 24, 2014, 04:31:00 PM
Quote from: grumbler on September 24, 2014, 04:28:18 PM
Quote from: garbon on September 24, 2014, 04:25:37 PM
I've a minor quibble regarding the bit in bold. If someone was raped and process ended with rapist getting away with it, are they expected to accept the results of the process?
Yes. That's part of the rule of law. One cannot only accept the rulings that one agrees with. Vigilantiism is frowned upon.
Oh well that's a whole different thing entirely. Where's this vigilantism bit coming from? It is possible to not accept the result of a process and yet not become a vigilante, no?
Actually, not so much. You have to accept that they are walking around free and unpunished. If you try to do anything about it you are likely to be committing a crime. You really shouldn't be stalking them, or harassing them, or refusing them service or attacking them or whatever.
Yeah so those are also different things form simply not accepting something. Or are you of the school that unless you do something, you are tacitly accepting something?
Quote from: viper37 on September 24, 2014, 06:57:40 PM
You smoke pot. You kill your roommate because you think he's a demon.
Someone hasn't smoked very much pot. :P
Quote from: garbon on September 24, 2014, 07:19:13 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on September 24, 2014, 06:54:07 PM
Quote from: garbon on September 24, 2014, 04:31:00 PM
Quote from: grumbler on September 24, 2014, 04:28:18 PM
Quote from: garbon on September 24, 2014, 04:25:37 PM
I've a minor quibble regarding the bit in bold. If someone was raped and process ended with rapist getting away with it, are they expected to accept the results of the process?
Yes. That's part of the rule of law. One cannot only accept the rulings that one agrees with. Vigilantiism is frowned upon.
Oh well that's a whole different thing entirely. Where's this vigilantism bit coming from? It is possible to not accept the result of a process and yet not become a vigilante, no?
Actually, not so much. You have to accept that they are walking around free and unpunished. If you try to do anything about it you are likely to be committing a crime. You really shouldn't be stalking them, or harassing them, or refusing them service or attacking them or whatever.
Yeah so those are also different things form simply not accepting something. Or are you of the school that unless you do something, you are tacitly accepting something?
You are tacitly accepting it by not doing anything. If you believe someone has committed a crime against you, you call the police on them. Since she is not doing that she is essentially accepting that they have not committed a crime. She may protest loudly about it, but she is accepting the legal reality that the person is not wanted by the authorities or criminally liable.
Quote from: Razgovory on September 24, 2014, 07:50:23 PM
Quote from: garbon on September 24, 2014, 07:19:13 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on September 24, 2014, 06:54:07 PM
Quote from: garbon on September 24, 2014, 04:31:00 PM
Quote from: grumbler on September 24, 2014, 04:28:18 PM
Quote from: garbon on September 24, 2014, 04:25:37 PM
I've a minor quibble regarding the bit in bold. If someone was raped and process ended with rapist getting away with it, are they expected to accept the results of the process?
Yes. That's part of the rule of law. One cannot only accept the rulings that one agrees with. Vigilantiism is frowned upon.
Oh well that's a whole different thing entirely. Where's this vigilantism bit coming from? It is possible to not accept the result of a process and yet not become a vigilante, no?
Actually, not so much. You have to accept that they are walking around free and unpunished. If you try to do anything about it you are likely to be committing a crime. You really shouldn't be stalking them, or harassing them, or refusing them service or attacking them or whatever.
Yeah so those are also different things form simply not accepting something. Or are you of the school that unless you do something, you are tacitly accepting something?
You are tacitly accepting it by not doing anything. If you believe someone has committed a crime against you, you call the police on them. Since she is not doing that she is essentially accepting that they have not committed a crime. She may protest loudly about it, but she is accepting the legal reality that the person is not wanted by the authorities or criminally liable.
Odd, I think G was suggesting that she isn't accepting the process outcome with her antics.
And no, I completely disagree with that. In a hypothetical, if you don't think the police will actually doing anything, you aren't accepting that some hasn't committed a crime if you refuse to report a crime against you, to them.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1iUoqTaowaI
And really, Raz, where does that go? If you aren't protesting/taking action against any and everything you dislike, think is unjust, etc. are you accepting it?
Quote from: grumbler on September 24, 2014, 06:15:07 PM
As an aside, she is a shitty ad for the value of a Colombia education. She is arguing for either an infinite process of appealing to reverse every decision that one of the involved parties does not like or else she is arguing that she deserves a special rule just for her.
I'm going to put joking aside for a moment because it seems the line between crude jokes and actual misogyny is getting blurry.
She is one of two parties that knows exactly what happened. Lets assume that she actually was raped (which isn't very far fetched--I doubt most rape victims are making their stories up). So she knows she was raped, and the powers that be came to a decision that allowed her rapist to continue as her classmate. Maybe there was a procedural flaw in the decision, maybe the rules governing the system are flawed, or maybe it was just a he said/she said situation with a presumption of innocence. Whatever the case may be, the outcome was an injustice, and that is worth drawing attention to.
Also, confronted with a system that won't or can't punish her rapist, this may be a means to maximize his discomfort and punish him through the exercise of her free speech rights.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on September 24, 2014, 07:23:34 PM
Quote from: viper37 on September 24, 2014, 06:57:40 PM
You smoke pot. You kill your roommate because you think he's a demon.
Someone hasn't smoked very much pot. :P
Some people don't have to smoke any at all.
http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2012-05-31/news/bs-md-ha-dismemberment-follow-20120531_1_natalie-fabien-alexander-kinyua-kujoe-bonsafo-agyei-kodie
I think it's possible she's convinced herself she was raped but really wasn't.
Quote from: alfred russel on September 24, 2014, 08:08:45 PM
I'm going to put joking aside for a moment because it seems the line between crude jokes and actual misogyny is getting blurry.
She is one of two parties that knows exactly what happened. Lets assume that she actually was raped (which isn't very far fetched--I doubt most rape victims are making their stories up). So she knows she was raped, and the powers that be came to a decision that allowed her rapist to continue as her classmate. Maybe there was a procedural flaw in the decision, maybe the rules governing the system are flawed, or maybe it was just a he said/she said situation with a presumption of innocence. Whatever the case may be, the outcome was an injustice, and that is worth drawing attention to.
Also, confronted with a system that won't or can't punish her rapist, this may be a means to maximize his discomfort and punish him through the exercise of her free speech rights.
Granted. But I don't think the average person in that situation would wait months after the school panel made their judgement, years after the incident, to go to the police, then flake out on the police and not press charges. I also think the average person would try to get their version of the story out to the public. Has she said anything about the particulars apart from "he raped me?"
Quote from: Admiral Yi on September 24, 2014, 08:21:14 PM
Granted. But I don't think the average person in that situation would wait months after the school panel made their judgement, years after the incident, to go to the police, then flake out on the police and not press charges. I also think the average person would try to get their version of the story out to the public. Has she said anything about the particulars apart from "he raped me?"
I don't know anything about this case, but maybe she knows the case is weak and doesn't want to go through the meat grinder that is the legal process only to have her rapist found not guilty?
Quote from: alfred russel on September 24, 2014, 08:27:26 PM
I don't know anything about this case, but maybe she knows the case is weak and doesn't want to go through the meat grinder that is the legal process only to have her rapist found not guilty?
Her comments about the school panel don't give the impression of someone who thinks her case is weak.
In fact, now that I think about it, those comments give the impression she thinks the dude's expulsion is just a question of political preference. If they're progressive enough, they'll expel him.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on September 24, 2014, 08:21:14 PM
Has she said anything about the particulars apart from "he raped me?"
Yes the article is pretty clear on that front:
"Paul kissed Sulkowicz, who says that she was sober except for a sip of gin-and-Sprite. He was buzzed and carrying a handle of vodka. While they were having consensual sex in her dorm room, she alleges that he suddenly pushed her legs against her chest, choked her, slapped her and anally penetrated her as she struggled and clearly repeated 'No.'"
Article continues on to say/editorialize:
"Sulkowicz didn't report the incident at first. But when two classmates told her that Paul had been abusive to them too- one who had been in a long-term relationship with him, the other alleging he groped her- she pressed charges with the administration. Students tend to be uncomfortable going to the cops, who, despite what plots of Law & Order suggest, aren't always great with rape. The preference suits the universities, too, which prefer to handle issues quietly in-house."
Later on then Paul apparently said (as told by Sulkowicz)
"Paul denied the charges. If Sulkowicz is a fencer, she alleges he told the panel, her legs are the strongest part of her body, and he was only a lightweight rower - how could he have pinned her legs down? The anal sex was consensual, he said. He went into detail about how he came on Sulkowicz, and then she grabbed a tissue, wiped the ejaculate off, and 'threw the tissue away,' she says. 'None of which is true- he never came that night. He just stopped and ran away."
Then some bit about how Columbia didn't hear charges for 6 months, found in favor of Paul, when she appeal tean refused to overturn verdict saying that by Columbia's bylaws his decision was final.
Grazie.
Quote from: garbon on September 24, 2014, 08:07:06 PM
And really, Raz, where does that go? If you aren't protesting/taking action against any and everything you dislike, think is unjust, etc. are you accepting it?
In a legal situation, I think that is accurate. I'm not a big fan of "symbolic protests" and other such stuff.
Quote from: Razgovory on September 24, 2014, 09:20:12 PM
Quote from: garbon on September 24, 2014, 08:07:06 PM
And really, Raz, where does that go? If you aren't protesting/taking action against any and everything you dislike, think is unjust, etc. are you accepting it?
In a legal situation, I think that is accurate. I'm not a big fan of "symbolic protests" and other such stuff.
Alright so what's the full boundaries of that - do you think in a legal situation? Like let's say you report a crime and the cops don't investigate or do a cursory investigation. Are you just accepting that a crime wasn't committed if you don't continue to push? And in the case where it is a crime committed against yourself, how much onus is on the victim that you'd consider them to have crossed the line from accepting it wasn't a crime and not?
I find one interesting bit here to be the perception that ejecting a student who has (and yes, because of the ramifications, I'm going to leave it to "has" and not "likely has") committed an assault is some form of de facto judicial measure.
What everybody's glossing over is that college dorms are massive repositories of 17-21 year olds, many of whom have had no experience living independently. If the college is going to take the students and provide their shelter, I believe that 1) it's not unreasonable to hold the college to a moderate standard of ensuring the safety of its resident student population, and 2) ejection of a student found to have committed sexual assault is by no means an "overreaction." Just the knowledge that that person is still on campus can have a hugely detrimental effect on student safety- the likelihood that people won't report incidents or that students with emotions running high will try to take on their own handling of ejecting the culprit are just too high.
TL;DR:
1) Schools should immediately get out of the business of conducting their own investigations of sexual assault. Immediately give it to the pros and don't take on that liability yourself.
2) Schools provide shelter for students, and part of that shelter is providing a safe environment, up to and including removing threats from the premises.
3) Combining 1 and 2, schools should be reporting everything to LEOs and acting every time the authorities make that call, but only when the authorities make that call.
:mad:
http://politi.co/1CiN4HL
Quote from: CountDeMoney on September 24, 2014, 10:12:50 PM
:mad:
http://politi.co/1CiN4HL
I have to ashamedly admit that I like the jezebel play by play. -_-
http://jezebel.com/frat-alumni-president-blames-drunk-female-guests-for-ru-1638524129
Quote from: garbon on September 24, 2014, 09:26:51 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on September 24, 2014, 09:20:12 PM
Quote from: garbon on September 24, 2014, 08:07:06 PM
And really, Raz, where does that go? If you aren't protesting/taking action against any and everything you dislike, think is unjust, etc. are you accepting it?
In a legal situation, I think that is accurate. I'm not a big fan of "symbolic protests" and other such stuff.
Alright so what's the full boundaries of that - do you think in a legal situation? Like let's say you report a crime and the cops don't investigate or do a cursory investigation. Are you just accepting that a crime wasn't committed if you don't continue to push? And in the case where it is a crime committed against yourself, how much onus is on the victim that you'd consider them to have crossed the line from accepting it wasn't a crime and not?
I would say you keep reporting a crime until they tell you they aren't going to do shit about it or the person is found not guilty. Then you have to accept the reality of the situation.
Yeah most people have better shit to do / don't feel like making it all about a crime that happened to them.
Plus they wouldn't be accepting that the crime didn't happen but rather accepting that the police couldn't be bothered to care.
Quote from: garbon on September 24, 2014, 04:31:00 PM
Quote from: grumbler on September 24, 2014, 04:28:18 PM
Quote from: garbon on September 24, 2014, 04:25:37 PM
I've a minor quibble regarding the bit in bold. If someone was raped and process ended with rapist getting away with it, are they expected to accept the results of the process?
Yes. That's part of the rule of law. One cannot only accept the rulings that one agrees with. Vigilantiism is frowned upon.
Oh well that's a whole different thing entirely. Where's this vigilantism bit coming from? It is possible to not accept the result of a process and yet not become a vigilante, no?
I would say trying to put pressure on the system so that someone who was found not guilty by the system nonetheless is punished is a form of vigilantism.
I'm assuming she's allowed to carry the mattress outside the free-speech zone? :P
Quote from: garbon on September 24, 2014, 11:48:35 PM
Yeah most people have better shit to do / don't feel like making it all about a crime that happened to them.
Plus they wouldn't be accepting that the crime didn't happen but rather accepting that the police couldn't be bothered to care.
I suspect that people who have been raped tend regard that as rather important.
What everyone is glossing over is that schemes like DSB proposes were, in fact, the way universities treated sexual assault right up until the resulting rape epidemic caused congress to change the rules on how campuses were to protect their students from sexually aggressive fellow-students. We know for a fact that it doesn't work to have schools ignore allegations of sexual misconduct until they rise to the level of a convicted-in-criminal-court felony.
As a result of changes to Title IX, universities are obliged to work actively, not passively as some here have recommended, to ensure the safety of their students and the creation of an atmosphere free of fear and intimidation. They must investigate claims of sexual harassment, misconduct, and assault. They must encourage those who report being victims of crime to report those crimes to the police. But, whether the criminal justice system sanctions the alleged perp or not, the universities still bear a responsibility to rid themselves of students or behaviors that create a hostile atmosphere for other students.
This is, of course, no different than they treat any other violation of the student code of conduct. Only a few forms of bullying are actually violations of the law, but the universities are obliged to stamp out all bullying that comes to their attention, whether the criminal justice system acts in those cases or not. Ditto for racist comments, "fag bashing," or anything else that creates a hostile atmosphere. I don't mention lying or cheating here, because I think even DSB believes that universities should deal with those outside the criminal justice system.
In this case, i believe that Colombia did exactly what it was obliged to do, and that the system worked as it was supposed to. Sulkowicz, on the other hand, doesn't come off so well: for all her current vehemence, she didn't seem to mind the guy being on campus for more than a year between the time of the incident and the time she reported it. She doesn't seem to think his actions were sufficiently criminal to be worth pursuing in the criminal justice system. Her real objection seems to be that the schools student misconduct review panel didn't accept her story at its face value, and she wants the right to appeal every decision that goes against her until she gets a decision that doesn't.
tl; dr
(1) DSB and others propose going back to the old system that allowed the campus rape crisis to begin; we should reject this sort of reactionary thinking
(2) Colombia seems to have done everything right and above-board, and Sulkowicz everything selfishly and emo. I have no sympathy for her.
Quote from: grumbler on September 25, 2014, 06:46:28 AM
What everyone is glossing over is that schemes like DSB proposes were, in fact, the way universities treated sexual assault right up until the resulting rape epidemic caused congress to change the rules on how campuses were to protect their students from sexually aggressive fellow-students. We know for a fact that it doesn't work to have schools ignore allegations of sexual misconduct until they rise to the level of a convicted-in-criminal-court felony.
As a result of changes to Title IX, universities are obliged to work actively, not passively as some here have recommended, to ensure the safety of their students and the creation of an atmosphere free of fear and intimidation. They must investigate claims of sexual harassment, misconduct, and assault. They must encourage those who report being victims of crime to report those crimes to the police. But, whether the criminal justice system sanctions the alleged perp or not, the universities still bear a responsibility to rid themselves of students or behaviors that create a hostile atmosphere for other students.
This is, of course, no different than they treat any other violation of the student code of conduct. Only a few forms of bullying are actually violations of the law, but the universities are obliged to stamp out all bullying that comes to their attention, whether the criminal justice system acts in those cases or not. Ditto for racist comments, "fag bashing," or anything else that creates a hostile atmosphere. I don't mention lying or cheating here, because I think even DSB believes that universities should deal with those outside the criminal justice system.
In this case, i believe that Colombia did exactly what it was obliged to do, and that the system worked as it was supposed to. Sulkowicz, on the other hand, doesn't come off so well: for all her current vehemence, she didn't seem to mind the guy being on campus for more than a year between the time of the incident and the time she reported it. She doesn't seem to think his actions were sufficiently criminal to be worth pursuing in the criminal justice system. Her real objection seems to be that the schools student misconduct review panel didn't accept her story at its face value, and she wants the right to appeal every decision that goes against her until she gets a decision that doesn't.
tl; dr
(1) DSB and others propose going back to the old system that allowed the campus rape crisis to begin; we should reject this sort of reactionary thinking
(2) Colombia seems to have done everything right and above-board, and Sulkowicz everything selfishly and emo. I have no sympathy for her.
Even her last name is emo.
Quote from: Martinus on September 25, 2014, 07:13:19 AM
Even her last name is emo.
Analwicz would be too much irony.
Quote from: grumbler on September 25, 2014, 06:46:28 AM
What everyone is glossing over is that schemes like DSB proposes were, in fact, the way universities treated sexual assault right up until the resulting rape epidemic caused congress to change the rules on how campuses were to protect their students from sexually aggressive fellow-students. We know for a fact that it doesn't work to have schools ignore allegations of sexual misconduct until they rise to the level of a convicted-in-criminal-court felony.
Step away from the bag of straw.
I'm not saying anything should be ignored, I'm saying everything should be reported to the police. Sexual offenses are a criminal matter and should be left to the authorities.
Where is this magic instance of sexual assault that doesn't rise to the level of a felony? Not rape-rape?
Getting drunk and copping a feel in student parties, for example? There's lots of insidious behavior that doesn't rise to a criminal matter that people can be educated about.
Quote from: Razgovory on September 25, 2014, 02:30:38 AM
Quote from: garbon on September 24, 2014, 11:48:35 PM
Yeah most people have better shit to do / don't feel like making it all about a crime that happened to them.
Plus they wouldn't be accepting that the crime didn't happen but rather accepting that the police couldn't be bothered to care.
I suspect that people who have been raped tend regard that as rather important.
And yet oddly all the time rape victims don't actually report what has been happened to them or get cold feet. To say those individuals are accepting that a crime didn't actually occur is...well mind-boggling.
Quote from: DontSayBanana on September 25, 2014, 07:38:27 AM
Quote from: grumbler on September 25, 2014, 06:46:28 AM
What everyone is glossing over is that schemes like DSB proposes were, in fact, the way universities treated sexual assault right up until the resulting rape epidemic caused congress to change the rules on how campuses were to protect their students from sexually aggressive fellow-students. We know for a fact that it doesn't work to have schools ignore allegations of sexual misconduct until they rise to the level of a convicted-in-criminal-court felony.
Step away from the bag of straw.
I'm not saying anything should be ignored, I'm saying everything should be reported to the police. Sexual offenses are a criminal matter and should be left to the authorities.
Where is this magic instance of sexual assault that doesn't rise to the level of a felony? Not rape-rape?
Stop making up arguments that don't exist. All suspected lawbreaking is supposed to be reported to the police under the system you want to scrap. Not all sexual offenses are criminal, and not all alleged criminal sexual offenses are successfully prosecuted, so if students are to be protected against unsuccessfully-prosecuted assault and non-criminal sexual misconduct, civil sanctions are warranted.
I don't think magic has anything to do with this. And you create a strawman by changing "sexual misconduct" (which is what the universities punish) to 'sexual assault" (which is what the criminal justice system prosecutes). No one else argues that sexual assault is something you seem to think is "rape-rape." All sexual assault is sexual misconduct, but not all sexual misconduct is sexual assault. Publishing nude photos of a sexual partner in revenge for a breakup is sexual misconduct, for instance, but not sexual assault. Some schools require a higher level of explicit consent to sex for intoxicated students than non-intoxicated ones - sex under this concept of consent may not be criminal sexual assault, but could still be a violation of the student code of conduct prohibition of sexual misconduct.
As I have noted before, the university disciplinary process is more akin to the civil justice system than the criminal justice system. The one distinguishing feature between the civil model and the university discipline model is that, since about two years ago, universities are required to investigate and process claims of sexual misconduct even when the accuser declines to cooperate.
Quote from: DontSayBanana on September 25, 2014, 07:38:27 AM
Quote from: grumbler on September 25, 2014, 06:46:28 AM
What everyone is glossing over is that schemes like DSB proposes were, in fact, the way universities treated sexual assault right up until the resulting rape epidemic caused congress to change the rules on how campuses were to protect their students from sexually aggressive fellow-students. We know for a fact that it doesn't work to have schools ignore allegations of sexual misconduct until they rise to the level of a convicted-in-criminal-court felony.
Step away from the bag of straw.
I'm not saying anything should be ignored, I'm saying everything should be reported to the police. Sexual offenses are a criminal matter and should be left to the authorities.
Where is this magic instance of sexual assault that doesn't rise to the level of a felony? Not rape-rape?
Heh, I tried saying something like this before - for some reason, it isn't getting through. Don't sweat it. :D
Quote from: alfred russel on September 24, 2014, 08:08:45 PM
Quote from: grumbler on September 24, 2014, 06:15:07 PM
As an aside, she is a shitty ad for the value of a Colombia education. She is arguing for either an infinite process of appealing to reverse every decision that one of the involved parties does not like or else she is arguing that she deserves a special rule just for her.
I'm going to put joking aside for a moment because it seems the line between crude jokes and actual misogyny is getting blurry.
She is one of two parties that knows exactly what happened. Lets assume that she actually was raped (which isn't very far fetched--I doubt most rape victims are making their stories up). So she knows she was raped, and the powers that be came to a decision that allowed her rapist to continue as her classmate. Maybe there was a procedural flaw in the decision, maybe the rules governing the system are flawed, or maybe it was just a he said/she said situation with a presumption of innocence. Whatever the case may be, the outcome was an injustice, and that is worth drawing attention to.
Also, confronted with a system that won't or can't punish her rapist, this may be a means to maximize his discomfort and punish him through the exercise of her free speech rights.
I would agree with you in a different case.
In this case, the alleged victim did not go through with the usual process - she dropped charges against the alleged perp, allegedly because she found the cops annoyingly persistent in questioning her, and couldn't be bothered with cooperating with their investigation, which would take up too much of her effort and time (and that was
her explaination). It can hardly be said that 'the system failed her', when she hasn't bothered to pursue the ordinary avenue of redress (the police). She hasn't used the system.
One possible inference from this is that she, for whatever reason, strongly suspects that the police investigation will conclude that the charges were not justified (it is incredible, to me at least, that she would go through all the bother of carrying a matress with her everywhere to protest a crime against her, while at the same time finding a police investigation into the same incident 'too onerous').
As to possible motive for the charade, assuming the crime was not actually committed ... well, there are several possibilities. First is revenge against this guy, for whatever reason. Second, fame - she is on the cover of magazines. Third is popularity - she has a whole faction of the student body supporting her. Not to mention the 'art project' aspect.
Again, this is no reflection on the prevelence of sexual assault on campus, which is a serious problem.
Quote from: Malthus on September 25, 2014, 08:19:43 AM
Quote from: DontSayBanana on September 25, 2014, 07:38:27 AM
Quote from: grumbler on September 25, 2014, 06:46:28 AM
What everyone is glossing over is that schemes like DSB proposes were, in fact, the way universities treated sexual assault right up until the resulting rape epidemic caused congress to change the rules on how campuses were to protect their students from sexually aggressive fellow-students. We know for a fact that it doesn't work to have schools ignore allegations of sexual misconduct until they rise to the level of a convicted-in-criminal-court felony.
Step away from the bag of straw.
I'm not saying anything should be ignored, I'm saying everything should be reported to the police. Sexual offenses are a criminal matter and should be left to the authorities.
Where is this magic instance of sexual assault that doesn't rise to the level of a felony? Not rape-rape?
Heh, I tried saying something like this before - for some reason, it isn't getting through. Don't sweat it. :D
Yes, and you were just as wrong as DSB. Don't sweat it. :D
Quote from: garbon on September 24, 2014, 09:03:03 PM
Later on then Paul apparently said (as told by Sulkowicz)
"Paul denied the charges. If Sulkowicz is a fencer, she alleges he told the panel, her legs are the strongest part of her body, and he was only a lightweight rower - how could he have pinned her legs down? The anal sex was consensual, he said. He went into detail about how he came on Sulkowicz, and then she grabbed a tissue, wiped the ejaculate off, and 'threw the tissue away,' she says. 'None of which is true- he never came that night. He just stopped and ran away."
I never caught that in Letters of Paul. Maybe it's in that NIV I never bothered to read.
Quote from: Malthus on September 25, 2014, 08:31:57 AM
I would agree with you in a different case.
In this case, the alleged victim did not go through with the usual process - she dropped charges against the alleged perp, allegedly because she found the cops annoyingly persistent in questioning her, and couldn't be bothered with cooperating with their investigation, which would take up too much of her effort and time (and that was her explaination). It can hardly be said that 'the system failed her', when she hasn't bothered to pursue the ordinary avenue of redress (the police). She hasn't used the system.
One possible inference from this is that she, for whatever reason, strongly suspects that the police investigation will conclude that the charges were not justified (it is incredible, to me at least, that she would go through all the bother of carrying a matress with her everywhere to protest a crime against her, while at the same time finding a police investigation into the same incident 'too onerous').
My basic understanding of the facts of her allegation: she was having consensual sex, the dude went for unauthorized anal which she protested, and she didn't file charges until somewhat later. That seems to my amateur eye to be the sort of case that is almost impossible to prove. I don't think it is far fetched that the police communicated this to her, directly or indirectly, and she would be relectant to express that by saying something like "the investigators were skeptical that the allegations had enough supporting evidence to get a conviction in court."
That doesn't change that she experienced what happened. Maybe she is fabricating the whole story--as you say she does have some incentives to do so. But then maybe she isn't. Probably only she and the guy know for sure.
Quote from: DontSayBanana on September 25, 2014, 07:38:27 AM
Quote from: grumbler on September 25, 2014, 06:46:28 AM
What everyone is glossing over is that schemes like DSB proposes were, in fact, the way universities treated sexual assault right up until the resulting rape epidemic caused congress to change the rules on how campuses were to protect their students from sexually aggressive fellow-students. We know for a fact that it doesn't work to have schools ignore allegations of sexual misconduct until they rise to the level of a convicted-in-criminal-court felony.
Step away from the bag of straw.
I'm not saying anything should be ignored, I'm saying everything should be reported to the police. Sexual offenses are a criminal matter and should be left to the authorities.
Where is this magic instance of sexual assault that doesn't rise to the level of a felony? Not rape-rape?
This is the type of reasoning that leads to kids being jailed for drawing a gun in a notebook. There are many cases of inappropriate behaviour - especially among young people - that should not be criminalised but should be corrected by disciplinary means.
Quote from: Martinus on September 25, 2014, 09:26:18 AM
This is the type of reasoning that leads to kids being jailed for drawing a gun in a notebook. There are many cases of inappropriate behaviour - especially among young people - that should not be criminalised but should be corrected by disciplinary means.
Oh, Marty. I've missed your analogies.
Nowhere did I indicate action should be taken by the authorities prior to an assault actually occurring, hence my repeated use of the word "assault." The schools can keep an eye on patterns of risky behavior, but that's prior to an assault and can be done administratively.
Some examples of administrative means to prevent: get a solid pledge from fraternities and sororities that parties will be dry, even off-campus (giving them some actual teeth to deal with fraternities that get around dry campus rules by holding events off-campus). Less obvious examples would be that later classes should be scheduled nearer to dorms to minimize students being alone in isolated areas at night. Staggered hourly foot patrol by campus security/police along footpaths during night hours.
Quote from: Martinus on September 25, 2014, 09:29:24 AM
Quote from: garbon on September 25, 2014, 09:27:22 AM
Quote from: Martinus on September 25, 2014, 09:22:01 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on September 25, 2014, 07:26:05 AM
Quote from: Martinus on September 25, 2014, 07:13:19 AM
Even her last name is emo.
Analwicz would be too much irony.
Funnily, in Polish "wicz" is pronounced "witch".
Wow.
:huh: ?
I was just excited about this insightful line of discussion. :)
Quote from: DontSayBanana on September 25, 2014, 09:34:06 AM
Some examples of administrative means to prevent: get a solid pledge from fraternities and sororities that parties will be dry, even off-campus (giving them some actual teeth to deal with fraternities that get around dry campus rules by holding events off-campus).
:bleeding:
Quote from: alfred russel on September 25, 2014, 09:02:28 AM
Quote from: Malthus on September 25, 2014, 08:31:57 AM
I would agree with you in a different case.
In this case, the alleged victim did not go through with the usual process - she dropped charges against the alleged perp, allegedly because she found the cops annoyingly persistent in questioning her, and couldn't be bothered with cooperating with their investigation, which would take up too much of her effort and time (and that was her explaination). It can hardly be said that 'the system failed her', when she hasn't bothered to pursue the ordinary avenue of redress (the police). She hasn't used the system.
One possible inference from this is that she, for whatever reason, strongly suspects that the police investigation will conclude that the charges were not justified (it is incredible, to me at least, that she would go through all the bother of carrying a matress with her everywhere to protest a crime against her, while at the same time finding a police investigation into the same incident 'too onerous').
My basic understanding of the facts of her allegation: she was having consensual sex, the dude went for unauthorized anal which she protested, and she didn't file charges until somewhat later. That seems to my amateur eye to be the sort of case that is almost impossible to prove. I don't think it is far fetched that the police communicated this to her, directly or indirectly, and she would be relectant to express that by saying something like "the investigators were skeptical that the allegations had enough supporting evidence to get a conviction in court."
That doesn't change that she experienced what happened. Maybe she is fabricating the whole story--as you say she does have some incentives to do so. But then maybe she isn't. Probably only she and the guy know for sure.
That's as may be, I agree that rape in the course of otherwise-consentual sex is always going to be difficult to prove by its very nature, particularly where the alleged victim waits some years after the fact to report it, but my point is that sympathy for those protesting that 'the system failed me'
should be muted in cases in which the person making that allegation haven't attempted to fully use the 'system' which they claimed to have 'failed'.
What, exactly, is she claiming 'the system' ought to have done differently? In what way dit it "fail"? From her interview, it seems her beef is that she wasn't allowed to continually appeal the verdict at the administrative hearing until they agreed with her.
Quote from: Malthus on September 25, 2014, 09:45:55 AM
From her interview, it seems her beef is that she wasn't allowed to continually appeal the verdict at the administrative hearing until they agreed with her.
I think you protest too much. Making one appeal that denied is hardly "continually".
Quote from: derspiess on September 25, 2014, 09:42:09 AM
Quote from: DontSayBanana on September 25, 2014, 09:34:06 AM
Some examples of administrative means to prevent: get a solid pledge from fraternities and sororities that parties will be dry, even off-campus (giving them some actual teeth to deal with fraternities that get around dry campus rules by holding events off-campus).
:bleeding:
We didn't allow sororities to host parties in their own housing.
I'm not sure what Bwog is but here's another bit about when she went to the police - which looks like 6 months post when uni decided against her.
http://bwog.com/2014/05/16/emma-sulkowicz-files-police-report-for-sexual-assault/
QuoteEmma Sulkowicz Files Police Report For Sexual Assault
In the last week, campuses around the country have been reeling over an increased focus on sexual assault, and publications from all fronts have addressed the topic. Here at Columbia, the past seven days have featured lists of four alleged rapists in bathrooms in Hamilton, Lerner, and Butler.
On the morning of May 14, according to Spec, Emma Sulkowicz, CC '15, filed a police report against Jean-Paul Nungesser, CC '15, for alleged sexual assault. Nungesser's name appeared on the list circulating around campus listing the names of four alleged rapists.
According to Spec, Sulkowicz went to the police after finishing her finals on the 13th. She filed a complaint with the NYPD after being dissatisfied with Columbia's internal handling of the case.
Sulkowicz's experience with the NYPD was harrowing, to say the least. She describes the police as "dismissive," as they emphasized the fact that she had engaged in earlier consensual sex with Nungesser and that she could not remember specific details of the attack, like what shoes Nungesser was wearing. They demanded graphic details, and one officer also allegedly told friends Sulkowicz brought for emotional support that he "didn't believe [her] for a second."
Sulkowicz, one of 23 survivors who recently filed a Title IX claim against Columbia, was also featured in a Time Magazine video, part of Time's recent feature on sexual assault on college campuses. Sulkowicz writes, "The Columbia administration is harboring serial rapists on campus. They're more concerned about their public image than keeping people safe."
Columbia University has declined to comment on the matter.
Here's also what aljazaera reported at the time.
http://america.aljazeera.com/watch/shows/america-tonight/articles/2014/5/19/why-college-rapevictimsdonatgotothepolice.html
QuoteWhy college rape victims don't go to the police
Tired of being asked why she hadn't, Emma Sulkowicz reported her alleged rape to the police; this is what happened
At the end of finals, most college kids go party. When Emma Sulkowicz finished her last exam of the school year on Tuesday, she went back to her dorm room and dialed 911.
It had been almost two years since Sulkowicz, now a rising senior at Columbia University, says she was raped by a classmate. And it had been seven months since she revisited the experience at a school disciplinary hearing, a process that she said left her feeling physically sick, then empty and then scared.
In the hearing, Sulkowicz said she had to explain to the three administrators on the panel how anal rape worked. She told them she had been hit across the face, choked and pinned down, but, she said, one still seemed confused about how it was possible for someone to penetrate her there without lubricant. Sulkowicz said she had to draw them a diagram.
"To have random administrators being the ones who have to stomach the gory details of rape — they weren't prepared for this role," said Sulkowicz.
Her best friend was meant to be at the hearing; Sulkowicz had chosen her as her one "supporter." But her friend was kicked out of that role for talking about the case, according to Sulkowicz, in violation of the university's confidentiality policy. As punishment, her friend was also put on probation and made to write two reflection papers: one from the perspective of Sulkowicz and another from the accused.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Famerica.aljazeera.com%2Fcontent%2Fajam%2Fwatch%2Fshows%2Famerica-tonight%2Farticles%2F2014%2F5%2F19%2Fwhy-college-rapevictimsdonatgotothepolice%2Fjcr%3Acontent%2Fmainpar%2Fadaptiveimage%2Fsrc.adapt.960.high.1400621807877.jpg&hash=50f52c90e3cc61f4ac9b7836d1d60d40830b6e08)
"It was a really sick thing for them to do," Sulkowicz said, "to make my best friend write an essay from the perspective of the man who raped me."
In the end, the man Sulkowicz had accused was found not responsible. America Tonight confirmed that at least one other student at the university filed a report with the school charging that the same man had raped her, too. Columbia University said it does not discuss individual cases.
"I see him around campus, and it's really scary, because I know what he's capable of," Sulkowicz said. "... I know he's going to continue to rape other women on campus."
Sulkowicz went public with her story at an April event on Columbia's campus with New York Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, and she's become part of a growing wave of student activists campaigning against what they say are the failures of their colleges to handle sexual assault.
Many of those who learned about her story asked her the same question — to her face and on Facebook: Why didn't you just go to the police?
According to a 2000 study by the Department of Justice, fewer than 5 percent of college women who suffered completed or attempted rapes reported it to law enforcement. Almost a quarter of rape victims who did not report said they were afraid of being treated with hostility. Twenty-seven percent said they thought the police wouldn't think it was serious enough.
By Tuesday night, Sulkowicz had had enough: She was ready to do the one thing that so many people had asked her why she hadn't done. With her finals finished and her boyfriend and friend by her side, she called the police.
What color are his eyes?
It only took five to 10 minutes, Sulkowicz said, for four officers to come knock on the door of her dorm room.
They wouldn't talk to her in her room with her two friends present, because of "procedure," according to an audio recording Sulkowicz's friend made while she was present.
So Sulkowicz came out into her dormitory hall, where classmates walked by. There, the officers told her to recount her whole story.
From the questions officers asked her, Sulkowicz quickly got the impression that they thought she was making it all up. "You didn't call the police? Most women would have called the police," one said, according to Sulkowicz. "You don't even remember the color of his eyes?"
Sulkowicz said that same officer also insisted that she hadn't been raped, telling her, "You invited him into your room. That's not the legal definition of rape."
After the initial questioning, the officers wanted to take Sulkowicz to the station alone, but her friends said they insisted on joining. They drove to a station on New York City's Upper West Side.
When they arrived, Sulkowicz filled out her police report in a room with smooth jazz blaring. But that station didn't have a special victims division, a unit that specializes in sex crimes, so it was back into a police car to head to a station across town that had one.
The officer driving lit up a cigarette. Thinking her friend was close to the breaking point, Zoe Ridolfi-Starr, also a rising Columbia senior, told the officer her throat was hurting, and asked if he wouldn't mind putting out his smoke.
"You're in my office right now, alright?" he said, according to the audio recording.
At the next station, while Sulkowicz was questioned in a private room, the same officer started a conversation with her two friends. Ridolfi-Starr told him that she thought the police's questioning had been uncomfortable.
"Well, it's supposed to be uncomfortable," the officer responded. "If it goes to trial, this is what's going to happen ... You think that was bad? Nah."
"For every single rape I've had, I've had 20 that are total bull----," he added. "It's also my type of job to get to the truth. If that means being harsh about it, that's what I do."
A little later, he went on to remark that Sulkowicz couldn't even tell him the eye color of the man she was accusing.
"He made it very clear that he didn't believe it, and that she had handled the whole case improperly," said Erik Ramberg, Sulkowicz's boyfriend and a rising Columbia senior. "He was illustrating exactly why girls feel uncomfortable going to the police. The worst fears of a stereotype confirmed."
When asked to comment, the New York Police Department only responded by e-mail, writing only that, "This is an active ongoing investigation by the Manhattan special victim squad."
In the last few years, the NYPD has made an effort to better handle sexual assault reports, under a crush of criticism that its officers were dismissing and minimizing complaints.
Earlier this month, the NYPD held its first dedicated 80-hour training for special victims division staff, according to Mary Haviland, the executive director of the New York City Alliance Against Sexual Assault, who was impressed by the portion of the event she attended. But there are only a few hundred officers in the special victims division, not nearly enough to respond to every complaint of sexual violence.
In 2010, a task force appointed to address criticisms recommended new training protocols for officers dealing with sex crime victims. Upon those recommendations, the New York City Police Academy introduced a video on sexual violence response for officers in training, according to Haviland, but it's unclear whether it's been shown to officers already serving. The NYPD did not respond to questions about their training guidelines.
When Sulkowicz's experience was recounted Monday at a campus sexual assault roundtable hosted by Missouri Sen. Claire McCaskill, the senator, who is drafting legislation to address campus sexual assault, said she was "shocked" that a police department of that size would have dispatched someone ill-equipped to respond.
As sexual misconduct on college campuses has become a national issue, with the White House weighing in last month, many commentators have questioned why colleges are in the business of handling sexual assault at all.
"There's a multi-hundred year history of a complete failure of the criminal justice system to handle sexual assault," explained David Lisak, a forensic consultant who has advised more than 100 colleges on how to handle sexual misconduct.
"Victims are frightened by it. There's no confidence in it. [Not all that long ago] there was no point in reporting if you couldn't show by the bruises, cuts and broken bones on your body that you had fought to your end and finally been overcome."
For rape victims who don't want to go to the police, the college system provides a mechanism where they can at least get their rapist kicked out of their class, dorm or campus. Most colleges require a much lower standard of proof: more likely than not, as opposed to beyond a reasonable doubt. So in theory, on college campuses, rape victims should have much easier access to some sort of justice.
"Female sexual assault victims on college campuses, where alcohol was present and it happened behind closed doors with little or no witnesses, that conviction rate has to be 1 percent, at best," said Brett Sokolow, the CEO of the consulting and law firm the National Center for Higher Education Risk Management. "You're basically saying, 'Let the rapists go free.' The only system that can hold them accountable is the college system."
Ridolfi-Starr was also sexually assaulted as a student at Columbia and said she would never consider reporting to the police after witnessing what Sulkowicz experienced. "I would never, ever subject myself to that kind of emotional abuse," she said.
And if other victims were to come to her and ask whether they should report, Ridolfi-Starr said she would advise them, "Clear your schedule for 48 hours, because you're going to want to sit and cry."
On bright side, said Sulkowicz, the police now have her accused rapist's name on record, in case he were to assault somebody else. "America Tonight" chose not to publish his name because he hasn't been arrested or charged.
But ultimately, Sulkowicz has one message for rape victims.
"If you want to go to the police, this is what to expect: You'll be verbally abused. But at least no one will yell at you for not going to the police and getting verbally abused," she said. "Just take your pick."
Quote from: garbon on September 25, 2014, 09:48:18 AM
Quote from: Malthus on September 25, 2014, 09:45:55 AM
From her interview, it seems her beef is that she wasn't allowed to continually appeal the verdict at the administrative hearing until they agreed with her.
I think you protest too much. Making one appeal that denied is hardly "continually".
I think you misunderstand her argument. She had the one appeal that is currently allowed. That appeal was denied. She wants a new process that allows her to appeal as many times as she wants until she gets the verdict she desires.
I will admit that it is unclear as to whether she wants the person she is accusing of also being able to appeal until he gets the verdict that he wants. Presumably, the school would be too progressive to ever grant his appeal, but if he is allowed as many appeals as she is allowed, it would be a moot issue since he would graduate without ever actually being expelled.
Quote from: garbon on September 25, 2014, 09:48:43 AM
Quote from: derspiess on September 25, 2014, 09:42:09 AM
Quote from: DontSayBanana on September 25, 2014, 09:34:06 AM
Some examples of administrative means to prevent: get a solid pledge from fraternities and sororities that parties will be dry, even off-campus (giving them some actual teeth to deal with fraternities that get around dry campus rules by holding events off-campus).
:bleeding:
We didn't allow sororities to host parties in their own housing.
But did you allow fraternities to do so?
Quote from: grumbler on September 25, 2014, 09:56:39 AM
Quote from: garbon on September 25, 2014, 09:48:18 AM
Quote from: Malthus on September 25, 2014, 09:45:55 AM
From her interview, it seems her beef is that she wasn't allowed to continually appeal the verdict at the administrative hearing until they agreed with her.
I think you protest too much. Making one appeal that denied is hardly "continually".
I think you misunderstand her argument. She had the one appeal that is currently allowed. That appeal was denied. She wants a new process that allows her to appeal as many times as she wants until she gets the verdict she desires.
Can you point me to where she has stated this?
Quote from: derspiess on September 25, 2014, 10:00:26 AM
Quote from: garbon on September 25, 2014, 09:48:43 AM
Quote from: derspiess on September 25, 2014, 09:42:09 AM
Quote from: DontSayBanana on September 25, 2014, 09:34:06 AM
Some examples of administrative means to prevent: get a solid pledge from fraternities and sororities that parties will be dry, even off-campus (giving them some actual teeth to deal with fraternities that get around dry campus rules by holding events off-campus).
:bleeding:
We didn't allow sororities to host parties in their own housing.
But did you allow fraternities to do so?
Yes, fraternities were allowed to do so. Actually sororities were allowed to have parties in their housing - just it couldn't be whatever the "level of party" was that was considered a "campus-wide party." If a sorority wanted to have a campus wide party (basically meaning that they were allowed to ignore firecodes and whole campus was invited) - they typically did so then in conjunction with a frat party or at one of the other housing units. Yeah pretty sexist really.
I posted the aljazaera article above.
Thing is, one of the cited beefs in the article is a fear that the cops won't take the case seriously enough, or indeed, do anything much.
In her quoted interview - that you quoted - she claims she dropped the case because the cops were taking up too much of her time with their investigation, calling her all the time, etc.
Were the cops harsh, abrasive and dismissive? We have her word on it - mind you, she's hardly impartial, and some of her stated beefs are simply strange (smooth jazz blaring? - granted, Muzak is a crime against humanity). Were they prompt to show up, and diligent in following up her case? Ironically, we have her word on that, too. According to her own story, they showed up in "5 or 10 minutes", took her to a special victims unit, and that unit followed up (too much, according to her).
Quote from: garbon on September 25, 2014, 10:03:57 AM
Quote from: grumbler on September 25, 2014, 09:56:39 AM
Quote from: garbon on September 25, 2014, 09:48:18 AM
Quote from: Malthus on September 25, 2014, 09:45:55 AM
From her interview, it seems her beef is that she wasn't allowed to continually appeal the verdict at the administrative hearing until they agreed with her.
I think you protest too much. Making one appeal that denied is hardly "continually".
I think you misunderstand her argument. She had the one appeal that is currently allowed. That appeal was denied. She wants a new process that allows her to appeal as many times as she wants until she gets the verdict she desires.
Can you point me to where she has stated this?
She is carrying a goddamn mattress and making a spectacle out of herself saying she will do so until he is expelled. Surely, if the college has already made a decision not to expel him, then in order to reverse this decision, it would need to come as a result of an appeal against the earlier decision she disagrees with. You understand that, right?
I'd be interested to hear a female poster's take on this. Meri, perhaps.
Quote from: Malthus on September 25, 2014, 10:09:45 AM
I posted the aljazaera article above.
Oh sorry, didn't see it.
Quote from: Malthus on September 25, 2014, 10:09:45 AM
Thing is, one of the cited beefs in the article is a fear that the cops won't take the case seriously enough, or indeed, do anything much.
In her quoted interview - that you quoted - she claims she dropped the case because the cops were taking up too much of her time with their investigation, calling her all the time, etc.
Were the cops harsh, abrasive and dismissive? We have her word on it - mind you, she's hardly impartial, and some of her stated beefs are simply strange (smooth jazz blaring? - granted, Muzak is a crime against humanity). Were they prompt to show up, and diligent in following up her case? Ironically, we have her word on that, too. According to her own story, they showed up in "5 or 10 minutes", took her to a special victims unit, and that unit followed up (too much, according to her).
I mean she's a young woman. Now perhaps during your poverty days you were very well put together and consistent with your thoughts and message at all times but I don't expect that from a young 20 something based on my interactions with them (/memory of being one). Add on top of that a traumatic event and having to deal with police officers and I can totally see how she might lash out in all directions (including smooth jazz non-complaint).
Point of fact is that dealing with police officers (and famously the NYPD) is not fun and a tiring process even for those who have not been victims of such crimes. From her description even though they were promptly handling her case, it sounds like they were pretty dismissive. I can easily imagine how she decided it all wasn't worth it but then later this summer decided she had been foolish (as was the case in how long it took her to even approach the university about it). And with that I can see how she might not want to go back to the callous cops, who would certainly be more skeptical at this point, but opt for this "easier" protest route.
I understand that all of this adds a degree of doubt her and makes her less of an ideal banner for raising awareness about rape on college campuses (as like you've said it muddies just exactly what the message is), but by the same token, I don't know that we should expect victims to act completely rational and calculating - expecting that if they are telling a truth then they will participate fully and never waver.
What I haven't seen yet is evidence of changing stories that she told about the actual rape.
Quote from: derspiess on September 25, 2014, 10:20:45 AM
I'd be interested to hear a female poster's take on this. Meri, perhaps.
SCRRECH! WHARGARBLL!
Quote from: Martinus on September 25, 2014, 10:16:03 AM
Quote from: garbon on September 25, 2014, 10:03:57 AM
Quote from: grumbler on September 25, 2014, 09:56:39 AM
Quote from: garbon on September 25, 2014, 09:48:18 AM
Quote from: Malthus on September 25, 2014, 09:45:55 AM
From her interview, it seems her beef is that she wasn't allowed to continually appeal the verdict at the administrative hearing until they agreed with her.
I think you protest too much. Making one appeal that denied is hardly "continually".
I think you misunderstand her argument. She had the one appeal that is currently allowed. That appeal was denied. She wants a new process that allows her to appeal as many times as she wants until she gets the verdict she desires.
Can you point me to where she has stated this?
She is carrying a goddamn mattress and making a spectacle out of herself saying she will do so until he is expelled. Surely, if the college has already made a decision not to expel him, then in order to reverse this decision, it would need to come as a result of an appeal against the earlier decision she disagrees with. You understand that, right?
You understand, of course, that she's going to take off once she graduates right? This protesting performance art piece isn't actually likely to drive any appeal and certainly isn't going to drive several appeals.
Besides, you say spectacle like it is a bad thing. That's the whole point of the piece and it looks to be pretty darn effective in garnering attention.
it doesn't seem like stanford did anything wrong. they investigated it, and i'm sure they took it seriously. she keeps stressing this comment by one of the judges, "how does someone even have anal sex without lubricant?" at best, it could show the comment was an incredulous response by the judge, but more evidence would have to be presented. honestly, it seems more likely that it had nothing to do with lack of belief but more surprise and even sympathy for her. her recollection is going to be flawed and biased. this is a problem when victims wait before reporting the incident immediately.
the reflection paper isn't crazy, even if it appears tactless. a student was allowed by the board to witness a confidential proceeding, and that student then talked about it outside of the proceeding. anyone who knew the student had access to confidential information is going to have a tendency to believe that student, regardless of what actually occurred during the proceeding.
can't really comment on the interaction with the police. if there's evidence that the current NYPD is hostile (not perceived hostility) to rape victims, then that's unacceptable. but, i'm not going to take this girl's word for it. she lost any credibility when she started dragging a mattress around. and, comments taken out of context (which may or may not have been the case here) don't prove anything.
You were carrying a mattress in a cocktail bar, when I met you.
Quote from: The Brain on September 25, 2014, 11:08:18 AM
You were carrying a mattress in a cocktail bar, when I met you.
:D
The meter is wrong though. :nerd:
Quote from: garbon on September 25, 2014, 07:55:16 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on September 25, 2014, 02:30:38 AM
Quote from: garbon on September 24, 2014, 11:48:35 PM
Yeah most people have better shit to do / don't feel like making it all about a crime that happened to them.
Plus they wouldn't be accepting that the crime didn't happen but rather accepting that the police couldn't be bothered to care.
I suspect that people who have been raped tend regard that as rather important.
And yet oddly all the time rape victims don't actually report what has been happened to them or get cold feet. To say those individuals are accepting that a crime didn't actually occur is...well mind-boggling.
I find the idea that this is important enough to her to carry a mattress around all the time, but not important enough to her to actually go through the legal process rather puzzling.
I can understand the idea that pursuing legal sanction might not be worth the stress, given the low odds of any actual effect from that.
But the idea that the alternative is to carry your mattress around as an *easier* or less stressful means of handling the problem is pretty ridiculous. If she had fully exhausted her legal options, and THEN decided on this radical action as a last resort, I would have much more respect for what she is trying to accomplish.
As it is, I don't believe that this has anything to do with her desire for justice, it looks like it is about her desire for attention.
the problem is it can be hard to prove rape, and that's what this girl doesn't seem to understand. had she visited the hospital the next day or found another way to document the physical injuries she received, or done anything, it would have been easier to prove the rape occurred. she went about this in a very immature fashion. her story shouldn't be "look at me, the victim attacked by authorities who refuse to stand up to rape culture," but more "look at me, i decided too late to try to get my rapist punished for what he did."
a lot of women do hesitate about whether to approach authorities, and many think there is a prejudice against them. in many instances there are, but i suspect it's the minority of cases where actual (and not perceived) prejudice exists. rather than convincing women to take a stand against rapists by confronting him immediately and getting evidence it occurred, the message sulkowicz offers to future rape victims just adds to the fear of prejudice.
As an art piece, what she's doing is very successful. I'm guessing it's also a whole lot more satisfying than being grilled by NYPD's finest, including the guy whose base premise is that he deals with 20 fake rape cases for every real one and it's his job to ferret that out by being abrasive.
So to me it makes perfect sense for her to have taken the course of action that she did.
Quote from: garbon on September 25, 2014, 10:03:57 AM
Quote from: grumbler on September 25, 2014, 09:56:39 AM
Quote from: garbon on September 25, 2014, 09:48:18 AM
Quote from: Malthus on September 25, 2014, 09:45:55 AM
From her interview, it seems her beef is that she wasn't allowed to continually appeal the verdict at the administrative hearing until they agreed with her.
I think you protest too much. Making one appeal that denied is hardly "continually".
I think you misunderstand her argument. She had the one appeal that is currently allowed. That appeal was denied. She wants a new process that allows her to appeal as many times as she wants until she gets the verdict she desires.
Can you point me to where she has stated this?
Quote"In my case, the biggest problem is there is no retroactive motion to open closed cases and to get our rapists off campus, which would be admitting that they've done wrong, which is what they need to do right now."
What she wants is to reopen cases with the outcome that the accused get kicked out of school. Reopening cases with any other result comes back to reopening the case until the desired outcome is achieved.
Quote from: garbon on September 25, 2014, 07:55:16 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on September 25, 2014, 02:30:38 AM
Quote from: garbon on September 24, 2014, 11:48:35 PM
Yeah most people have better shit to do / don't feel like making it all about a crime that happened to them.
Plus they wouldn't be accepting that the crime didn't happen but rather accepting that the police couldn't be bothered to care.
I suspect that people who have been raped tend regard that as rather important.
And yet oddly all the time rape victims don't actually report what has been happened to them or get cold feet. To say those individuals are accepting that a crime didn't actually occur is...well mind-boggling.
I'm sorry your mind is boggled.
Quote from: Jacob on September 25, 2014, 11:35:57 AM
As an art piece, what she's doing is very successful. I'm guessing it's also a whole lot more satisfying than being grilled by NYPD's finest, including the guy whose base premise is that he deals with 20 fake rape cases for every real one and it's his job to ferret that out by being abrasive.
So to me it makes perfect sense for her to have taken the course of action that she did.
I don't think anyone would contest that she took the course of action she found more satisfying. Rather the issue is what inferences we can draw from her actions about the validity of her case.
Quote from: Razgovory on September 25, 2014, 11:47:24 AM
Quote from: garbon on September 25, 2014, 07:55:16 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on September 25, 2014, 02:30:38 AM
Quote from: garbon on September 24, 2014, 11:48:35 PM
Yeah most people have better shit to do / don't feel like making it all about a crime that happened to them.
Plus they wouldn't be accepting that the crime didn't happen but rather accepting that the police couldn't be bothered to care.
I suspect that people who have been raped tend regard that as rather important.
And yet oddly all the time rape victims don't actually report what has been happened to them or get cold feet. To say those individuals are accepting that a crime didn't actually occur is...well mind-boggling.
I'm sorry your mind is boggled.
Mine isn't really. :)
Quote from: Admiral Yi on September 25, 2014, 11:49:29 AM
Rather the issue is what inferences we can draw from her actions about the validity of her case.
I'm not really sure the exact circumstances of her case are all that important.
I imagine they would be if a crime was committed.
Quote from: Razgovory on September 25, 2014, 12:01:54 PM
I imagine they would be if a crime was committed.
That's nice.
Quote from: garbon on September 25, 2014, 12:00:17 PM
I'm not really sure the exact circumstances of her case are all that important.
Is whether or not she was raped not that important?
Quote from: Admiral Yi on September 25, 2014, 12:05:14 PM
Quote from: garbon on September 25, 2014, 12:00:17 PM
I'm not really sure the exact circumstances of her case are all that important.
Is whether or not she was raped not that important?
If she was raped, the exact circumstances are not important. If she was, then they are.
Quote from: Razgovory on September 25, 2014, 12:06:33 PM
If she was raped, the exact circumstances are not important. If she was, then they are.
:hmm:
Well I screwed that one up.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on September 25, 2014, 12:05:14 PM
Quote from: garbon on September 25, 2014, 12:00:17 PM
I'm not really sure the exact circumstances of her case are all that important.
Is whether or not she was raped not that important?
I don't see how we're ever actually going to know - unless she comes out sometime saying she wasn't.
Quote from: Razgovory on September 25, 2014, 12:08:39 PM
Well I screwed that one up.
Going with what you meant to say. Important in what sense?
Quote from: Jacob on September 25, 2014, 11:35:57 AM
As an art piece, what she's doing is very successful. I'm guessing it's also a whole lot more satisfying than being grilled by NYPD's finest, including the guy whose base premise is that he deals with 20 fake rape cases for every real one and it's his job to ferret that out by being abrasive.
So to me it makes perfect sense for her to have taken the course of action that she did.
Do you believe her claim?
Quote from: derspiess on September 25, 2014, 12:15:44 PM
Quote from: Jacob on September 25, 2014, 11:35:57 AM
As an art piece, what she's doing is very successful. I'm guessing it's also a whole lot more satisfying than being grilled by NYPD's finest, including the guy whose base premise is that he deals with 20 fake rape cases for every real one and it's his job to ferret that out by being abrasive.
So to me it makes perfect sense for her to have taken the course of action that she did.
Do you believe her claim?
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Foi60.tinypic.com%2Fwcodw5.jpg&hash=7c90dd755641b04fd7c4f9577f8f5d538ff5387d)
;)
That dude is soooo friend-zoned.
Quote from: derspiess on September 25, 2014, 12:15:44 PMDo you believe her claim?
I don't see any reason not to.
Do you believe her?
Quote from: garbon on September 25, 2014, 12:13:07 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on September 25, 2014, 12:08:39 PM
Well I screwed that one up.
Going with what you meant to say. Important in what sense?
I would say that the details of actual event are more important then the details of a non-event.
Quote from: Jacob on September 25, 2014, 12:48:18 PM
Quote from: derspiess on September 25, 2014, 12:15:44 PMDo you believe her claim?
I don't see any reason not to.
Do you believe her?
Do you have reason to believe the man she has accused is lying?
Quote from: Razgovory on September 25, 2014, 12:52:21 PM
Quote from: Jacob on September 25, 2014, 12:48:18 PM
Quote from: derspiess on September 25, 2014, 12:15:44 PMDo you believe her claim?
I don't see any reason not to.
Do you believe her?
Do you have reason to believe the man she has accused is lying?
We haven't actually hear anything from the accused man.
Quote from: Jacob on September 25, 2014, 12:48:18 PM
Quote from: derspiess on September 25, 2014, 12:15:44 PMDo you believe her claim?
I don't see any reason not to.
Do you believe her?
:huh: After an investigation, the case was reviewed by the competent tribunal, and the preponderance of evidence was found to be on the side of the accused. After a review by the school dean of students, the finding was confirmed. You are saying the guy was lying and the investigators, tribunal, and dean were all incompetent. What reason do you find for this belief?
Quote from: garbon on September 25, 2014, 12:53:26 PMQuote
Do you have reason to believe the man she has accused is lying?
We haven't actually hear anything from the accused man.
We have from the accused girl that the accused man said he wasn't guilty.
Quote from: grumbler on September 25, 2014, 12:57:24 PM:huh: After an investigation, the case was reviewed by the competent tribunal, and the preponderance of evidence was found to be on the side of the accused. After a review by the school dean of students, the finding was confirmed. You are saying the guy was lying and the investigators, tribunal, and dean were all incompetent. What reason do you find for this belief?
:huh:
Quote from: grumbler on September 25, 2014, 12:58:11 PM
Quote from: garbon on September 25, 2014, 12:53:26 PM
Do you have reason to believe the man she has accused is lying?
We haven't actually hear anything from the accused man.
We have from the accused girl that the accused man said he wasn't guilty.
[/quote]
We have from the girl that she was raped too.
I find your statement perplexing as well Jacob.
Quote from: garbon on September 25, 2014, 01:02:56 PM
We have from the girl that she was raped too.
Statement against interest.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on September 25, 2014, 01:03:13 PM
I find your statement perplexing as well Jacob.
I'm waiting for Spicy to answer my question, since I did him the courtesy of answering his straight up.
How about you, do you believe her? I'm assuming the answer is "no"?
I see no reason to believe she is telling the truth. :P
Quote from: derspiess on September 25, 2014, 01:09:35 PM
Quote from: Jacob on September 25, 2014, 12:48:18 PM
Quote from: derspiess on September 25, 2014, 12:15:44 PMDo you believe her claim?
I don't see any reason not to.
Do you believe her?
Not really, no.
Yeah, that would have been my guess.
I'm guessing a lot of the responses to this case maps to whether people think fake rape accusations and attention whoring is something that happens more and/or is a bigger deal vs actual rapes happing and not being dealt with appropriately.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on September 25, 2014, 01:03:13 PM
I find your statement perplexing as well Jacob.
Since Spicy obliged :)...
What about my statement perplexes you?
Quote from: Jacob on September 25, 2014, 01:13:55 PM
I'm guessing a lot of the responses to this case maps to whether people think fake rape accusations and attention whoring is something that happens more and/or is a bigger deal vs actual rapes happing and not being dealt with appropriately.
What if we think both are big problems? Is that not possible? I happen to think they are closely linked, since false claims don't just hurt the falsely accused-- they affect all women as well.
Quote from: Jacob on September 25, 2014, 01:16:10 PM
What about my statement perplexes you?
More or less what grumbler said. You seem to be totally disregarding a lot of evidence.
Quote from: Jacob on September 25, 2014, 01:16:10 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on September 25, 2014, 01:03:13 PM
I find your statement perplexing as well Jacob.
Since Spicy obliged :)...
Sorry for the 21-minute delay there :Embarrass:
I haven't read all replies, but do tell me: rape cases in US universities ARE handed over to the police, right?
(can't imagine a scenario where allegations of a crime won't be handed over to the proper authorities).
As for this particular case, from my experience raped women tend very much to avoid contact with anything that reminds them of what happened to them. And therefore walking around with a mattress where she was supposedly raped strikes me as very odd (not to mention her behaviour).
I am skeptical of the claims :hmm:
Quote from: Jacob on September 25, 2014, 01:13:55 PM
I'm guessing a lot of the responses to this case maps to whether people think fake rape accusations and attention whoring is something that happens more and/or is a bigger deal vs actual rapes happing and not being dealt with appropriately.
I'm guessing that that is not true. You may respond to each case based on your beliefs about the relationships between false rape accusations and real rapes, but I'd bet more people are like me, and look at each story separately, as though the victims and perps (of either sort) were individuals.
Quote from: Martim Silva on September 25, 2014, 01:22:59 PM
I haven't read all replies, but do tell me: rape cases in US universities ARE handed over to the police, right?
It would appear its up to the victim to take the matter up with the police. It's not done automatically by the university.
iirc hitler supported making fun of those who carry mattreses
I dont see why the NYPD needs to be dragged into a case involving assplay that doesnt involve Haitian immigrants.
Quote from: Martim Silva on September 25, 2014, 01:22:59 PM
I haven't read all replies, but do tell me: rape cases in US universities ARE handed over to the police, right?
All rape cases are turned over to the police if the victim is willing. Where the victim is unwilling, like in the Colombia case in question, the police are pretty much powerless.
QuoteAs for this particular case, from my experience raped women tend very much to avoid contact with anything that reminds them of what happened to them. And therefore walking around with a mattress where she was supposedly raped strikes me as very odd (not to mention her behaviour).
I am skeptical of the claims :hmm:
Two arguments in favor of not weighing the "drag the mattress" thing too heavily against her:
(1) The incident in question occurred about two years ago, so she has had some time to recover and reflect; and
(2) She may see the whole mattress deal as a means of empowering herself against the helpless feelings that rape can engender.
I still doubt her story, because people infinitely more experienced in dealing with the topic, and knowing infinitely more about the incident than i do, have concluded that the preponderance of evidence (which, again, they have seen and I have not) favors the guy's version of the story. True, the woman's actions would also cast doubt on the veracity of her story, but the fact that her story has been rejected by the competent and informed authorities after due process weighs far more heavily on me (even if Jake gives it no weight at all).
Quote from: Admiral Yi on September 25, 2014, 01:24:25 PM
Quote from: Martim Silva on September 25, 2014, 01:22:59 PM
I haven't read all replies, but do tell me: rape cases in US universities ARE handed over to the police, right?
It would appear its up to the victim to take the matter up with the police. It's not done automatically by the university.
The university is required to strongly urge the victim to go to the police, but cannot make the victim do so.
Quote from: grumbler on September 25, 2014, 01:30:47 PM
All rape cases are turned over to the police if the victim is willing.
:wacko:
Quote from: The Brain on September 25, 2014, 01:34:50 PM
Quote from: grumbler on September 25, 2014, 01:30:47 PM
All rape cases are turned over to the police if the victim is willing.
:wacko:
yeah, it seems kinda crazy, but the fact of the matter is that, if the victim isn't willing to cooperate in the investigation, it isn't going to go anywhere (in the US, at least). I suppose that there are places where there is enough surveillance available that the cops can figure out and prove who dunnit without getting any of the facts or evidence from the victim, but the US isn't one of them.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on September 24, 2014, 07:23:34 PM
Quote from: viper37 on September 24, 2014, 06:57:40 PM
You smoke pot. You kill your roommate because you think he's a demon.
Someone hasn't smoked very much pot. :P
true legal case, the guy was acquitted on grounds of temporary insanity. He was considered addicted to pot, thus not responsible for his actions.
Quote from: derspiess on September 25, 2014, 01:17:46 PM
What if we think both are big problems? Is that not possible? I happen to think they are closely linked, since false claims don't just hurt the falsely accused-- they affect all women as well.
Fair point.
When it comes to rape allegations I like to ask "what motivation is there to make up such a story"? It's not as if identifying yourself as a rape victim is a badge of honour in this society. Indeed - look at how she has opened herself up to getting every aspect of her life analyzed.
Now, sometimes there is a motive to make up a story. You've done something you're not proud of, so you claim to be raped. Maybe you're looking for some kind of financial payout. In the right circumstances those factors can apply.
But for the large majority of rape allegations, they don't. Which is why I tend to believe most rape victims.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on September 25, 2014, 01:18:43 PM
Quote from: Jacob on September 25, 2014, 01:16:10 PM
What about my statement perplexes you?
More or less what grumbler said. You seem to be totally disregarding a lot of evidence.
I don't want to put words into your mouth here, but are you saying that by the evidence we have seen the girl with the mattress is definitely lying?
Quote from: Barrister on September 25, 2014, 01:58:26 PM
When it comes to rape allegations I like to ask "what motivation is there to make up such a story"? It's not as if identifying yourself as a rape victim is a badge of honour in this society. Indeed - look at how she has opened herself up to getting every aspect of her life analyzed.
Now, sometimes there is a motive to make up a story. You've done something you're not proud of, so you claim to be raped. Maybe you're looking for some kind of financial payout. In the right circumstances those factors can apply.
But for the large majority of rape allegations, they don't. Which is why I tend to believe most rape victims.
Why does it have to be a rational reason? Can't it be just pure vengeance (which, after a while, also becomes a story you're stuck with)? Most people just move on with their lives, but you're not dealing with most people. By its nature your job tends to deal with people that are often highly deviant in some way.
Quote from: Jacob on September 25, 2014, 01:59:34 PM
I don't want to put words into your mouth here, but are you saying that by the evidence we have seen the girl with the mattress is definitely lying?
I am saying we have evidence that make either conclusion, that she is lying or telling the truth, not a metaphysical certainty, as you seem to have done.
I believe she is lying, but I don't claim there is zero evidence she is telling the truth.
Quote from: DGuller on September 25, 2014, 02:02:42 PM
Quote from: Barrister on September 25, 2014, 01:58:26 PM
When it comes to rape allegations I like to ask "what motivation is there to make up such a story"? It's not as if identifying yourself as a rape victim is a badge of honour in this society. Indeed - look at how she has opened herself up to getting every aspect of her life analyzed.
Now, sometimes there is a motive to make up a story. You've done something you're not proud of, so you claim to be raped. Maybe you're looking for some kind of financial payout. In the right circumstances those factors can apply.
But for the large majority of rape allegations, they don't. Which is why I tend to believe most rape victims.
Why does it have to be a rational reason? Can't it be just pure vengeance (which, after a while, also becomes a story you're stuck with)? Most people just move on with their lives, but you're not dealing with most people. By its nature your job tends to deal with people that are often highly deviant in some way.
"Canadians"?
Quote from: Admiral Yi on September 25, 2014, 02:03:22 PM
Quote from: Jacob on September 25, 2014, 01:59:34 PM
I don't want to put words into your mouth here, but are you saying that by the evidence we have seen the girl with the mattress is definitely lying?
I am saying we have evidence that make either conclusion, that she is lying or telling the truth, not a metaphysical certainty, as you seem to have done.
I believe she is lying, but I don't claim there is zero evidence she is telling the truth.
Thanks for the clarification :)
I believe that the evidence that we have seen doesn't indicate much in the way of lying or telling the truth either way.
What parts of the evidence points towards "she's most likely lying" in your eyes?
Quote from: Barrister on September 25, 2014, 01:58:26 PM
Which is why I tend to believe most rape victims.
I think most people believe most rape allegations. However, the fact that most rape accusations are believable doesn't change the approach one should take to any specific rape allegation, particularly one that has been examined as part of due process, and found wanting. The presumption of honesty can be challenged by specific facts.
Similarly, we must guard against assuming that, since most due process outcomes are just, all due process outcomes are just. The presumption of justice can also be challenged by the facts.
In this particular case, however, there is no evidence that the presumption of justice should be waived, and some evidence that the presumption of honesty should be waived. Hence my belief that the woman is the one who is wrong... in this case.
Quote from: Jacob on September 25, 2014, 01:56:39 PM
Quote from: derspiess on September 25, 2014, 01:17:46 PM
What if we think both are big problems? Is that not possible? I happen to think they are closely linked, since false claims don't just hurt the falsely accused-- they affect all women as well.
Fair point.
I don't know about that. I can't really believe false accusations are as big a problem as rape. Really I think point out false accusations is just an easy excuse for people who aren't that concerned about rape - well they are concerned about rape if it is rape rape.
Quote from: garbon on September 25, 2014, 02:16:06 PM
Quote from: Jacob on September 25, 2014, 01:56:39 PM
Quote from: derspiess on September 25, 2014, 01:17:46 PM
What if we think both are big problems? Is that not possible? I happen to think they are closely linked, since false claims don't just hurt the falsely accused-- they affect all women as well.
Fair point.
I don't know about that. I can't really believe false accusations are as big a problem as rape. Really I think point out false accusations is just an easy excuse for people who aren't that concerned about rape - well they are concerned about rape if it is rape rape.
Also a fair point :)
it sounds suspiciously close to calling anyone who doesn't agree with a liar.
Quote from: grumbler on September 25, 2014, 02:14:53 PM
Similarly, we must guard against assuming that, since most due process outcomes are just, all due process outcomes are just.
I reject that premise. I see more unjust outcomes than just ones every single day.
Quote from: DGuller on September 25, 2014, 02:02:42 PM
Quote from: Barrister on September 25, 2014, 01:58:26 PM
When it comes to rape allegations I like to ask "what motivation is there to make up such a story"? It's not as if identifying yourself as a rape victim is a badge of honour in this society. Indeed - look at how she has opened herself up to getting every aspect of her life analyzed.
Now, sometimes there is a motive to make up a story. You've done something you're not proud of, so you claim to be raped. Maybe you're looking for some kind of financial payout. In the right circumstances those factors can apply.
But for the large majority of rape allegations, they don't. Which is why I tend to believe most rape victims.
Why does it have to be a rational reason? Can't it be just pure vengeance (which, after a while, also becomes a story you're stuck with)? Most people just move on with their lives, but you're not dealing with most people. By its nature your job tends to deal with people that are often highly deviant in some way.
Even in the criminal court peoples responses are overwhelmingly rational. Not maybe in cold Vulcan logic, but people respond out of their perceived best interests. People who act in a completely illogical, unbalanced manner are vanishingly few and tend to have diagnosed mental illnesses.
Quote from: Jacob on September 25, 2014, 01:13:55 PM
Quote from: derspiess on September 25, 2014, 01:09:35 PM
Quote from: Jacob on September 25, 2014, 12:48:18 PM
Quote from: derspiess on September 25, 2014, 12:15:44 PMDo you believe her claim?
I don't see any reason not to.
Do you believe her?
Not really, no.
Yeah, that would have been my guess.
I'm guessing a lot of the responses to this case maps to whether people think fake rape accusations and attention whoring is something that happens more and/or is a bigger deal vs actual rapes happing and not being dealt with appropriately.
Not the case for me. I think it probable she is lying - that is, a less than 50% chance she was actually raped (though of course we cannot know for sure), and I also at the same time think that that "fake rape accusations and attention whoring" is a tiny, minor and unusual problem compared with " actual rapes happing and not being dealt with appropriately".
I've been lied to by clients who were a lot more sympathetic-sounding than her.
Reasons why I think her chances of being truthful are less than 50%:
(1) She had a hearing before an administrative tribunal in which the standard is (generally) 'preponderance of the evidence', that is, 51%; they presumably had available more evidence than we do, and they found against her. Which of course is not in and of itself proof she was lying.
(2) She refused to go through with charging the alleged perp. This is more troubling. Specifcally, the reasons she gave in her interview for not going through with it are troubling - that it was taking too long, and she did not want to bother - this, even though the by her own account the cops were pursuing the matter and thought there was a "case to pursue".
QuoteThe last time we spoke you said you had filed a report with the NYPD and they were starting to investigate. What is the status of that?
It got transferred to the district attorney's office, and I decided I didn't want to pursue it any further because they told it me it would take nine months to a year to actually go to court, which would be after I graduated and probably wanting to erase all of my memories of Columbia from my brain anyway, so I decided not to pursue it.
Did the police seem to think there was a case there to pursue?
Yeah, they were going to contact the other women who reported against him, and they would have subpoenaed the information from the university files.
In another case, the 'I just want to put it all behind me' response would be sympathetic and make sense; it doesn't, from a woman devoting a whole year to carrying a matress around. It just doesn't add up, leading me to suspect that there is a greater-than-even chance she isn't telling the truth.
Quote from: Barrister on September 25, 2014, 02:26:16 PM
Quote from: DGuller on September 25, 2014, 02:02:42 PM
Quote from: Barrister on September 25, 2014, 01:58:26 PM
When it comes to rape allegations I like to ask "what motivation is there to make up such a story"? It's not as if identifying yourself as a rape victim is a badge of honour in this society. Indeed - look at how she has opened herself up to getting every aspect of her life analyzed.
Now, sometimes there is a motive to make up a story. You've done something you're not proud of, so you claim to be raped. Maybe you're looking for some kind of financial payout. In the right circumstances those factors can apply.
But for the large majority of rape allegations, they don't. Which is why I tend to believe most rape victims.
Why does it have to be a rational reason? Can't it be just pure vengeance (which, after a while, also becomes a story you're stuck with)? Most people just move on with their lives, but you're not dealing with most people. By its nature your job tends to deal with people that are often highly deviant in some way.
Even in the criminal court peoples responses are overwhelmingly rational. Not maybe in cold Vulcan logic, but people respond out of their perceived best interests. People who act in a completely illogical, unbalanced manner are vanishingly few and tend to have diagnosed mental illnesses.
In this
particular case, she has at least two entirely rational, self-interested reasons for what she is doing - quite unlike most alleged rape victims: (1) it has gained her an immense amount of publicity and, evidently, popularity on campus; and (2) she is making an art project out of it.
Quote from: Malthus on September 25, 2014, 02:32:29 PM
Quote from: Barrister on September 25, 2014, 02:26:16 PM
Quote from: DGuller on September 25, 2014, 02:02:42 PM
Quote from: Barrister on September 25, 2014, 01:58:26 PM
When it comes to rape allegations I like to ask "what motivation is there to make up such a story"? It's not as if identifying yourself as a rape victim is a badge of honour in this society. Indeed - look at how she has opened herself up to getting every aspect of her life analyzed.
Now, sometimes there is a motive to make up a story. You've done something you're not proud of, so you claim to be raped. Maybe you're looking for some kind of financial payout. In the right circumstances those factors can apply.
But for the large majority of rape allegations, they don't. Which is why I tend to believe most rape victims.
Why does it have to be a rational reason? Can't it be just pure vengeance (which, after a while, also becomes a story you're stuck with)? Most people just move on with their lives, but you're not dealing with most people. By its nature your job tends to deal with people that are often highly deviant in some way.
Even in the criminal court peoples responses are overwhelmingly rational. Not maybe in cold Vulcan logic, but people respond out of their perceived best interests. People who act in a completely illogical, unbalanced manner are vanishingly few and tend to have diagnosed mental illnesses.
In this particular case, she has at least two entirely rational, self-interested reasons for what she is doing - quite unlike most alleged rape victims: (1) it has gained her an immense amount of publicity and, evidently, popularity on campus; and (2) she is making an art project out of it.
But both arose months after the initial allegation. It's impossible to imagine this was her initial plan.
At best she seems like a poor role model for other victims to emulate. At worst, she is a monster who is making it more difficult for actual victims to get justice.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on September 25, 2014, 02:22:52 PM
it sounds suspiciously close to calling anyone who doesn't agree with a liar.
I don't think so as that isn't the intent at all. I've just yet to see any stats on how many claimed rapes are actually false and any look at what impact that has on attitudes towards rape. Presumably, someone making the claim that false rapes are just as big a problem as rapes would have some cites for that, right?
Quote from: Barrister on September 25, 2014, 02:39:21 PM
Quote from: Malthus on September 25, 2014, 02:32:29 PM
Quote from: Barrister on September 25, 2014, 02:26:16 PM
Quote from: DGuller on September 25, 2014, 02:02:42 PM
Quote from: Barrister on September 25, 2014, 01:58:26 PM
When it comes to rape allegations I like to ask "what motivation is there to make up such a story"? It's not as if identifying yourself as a rape victim is a badge of honour in this society. Indeed - look at how she has opened herself up to getting every aspect of her life analyzed.
Now, sometimes there is a motive to make up a story. You've done something you're not proud of, so you claim to be raped. Maybe you're looking for some kind of financial payout. In the right circumstances those factors can apply.
But for the large majority of rape allegations, they don't. Which is why I tend to believe most rape victims.
Why does it have to be a rational reason? Can't it be just pure vengeance (which, after a while, also becomes a story you're stuck with)? Most people just move on with their lives, but you're not dealing with most people. By its nature your job tends to deal with people that are often highly deviant in some way.
Even in the criminal court peoples responses are overwhelmingly rational. Not maybe in cold Vulcan logic, but people respond out of their perceived best interests. People who act in a completely illogical, unbalanced manner are vanishingly few and tend to have diagnosed mental illnesses.
In this particular case, she has at least two entirely rational, self-interested reasons for what she is doing - quite unlike most alleged rape victims: (1) it has gained her an immense amount of publicity and, evidently, popularity on campus; and (2) she is making an art project out of it.
But both arose months after the initial allegation. It's impossible to imagine this was her initial plan.
And wouldn't both have been better performed as part of this plan if she had done so shortly after her supposed rape then waiting years to do so?
Quote from: Malthus on September 25, 2014, 02:26:55 PM
(1) She had a hearing before an administrative tribunal in which the standard is (generally) 'preponderance of the evidence', that is, 51%; they presumably had available more evidence than we do, and they found against her. Which of course is not in and of itself proof she was lying.
What sort of evidence would there be beyond she said, he said, when the tribunal was taken place more than a year post the rape?
Quote from: Malthus on September 25, 2014, 02:26:55 PMIn another case, the 'I just want to put it all behind me' response would be sympathetic and make sense; it doesn't, from a woman devoting a whole year to carrying a matress around. It just doesn't add up, leading me to suspect that there is a greater-than-even chance she isn't telling the truth.
For me your analysis is very unconvincing. There is a big difference between:
1) Having the police tell her and her friends that she's probably lying and facing university authorities who're, at best, saying "it may have happened, but yeah really there's nothing we can do; and hey, your friend needs to write an essay from the point of view of the person who you say raped you" on one hand; NS
2) Making a public statement and getting support from your peers and others, drawing attention to a problem which you think is being dealt with inappropriately by the authorities, and turning something bad that happened to you into fuel for your art practice, on the other.
The first is an exercise in frustration, being marginalized, and dismissed. It seems eminently reasonable to feel it's not worth it to pursue something in a system that appears explicitly designed to create that outcome (especially in light of the NYPD officer they dealt with saying there's a 20:1 ratio of false:true accusations and it's his job to figure out which is which by being abrasive).
The second is an exercise in trying to empower yourself in the face of adversity and turning something negative into something positive.
I do not at all find choosing to abandon effort on 1) in favour of 2) strange or otherwise indicative of dishonesty. It makes perfect sense.
Now I understand that some see the preference of 2) over 1) as indicative of wanting to "attention whore", and that those actions in and of themselves provide a credible motive for lying. I do not find that line of reasoning convincing, myself.
Quote from: Barrister on September 25, 2014, 02:39:21 PM
Quote from: Malthus on September 25, 2014, 02:32:29 PM
Quote from: Barrister on September 25, 2014, 02:26:16 PM
Quote from: DGuller on September 25, 2014, 02:02:42 PM
Quote from: Barrister on September 25, 2014, 01:58:26 PM
When it comes to rape allegations I like to ask "what motivation is there to make up such a story"? It's not as if identifying yourself as a rape victim is a badge of honour in this society. Indeed - look at how she has opened herself up to getting every aspect of her life analyzed.
Now, sometimes there is a motive to make up a story. You've done something you're not proud of, so you claim to be raped. Maybe you're looking for some kind of financial payout. In the right circumstances those factors can apply.
But for the large majority of rape allegations, they don't. Which is why I tend to believe most rape victims.
Why does it have to be a rational reason? Can't it be just pure vengeance (which, after a while, also becomes a story you're stuck with)? Most people just move on with their lives, but you're not dealing with most people. By its nature your job tends to deal with people that are often highly deviant in some way.
Even in the criminal court peoples responses are overwhelmingly rational. Not maybe in cold Vulcan logic, but people respond out of their perceived best interests. People who act in a completely illogical, unbalanced manner are vanishingly few and tend to have diagnosed mental illnesses.
In this particular case, she has at least two entirely rational, self-interested reasons for what she is doing - quite unlike most alleged rape victims: (1) it has gained her an immense amount of publicity and, evidently, popularity on campus; and (2) she is making an art project out of it.
But both arose months after the initial allegation. It's impossible to imagine this was her initial plan.
True, those are the reasons for what she is doing
right now.
A rational reason for lodging an accusation against this particular person with the university could very easily be personal dislike of this person, with whom we know she was, at one point, she was having a sexual relationship. Lots of people who break up do so in ways leaving one party or another with a grievance.
The reasons against lodging such an accusation, as you put them, are typically fear of the ensuing publicity - and as you put it "getting every aspect of her life analyzed" in public, no less. This is an
entirely rational reason to doubt the falseness of an accusation as a generality --
except, perhaps, in the case of a woman who willingly courts publicity by lugging a matress about in public. Such a person, it seems to me, is less likely than the average to fear having her private life exposed in public, or be concerned about a "victim stigma".
Quote from: garbon on September 25, 2014, 02:46:47 PM
Quote from: Malthus on September 25, 2014, 02:26:55 PM
(1) She had a hearing before an administrative tribunal in which the standard is (generally) 'preponderance of the evidence', that is, 51%; they presumably had available more evidence than we do, and they found against her. Which of course is not in and of itself proof she was lying.
What sort of evidence would there be beyond she said, he said, when the tribunal was taken place more than a year post the rape?
I have no idea.
Quote from: Malthus on September 25, 2014, 02:54:57 PM
A rational reason for lodging an accusation against this particular person with the university could very easily be personal dislike of this person, with whom we know she was, at one point, she was having a sexual relationship. Lots of people who break up do so in ways leaving one party or another with a grievance.
The reasons against lodging such an accusation, as you put them, are typically fear of the ensuing publicity - and as you put it "getting every aspect of her life analyzed" in public, no less. This is an entirely rational reason to doubt the falseness of an accusation as a generality -- except, perhaps, in the case of a woman who willingly courts publicity by lugging a matress about in public. Such a person, it seems to me, is less likely than the average to fear having her private life exposed in public, or be concerned about a "victim stigma".
So because she chooses to speak out now and face public scrutiny on her own terms, she can never credibly have made decisions wanting to avoid public scrutiny on other terms in the past?
I'm not convinced.
Quote from: Jacob on September 25, 2014, 02:50:27 PM
Quote from: Malthus on September 25, 2014, 02:26:55 PMIn another case, the 'I just want to put it all behind me' response would be sympathetic and make sense; it doesn't, from a woman devoting a whole year to carrying a matress around. It just doesn't add up, leading me to suspect that there is a greater-than-even chance she isn't telling the truth.
For me your analysis is very unconvincing. There is a big difference between:
1) Having the police tell her and her friends that she's probably lying and facing university authorities who're, at best, saying "it may have happened, but yeah really there's nothing we can do; and hey, your friend needs to write an essay from the point of view of the person who you say raped you" on one hand; NS
2) Making a public statement and getting support from your peers and others, drawing attention to a problem which you think is being dealt with inappropriately by the authorities, and turning something bad that happened to you into fuel for your art practice, on the other.
The first is an exercise in frustration, being marginalized, and dismissed. It seems eminently reasonable to feel it's not worth it to pursue something in a system that appears explicitly designed to create that outcome (especially in light of the NYPD officer they dealt with saying there's a 20:1 ratio of false:true accusations and it's his job to figure out which is which by being abrasive).
The second is an exercise in trying to empower yourself in the face of adversity and turning something negative into something positive.
I do not at all find choosing to abandon effort on 1) in favour of 2) strange or otherwise indicative of dishonesty. It makes perfect sense.
Now I understand that some see the preference of 2) over 1) as indicative of wanting to "attention whore", and that those actions in and of themselves provide a credible motive for lying. I do not find that line of reasoning convincing, myself.
Seems like there is a fallacy somewhere in basing an analysis on whether or not she's lying entirely on
her version of events. If she is, in fact, lying, isn't she likely to lie about (or at least exaggerate) what the cops said to her, to make herself look more the victim - given that the cops won't comment, and her friends will back her up?
OTOH, if you look at
other statements made by her, it doesn't add up to her case being "marginalized and dismissed" by the cops. According to her interview, she said that the cops believed there
was a case to answer, and it was
her who dropped the case - not because she was "margenalized and dismissed", but becaise it would take nine months to a year, and she did not care to think about it that long. Was she lying about that?
Look again at her complaints, and while some of them were serious, a lot of them appear bizzarely petty. They had muzak on. They made her drive to the Special Victims Unit. A cop was smoking.
Quote from: Jacob on September 25, 2014, 02:58:07 PM
Quote from: Malthus on September 25, 2014, 02:54:57 PM
A rational reason for lodging an accusation against this particular person with the university could very easily be personal dislike of this person, with whom we know she was, at one point, she was having a sexual relationship. Lots of people who break up do so in ways leaving one party or another with a grievance.
The reasons against lodging such an accusation, as you put them, are typically fear of the ensuing publicity - and as you put it "getting every aspect of her life analyzed" in public, no less. This is an entirely rational reason to doubt the falseness of an accusation as a generality -- except, perhaps, in the case of a woman who willingly courts publicity by lugging a matress about in public. Such a person, it seems to me, is less likely than the average to fear having her private life exposed in public, or be concerned about a "victim stigma".
So because she chooses to speak out now and face public scrutiny on her own terms, she can never credibly have made decisions wanting to avoid public scrutiny on other terms in the past?
I'm not convinced.
Huh? No.
Because she very obviously does not fear a "victim stigma" now, makes it more likely that she did not fear a "victim stigma" then, because she's not the sort of person that fears a "victim stigma".
This bit of information goes into the cost/benefit analysis as to whether she would have been deterred by fear of a "victim stigma" from making an accusation.
While it is rational to presume that most people are strongly deterred by fear of a "victim stigma" from making accusations (false or true) as a generality, that generality does not hold true in her case.
I suppose there is also a possibility that she was raped but that she is suffering from a psychological disorder. That would explain her bizarre behaviour (and the fact that the relevant university investigation body found her incredible) while not necessarily meaning she is lying.
Quote from: Malthus on September 25, 2014, 03:09:07 PM
Quote from: Jacob on September 25, 2014, 02:58:07 PM
Quote from: Malthus on September 25, 2014, 02:54:57 PM
A rational reason for lodging an accusation against this particular person with the university could very easily be personal dislike of this person, with whom we know she was, at one point, she was having a sexual relationship. Lots of people who break up do so in ways leaving one party or another with a grievance.
The reasons against lodging such an accusation, as you put them, are typically fear of the ensuing publicity - and as you put it "getting every aspect of her life analyzed" in public, no less. This is an entirely rational reason to doubt the falseness of an accusation as a generality -- except, perhaps, in the case of a woman who willingly courts publicity by lugging a matress about in public. Such a person, it seems to me, is less likely than the average to fear having her private life exposed in public, or be concerned about a "victim stigma".
So because she chooses to speak out now and face public scrutiny on her own terms, she can never credibly have made decisions wanting to avoid public scrutiny on other terms in the past?
I'm not convinced.
Huh? No.
Because she very obviously does not fear a "victim stigma" now, makes it more likely that she did not fear a "victim stigma" then, because she's not the sort of person that fears a "victim stigma".
This bit of information goes into the cost/benefit analysis as to whether she would have been deterred by fear of a "victim stigma" from making an accusation.
While it is rational to presume that most people are strongly deterred by fear of a "victim stigma" from making accusations (false or true) as a generality, that generality does not hold true in her case.
Oddly in May when interviewed by the school newspaper she said:
http://columbiaspectator.com/news/2014/05/16/frustrated-columbias-inaction-student-reports-sexual-assault-police
QuoteSulkowicz said that she didn't want to report her attack to the police because she was embarrassed and ashamed of what had happened to her.
"When it first happened, I didn't want to talk to anyone. I didn't even tell my parents. ... I didn't even want to talk to my best friend," she said.
Sulkowicz decided to file a complaint against Nungesser through the University when she met two other women he allegedly assaulted. "I realized that if I didn't report him he'd continue to attack women on this campus. I had to do it for those other women," Sulkowicz said.
Quote from: Martinus on September 25, 2014, 03:16:53 PM
I suppose there is also a possibility that she was raped but that she is suffering from a psychological disorder.
Oh like how PTSD can occur after a traumatic event like rape?
Oh well, I'm agnostic.
Quote from: Malthus on September 25, 2014, 03:09:07 PM
Huh? No.
Because she very obviously does not fear a "victim stigma" now, makes it more likely that she did not fear a "victim stigma" then, because she's not the sort of person that fears a "victim stigma".
This bit of information goes into the cost/benefit analysis as to whether she would have been deterred by fear of a "victim stigma" from making an accusation.
While it is rational to presume that most people are strongly deterred by fear of a "victim stigma" from making accusations (false or true) as a generality, that generality does not hold true in her case.
Not responding to my point - that there's a difference between backing off dealing with something under one set of circumstances and embracing dealing with them under a different set of circumstances - by restating your argument does not make it more convincing.
I don't really think cost/benefit analysis is an appropriate term to use when dealing with this type of case, but even so - there's a different cost/benefit analysis for her then and now. In one situation she felt alone, that nothing would come out of it, and that the process would be painful; now she's found away to make the process not painful - empowering even - and there are some positive things associated with it.
She's found a way to turn the cost/benefit analysis of pursuing this into a positive; you are taking that as proof that she is likely lying. I remain unconvinced.
I'm around 70/30 lie/truth.
What does it matter? Pretty hard to prove anything in a meaningful way long after the fact.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on September 25, 2014, 03:26:51 PM
I'm around 70/30 lie/truth.
I'm 5/95 lie/truth.
What are the things that push your "lie" numbers up?
I admit I dislike the automatic assumption that an accusation has factual basis. I think that people should take a more neutral stand starting out.
Quote from: garbon on September 25, 2014, 02:42:46 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on September 25, 2014, 02:22:52 PM
it sounds suspiciously close to calling anyone who doesn't agree with a liar.
I don't think so as that isn't the intent at all. I've just yet to see any stats on how many claimed rapes are actually false and any look at what impact that has on attitudes towards rape. Presumably, someone making the claim that false rapes are just as big a problem as rapes would have some cites for that, right?
Well the cop in that Al-J article said he had to bully the girl because he gets 20 to one fake accusations. And the girl said she didn't want to report the rape to the cops because they would bully her. Sounds exactly like false claims making it hard for the victims.
Quote from: Jacob on September 25, 2014, 03:29:53 PM
What are the things that push your "lie" numbers up?
Have you been reading the thread?
Quote from: Jacob on September 25, 2014, 03:29:53 PM
I'm 5/95 lie/truth.
Very trusting of you. I'm only 95% sure you're Canadian.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on September 25, 2014, 03:38:27 PM
Quote from: Jacob on September 25, 2014, 03:29:53 PM
I'm 5/95 lie/truth.
Very trusting of you. I'm only 95% sure you're Canadian.
Always good to keep that 5% to hedge your bets.
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on September 25, 2014, 03:35:18 PM
Quote from: garbon on September 25, 2014, 02:42:46 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on September 25, 2014, 02:22:52 PM
it sounds suspiciously close to calling anyone who doesn't agree with a liar.
I don't think so as that isn't the intent at all. I've just yet to see any stats on how many claimed rapes are actually false and any look at what impact that has on attitudes towards rape. Presumably, someone making the claim that false rapes are just as big a problem as rapes would have some cites for that, right?
Well the cop in that Al-J article said he had to bully the girl because he gets 20 to one fake accusations. And the girl said she didn't want to report the rape to the cops because they would bully her. Sounds exactly like false claims making it hard for the victims.
You're right that's one possible piece of support although I'm really wondering if that's accurate. It would be so counter-common wisdom that tons of women are running out there making false rape accusations.
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on September 25, 2014, 03:35:18 PM
Well the cop in that Al-J article said he had to bully the girl because he gets 20 to one fake accusations. And the girl said she didn't want to report the rape to the cops because they would bully her. Sounds exactly like false claims making it hard for the victims.
Interesting. I get exactly the opposite conclusion out of it - that the system assumes most rape claims are false, thus making reporting rapes a harrowing experience leading the fewer reports, leading to a systematical trivializing and dismissal of rape as an issue.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on September 25, 2014, 03:37:03 PM
Quote from: Jacob on September 25, 2014, 03:29:53 PM
What are the things that push your "lie" numbers up?
Have you been reading the thread?
I have, yes. If you would do me the courtesy of pointing out the most relevant post(s) of yours answering my question, I would be much obliged.
Quote from: Barrister on September 25, 2014, 01:58:26 PM
When it comes to rape allegations I like to ask "what motivation is there to make up such a story"? It's not as if identifying yourself as a rape victim is a badge of honour in this society. Indeed - look at how she has opened herself up to getting every aspect of her life analyzed.
You serious, Clark??
If you're of the right mindset, there are huge benefits to making up a story like that. Keep in mind this is an academic environment. You get instant hero/celebrity status on campus-- people praise you for your bravery and give you all sorts of sympathy (I've known people who absolutely crave sympathy). This can all be leveraged for campus leadership positions, possibly a project that gives you a guaranteed A, and who knows what post-graduate opportunities.
And certain people will believe you, no matter what. Do you guys remember the girl at Ohio U. last year who was having oral sex performed on her out in public, and later claimed she was raped? All witnesses and video evidence indicated it was 100% consensual (both were drunk, but she was literally shoving his head into her crotch). She *still* was able to convince people she was somehow raped. Her particular motivation was different, of course.
Quote from: derspiess on September 25, 2014, 03:46:09 PMYou serious, Clark??
If you're of the right mindset, there are huge benefits to making up a story like that. Keep in mind this is an academic environment. You get instant hero/celebrity status on campus-- people praise you for your bravery and give you all sorts of sympathy (I've known people who absolutely crave sympathy). This can all be leveraged for campus leadership positions, possibly a project that gives you a guaranteed A, and who knows what post-graduate opportunities.
And certain people will believe you, no matter what. Do you guys remember the girl at Ohio U. last year who was having oral sex performed on her out in public, and later claimed she was raped? All witnesses and video evidence indicated it was 100% consensual (both were drunk, but she was literally shoving his head into her crotch). She *still* was able to convince people she was somehow raped. Her particular motivation was different, of course.
Yeah, I think there are some fundamentally different approaches on the subject going here.
Quote from: Barrister on September 25, 2014, 02:23:42 PM
Quote from: grumbler on September 25, 2014, 02:14:53 PM
Similarly, we must guard against assuming that, since most due process outcomes are just, all due process outcomes are just.
I reject that premise. I see more unjust outcomes than just ones every single day.
If I were in your office, I would see that, too. :cool:
Quote from: Jacob on September 25, 2014, 03:45:12 PM
I have, yes. If you would do me the courtesy of pointing out the most relevant post(s) of yours answering my question, I would be much obliged.
I haven't disagreed with anything Malthus has said yet.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on September 25, 2014, 04:04:15 PM
Quote from: Jacob on September 25, 2014, 03:45:12 PM
I have, yes. If you would do me the courtesy of pointing out the most relevant post(s) of yours answering my question, I would be much obliged.
I haven't disagreed with anything Malthus has said yet.
:lol: Okay, so "talk to Malthus, not me". Got it.
Quote from: Jacob on September 25, 2014, 03:43:08 PM
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on September 25, 2014, 03:35:18 PM
Well the cop in that Al-J article said he had to bully the girl because he gets 20 to one fake accusations. And the girl said she didn't want to report the rape to the cops because they would bully her. Sounds exactly like false claims making it hard for the victims.
Interesting. I get exactly the opposite conclusion out of it - that the system assumes most rape claims are false, thus making reporting rapes a harrowing experience leading the fewer reports, leading to a systematical trivializing and dismissal of rape as an issue.
Yes. Why is the "system" assuming that? Is it because the cops are misogynist douchebags or is it because they see so many false accusations? Or both?
I don't know for sure, but I'm willing to bet there is a lot of douchebaggery involved. We're talking about cops, after all. So I'll hedge and say both.
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on September 25, 2014, 03:35:18 PM
Well the cop in that Al-J article said he had to bully the girl because he gets 20 to one fake accusations. And the girl said she didn't want to report the rape to the cops because they would bully her. Sounds exactly like false claims making it hard for the victims.
The cop said no such thing in the AJ article. Sulkowicz's friends
claimed that he said that. I don't put a lot of cred in the claim, because it fits too neatly into the narrative she is creating to justify not doing the right thing the first time, and doesn't sound like something a cop would actually say. Twenty-to-one accusations to convictions is credible; twenty-to-one false accusations to real is not.
Quote from: Jacob on September 25, 2014, 04:05:14 PM
:lol: Okay, so "talk to Malthus, not me". Got it.
:mellow:
I'm happy to talk to you, don't feel up to summarizing all my points from a 20 page thread. If for whatever reason you need a synopsis, use Malthus as a proxy.
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on September 25, 2014, 04:15:09 PM
Quote from: Jacob on September 25, 2014, 03:43:08 PM
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on September 25, 2014, 03:35:18 PM
Well the cop in that Al-J article said he had to bully the girl because he gets 20 to one fake accusations. And the girl said she didn't want to report the rape to the cops because they would bully her. Sounds exactly like false claims making it hard for the victims.
Interesting. I get exactly the opposite conclusion out of it - that the system assumes most rape claims are false, thus making reporting rapes a harrowing experience leading the fewer reports, leading to a systematical trivializing and dismissal of rape as an issue.
Yes. Why is the "system" assuming that? Is it because the cops are misogynist douchebags or is it because they see so many false accusations? Or both?
I don't know for sure, but I'm willing to bet there is a lot of douchebaggery involved. We're talking about cops, after all. So I'll hedge and say both.
I don't believe either contention. A large percentage of the officers working in the sex crimes units are women. Are they misogynistic douchbags, too? Again, all the "evidence" cited in this thread has been from the woman and her close friends, who have an axe to grind.
Quote from: grumbler on September 25, 2014, 12:57:24 PM
Quote from: Jacob on September 25, 2014, 12:48:18 PM
Quote from: derspiess on September 25, 2014, 12:15:44 PMDo you believe her claim?
I don't see any reason not to.
Do you believe her?
:huh: After an investigation, the case was reviewed by the competent tribunal, and the preponderance of evidence was found to be on the side of the accused. After a review by the school dean of students, the finding was confirmed. You are saying the guy was lying and the investigators, tribunal, and dean were all incompetent. What reason do you find for this belief?
Interesting thread.
She alleges that the University tribunal hearing the case was incompetent. But there is little in the article to make a judgment about that. In Canada if a student believed that a University internal decision maker deprived them of a fair hearing (as she seems to allege) then the remedy would be a judicial review of that decision. I assume that such a remedy exists in the US. If so at least some negative inference can be drawn from her not seeking that remedy. Even if she did have difficulty with the police she chose the administrative route and so one would think she could have seen that through if the decision was as flawed as she claims.
Quote from: crazy canuck on September 25, 2014, 04:42:07 PM
Quote from: grumbler on September 25, 2014, 12:57:24 PM
Quote from: Jacob on September 25, 2014, 12:48:18 PM
Quote from: derspiess on September 25, 2014, 12:15:44 PMDo you believe her claim?
I don't see any reason not to.
Do you believe her?
:huh: After an investigation, the case was reviewed by the competent tribunal, and the preponderance of evidence was found to be on the side of the accused. After a review by the school dean of students, the finding was confirmed. You are saying the guy was lying and the investigators, tribunal, and dean were all incompetent. What reason do you find for this belief?
Interesting thread.
She alleges that the University tribunal hearing the case was incompetent. But there is little in the article to make a judgment about that. In Canada if a student believed that a University internal decision maker deprived them of a fair hearing (as she seems to allege) then the remedy would be a judicial review of that decision. I assume that such a remedy exists in the US. If so at least some negative inference can be drawn from her not seeking that remedy. Even if she did have difficulty with the police she chose the administrative route and so one would think she could have seen that through if the decision was as flawed as she claims.
:lol:
I am not sure what I said that is particularly funny.
Quote from: crazy canuck on September 25, 2014, 04:49:43 PM
I am not sure what I said that is particularly funny.
Also, she was actually one of the 23 students that lodged this federal complaint about the University's handling of sexual assault claims.
http://www.cnn.com/2014/04/25/us/columbia-university-sexual-assault-complaint/
Quote from: grumbler on September 25, 2014, 04:15:10 PM
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on September 25, 2014, 03:35:18 PM
Well the cop in that Al-J article said he had to bully the girl because he gets 20 to one fake accusations. And the girl said she didn't want to report the rape to the cops because they would bully her. Sounds exactly like false claims making it hard for the victims.
The cop said no such thing in the AJ article. Sulkowicz's friends claimed that he said that. I don't put a lot of cred in the claim, because it fits too neatly into the narrative she is creating to justify not doing the right thing the first time, and doesn't sound like something a cop would actually say. Twenty-to-one accusations to convictions is credible; twenty-to-one false accusations to real is not.
I think those statements come from recordings the she made.
Quote from: garbon on September 25, 2014, 04:51:59 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on September 25, 2014, 04:49:43 PM
I am not sure what I said that is particularly funny.
Also, she was actually one of the 23 students that lodged this federal complaint about the University's handling of sexual assault claims.
http://www.cnn.com/2014/04/25/us/columbia-university-sexual-assault-complaint/
I am still dont understand what you found funny.
But in relation to the news article I have two observations.
First, the fact that she has filed this proceeding doesn't answer my question. If the hearing was as flawed as she suggests why didnt she apply for a judicial review.
Second, the fact that there was an internal decision against her would probably be a very strong defence for the University to the complaint now being filed. This isnt a case of the University failing in its duty. This is a case of the complainent not liking the decision, claiming it was flawed in some way but then not taking any steps to have it set aside. The only reasonable explanation I can think of is that the US doesnt have the same procedural safeguards as we do in Canada - a proposition I find hard to accept.
Quote from: crazy canuck on September 25, 2014, 05:00:14 PM
...If the hearing was as flawed as she suggests why didnt she apply for a judicial review.
Second, the fact that there was an internal decision against her would probably be a very strong defence for the University to the complaint now being filed. This isnt a case of the University failing in its duty. This is a case of the complainent not liking the decision, claiming it was flawed in some way but then not taking any steps to have it set aside. The only reasonable explanation I can think of is that the US doesnt have the same procedural safeguards as we do in Canada - a proposition I find hard to accept.
I'm not sure what you mean by "judicial review" here. The courts in the US do not typically have any power to review administrative rulings of universities. The student can sue for denial of rights if the school doesn't follow its procedures, or the procedures aren't in accordance with law, but someone accused of cheating, or accusing someone of non-criminal sexual misconduct, doesn't have a right to a court hearing over the outcome of the administrative hearing, insofar as I know.
Quote from: grumbler on September 25, 2014, 05:10:39 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on September 25, 2014, 05:00:14 PM
...If the hearing was as flawed as she suggests why didnt she apply for a judicial review.
Second, the fact that there was an internal decision against her would probably be a very strong defence for the University to the complaint now being filed. This isnt a case of the University failing in its duty. This is a case of the complainent not liking the decision, claiming it was flawed in some way but then not taking any steps to have it set aside. The only reasonable explanation I can think of is that the US doesnt have the same procedural safeguards as we do in Canada - a proposition I find hard to accept.
I'm not sure what you mean by "judicial review" here. The courts in the US do not typically have any power to review administrative rulings of universities. The student can sue for denial of rights if the school doesn't follow its procedures, or the procedures aren't in accordance with law, but someone accused of cheating, or accusing someone of non-criminal sexual misconduct, doesn't have a right to a court hearing over the outcome of the administrative hearing, insofar as I know.
I would be interested in the answer to that from one of the American law talkers.
Here any final administrative decision is subject to review by the Courts. If the decision is made pursuant to a statutory power then the process of review is governed by the various provincial Judicial Review Procedure Acts. This would be the route for most administrative decisions made in Canadian Universities since they are mainly created by and derive their powers from a statue. Back in the day a fair amount of my practice was defending Universities from these sorts of applications. I assume most State Universities in the US are the same. In the case of private institutions judicial reviews are still available pursuant to the common law principles of administrative law which are a bit arcane but still usable.
Columbia is a private school.
Edit: I don't see how any judicial review would have any right or jurisdiction to intervene in the administrative decisions of any private entity, whether it's a school, corporation, club, union or whathaveyou.
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on September 25, 2014, 05:36:40 PM
Columbia is a private school.
Edit: I don't see how any judicial review would have any right or jurisdiction to intervene in the administrative decisions of any private entity, whether it's a school, corporation, club, union or whathaveyou.
Yes, so they would not be exercising a statutory power of decision. But in Canada that is not the end of the question. If you had continued to read my post you would have noticed that I said "In the case of private institutions judicial reviews are still available pursuant to the common law principles of administrative law which are a bit arcane but still usable."
I am interested to know if similar judicial review remedies are available in the US.
edit: by the way your edit was too broad. For example despite what the USSC has recently said, corporations are still creatures of statute and most of those statutes give jurisdiction to the Courts for a variety of forms of review.
Quote from: crazy canuck on September 25, 2014, 05:00:14 PM
Quote from: garbon on September 25, 2014, 04:51:59 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on September 25, 2014, 04:49:43 PM
I am not sure what I said that is particularly funny.
Also, she was actually one of the 23 students that lodged this federal complaint about the University's handling of sexual assault claims.
http://www.cnn.com/2014/04/25/us/columbia-university-sexual-assault-complaint/
I am still dont understand what you found funny.
It's just so typical of you to come in with your lawyer bravado of well this is how it works in Canada, I've no idea how it works in the US, but if it is sensibly the same, then here's my judgment.
-_-
Quote from: garbon on September 25, 2014, 06:09:07 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on September 25, 2014, 05:00:14 PM
Quote from: garbon on September 25, 2014, 04:51:59 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on September 25, 2014, 04:49:43 PM
I am not sure what I said that is particularly funny.
Also, she was actually one of the 23 students that lodged this federal complaint about the University's handling of sexual assault claims.
http://www.cnn.com/2014/04/25/us/columbia-university-sexual-assault-complaint/
I am still dont understand what you found funny.
It's just so typical of you to come in with your lawyer bravado of well this is how it works in Canada, I've no idea how it works in the US, but if it is sensibly the same, then here's my judgment.
-_-
It doesnt seem sensible to you that a country that has a close connection to British legal traditions would have a system of administrative review similar to those found in other countries with the same legal tradition?
garbon makes a good point, she could be getting a degree in something that would lead her to get a job in Market Research and thus really can't be trusted until that issue is cleared up.
I find it rather silly that the school administration thought it proper to have some kind of panel or "tribunal" in the first place. The most sensible university policy to one of their students making a claim of rape(or any crime) by another student would be to immediately refer the matter to the appropriate criminal jurisdiction.
School administrators holding some kind of "panel" to determine if a rape happened or not, seems rather inappropriate to me.
Quote from: grumbler on September 25, 2014, 12:57:24 PM
Quote from: Jacob on September 25, 2014, 12:48:18 PM
Quote from: derspiess on September 25, 2014, 12:15:44 PMDo you believe her claim?
I don't see any reason not to.
Do you believe her?
:huh: After an investigation, the case was reviewed by the competent tribunal, and the preponderance of evidence was found to be on the side of the accused. After a review by the school dean of students, the finding was confirmed. You are saying the guy was lying and the investigators, tribunal, and dean were all incompetent. What reason do you find for this belief?
I can believe her and at the same time believe that the investigators, tribunal and dean were all competent people who made the appropriate decision. Regardless of whether a credible claim was made that claim must be provable by evidence for action to be taken against the perpetrator. Unfortunately, in most rape cases there is little to no concrete evidence.
I dunno, if you have a member of the tribunal asking questions like "dur, how can you even do anal without lubricant?", that doesn't sound very competent to me. That sounds like a clown college court.
As I said, the idea of the college even thinking that having an administrative "tribunal" to decide a serious criminal issue such as rape is preposterous. If a coworker at General Motors rapes you, you don't have the Board of Directors take witness statements and come up with a ruling.
[CdM] You just fire everybody involved instead. [/CdM] :P
Quote from: Tonitrus on September 25, 2014, 10:03:45 PM
I dunno, if you have a member of the tribunal asking questions like "dur, how can you even do anal without lubricant?", that doesn't sound very competent to me. That sounds like a clown college court.
It's a valid question. :mad: Riding bareback may be OK with you, but I chafe.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on September 25, 2014, 10:07:55 PM
Quote from: Tonitrus on September 25, 2014, 10:03:45 PM
I dunno, if you have a member of the tribunal asking questions like "dur, how can you even do anal without lubricant?", that doesn't sound very competent to me. That sounds like a clown college court.
It's a valid question. :mad: Riding bareback may be OK with you, but I chafe.
It isn't really a valid question when think about a rape.
Actually, come to think of it, the idea of a college "tribunal" is so silly to me, that I am surprised some enterprising lawyer hasn't seen the dollar sign opportunity in going after them. After all, O.J. Simpson proved that you don't need to be found guilty in a court of law to be beaten down with a civil lawsuit.
Quote from: garbon on September 25, 2014, 10:10:18 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on September 25, 2014, 10:07:55 PM
Quote from: Tonitrus on September 25, 2014, 10:03:45 PM
I dunno, if you have a member of the tribunal asking questions like "dur, how can you even do anal without lubricant?", that doesn't sound very competent to me. That sounds like a clown college court.
It's a valid question. :mad: Riding bareback may be OK with you, but I chafe.
It isn't really a valid question when think about a rape.
Why, because it's not about sex but about power, or whatever the cliche is? You still have to worry about dick abrasions.
So, to cut down on campus rape, women should be forced to live in rape factories? :hmm:
http://www.slate.com/articles/life/inside_higher_ed/2014/09/wesleyan_university_fraternities_college_mandates_fraternities_accept_women.html
QuoteAccept Women—or Else
Fraternities at Wesleyan are becoming coed. Will it help cut down on sexual assault?
By Jake New.
This article originally appeared in Inside Higher Ed.
All on-campus fraternities at Wesleyan University must soon become coeducational or they will be shut down, the university announced Monday, giving its small but often under-fire Greek system a three-year deadline to open its doors to female students.
"Over the summer a great many Wesleyan alumni, students and faculty offered their views," Michael Roth, Wesleyan's president, said in a statement. "Some have urged that we preserve the status quo; others have argued for the elimination of all exclusive social societies. The trustees and administration recognize that residential fraternities have contributed greatly to Wesleyan over a long period of time, but we also believe they must change to continue to benefit their members and the larger campus community."
Sponsored ContentAvoiding Mobile Apps For Security Reasons Is a Security Blunder
The university has been considering the change for several years, but a series of high-profile incidents at its fraternities expedited the process in recent months. Two weeks ago, Wesleyan banned all of its students from the house of an off-campus fraternity called Beta Theta Pi after a sophomore fell from a third-story window there. In 2012 a student sued both the fraternity and the university, saying she was raped while at the house. She referred to the residence in the lawsuit as a "rape factory."
Another Wesleyan fraternity, Psi Upsilon, is also facing a lawsuit over an alleged sexual assault. Along with Delta Kappa Epsilon, Psi Upsilon is one of two officially recognized, on-campus fraternities at Wesleyan, a university where just 4 percent of the student body belongs to a Greek organization. Fewer than 100 students live in those two houses. There is only one sorority, and it is located off-campus. Student and faculty proponents of either closing the fraternities or making them admit women have said that their influence on campus culture is far greater than their share of the student body.
"The fraternities are recognized as 'program housing' at Wesleyan, which means that it's official housing," said Kate Carlisle, a university spokeswoman. "We have affinity for program houses for a wide variety of groups, including Russian House, Buddhist House, and Earth House. So, if a fraternity fails to comply with the policy change, they will no longer be recognized program housing. They'll effectively be shut down."
While Carlisle would not confirm that the policy change was an attempt at curbing sexual assault specifically, she did say that it was designed to "increase gender equity on campus." For the Wesleyan Student Assembly, however, sexual assault prevention was the key reason it pushed for the integration last year.
Nicole Updegrove, the assembly's president at the time, called for all Greek chapters to become coed by the end of the fall semester or lose their campus houses. About 500 people, including 75 professors, signed a "call to action" backing the fraternity integration. "The culture of these houses contributes to the culture of sexual assault in a way we weren't willing to stand for anymore," Updegrove said in May. In a blog post in April, Roth wrote that it's "clear that many students see fraternity houses as spaces where women enter with a different status than in any other building on campus, sometimes with terrible consequences."
Wesleyan is not the only Connecticut college to ban all-male fraternities in recent years. In 2012, Trinity College required all of its Greek houses on campus to go coed, prompting more than 4,000 people to sign a Change.org petition protesting the decision. Critics argued that, as many national organizations do not officially recognize coed chapters, Trinity was effectively banning fraternities and sororities altogether.
Similar concerns have surrounded Wesleyan's decision. Thomas Fox, Psi Upsilon national executive director, said that the national organization will still recognize its Wesleyan chapter, but that he doesn't believe making a fraternity coed will do much to change student behavior.
"I'm disappointed in colleges that feel the need to mandate that single-sex organizations become coed," Fox said. "I would think that it would be seen as a benefit to a college campus to have multiple options for students to join, both single-sex and coed. If it's a behavioral concern, then the answer is for the college to work to create better oversight and hold groups accountable."
John Foubert, president of sexual assault prevention program One in Four, was recently hired by a consortium of Delta Kappa Epsilon alumni to start a campus chapter of his program at Wesleyan. Foubert said he "would be interested to see" how coeducation could change a fraternity's culture, but that it's a difficult transition to accurately observe.
Attempting to radically alter an existing fraternity can sometimes lead the organization to go off-campus, he said, creating an underground fraternity over which the university has no jurisdiction, much like Beta Theta Pi. "Generally speaking, I think it is best to work with student organizations in their existing structure, rather than mandating modifications," Foubert said.
The Wesleyan Student Assembly's new president, Grant Tanenbaum, said that integration represents a compromise, and that opening fraternities to female members is just one step in an ongoing effort to prevent sexual assault on Wesleyan's campus.
"The options available were to do nothing, abolish all fraternities and societies, or try to seek some sort of middle ground," Tanenbaum said. "The status quo was obviously unsustainable, students didn't feel safe in these spaces. So doing nothing was not an option, and going coeducational allows us to chart a middle ground where these organizations can continue to contribute to Wesleyan."
Tim + Slate + Rape. Ugh. :bleeding:
Quote from: garbon on September 25, 2014, 10:17:32 PM
Tim + Slate + Rape. Ugh. :bleeding:
#1 - I'm on your and Jacob's side in this.
#2 - That article originally appeared in Inside Higher Ed.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on September 25, 2014, 10:34:38 PM
Quote from: garbon on September 25, 2014, 10:17:32 PM
Tim + Slate + Rape. Ugh. :bleeding:
#1 - I'm on your and Jacob's side in this.
Not sure if that is helpful. :secret:
Incidentally, what makes a co-ed facility "a rape factory"? :lol:
Quote from: Martinus on September 26, 2014, 01:07:09 AM
Incidentally, what makes a co-ed facility "a rape factory"? :lol:
It won't make it one, it already is.
QuoteIn 2012 a student sued both the fraternity and the university, saying she was raped while at the house. She referred to the residence in the lawsuit as a "rape factory."
You are not giving any arguments for your claim.
I would imagine a situation where women can date/have sex with men in a building where the women's friends are present (as opposed to having to go to an external location or a all-men frathouse) would reduce the number of rapes, not increase it.
Quote from: grumbler on September 25, 2014, 01:37:58 PM
Quote from: The Brain on September 25, 2014, 01:34:50 PM
Quote from: grumbler on September 25, 2014, 01:30:47 PM
All rape cases are turned over to the police if the victim is willing.
:wacko:
yeah, it seems kinda crazy, but the fact of the matter is that, if the victim isn't willing to cooperate in the investigation, it isn't going to go anywhere (in the US, at least). I suppose that there are places where there is enough surveillance available that the cops can figure out and prove who dunnit without getting any of the facts or evidence from the victim, but the US isn't one of them.
I think you failed to understand The Brain's particular brand of humour. :lol:
Although given your tendency to nitpick about imprecise language, I think you should have. :P
Quote from: jimmy olsen on September 25, 2014, 09:59:56 PM
I can believe her and at the same time believe that the investigators, tribunal and dean were all competent people who made the appropriate decision. Regardless of whether a credible claim was made that claim must be provable by evidence for action to be taken against the perpetrator. Unfortunately, in most rape cases there is little to no concrete evidence.
I believe that you are speaking from ignorance. There is no requirement that a "claim must be provable by evidence for action to be taken against the perpetrator." All that is required is a preponderance of evidence. Her testimony is evidence.
Quote from: Tonitrus on September 25, 2014, 10:03:45 PM
I dunno, if you have a member of the tribunal asking questions like "dur, how can you even do anal without lubricant?", that doesn't sound very competent to me. That sounds like a clown college court.
As I said, the idea of the college even thinking that having an administrative "tribunal" to decide a serious criminal issue such as rape is preposterous. If a coworker at General Motors rapes you, you don't have the Board of Directors take witness statements and come up with a ruling.
We don't know that any of the details of the hearing except her self-serving claims. And the idea that universities have tribunals to rle on student misconduct (not criminal cases - that's for the criminal justice system - isn't preposterous at all. If a student cheats on a paper, or behaves in an intolerable manner, you don't go to court - the court would laugh the cases right back out. I don't think that General Motors has a code of conduct to be ruled on.
Quote from: Martinus on September 26, 2014, 01:38:13 AM
I think you failed to understand The Brain's particular brand of humour. :lol:
Although given your tendency to nitpick about imprecise language, I think you should have. :P
I did miss the amusing wording that Brain was responding to. Glad to see you can't pass up the chance for an
ad hom, though.
Quote from: grumbler on September 26, 2014, 05:10:13 AM
Quote from: Martinus on September 26, 2014, 01:38:13 AM
I think you failed to understand The Brain's particular brand of humour. :lol:
Although given your tendency to nitpick about imprecise language, I think you should have. :P
I did miss the amusing wording that Brain was responding to. Glad to see you can't pass up the chance for an ad hom, though.
Is this some subtle humor where you're pretending not to know what an ad hom is? :huh:
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on September 26, 2014, 06:20:14 AM
Is this some subtle humor where you're pretending not to know what an ad hom is? :huh:
:huh: I don't get the joke. Are you sure you meant to use the phrase "ad hom" there?
/picture of naked baby swimming in a pool
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on September 26, 2014, 06:33:59 AM
/picture of naked baby swimming in a pool
/sound of theme from
Jaws.
:D
Quote from: grumbler on September 26, 2014, 05:10:13 AM
Quote from: Martinus on September 26, 2014, 01:38:13 AM
I think you failed to understand The Brain's particular brand of humour. :lol:
Although given your tendency to nitpick about imprecise language, I think you should have. :P
I did miss the amusing wording that Brain was responding to. Glad to see you can't pass up the chance for an ad hom, though.
How is that an ad hom? Ad hominem is a logical fallacy when an argument of a person is being dismissed not because of merits, but because of personal qualities of the person making an argument. A personal joke/jab made outside of a debate is not an ad hom. Besides, are you saying you do not tend to nitpick over imprecisions of language?
Quote from: Martinus on September 26, 2014, 07:02:20 AM
How is that an ad hom? Ad hominem is a logical fallacy when an argument of a person is being dismissed not because of merits, but because of personal qualities of the person making an argument. A personal joke/jab made outside of a debate is not an ad hom. Besides, are you saying you do not tend to nitpick over imprecisions of language?
"Although given your tendency to nitpick about imprecise language, I think you should have" is an ad hom. It references not my argument/statement, but an alleged personal characteristic. A personal jab outside the debate doesn't reference a statement made in the debate. "You missed the point, and your father is a hamster" is a personal jab. "You missed the point because your father is a hamster" is an ad hom.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on September 25, 2014, 10:15:14 PM
So, to count down on campus rape,
I'm Casey Kasem, your host, counting down on your favorite campus rapes, coast to coast. Now back to the countdown. This week's pick, coming in at number four, before landing on our charts was the starting quarterback for Florida State University...
Quote from: Savonarola on September 26, 2014, 07:32:50 AM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on September 25, 2014, 10:15:14 PM
So, to count down on campus rape,
I'm Casey Kasem, your host, counting down on your favorite campus rapes, coast to coast. Now back to the countdown. This week's pick, coming in at number four, before landing on our charts was the starting quarterback for Florida State University...
:blush: Should have been cut down of course
Quote from: Savonarola on September 26, 2014, 07:32:50 AM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on September 25, 2014, 10:15:14 PM
So, to count down on campus rape,
I'm Casey Kasem, your host, counting down on your favorite campus rapes, coast to coast. Now back to the countdown. This week's pick, coming in at number four, before landing on our charts was the starting quarterback for Florida State University...
Speaking of a guy falsely accused of rape by a coed with an agenda...
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi29.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fc300%2Fsemis33%2Fosc.jpg&hash=6b414fd33519d093e2f231d54657072905e6aaac) (http://s29.photobucket.com/user/semis33/media/osc.jpg.html)
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/04/16/sports/errors-in-inquiry-on-rape-allegations-against-fsu-jameis-winston.html?_r=0
:hmm:
Quote from: garbon on September 26, 2014, 08:22:17 AM
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/04/16/sports/errors-in-inquiry-on-rape-allegations-against-fsu-jameis-winston.html?_r=0
:hmm:
Yeah, the rapist appears to be getting away with the crime (and the Heisman), but I'd argue that the handling of his case is more an example of police and university officials not wanting to rock the Heisman and National Championship vote rather than because they thought the woman was lying about being raped.
#bringbackourcrablegs
Quote from: grumbler on September 26, 2014, 08:39:57 AM
Quote from: garbon on September 26, 2014, 08:22:17 AM
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/04/16/sports/errors-in-inquiry-on-rape-allegations-against-fsu-jameis-winston.html?_r=0
:hmm:
Yeah, the rapist appears to be getting away with the crime (and the Heisman), but I'd argue that the handling of his case is more an example of police and university officials not wanting to rock the Heisman and National Championship vote rather than because they thought the woman was lying about being raped.
have you actually reviewed the investigation file, which is a public record under florida law and available on line?
I don't know what actually happened that night but I know that from my review of the primary source materials available to the state attorney, I concluded that there was significant reasonable doubt given the victim's three differing versions of events all of which were inconsistent with the forensic evidence which forensic evidence was in fact was consistent with the accused's version of events.
police corruption and cover up in small southern college town does sell more papers in New York though
discount my opinions as a seminole if you wish but I think on the other side of the bias ledger I had a daughter in undergrad at fsu at the time this all occured and think i looked at the investigative material with an objective lawyer's eye
Quote from: Jacob on September 25, 2014, 03:22:08 PM
Quote from: Malthus on September 25, 2014, 03:09:07 PM
Huh? No.
Because she very obviously does not fear a "victim stigma" now, makes it more likely that she did not fear a "victim stigma" then, because she's not the sort of person that fears a "victim stigma".
This bit of information goes into the cost/benefit analysis as to whether she would have been deterred by fear of a "victim stigma" from making an accusation.
While it is rational to presume that most people are strongly deterred by fear of a "victim stigma" from making accusations (false or true) as a generality, that generality does not hold true in her case.
Not responding to my point - that there's a difference between backing off dealing with something under one set of circumstances and embracing dealing with them under a different set of circumstances - by restating your argument does not make it more convincing.
I don't really think cost/benefit analysis is an appropriate term to use when dealing with this type of case, but even so - there's a different cost/benefit analysis for her then and now. In one situation she felt alone, that nothing would come out of it, and that the process would be painful; now she's found away to make the process not painful - empowering even - and there are some positive things associated with it.
She's found a way to turn the cost/benefit analysis of pursuing this into a positive; you are taking that as proof that she is likely lying. I remain unconvinced.
I'm not taking her current 'turning this into a positive' as proof she is lying; I'm taking it as proof she does not have the cultural attitute, found in many men and women, that exposing her victimhood to the public puts her under a stigma and so is to be avoided - the very point of data BB was alluding to when he said that, as a generality, he believes rape accusations.
She's the same
person then as now, so it is a reasonable, allbeit rebuttable, assumption that her attitudes towards such issues are reasonably consistent. Proposing otherwise I think requires something in the way of proof.
Quote from: Malthus on September 26, 2014, 09:02:52 AM
Quote from: Jacob on September 25, 2014, 03:22:08 PM
Quote from: Malthus on September 25, 2014, 03:09:07 PM
Huh? No.
Because she very obviously does not fear a "victim stigma" now, makes it more likely that she did not fear a "victim stigma" then, because she's not the sort of person that fears a "victim stigma".
This bit of information goes into the cost/benefit analysis as to whether she would have been deterred by fear of a "victim stigma" from making an accusation.
While it is rational to presume that most people are strongly deterred by fear of a "victim stigma" from making accusations (false or true) as a generality, that generality does not hold true in her case.
Not responding to my point - that there's a difference between backing off dealing with something under one set of circumstances and embracing dealing with them under a different set of circumstances - by restating your argument does not make it more convincing.
I don't really think cost/benefit analysis is an appropriate term to use when dealing with this type of case, but even so - there's a different cost/benefit analysis for her then and now. In one situation she felt alone, that nothing would come out of it, and that the process would be painful; now she's found away to make the process not painful - empowering even - and there are some positive things associated with it.
She's found a way to turn the cost/benefit analysis of pursuing this into a positive; you are taking that as proof that she is likely lying. I remain unconvinced.
I'm not taking her current 'turning this into a positive' as proof she is lying; I'm taking it as proof she does not have the cultural attitute, found in many men and women, that exposing her victimhood to the public puts her under a stigma and so is to be avoided - the very point of data BB was alluding to when he said that, as a generality, he believes rape accusations.
She's the same person then as now, so it is a reasonable, allbeit rebuttable, assumption that her attitudes towards such issues are reasonably consistent. Proposing otherwise I think requires something in the way of proof.
You mean like how when first decided to come forward she stated she hadn't because she been afraid/ashamed and hadn't even wanted to mention it to family or friends?
Quote from: Rasputin on September 26, 2014, 08:55:03 AM
have you actually reviewed the investigation file, which is a public record under florida law and available on line?
I don't know what actually happened that night but I know that from my review of the primary source materials available to the state attorney, I concluded that there was significant reasonable doubt given the victim's three differing versions of events all of which were inconsistent with the forensic evidence which forensic evidence was in fact was consistent with the accused's version of events.
police corruption and cover up in small southern college town does sell more papers in New York though
discount my opinions as a seminole if you wish but I think on the other side of the bias ledger I had a daughter in undergrad at fsu at the time this all occured and think i looked at the investigative material with an objective lawyer's eye
Yep, I looked at the same data, and, unsurprisingly, came to a different conclusion than you. However, the investigative blunders have far more to do with the investigative process than the investigative product, given that the product was a result of the flawed process.
Quote from: garbon on September 26, 2014, 09:07:11 AM
Quote from: Malthus on September 26, 2014, 09:02:52 AM
Quote from: Jacob on September 25, 2014, 03:22:08 PM
Quote from: Malthus on September 25, 2014, 03:09:07 PM
Huh? No.
Because she very obviously does not fear a "victim stigma" now, makes it more likely that she did not fear a "victim stigma" then, because she's not the sort of person that fears a "victim stigma".
This bit of information goes into the cost/benefit analysis as to whether she would have been deterred by fear of a "victim stigma" from making an accusation.
While it is rational to presume that most people are strongly deterred by fear of a "victim stigma" from making accusations (false or true) as a generality, that generality does not hold true in her case.
Not responding to my point - that there's a difference between backing off dealing with something under one set of circumstances and embracing dealing with them under a different set of circumstances - by restating your argument does not make it more convincing.
I don't really think cost/benefit analysis is an appropriate term to use when dealing with this type of case, but even so - there's a different cost/benefit analysis for her then and now. In one situation she felt alone, that nothing would come out of it, and that the process would be painful; now she's found away to make the process not painful - empowering even - and there are some positive things associated with it.
She's found a way to turn the cost/benefit analysis of pursuing this into a positive; you are taking that as proof that she is likely lying. I remain unconvinced.
I'm not taking her current 'turning this into a positive' as proof she is lying; I'm taking it as proof she does not have the cultural attitute, found in many men and women, that exposing her victimhood to the public puts her under a stigma and so is to be avoided - the very point of data BB was alluding to when he said that, as a generality, he believes rape accusations.
She's the same person then as now, so it is a reasonable, allbeit rebuttable, assumption that her attitudes towards such issues are reasonably consistent. Proposing otherwise I think requires something in the way of proof.
You mean like how when first decided to come forward she stated she hadn't because she been afraid/ashamed and hadn't even wanted to mention it to family or friends?
That's a pretty obviously self-serving statement to explain why she waited so long to make the complaint. Again, rather inconsistent with her stated beliefs and behavours.
Quote from: Malthus on September 26, 2014, 09:09:49 AM
Quote from: garbon on September 26, 2014, 09:07:11 AM
Quote from: Malthus on September 26, 2014, 09:02:52 AM
Quote from: Jacob on September 25, 2014, 03:22:08 PM
Quote from: Malthus on September 25, 2014, 03:09:07 PM
Huh? No.
Because she very obviously does not fear a "victim stigma" now, makes it more likely that she did not fear a "victim stigma" then, because she's not the sort of person that fears a "victim stigma".
This bit of information goes into the cost/benefit analysis as to whether she would have been deterred by fear of a "victim stigma" from making an accusation.
While it is rational to presume that most people are strongly deterred by fear of a "victim stigma" from making accusations (false or true) as a generality, that generality does not hold true in her case.
Not responding to my point - that there's a difference between backing off dealing with something under one set of circumstances and embracing dealing with them under a different set of circumstances - by restating your argument does not make it more convincing.
I don't really think cost/benefit analysis is an appropriate term to use when dealing with this type of case, but even so - there's a different cost/benefit analysis for her then and now. In one situation she felt alone, that nothing would come out of it, and that the process would be painful; now she's found away to make the process not painful - empowering even - and there are some positive things associated with it.
She's found a way to turn the cost/benefit analysis of pursuing this into a positive; you are taking that as proof that she is likely lying. I remain unconvinced.
I'm not taking her current 'turning this into a positive' as proof she is lying; I'm taking it as proof she does not have the cultural attitute, found in many men and women, that exposing her victimhood to the public puts her under a stigma and so is to be avoided - the very point of data BB was alluding to when he said that, as a generality, he believes rape accusations.
She's the same person then as now, so it is a reasonable, allbeit rebuttable, assumption that her attitudes towards such issues are reasonably consistent. Proposing otherwise I think requires something in the way of proof.
You mean like how when first decided to come forward she stated she hadn't because she been afraid/ashamed and hadn't even wanted to mention it to family or friends?
That's a pretty obviously self-serving statement to explain why she waited so long to make the complaint. Again, rather inconsistent with her stated beliefs and behavours.
You mean inconsistent with how she didn't say anything for a long time then filed a complaint with university (not police) about the rape after hearing that the accused had sexually assaulted two other women? How she didn't to go to the police until prodded her to do so? How she didn't start mattress art until recently?
Btw, unless someone was just impervious to any and all judgments cast their way - bit hard to believe that she has no fear of a "victim stigma." It takes an odd duck to not care one whit about society/people around them.
Quote from: grumbler on September 26, 2014, 09:07:24 AM
Quote from: Rasputin on September 26, 2014, 08:55:03 AM
have you actually reviewed the investigation file, which is a public record under florida law and available on line?
I don't know what actually happened that night but I know that from my review of the primary source materials available to the state attorney, I concluded that there was significant reasonable doubt given the victim's three differing versions of events all of which were inconsistent with the forensic evidence which forensic evidence was in fact was consistent with the accused's version of events.
police corruption and cover up in small southern college town does sell more papers in New York though
discount my opinions as a seminole if you wish but I think on the other side of the bias ledger I had a daughter in undergrad at fsu at the time this all occured and think i looked at the investigative material with an objective lawyer's eye
Yep, I looked at the same data, and, unsurprisingly, came to a different conclusion than you. However, the investigative blunders have far more to do with the investigative process than the investigative product, given that the product was a result of the flawed process.
I didn't even have to look into the data at all to know that Winston is guilty. The game tape of him raping Miami's secondary was all the evidence I needed to know that the man is an experienced and remorseless rapist.
Quote from: garbon on September 26, 2014, 09:14:15 AM
Btw, unless someone was just impervious to any and all judgments cast their way - bit hard to believe that she has no fear of a "victim stigma." It takes an odd duck to not care one whit about society/people around them.
Which society are you referring to? The society of student life on campus, in which she is now, by all accounts, a hero?
I haven't been to university for a long time, but even when I went, back in the 90s, a woman who was a victim of rape was not "stigmatized" in certain circles--namely, arty, left-leaning, feminist ones. Has that changed?
Quote from: Malthus on September 26, 2014, 09:19:01 AM
Quote from: garbon on September 26, 2014, 09:14:15 AM
Btw, unless someone was just impervious to any and all judgments cast their way - bit hard to believe that she has no fear of a "victim stigma." It takes an odd duck to not care one whit about society/people around them.
Which society are you referring to? The society of student life on campus, in which she is now, by all accounts, a hero?
Well you haven't read all accounts. The back half of the article has mentions of students who find the accounts of the various rape victims on campuses difficult to believe and there was a big backlash when the rape group (that Sulkowicz seems to be a part of though no mention, of course, if she participated) started graffiting the names of accused rapists in campus bathrooms./there are accused men that have received some punishments so people thought they'd already got what they deserved. There are also a few accused males who have been tossed from the university that are suing.
Just because there are nice photo-ops with her with several supporters doesn't mean the campus is united behind her.
Quote from: Malthus on September 26, 2014, 09:19:01 AM
I haven't been to university for a long time, but even when I went, back in the 90s, a woman who was a victim of rape was not "stigmatized" in certain circles--namely, arty, left-leaning, feminist ones. Has that changed?
Yes because the only people she will have significant interactions with are some left-leaning folks in university. Oh wait, she's now a senior who will be graduating / also has people round the world casting judgments about her.
I was chatting up an MFA at my karaoke, and within a minute of she had told me she was raped in Ghana while doing work with an NGO.
Quote from: garbon on September 26, 2014, 09:14:15 AM
Btw, unless someone was just impervious to any and all judgments cast their way - bit hard to believe that she has no fear of a "victim stigma." It takes an odd duck to not care one whit about society/people around them.
In the Winston case I can see that. You raise allegations against a star QB and Heisman candidate (who of course later won), you're going to raise the ire of quite a few people with a vested interest in the accused.
In the Mattress Girl case it's a bit different. In her campus bubble she seems to have suffered from little if any victim stigma.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on September 26, 2014, 09:29:01 AM
I was chatting up an MFA at my karaoke, and within a minute of she had told me she was raped in Ghana while doing work with an NGO.
There was a gal in my sophomore English class that made it a point to bring up at least once each class that she had been raped. Seemed weird, but I figured maybe that was just how she was coping.
Quote from: grumbler on September 26, 2014, 09:07:24 AM
Quote from: Rasputin on September 26, 2014, 08:55:03 AM
have you actually reviewed the investigation file, which is a public record under florida law and available on line?
I don't know what actually happened that night but I know that from my review of the primary source materials available to the state attorney, I concluded that there was significant reasonable doubt given the victim's three differing versions of events all of which were inconsistent with the forensic evidence which forensic evidence was in fact was consistent with the accused's version of events.
police corruption and cover up in small southern college town does sell more papers in New York though
discount my opinions as a seminole if you wish but I think on the other side of the bias ledger I had a daughter in undergrad at fsu at the time this all occured and think i looked at the investigative material with an objective lawyer's eye
Yep, I looked at the same data, and, unsurprisingly, came to a different conclusion than you. However, the investigative blunders have far more to do with the investigative process than the investigative product, given that the product was a result of the flawed process.
a rape kit with no evidence of trauma and tearing, her telling the police she was drugged with no evidence of that in her blood, her telling the police she was hit over the head and lost consciousness with no evidence of head trauma, and her telling the police she was too drunk to remember what happened despite blood alcohol regression showing she was legal to drive at the time of the alleged rape cause you no reasonable doubt? She had bruising only on her knees. The accused admits having consensual doggy style sex with her on a tiled bathroom floor. Again I'm not proclaiming Jameis innocent but this reflects reasonable doubt.
Quote from: alfred russel on September 26, 2014, 09:18:00 AM
Quote from: grumbler on September 26, 2014, 09:07:24 AM
Quote from: Rasputin on September 26, 2014, 08:55:03 AM
have you actually reviewed the investigation file, which is a public record under florida law and available on line?
I don't know what actually happened that night but I know that from my review of the primary source materials available to the state attorney, I concluded that there was significant reasonable doubt given the victim's three differing versions of events all of which were inconsistent with the forensic evidence which forensic evidence was in fact was consistent with the accused's version of events.
police corruption and cover up in small southern college town does sell more papers in New York though
discount my opinions as a seminole if you wish but I think on the other side of the bias ledger I had a daughter in undergrad at fsu at the time this all occured and think i looked at the investigative material with an objective lawyer's eye
Yep, I looked at the same data, and, unsurprisingly, came to a different conclusion than you. However, the investigative blunders have far more to do with the investigative process than the investigative product, given that the product was a result of the flawed process.
I didn't even have to look into the data at all to know that Winston is guilty. The game tape of him raping Miami's secondary was all the evidence I needed to know that the man is an experienced and remorseless rapist.
Miami wanted it. They've even invited us to their house to do it again this year.
Quote from: Rasputin on September 26, 2014, 09:45:45 AM
Miami wanted it. They've even invited us to their house to do it again this year.
I'm not delusional about our chances, but if there is enough of the old Miami spirit in this team to have just one guy break Winston's leg, I'll consider this season a success. :)
jimbo can have a job for life so long as he goes at least 2 and ten every season as long as his two wins are against the gators and canes
Quote from: Rasputin on September 26, 2014, 10:04:03 AM
jimbo can have a job for life so long as he goes at least 2 and ten every season as long as his two wins are against the gators and canes
In a lot of years, beating those two teams in the same season means almost by definition you are national championship caliber. These aren't those years. :(
Quote from: Admiral Yi on September 26, 2014, 09:29:01 AM
I was chatting up an MFA at my karaoke, and within a minute of she had told me she was raped in Ghana while doing work with an NGO.
MFA?
Masters of Fine Arts.
Quote from: alfred russel on September 26, 2014, 10:20:39 AM
Quote from: Rasputin on September 26, 2014, 10:04:03 AM
jimbo can have a job for life so long as he goes at least 2 and ten every season as long as his two wins are against the gators and canes
In a lot of years, beating those two teams in the same season means almost by definition you are national championship caliber. These aren't those years. :(
but those two victories would still taste just as sweet as the glory years
Quote from: Admiral Yi on September 26, 2014, 09:29:01 AM
I was chatting up an MFA at my karaoke, and within a minute of she had told me she was raped in Ghana while doing work with an NGO.
Big problem with that the last several years with NGOs and even the Peace Corp. Doesnt help that most of the work being done is in shitholes.
Fun fact: 2/3rds of all Americans under the age of 25 traveling overseas for volunteer work are female.
For some reason I thought Ghana was not quite a shit hole.
And what reason would that be?
Quote from: Admiral Yi on September 26, 2014, 10:38:22 AM
For some reason I thought Ghana was not quite a shit hole.
I assume every place over there is until I see definitive proof.
Quote from: derspiess on September 26, 2014, 10:42:55 AM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on September 26, 2014, 10:38:22 AM
For some reason I thought Ghana was not quite a shit hole.
I assume every place over there is until I see definitive proof.
Yeah. Same here.
One of the rape activists at Columbia (who said she was raped while at Columbia and then also again at some DNC event in NC) says that when she first told her mothers about being raped they said this happened while you were in Argentina, didn't it? "You've always been too adventurous." She was like no it happened here but even if it happened in Argentina, [the rape] wouldn't be my fault for going to Argentina.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on September 26, 2014, 10:42:18 AM
And what reason would that be?
i remember some discussion years back about Ghana being an economic success story.
And I don't think they've ever had armies of children hacking off limbs.
Pretty low bar set for "shithole" then.
Quote from: Malthus on September 26, 2014, 09:02:52 AMI'm not taking her current 'turning this into a positive' as proof she is lying; I'm taking it as proof she does not have the cultural attitute, found in many men and women, that exposing her victimhood to the public puts her under a stigma and so is to be avoided - the very point of data BB was alluding to when he said that, as a generality, he believes rape accusations.
She's the same person then as now, so it is a reasonable, allbeit rebuttable, assumption that her attitudes towards such issues are reasonably consistent. Proposing otherwise I think requires something in the way of proof.
"Cultural attitude"? I'm not sure what you mean by this?
She didn't want to pursue it when faced with a bunch of abrasive people proceeding from the assumption that she was lying. She figured there wasn't going to be any results, and they were making her feel more miserable, so she backed down.
Later, when learning that she wasn't alone, she decided she shouldn't be silent and she decided she wanted to deal with it by taking a stand on her terms.
That seems perfectly normal to me.
It has nothing to do with "cultural attitudes" and nothing to do with fearing stigma, it has to do with not wanting to be made to feel like shit and backing down, and then later figuring out that the best way to not feel like shit is to confront the issue.
Quote from: Malthus on September 26, 2014, 09:09:49 AM
That's a pretty obviously self-serving statement to explain why she waited so long to make the complaint. Again, rather inconsistent with her stated beliefs and behavours.
It's obvious, perhaps, if you start from the assumption that she's lying.
Quote from: Jacob on September 26, 2014, 11:23:21 AM
Quote from: Malthus on September 26, 2014, 09:09:49 AM
That's a pretty obviously self-serving statement to explain why she waited so long to make the complaint. Again, rather inconsistent with her stated beliefs and behavours.
It's obvious, perhaps, if you start from the assumption that she's lying.
Do you assume guilt of everyone accused of a crime? Or do you just make an exception for alleged rape cases?
Quote from: derspiess on September 26, 2014, 11:35:38 AMDo you assume guilt of everyone accused of a crime? Or do you just make an exception for alleged rape cases?
:huh:
Quote from: derspiess on September 26, 2014, 11:35:38 AM
Do you assume guilt of everyone accused of a crime?
Mostly.
Quote from: Jacob on September 26, 2014, 11:20:34 AM
"Cultural attitude"? I'm not sure what you mean by this?
She didn't want to pursue it when faced with a bunch of abrasive people proceeding from the assumption that she was lying. She figured there wasn't going to be any results, and they were making her feel more miserable, so she backed down.
Later, when learning that she wasn't alone, she decided she shouldn't be silent and she decided she wanted to deal with it by taking a stand on her terms.
That seems perfectly normal to me.
It has nothing to do with "cultural attitudes" and nothing to do with fearing stigma, it has to do with not wanting to be made to feel like shit and backing down, and then later figuring out that the best way to not feel like shit is to confront the issue.
You have the sequence of events wrong, btw. She never went to the police until months after she lost her case in front of the misconduct panel.
And, incidentally, the only evidence we have that the police didn't believe her is her own self-serving assertions that the police behaved exactly as she claims she thought they would when she decided initially that her rape wasn't worth reporting to the cops.
But, as you say, your interpretation of facts is shaded by your initial assumptions about her honesty. More facts won't change anything.
Quote from: Jacob on September 26, 2014, 11:23:21 AM
Quote from: Malthus on September 26, 2014, 09:09:49 AM
That's a pretty obviously self-serving statement to explain why she waited so long to make the complaint. Again, rather inconsistent with her stated beliefs and behavours.
It's obvious, perhaps, if you start from the assumption that she's lying.
Its also obvious if you don't start with any assumptions about her honesty. It's not obviously only when you start with the assumption that odds are 95 out of a hundred that she is telling the truth, and then don't allow any facts to alter your near-certainty.
I found this one bit on stats for false rape claims (in general). Haven't had a chance to read fully but I like how it said a review of literature has estimates from 1.5% to 90%. :D
http://ndaa.org/pdf/the_voice_vol_3_no_1_2009.pdf
And then there was this person on reddit who put together some stuff and summarized this:
http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/1o74n7/facts_and_statistics_about_false_rape_claims_a/
QuoteTLDR:
- At least 6% of rape claims are false
- The vast majority of rape claims are unknown whether they are true or false
- The 6% figure does not include mistaken accusations where the accuser was raped but named the wrong defendant
- The 6% figure only includes those cases where there is strong proof it was false
- False rape claims often result in serious harm, even the ones that do not end in conviction
- Punishing false accusers does not mean that a genuine rape accuser would be prosecuted if they could not prove they were raped
- False rape claims are 4x more common than false claims of other crimes
- Rape victims receive a lot of help, but false rape claim victims receive virtually none - this should be changed.
Quote from: grumbler on September 26, 2014, 11:49:13 AM
Quote from: Jacob on September 26, 2014, 11:20:34 AM
"Cultural attitude"? I'm not sure what you mean by this?
She didn't want to pursue it when faced with a bunch of abrasive people proceeding from the assumption that she was lying. She figured there wasn't going to be any results, and they were making her feel more miserable, so she backed down.
Later, when learning that she wasn't alone, she decided she shouldn't be silent and she decided she wanted to deal with it by taking a stand on her terms.
That seems perfectly normal to me.
It has nothing to do with "cultural attitudes" and nothing to do with fearing stigma, it has to do with not wanting to be made to feel like shit and backing down, and then later figuring out that the best way to not feel like shit is to confront the issue.
You have the sequence of events wrong, btw. She never went to the police until months after she lost her case in front of the misconduct panel.
And, incidentally, the only evidence we have that the police didn't believe her is her own self-serving assertions that the police behaved exactly as she claims she thought they would when she decided initially that her rape wasn't worth reporting to the cops.
But, as you say, your interpretation of facts is shaded by your initial assumptions about her honesty. More facts won't change anything.
One thing I'm curious about, but I suppose we'll never know because of privacy concerns, is what exactly did university do when she first filed complaint. Seems like police would have tried to get a statement from her then, no?
Quote from: garbon on September 26, 2014, 11:54:15 AM
Quote from: grumbler on September 26, 2014, 11:49:13 AM
Quote from: Jacob on September 26, 2014, 11:20:34 AM
"Cultural attitude"? I'm not sure what you mean by this?
She didn't want to pursue it when faced with a bunch of abrasive people proceeding from the assumption that she was lying. She figured there wasn't going to be any results, and they were making her feel more miserable, so she backed down.
Later, when learning that she wasn't alone, she decided she shouldn't be silent and she decided she wanted to deal with it by taking a stand on her terms.
That seems perfectly normal to me.
It has nothing to do with "cultural attitudes" and nothing to do with fearing stigma, it has to do with not wanting to be made to feel like shit and backing down, and then later figuring out that the best way to not feel like shit is to confront the issue.
You have the sequence of events wrong, btw. She never went to the police until months after she lost her case in front of the misconduct panel.
And, incidentally, the only evidence we have that the police didn't believe her is her own self-serving assertions that the police behaved exactly as she claims she thought they would when she decided initially that her rape wasn't worth reporting to the cops.
But, as you say, your interpretation of facts is shaded by your initial assumptions about her honesty. More facts won't change anything.
One thing I'm curious about, but I suppose we'll never know because of privacy concerns, is what exactly did university do when she first filed complaint. Seems like police would have tried to get a statement from her then, no?
The procedure (and I know this from a case that was processed about a year ago at Michigan and involved a football player, so had a lot of leaks and violations of confidentiality and student-privacy laws) is that
(1) the student alleging rape can report it to any official of the school, but usually does this through an RA if in the dorms, or campus security if not in the dorm. Whoever is approached is required by federal law to encourage the student to report the matter to the police, but the ,university officials can't force this and can't allow the student's decision to impact their own investigation.
(1a) if a university official becomes aware of a potential sexual assault (for instance, from police reports even if the student who is filing the complaint does want the university involved), they also must stat an investigation.
(2) the university appoints an investigating officer (they have several of these around, usually ex-cops, specifically to do misconduct investigations) who investigates and reaches a recommended ruling. The accuser and accused both gets copies of the investigation results, with the caveat that they are not to show these to anyone outside the process nor to make any copies - the absolute privacy of the process is required by federal law.
(3) the university convenes a hearing in front of a student misconduct panel, to consider the evidence of the report in light of any additional statements or comments from the accuser and accused. Each of the students involved can bring one advocate with them, who is not allowed to speak to the tribunal but can speak to their principal. Again, strict privacy is enjoined.
(4) the panel meets again to consider the investigator's recommendations in light of the testimony of the principals, and decides what the disposition of the case is. The principals are notified of the results of this deliberation.
(5) Either or both principals can appeal the decision of the panel to the dean of students. The results of these appeals, if any, are final.
The worst sanction that the panel can impose is expulsion. It has no power to impose monetary penalties, but can do things like requiring the advocate of a principal who is contemptuous of student privacy to write essays about student privacy.
The only results that can be publicly revealed are the fact of expulsion if a student is, indeed, expelled, and the reasons for the expulsion.
Ah so the university is aware of - but police are only contacted if victim chooses to contact police themselves?
Speaking of Michigan...
http://www.examiner.com/article/university-of-michigan-says-that-withholding-sex-is-sexual-violence
lol wut
Quote from: derspiess on September 26, 2014, 12:42:18 PM
Speaking of Michigan...
http://www.examiner.com/article/university-of-michigan-says-that-withholding-sex-is-sexual-violence
lol wut
Not sure what is more confusing - the UoMichigan's policy or the article by this "news examiner".
http://hr.umich.edu/stopabuse/resources/definitions.html
QuoteSexual violence
Examples of sexual violence include: discounting the partner's feelings regarding sex; criticizing the partner sexually; touching the partner sexually in inappropriate and uncomfortable ways; withholding sex and affection; always demanding sex; forcing partner to strip as a form of humiliation (maybe in front of children), to witness sexual acts, to participate in uncomfortable sex or sex after an episode of violence, to have sex with other people; and using objects and/or weapons to hurt during sex or threats to back up demands for sex.
Fuck, now I have to carry around my oversized mattress.
IOW every man's wife is sexually violent. :(
Quote from: The Brain on September 26, 2014, 12:55:41 PM
Fuck, now I have to carry around my oversized mattress.
I bet mine is bigger. California King FTW
Quote from: grumbler on September 26, 2014, 05:08:36 AM
Quote from: Tonitrus on September 25, 2014, 10:03:45 PM
I dunno, if you have a member of the tribunal asking questions like "dur, how can you even do anal without lubricant?", that doesn't sound very competent to me. That sounds like a clown college court.
As I said, the idea of the college even thinking that having an administrative "tribunal" to decide a serious criminal issue such as rape is preposterous. If a coworker at General Motors rapes you, you don't have the Board of Directors take witness statements and come up with a ruling.
We don't know that any of the details of the hearing except her self-serving claims. And the idea that universities have tribunals to rle on student misconduct (not criminal cases - that's for the criminal justice system - isn't preposterous at all. If a student cheats on a paper, or behaves in an intolerable manner, you don't go to court - the court would laugh the cases right back out. I don't think that General Motors has a code of conduct to be ruled on.
That's what I said in my other post...criminal-level offenses like rape should not even be contemplated by a university panel. Cheating, plagiarism, and smoking in the boys room? Have at it.
Quote from: Tonitrus on September 26, 2014, 01:39:15 PM
That's what I said in my other post...criminal-level offenses like rape should not even be contemplated by a university panel. Cheating, plagiarism, and smoking in the boys room? Have at it.
Rape is not contemplated by a university panel. Its a crime. Student sexual misconduct IS and should be considered, though. You cannot allow such misconduct on campus, as it endangers students.
Quote from: Martinus on September 26, 2014, 12:51:17 PM
Quote from: derspiess on September 26, 2014, 12:42:18 PM
Speaking of Michigan...
http://www.examiner.com/article/university-of-michigan-says-that-withholding-sex-is-sexual-violence
lol wut
Not sure what is more confusing - the UoMichigan's policy or the article by this "news examiner".
Both seem kinda strange, but at least the U of M policy is just listing some 'examples" while the "news" article presumably is trying to be complete. Seems like it cherry-picked a few phrases and wrote a story as though the cherry-picked portions are representative.
Quote from: Tonitrus on September 26, 2014, 01:39:15 PM
Quote from: grumbler on September 26, 2014, 05:08:36 AM
Quote from: Tonitrus on September 25, 2014, 10:03:45 PM
I dunno, if you have a member of the tribunal asking questions like "dur, how can you even do anal without lubricant?", that doesn't sound very competent to me. That sounds like a clown college court.
As I said, the idea of the college even thinking that having an administrative "tribunal" to decide a serious criminal issue such as rape is preposterous. If a coworker at General Motors rapes you, you don't have the Board of Directors take witness statements and come up with a ruling.
We don't know that any of the details of the hearing except her self-serving claims. And the idea that universities have tribunals to rle on student misconduct (not criminal cases - that's for the criminal justice system - isn't preposterous at all. If a student cheats on a paper, or behaves in an intolerable manner, you don't go to court - the court would laugh the cases right back out. I don't think that General Motors has a code of conduct to be ruled on.
That's what I said in my other post...criminal-level offenses like rape should not even be contemplated by a university panel. Cheating, plagiarism, and smoking in the boys room? Have at it.
Let's take a hypothetical though... person is charged with sexual assault. There is actually quite compelling evidence to support the person's guilt - let's say it's caught on video.
The criminal justice system however moves slowly. If this person gets bail (and despite even overwhelming evidence, if the person is of otherwise good character I suggest they will get bail) they could drag proceedings out for a year or longer, during which time they intend to continue attending the university.
Let's also say the rape was committed on or near university property.
Still think the university should just wash it's hands and say "we'll just let the system do it's work", or should they expel this particular student at the first opportunity?
Quote from: grumbler on September 26, 2014, 01:47:35 PM
Quote from: Martinus on September 26, 2014, 12:51:17 PM
Quote from: derspiess on September 26, 2014, 12:42:18 PM
Speaking of Michigan...
http://www.examiner.com/article/university-of-michigan-says-that-withholding-sex-is-sexual-violence
lol wut
Not sure what is more confusing - the UoMichigan's policy or the article by this "news examiner".
Both seem kinda strange, but at least the U of M policy is just listing some 'examples" while the "news" article presumably is trying to be complete. Seems like it cherry-picked a few phrases and wrote a story as though the cherry-picked portions are representative.
:lol: Homer.
Quote from: grumbler on September 26, 2014, 01:47:35 PM
Quote from: Martinus on September 26, 2014, 12:51:17 PM
Quote from: derspiess on September 26, 2014, 12:42:18 PM
Speaking of Michigan...
http://www.examiner.com/article/university-of-michigan-says-that-withholding-sex-is-sexual-violence
lol wut
Not sure what is more confusing - the UoMichigan's policy or the article by this "news examiner".
Both seem kinda strange, but at least the U of M policy is just listing some 'examples" while the "news" article presumably is trying to be complete. Seems like it cherry-picked a few phrases and wrote a story as though the cherry-picked portions are representative.
Yeah examiner.com is mainly just different bloggers. If you try to search for something like this story in google news, you just get a bunch of random blog posts.
Quote from: Caliga on September 26, 2014, 12:55:42 PM
IOW every man's wife is sexually violent. :(
Admittedly, the document she quotes seems to talk about "sexual abuse", not "sexual violence" - she conflates the two, but I don't think they are the same.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on September 26, 2014, 10:38:22 AM
For some reason I thought Ghana was not quite a shit hole.
Every country which is not in the OECD is a shithole. The converse does not apply, some OECD members are shitholes. However, the OECD list is a great rule of thumb.
Incidentally (and a bit off topic), what is the US law (or a predominant state law, if rape is not a federal crime) approach to prosecuting rape - is rape an offence that the victim must press charges about or can it be prosecuted "ex officio" (in the same way as murder)?
I am not talking about evidence side of things (it would obviously be difficult to prosecute rape if the victim is not cooperative) but if the victim refuses to testify or "press charges", can the prosecution still prosecute?
There has been a huge debate in Poland about this last year and (in line with international conventions against violence against women and under pressure from numerous women's rights organisations), it was changed to the model where the public prosecution can prosecute even if the victim is not cooperating/is not "pressing charges".
Quote from: Martinus on September 26, 2014, 03:23:02 PM
Admittedly, the document she quotes seems to talk about "sexual abuse", not "sexual violence" - she conflates the two, but I don't think they are the same.
She's just going by the document. As I quoted, the document does claim clearly non-violent acts (or non-acts) as "sexual violence".
Quote from: derspiess on September 26, 2014, 03:31:17 PM
Quote from: Martinus on September 26, 2014, 03:23:02 PM
Admittedly, the document she quotes seems to talk about "sexual abuse", not "sexual violence" - she conflates the two, but I don't think they are the same.
She's just going by the document. As I quoted, the document does claim clearly non-violent acts (or non-acts) as "sexual violence".
Oh sorry I thought you were quoting the article. This is really past bizarre. I wonder if this is some troll.
Quote from: Martinus on September 26, 2014, 03:32:33 PM
Quote from: derspiess on September 26, 2014, 03:31:17 PM
Quote from: Martinus on September 26, 2014, 03:23:02 PM
Admittedly, the document she quotes seems to talk about "sexual abuse", not "sexual violence" - she conflates the two, but I don't think they are the same.
She's just going by the document. As I quoted, the document does claim clearly non-violent acts (or non-acts) as "sexual violence".
Oh sorry I thought you were quoting the article. This is really past bizarre. I wonder if this is some troll.
Of course, in all likelihood, it is probably just a mistake in what they stated the definition of sexual violence to be. Tempest in a teacup.
One would think they'd exercise additional caution before publishing something like that. Anyway, if it were a mistake it's still there and they've had more than a day to take it down or update it (looks like the article was posted yesterday afternoon).
Quote from: derspiess on September 26, 2014, 03:39:38 PM
One would think they'd exercise additional caution before publishing something like that. Anyway, if it were a mistake it's still there and they've had more than a day to take it down or update it (looks like the article was posted yesterday afternoon).
Yeah because a big priority is probably a definition buried on one of their webpages. To be honest, I bet they aren't even aware of this blog chatter yet. After all no actual news agency has picked up this "story."
Quote from: derspiess on September 26, 2014, 03:31:17 PM
Quote from: Martinus on September 26, 2014, 03:23:02 PM
Admittedly, the document she quotes seems to talk about "sexual abuse", not "sexual violence" - she conflates the two, but I don't think they are the same.
She's just going by the document. As I quoted, the document does claim clearly non-violent acts (or non-acts) as "sexual violence".
No questions the Michigan document is strange, at a minimum, I don't believe.
Maybe hers is an elaborate stunt to allude to another Michael Jackson scandal involving blanket's older step sister?
Why can't more feminists be this reasonable?
http://time.com/3444749/camille-paglia-the-modern-campus-cannot-comprehend-evil/
QuoteCamille Paglia: The Modern Campus Cannot Comprehend Evil
Camille Paglia 9:40 AM ET
Paglia is the author of Glittering Images: A Journey Through Art From Egypt to Star Wars.
Young women today do not understand the fragility of civilization and the constant nearness of savage nature
The disappearance of University of Virginia sophomore Hannah Graham two weeks ago is the latest in a long series of girls-gone-missing cases that often end tragically. A 32-year-old, 270-pound former football player who fled to Texas has been returned to Virginia and charged with "abduction with intent to defile." At this date, Hannah's fate and whereabouts remain unknown.
Wildly overblown claims about an epidemic of sexual assaults on American campuses are obscuring the true danger to young women, too often distracted by cellphones or iPods in public places: the ancient sex crime of abduction and murder. Despite hysterical propaganda about our "rape culture," the majority of campus incidents being carelessly described as sexual assault are not felonious rape (involving force or drugs) but oafish hookup melodramas, arising from mixed signals and imprudence on both sides.
Colleges should stick to academics and stop their infantilizing supervision of students' dating lives, an authoritarian intrusion that borders on violation of civil liberties. Real crimes should be reported to the police, not to haphazard and ill-trained campus grievance committees.
Too many young middleclass women, raised far from the urban streets, seem to expect adult life to be an extension of their comfortable, overprotected homes. But the world remains a wilderness. The price of women's modern freedoms is personal responsibility for vigilance and self-defense.
Current educational codes, tracking liberal-Left, are perpetuating illusions about sex and gender. The basic Leftist premise, descending from Marxism, is that all problems in human life stem from an unjust society and that corrections and fine-tunings of that social mechanism will eventually bring utopia. Progressives have unquestioned faith in the perfectibility of mankind.
The horrors and atrocities of history have been edited out of primary and secondary education except where they can be blamed on racism, sexism, and imperialism — toxins embedded in oppressive outside structures that must be smashed and remade. But the real problem resides in human nature, which religion as well as great art sees as eternally torn by a war between the forces of darkness and light.
Liberalism lacks a profound sense of evil — but so does conservatism these days, when evil is facilely projected onto a foreign host of rising political forces united only in their rejection of Western values. Nothing is more simplistic than the now rote use by politicians and pundits of the cartoonish label "bad guys" for jihadists, as if American foreign policy is a slapdash script for a cowboy movie.
The gender ideology dominating academe denies that sex differences are rooted in biology and sees them instead as malleable fictions that can be revised at will. The assumption is that complaints and protests, enforced by sympathetic campus bureaucrats and government regulators, can and will fundamentally alter all men.
But extreme sex crimes like rape-murder emanate from a primitive level that even practical psychology no longer has a language for. Psychopathology, as in Richard von Krafft-Ebing's grisly Psychopathia Sexualis (1886), was a central field in early psychoanalysis. But today's therapy has morphed into happy talk, attitude adjustments, and pharmaceutical shortcuts.
There is a ritualistic symbolism at work in sex crime that most women do not grasp and therefore cannot arm themselves against. It is well-established that the visual faculties play a bigger role in male sexuality, which accounts for the greater male interest in pornography. The sexual stalker, who is often an alienated loser consumed with his own failures, is motivated by an atavistic hunting reflex. He is called a predator precisely because he turns his victims into prey.
Sex crime springs from fantasy, hallucination, delusion, and obsession. A random young woman becomes the scapegoat for a regressive rage against female sexual power: "You made me do this." Academic clichés about the "commodification" of women under capitalism make little sense here: It is women's superior biological status as magical life-creator that is profaned and annihilated by the barbarism of sex crime.
Misled by the naive optimism and "You go, girl!" boosterism of their upbringing, young women do not see the animal eyes glowing at them in the dark. They assume that bared flesh and sexy clothes are just a fashion statement containing no messages that might be misread and twisted by a psychotic. They do not understand the fragility of civilization and the constant nearness of savage nature.
Quote from: derspiess on September 29, 2014, 12:57:59 PM
Why can't more feminists be this reasonable?
Same reason why ideologues of all stripes (sorry Ide) have a hard time being reasonable. They inhabit an echo chamber that protects them from having to process outside views. There actually are lots of pretty insightful and good Feminists but, you know, they have to have spent time out in the world experiencing life and stuff.
I have to say that was quite a Hobbesian little essay.
Quote from: derspiess on September 29, 2014, 12:57:59 PM
Why can't more feminists be this reasonable?
I'd say "this reasonable" isn't terribly reasonable at all. The piece is full of half-truths, exaggerations, and outright lies, most of which I suspect the author knows will be recognized as such. She seems pretty indifferent to truth, like most preachers.
She seems to be insane.
Are you not familliar with Camille Paglia, one of garbon's favourite feminists?
She is insane.
Quote from: Barrister on September 29, 2014, 02:40:46 PM
Are you not familliar with Camille Paglia, one of garbon's favourite feminists?
To me this is one of the worst attempts on her part to extol her perceptions on date rape. To be fair, she's had the same argument for over 2 decades, so I guess she mistakenly feels she can just phone it in. I have to echo statements that the sounds crazy from this blurb.
So her point is "more Grimm, less GRRM"? :hmm:
Quote from: garbon on September 29, 2014, 02:45:10 PM
Quote from: Barrister on September 29, 2014, 02:40:46 PM
Are you not familliar with Camille Paglia, one of garbon's favourite feminists?
To me this is one of the worst attempts on her part to extol her perceptions on date rape. To be fair, she's had the same argument for over 2 decades, so I guess she mistakenly feels she can just phone it in. I have to echo statements that the sounds crazy from this blurb.
You seem to disagree with her more often than you agree :hmm:
Quote from: garbon on September 29, 2014, 02:45:10 PM
Quote from: Barrister on September 29, 2014, 02:40:46 PM
Are you not familliar with Camille Paglia, one of garbon's favourite feminists?
To me this is one of the worst attempts on her part to extol her perceptions on date rape. To be fair, she's had the same argument for over 2 decades, so I guess she mistakenly feels she can just phone it in. I have to echo statements that the sounds crazy from this blurb.
Having been a defender of "no means no" and that "date rape is rape", I thoroughly disagreed with her quote. It was just that grumbles and The Brain acted as if they didn't know who she was, when she's been referenced numerous times here on Languish.
Quote from: derspiess on September 29, 2014, 02:50:58 PM
Quote from: garbon on September 29, 2014, 02:45:10 PM
Quote from: Barrister on September 29, 2014, 02:40:46 PM
Are you not familliar with Camille Paglia, one of garbon's favourite feminists?
To me this is one of the worst attempts on her part to extol her perceptions on date rape. To be fair, she's had the same argument for over 2 decades, so I guess she mistakenly feels she can just phone it in. I have to echo statements that the sounds crazy from this blurb.
You seem to disagree with her more often than you agree :hmm:
Well, her point seems to be "we do not do enough to protect oir women from serial killers". From statistical perspective, it's like basing your accident response policy around the possibility of a meteorite strike.
Quote from: Barrister on September 29, 2014, 02:51:46 PM
Quote from: garbon on September 29, 2014, 02:45:10 PM
Quote from: Barrister on September 29, 2014, 02:40:46 PM
Are you not familliar with Camille Paglia, one of garbon's favourite feminists?
To me this is one of the worst attempts on her part to extol her perceptions on date rape. To be fair, she's had the same argument for over 2 decades, so I guess she mistakenly feels she can just phone it in. I have to echo statements that the sounds crazy from this blurb.
Having been a defender of "no means no" and that "date rape is rape", I thoroughly disagreed with her quote. It was just that grumbles and The Brain acted as if they didn't know who she was, when she's been referenced numerous times here on Languish.
Any thoughts on the 'yes-means-yes' law that just passed in California?
Quote from: derspiess on September 29, 2014, 02:50:58 PM
You seem to disagree with her more often than you agree :hmm:
You are one of my favorite posters yet I disagree with you more often than I agree :contract:
Quote from: Valmy on September 29, 2014, 02:54:44 PM
Quote from: Barrister on September 29, 2014, 02:51:46 PM
Quote from: garbon on September 29, 2014, 02:45:10 PM
Quote from: Barrister on September 29, 2014, 02:40:46 PM
Are you not familliar with Camille Paglia, one of garbon's favourite feminists?
To me this is one of the worst attempts on her part to extol her perceptions on date rape. To be fair, she's had the same argument for over 2 decades, so I guess she mistakenly feels she can just phone it in. I have to echo statements that the sounds crazy from this blurb.
Having been a defender of "no means no" and that "date rape is rape", I thoroughly disagreed with her quote. It was just that grumbles and The Brain acted as if they didn't know who she was, when she's been referenced numerous times here on Languish.
Any thoughts on the 'yes-means-yes' law that just passed in California?
Not sure how much it adds to be honest.
It's not that "no means no" is unclear. It is not. At all.
What is always difficult though in sex assault prosecutions is that you have two differing versions of events, with little to distinguish which version is true and which is not. This "yes means yes" law will still have that problem.
Quote from: derspiess on September 29, 2014, 02:50:58 PM
Quote from: garbon on September 29, 2014, 02:45:10 PM
Quote from: Barrister on September 29, 2014, 02:40:46 PM
Are you not familliar with Camille Paglia, one of garbon's favourite feminists?
To me this is one of the worst attempts on her part to extol her perceptions on date rape. To be fair, she's had the same argument for over 2 decades, so I guess she mistakenly feels she can just phone it in. I have to echo statements that the sounds crazy from this blurb.
You seem to disagree with her more often than you agree :hmm:
She challenges my view points. That doesn't mean I have to go around agreeing with everything that spills from her lips (like her hatred of Hillary!).
Quote from: garbon on September 29, 2014, 03:15:59 PM
She challenges my view points. That doesn't mean I have to go around agreeing with everything that spills from her lips (like her hatred of Hillary!).
I didn't say you had to agree with her all the time. I just can't remember any time you have agreed with her.
Quote from: derspiess on September 29, 2014, 03:36:09 PM
Quote from: garbon on September 29, 2014, 03:15:59 PM
She challenges my view points. That doesn't mean I have to go around agreeing with everything that spills from her lips (like her hatred of Hillary!).
I didn't say you had to agree with her all the time. I just can't remember any time you have agreed with her.
I don't disagree with how she has outlined her date rape stance in the past. I also agreed with her initial impression of Sarah Palin. -_-
Quote from: Barrister on September 29, 2014, 02:51:46 PM
Having been a defender of "no means no" and that "date rape is rape", I thoroughly disagreed with her quote. It was just that grumbles and The Brain acted as if they didn't know who she was, when she's been referenced numerous times here on Languish.
I was commenting on a piece of writing, not a person. My comments applied whether she is someone you know a lot about, or only a little about.
Now here's a rape story derspiess can get behind. PAY FOR YOUR OWN WHORE KITS
Quoteb]Billing for rape: Louisiana sex assault victims often face hefty bills for medical care
Rape victims billed for medical expenses[/b]
In Louisiana, victims of sex crimes often are billed for forensic medical exams and related care even though state and federal guidelines require many of these services be provided at no cost to the victim.
http://www.nola.com/health/index.ssf/2014/09/louisiana_rape_victims_often_b.html
Quote from: derspiess on September 25, 2014, 10:20:45 AM
I'd be interested to hear a female poster's take on this. Meri, perhaps.
I was raped twice in high school. I told no one; not even my best friend. I certainly didn't go to the police or the school authorities. I didn't believe that anyone would believe me, and I'm fairly certain that I made the right decision. Not for the pricks who raped me, but for myself. My dad was a lot like legbiter, and I doubt even he would have believed me. No way I would have put myself through all of that just to tarnish my name for no gain.
Was she raped? I don't know, and no one here does, either. Did she go about this ass-backwards? Yes, she did. I'm not sure that that determines that she's making this up, though. Sometimes, it takes knowing that someone will hurt others unless you speak up before you're willing to take that step. That could be the case here.
At a certain point, though, this whole thing took on a life of its own, and she's now along for the ride. She's getting attention - which she wanted - and fame, which I doubt she expected. She is bringing attention to campus sexual assault, which most people agree is a major concern. I don't necessarily agree with how she's going about it, but I can't argue with the results. I just wish that her case had been handled better so that those who already believe that 19 out of 20 claims of rape are made up wouldn't have an easy thing to point out to dismiss the real meat of the matter.
I don't think her case having been handled better would have prevented the people who believe that 19 out of 20 rape allegations are fake from finding some other reason to dismiss it.
I mean, I may be wrong, but that's what I believe.
Also... that's some heavy stuff to drop in the thread Meri. Relevant, but heavy. :hug:
Quote from: Jacob on September 30, 2014, 12:31:01 AM
I don't think her case having been handled better would have prevented the people who believe that 19 out of 20 rape allegations are fake from finding some other reason to dismiss it.
I mean, I may be wrong, but that's what I believe.
Probably not, but I'd rather not hand them the ammo gift wrapped, you know?
QuoteAlso... that's some heavy stuff to drop in the thread Meri. Relevant, but heavy. :hug:
It's not news here on Languish. I've mentioned in the past what happened to me. It's part of why I tend to stay silent in these threads. My experiences are very different from pretty much anyone here, and I know that they color my perceptions.
I couldn't imagine telling the truth that I was raped when it happened, so the idea that someone would lie about it is... inconceivable to me. I know it happens - I've seen the cases hit the news - but it seems unreal. It took me a long time before I could admit it out loud, but once I did, I didn't shut up about it. That's how I coped. I can see this girl doing the same thing. Kind of a "If I'm going to admit this, then damnit, you're all going to know that I'm admitting that this happened to me!" It's a bizarre way to deal with it, but reason and logic aren't a part of processing rape.
And you've all hit the nail on the head about rape. It's one of those crimes that is slippery. It's almost always he said/she said. Even most women aren't 100% sure if it's rape at first, because most rapes are people they know. Did I lead him on? Did I imply yes? What did I do to bring this on? It's how we're trained to think. We're the one apologizing for being raped. Well, I let him kiss me, so I guess it makes sense that he expected sex. I told him no, but I must have made him think I really meant yes.
Yeah, those really are all of the thoughts that went through my mind. Both times. Then I would teeter the other direction, hating him for putting me through what he did, hating the situation that I found myself in, hating that I felt too scared to tell anyone. Then back to blaming myself, telling myself that it wasn't that bad, that it could have been worse. It couldn't be rape because he didn't beat me up, too.
It's hard to explain all of that to people who are looking for a logical reaction to an illogical situation. I empathize with this girl because I can see how she could end up in the situation that she's in. She might be lying, but we'll never really know. What really saddens me about this whole situation is that the way that it's been played out, what girl from Columbia in her right mind is going to ever come forward if they're raped? According to this girl, the police are evil and worthless, the University is incompetent and are more concerned with their reputation, and ultimately, unless you're willing to make a spectacle of yourself, no one will bother to listen to you. That, more than anything, bothers me.
Where did we get the idea that there are "people who believe that 19 out of 20 rape allegations are fake?" From her self-serving account?
Interesting how some people can take a completely unsubstantiated/hearsay and wholly implausible claim and proceed to use that as a "fact" in their arguments.
Quote from: grumbler on September 30, 2014, 04:50:06 AM
Where did we get the idea that there are "people who believe that 19 out of 20 rape allegations are fake?" From her self-serving account?
Interesting how some people can take a completely unsubstantiated/hearsay and wholly implausible claim and proceed to use that as a "fact" in their arguments.
I never said that it was fact. I said that those who are in that boat - and there are plenty, with or without a recording of a cop saying it - are going to use cases like this to support their own claims that false rape claims far outnumber real rape claims. I'm sorry if that didn't come across.
Quote from: merithyn on September 30, 2014, 07:54:39 AM
I never said that it was fact. I said that those who are in that boat - and there are plenty, with or without a recording of a cop saying it - are going to use cases like this to support their own claims that false rape claims far outnumber real rape claims. I'm sorry if that didn't come across.
I don't know of anyone, anywhere, who has said, on tape or off it, that false rapes outnumber real rapes 19-1. I think that it is statistically possible that such people exist, but then it is statistically possible that all kinds of absurd positions are held by someone, somewhere.
What needs to change in public perception isn't that false rape claims outnumber real rape claims - I don't even know of anyone who holds that more moderate position - it is that false sexual assault (not even rape) claims are a sufficient percentage of total sexual assault claims that action against alleged sexual misconduct should be handled only by the criminal justice system, or that administrative action against alleged perps of sexual misconduct should use the criminal justice standards of proof.
The answer to the college sexual assault epidemic won't come when someone convinces those who allegedly believe that "false rape claims outnumber real rape claims" otherwise, because I don't think that there are many if any people who need to be convinced. It will come when college men and women understand that there are sexual behaviors that a university simply cannot tolerate and remain a university. There will always be cases that remain ambiguous, but the stance of the university, and the duties of the students to combat sexual assault, should not be ambiguous. No one should be allowed to believe that they can conduct or condone sexual assault, and no one should be allowed to believe that they can overturn due process by carrying around a mattress.
Quote from: grumbler on September 30, 2014, 08:29:59 AM
Quote from: merithyn on September 30, 2014, 07:54:39 AM
I never said that it was fact. I said that those who are in that boat - and there are plenty, with or without a recording of a cop saying it - are going to use cases like this to support their own claims that false rape claims far outnumber real rape claims. I'm sorry if that didn't come across.
I don't know of anyone, anywhere, who has said, on tape or off it, that false rapes outnumber real rapes 19-1. I think that it is statistically possible that such people exist, but then it is statistically possible that all kinds of absurd positions are held by someone, somewhere.
What needs to change in public perception isn't that false rape claims outnumber real rape claims - I don't even know of anyone who holds that more moderate position - it is that false sexual assault (not even rape) claims are a sufficient percentage of total sexual assault claims that action against alleged sexual misconduct should be handled only by the criminal justice system, or that administrative action against alleged perps of sexual misconduct should use the criminal justice standards of proof.
The answer to the college sexual assault epidemic won't come when someone convinces those who allegedly believe that "false rape claims outnumber real rape claims" otherwise, because I don't think that there are many if any people who need to be convinced. It will come when college men and women understand that there are sexual behaviors that a university simply cannot tolerate and remain a university. There will always be cases that remain ambiguous, but the stance of the university, and the duties of the students to combat sexual assault, should not be ambiguous. No one should be allowed to believe that they can conduct or condone sexual assault, and no one should be allowed to believe that they can overturn due process by carrying around a mattress.
Okay.
Quote from: merithyn on September 30, 2014, 10:08:48 AMOkay.
Basically, what happened is that due process determined that there wasn't enough evidence that a rape had happened to take action; therefore - as a matter of objective fact - a rape did not happen. If anyone thinks a rape may have happened, including the woman who alleged that she was raped, they are objectively wrong.
Okay.
Okay
Okay?
Well okay then.
Quote from: Jacob on September 30, 2014, 10:20:41 AM
Quote from: merithyn on September 30, 2014, 10:08:48 AMOkay.
Basically, what happened is that due process determined that there wasn't enough evidence that a rape had happened to take action; therefore - as a matter of objective fact - a rape did not happen. If anyone thinks a rape may have happened, including the woman who alleged that she was raped, they are objectively wrong.
:)
As I mentioned, I'm not objective on these topics, which is why I generally stay out. In this case, derspeiss specifically asked my opinion, so I gave it. I'm certainly not going to argue over some minutiae with anyone.
Jacob's post makes no sense to me, either as a response to someone else's post or as a description of the situation.
Quote from: merithyn on September 30, 2014, 10:48:51 AM
In this case, derspeiss specifically asked my opinion, so I gave it.
Thank you :) :hug:
Quote from: Admiral Yi on September 30, 2014, 10:51:01 AM
Jacob's post makes no sense to me, either as a response to someone else's post or as a description of the situation.
I'm going to wait for Malthus to weigh in.
Where's the "Asoka"?
Quote from: Jacob on September 30, 2014, 11:01:11 AM
I'm going to wait for Malthus to weigh in.
:lol: Pouty.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on September 30, 2014, 10:51:01 AM
Jacob's post makes no sense to me, either as a response to someone else's post or as a description of the situation.
Okay.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on September 30, 2014, 11:05:44 AM
Quote from: Jacob on September 30, 2014, 11:01:11 AM
I'm going to wait for Malthus to weigh in.
:lol: Pouty.
Your post makes no sense to me, either as a response to someone else's post or as a description of the situation.
Quote from: Jacob on September 30, 2014, 11:01:11 AM
I'm going to wait for Malthus to weigh in.
Dunno why he should. He'll never convince those who believe that 19 out of 20 things Canadians say are lies.
Quote from: Jacob on September 30, 2014, 11:10:21 AM
Your post makes no sense to me, either as a response to someone else's post or as a description of the situation.
This is fun.
Meri, maybe you can explain to me what you got from Jacob's post.
I don't entirely agree with Jacob, but I don't have any trouble understanding what he is trying to communicate.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on September 30, 2014, 11:13:25 AM
Meri, maybe you can explain to me what you got from Jacob's post.
I understood him to be saying that, according to many on Languish, because the University panel didn't believe the girl had been raped, no one else is allowed to believe otherwise, including the girl. It seems that several on Languish believe that the panel has created a fact by giving their opinion.
That's my interpretation of what he was saying, anyway. Does that help?
Quote from: merithyn on September 30, 2014, 11:20:32 AM
I understood him to be saying that, according to many on Languish, because the University panel didn't believe the girl had been raped, no one else is allowed to believe otherwise, including the girl. It seems that several on Languish believe that the panel has created a fact by giving their opinion.
That's my interpretation of what he was saying, anyway. Does that help?
Thanks. Do you believe that to be an accurate characterization of some posters' positions?
Quote from: Berkut on September 30, 2014, 11:14:27 AM
I don't entirely agree with Jacob, but I don't have any trouble understanding what he is trying to communicate.
It's long been established that Yi and I are basically unable to communicate. Every so often, one of us attempts to break through, but it never seems to work out :(
If the youn g lady in question is 100% correct about the facts of the case (ignoring for the moment her actions in response to those facts around stuff like not being able to be bothered to go to the cops initially, or pursuing it afterwards" then to some degree her actions are very defensible.
*She* at least knows the truth of what happened, and she can be pretty damn certain she was assaulted, if not raped. Finding out that similar things had happened to others exacerbates her position, and justifies even more her actions.
However, that doesn't change the fact that her actions are basically extra-legal. She went through the legal process, and did not get the outcome she wanted, so she is basically trying to get the outcome she wants outside the legal system. That can be, in some cases, pretty supportable. Hell, I read "A Time to Kill".
But for those of us who are NOT her, we have a very different standard to judge all this - for her efforts to be considered supportable, there is a ridiculously high bar she has to cross, since in fact she DID have access to legal remedy, and those remedies had an outcome, and she is basically asking us to set aside that outcome and join her in her vigilantism. That is a far, FAR cry from asking us to support the victims of sexual assault and rape, and that is where, I think, me and Jacob part ways.
Given that she is asking for some very extraordinary support, she provides very poor justification. I cannot see a travesty of justice here, I cannot see a system that I look at and think "Yeah, the system itself is grossly unjust, so we should in fact support her efforts outside that system". She was the alleged victim of a crime. Do all alleged victims of crimes have the right to publicly shame those they accuse and ask for MY support in hounding that person out of school?
I mean, sure, they can ask, but most of the time my answer is going to be "No, I won't support that, and don't think anyone should support that".
Quote from: Admiral Yi on September 30, 2014, 11:25:06 AM
Quote from: merithyn on September 30, 2014, 11:20:32 AM
I understood him to be saying that, according to many on Languish, because the University panel didn't believe the girl had been raped, no one else is allowed to believe otherwise, including the girl. It seems that several on Languish believe that the panel has created a fact by giving their opinion.
That's my interpretation of what he was saying, anyway. Does that help?
Thanks. Do you believe that to be an accurate characterization of some posters' positions?
No.
Quote from: Berkut on September 30, 2014, 11:36:54 AM
If the youn g lady in question is 100% correct about the facts of the case (ignoring for the moment her actions in response to those facts around stuff like not being able to be bothered to go to the cops initially, or pursuing it afterwards" then to some degree her actions are very defensible.
*She* at least knows the truth of what happened, and she can be pretty damn certain she was assaulted, if not raped. Finding out that similar things had happened to others exacerbates her position, and justifies even more her actions.
However, that doesn't change the fact that her actions are basically extra-legal. She went through the legal process, and did not get the outcome she wanted, so she is basically trying to get the outcome she wants outside the legal system. That can be, in some cases, pretty supportable. Hell, I read "A Time to Kill".
But for those of us who are NOT her, we have a very different standard to judge all this - for her efforts to be considered supportable, there is a ridiculously high bar she has to cross, since in fact she DID have access to legal remedy, and those remedies had an outcome, and she is basically asking us to set aside that outcome and join her in her vigilantism. That is a far, FAR cry from asking us to support the victims of sexual assault and rape, and that is where, I think, me and Jacob part ways.
Given that she is asking for some very extraordinary support, she provides very poor justification. I cannot see a travesty of justice here, I cannot see a system that I look at and think "Yeah, the system itself is grossly unjust, so we should in fact support her efforts outside that system". She was the alleged victim of a crime. Do all alleged victims of crimes have the right to publicly shame those they accuse and ask for MY support in hounding that person out of school?
I mean, sure, they can ask, but most of the time my answer is going to be "No, I won't support that, and don't think anyone should support that".
You had me until the last bit. Otherwise, I agree with your take on this.
Quote from: Berkut on September 30, 2014, 11:36:54 AM
But for those of us who are NOT her, we have a very different standard to judge all this - for her efforts to be considered supportable, there is a ridiculously high bar she has to cross, since in fact she DID have access to legal remedy, and those remedies had an outcome, and she is basically asking us to set aside that outcome and join her in her vigilantism. That is a far, FAR cry from asking us to support the victims of sexual assault and rape, and that is where, I think, me and Jacob part ways.
A good summary, Berkut. Though I'm not sure there's much need to part ways. I don't believe I've said that we should follow the course of action she advocates. All I've said is that I strongly lean towards believing her when she says she was raped.
Quote from: Berkut on September 30, 2014, 11:36:54 AM
If the youn g lady in question is 100% correct about the facts of the case (ignoring for the moment her actions in response to those facts around stuff like not being able to be bothered to go to the cops initially, or pursuing it afterwards" then to some degree her actions are very defensible.
*She* at least knows the truth of what happened, and she can be pretty damn certain she was assaulted, if not raped. Finding out that similar things had happened to others exacerbates her position, and justifies even more her actions.
This goes to the core of the problem, IMO; she
does not know what happened. She thinks that she knows what happened, but neither her memory nor her understanding of the rules is perfect. In virtually any case whatever involving participants and witnesses, there are disagreements about the specifics; people
absolutely know that they are 100% correct about the facts of the case, and yet it is obvious that not everyone can be because the details they are so sure of are mutually exclusive. Humans are fallible that way.
Now, in this case, we have a participant in an event who claims to be absolutely sure about the details of the case and the rules of the school, and is not going to be persuaded by mere officials responsible for the administration of those rules that they are right and she is not. Hence (well, that, plus the fact that she is getting course credit for it) the mattress deal.
I feel for her a little bit, but not much; I recognize that she thinks her "truth" trumps every other truth out there, but I see her "truth" as a subjective thing, like most 'truths." She is too arrogant to see that her truth is subjective, though, so my sympathies for her are limited.
Campus sexual assault is another matter entirely, the discussion of which isn't well-served by discussion of this case, IMO.
Quote from: grumbler on September 30, 2014, 11:50:40 AM
Campus sexual assault is another matter entirely, the discussion of which isn't well-served by discussion of this case, IMO.
Agreed.
Quote from: merithyn on September 30, 2014, 11:46:03 AM
Quote from: Berkut on September 30, 2014, 11:36:54 AM
If the youn g lady in question is 100% correct about the facts of the case (ignoring for the moment her actions in response to those facts around stuff like not being able to be bothered to go to the cops initially, or pursuing it afterwards" then to some degree her actions are very defensible.
*She* at least knows the truth of what happened, and she can be pretty damn certain she was assaulted, if not raped. Finding out that similar things had happened to others exacerbates her position, and justifies even more her actions.
However, that doesn't change the fact that her actions are basically extra-legal. She went through the legal process, and did not get the outcome she wanted, so she is basically trying to get the outcome she wants outside the legal system. That can be, in some cases, pretty supportable. Hell, I read "A Time to Kill".
But for those of us who are NOT her, we have a very different standard to judge all this - for her efforts to be considered supportable, there is a ridiculously high bar she has to cross, since in fact she DID have access to legal remedy, and those remedies had an outcome, and she is basically asking us to set aside that outcome and join her in her vigilantism. That is a far, FAR cry from asking us to support the victims of sexual assault and rape, and that is where, I think, me and Jacob part ways.
Given that she is asking for some very extraordinary support, she provides very poor justification. I cannot see a travesty of justice here, I cannot see a system that I look at and think "Yeah, the system itself is grossly unjust, so we should in fact support her efforts outside that system". She was the alleged victim of a crime. Do all alleged victims of crimes have the right to publicly shame those they accuse and ask for MY support in hounding that person out of school?
I mean, sure, they can ask, but most of the time my answer is going to be "No, I won't support that, and don't think anyone should support that".
You had me until the last bit. Otherwise, I agree with your take on this.
I am basically saying that IMO nobody should support vigilantism unless there is a clear and obvious travesty of justice. And regardless of the facts of what happened to her, it is pretty reasonably clear to me that her case does not at all come even close to justifying vigilantism.
Quote from: Berkut on September 30, 2014, 12:03:35 PM
I am basically saying that IMO nobody should support vigilantism unless there is a clear and obvious travesty of justice. And regardless of the facts of what happened to her, it is pretty reasonably clear to me that her case does not at all come even close to justifying vigilantism.
That's fair.
Quote from: Jacob on September 30, 2014, 11:46:45 AM
All I've said is that I strongly lean towards believing her when she says she was raped.
Your logic seems to be that given the assumption that most reports of rape are legitimate you will strongly believe all reports of rape unless you are satisfied to the contrary. As a matter of principle that seems a dangerous road. But good at getting at a biased result. The very thing you seem to be accusing others doing. I dont know how anyone can make an informed judgment about the truth of her claim since the only version of events we have are hers both as to the account of what occurred that night and of what occured at the university hearing.
Quote from: crazy canuck on September 30, 2014, 01:17:50 PM
Quote from: Jacob on September 30, 2014, 11:46:45 AM
All I've said is that I strongly lean towards believing her when she says she was raped.
Your logic seems to be that given the assumption that most reports of rape are legitimate you will strongly believe all reports of rape unless you are satisfied to the contrary. As a matter of principle that seems a dangerous road. But good at getting at a biased result. The very thing you seem to be accusing others doing. I dont know how anyone can make an informed judgment about the truth of her claim since the only version of events we have are hers both as to the account of what occurred that night and of what occured at the university hearing.
I agree that it's difficult for anyone of us to make an informed judgment about the truth of her claim. I'm certainly not claiming to have any special insight into the matter, and I certainly wouldn't want to be put in a position to render any kind of judgement that carried any kind of consequences with the information that I - that we - have.
All I'm saying is that I tend to believe that she's telling the truth. It's a belief, and it should not be construed as a verdict on the factual matters of the situation, because as you say and I agree, we don't really know enough.
But yes, I do tend to believe that absent other information, a claim of having been raped is more likely to be true than not, and that's what I'm applying in this case.
The things that inform that belief, for those who are interested, are the following:
What do we know? Not much. Media reports tend to garble things a fair bit, and I've often been told that attempting to draw conclusions from journalists reporting on legal is a pretty fraught business. Besides, as you point out, we only have one side of the story - hers, as rendered by the press. So the facts of the situation, as I see them, are the following:
1. The woman in question claims that she was raped, in particular that a sexual partner inflicted specific sexual acts on her when she clearly objected. That sexual partner has a different version of events, in which she consented to those acts.
2. Furthermore, at different times the alleged rape was dealt with by the university authorities (which concluded that a rape had not happened or that there was insufficient evidence to conclude that it had happened, I'm not clear) and the police (where the woman abandoned pursuing the process).
3. Finally, the woman, being dissatisfied with both the processes and outcomes of 2. decides to create a spectacle. This is successful, and she draws a bunch of attention.
That's about it, in terms of facts. So why am I inclined to believe her?
Personally - and this is anecdotal obviously - I know of a number of sexual assaults and rapes that have gone unreported for a number of reasons. I also believe that broadly speaking there are fairly strong incentives for women not to report rape and sexual assault given the nature of the process and likely outcomes of doing so. Conversely, it is not my impression that false rape accusations are that frequent; in my personal life and extended circle, for example, I have heard of none such. In several of the cases of sexual assault and rape I'm familiar with, the "she's making it up for reasons" argument was made and gained currency. It's not that I think that false accusations never happen, but given what I believe the ratio of reported rapes to unreported rapes to false accusations of rape to be, absent more information I tend to assume that when a woman says she was raped that it is true rather than false.
So yeah, my base premise is that if she says it happened, I believe her as a starting point.
Moving on to point 2., the official processes. We basically know nothing of what went in to them. Who handled it on the university side? How? What degree of rigour was involved? What evidence was considered? I don't know. It may well be that the process is great and appropriate, it may be that it is faulty; whether the process itself is good or bad, it may have gotten this specific case right or wrong.
Similarly with the police part of the process; maybe they were dealing with it just right, maybe they were a bunch of assholes who drove her off on purpose, maybe they had the effect of driving her off though it was not intentional given the combination of circumstances and personalities. Each of these scenarios are possible, but there is not enough information to determine which one it is. Again, from where I sit there have been enough cases of compromised and faulty processes on this sort of stuff that I'm not ready to default to "the verdict is correct", with no further information; conversely, I'm perfectly willing to accept that "the verdict may be correct", but I don't have any information to indicate that it is.
As for her timing in terms of waiting or not, I don't think victims of crimes, young people, or indeed people in general, are prone to picking their time tables to create the best PR optics for their cause unless guided by experienced people. The timing is, IMO, perfectly consistent with her having been raped, trying to do something about it, getting discouraged, giving up, then later deciding "no, I'm going to take a stand"; it is also consistent with other scenarios.
In short, there's not enough information on the process (police and university) for me to conclude whether it produced the right or the wrong result given the facts at hand, so it doesn't really affect whether I believe the initial claim or not.
Finally, the spectacle making - to me it is a perfectly reasonable response to the situation if her claim is true (which I start out defaulting to) and the process failed her (which I'm neutral on). It is also consistent with a different set of facts (that she's making it all up because she loves attention, for example) but the fact that she's making a spectacle does not, to me, indicate anything about the likelihood of the original claim being true or false.
So this leaves me believing that she's probably telling the truth, until I see further evidence.
Quote from: Jacob on September 30, 2014, 03:54:48 PM
Personally - and this is anecdotal obviously - I know of a number of sexual assaults and rapes that have gone unreported for a number of reasons. I also believe that broadly speaking there are fairly strong incentives for women not to report rape and sexual assault given the nature of the process and likely outcomes of doing so. Conversely, it is not my impression that false rape accusations are that frequent; in my personal life and extended circle, for example, I have heard of none such. In several of the cases of sexual assault and rape I'm familiar with, the "she's making it up for reasons" argument was made and gained currency. It's not that I think that false accusations never happen, but given what I believe the ratio of reported rapes to unreported rapes to false accusations of rape to be, absent more information I tend to assume that when a woman says she was raped that it is true rather than false.
My anecdotal experience is similar in one respect. I have been involved in a number of cases where a female employee has been sexuall assualted but for a variety of reasons she didnt want to report the assault. However, our experience does differ in that I have also seen a number of cases where sexual harrassment/assualt has been alleged but when investigated is found not to be credible but in the meantime, while the investigation is ongoing, the accused's life falls apart. That is why I think prejudging credibility simply based on the odds a claim might be true is dangerous.
Quote from: crazy canuck on September 30, 2014, 04:07:32 PM
My anecdotal experience is similar in one respect. I have been involved in a number of cases where a female employee has been sexuall assualted but for a variety of reasons she didnt want to report the assault. However, our experience does differ in that I have also seen a number of cases where sexual harrassment/assualt has been alleged but when investigated is found not to be credible but in the meantime, while the investigation is ongoing, the accused's life falls apart. That is why I think prejudging credibility simply based on the odds a claim might be true is dangerous.
Fair enough.
Were I in an official judgment making position, I'd definitely apply more stringent criteria than anecdotally derived odds. Hopefully I'd also have the opportunity to examine evidence (or even compel testimony) more credible than NY Daily Mag articles.
Interesting piece on a current missing persons investigation Virginia, tied to an individual that ran into issues at two other colleges, and what they did or did not share--
What colleges shared about U-Va. suspect, then accused of sexual assault, is murky
By Mary Pat Flaherty October 11 at 5:09 PM
Washington Post
Two Virginia universities are pressing each other to unearth the information they exchanged after an on-campus rape allegation against Jesse L. "LJ" Matthew Jr. more than a decade ago, when the football player was transferring from Liberty University to Christopher Newport University shortly after a woman accused him of sexual assault.
Matthew, 32, has been charged with abduction in connection with last month's disappearance of University of Virginia sophomore Hannah Graham, an alleged kidnapping that police say was for the purposes of sexually assaulting the 18-year-old from Fairfax County. The search continues for Graham, who went missing after witnesses saw her with Matthew in the early hours of Sept. 13 on Charlottesville's Downtown Mall.
The allegations against Matthew from the early 2000s are receiving renewed law enforcement scrutiny amid a widening investigation spurred by the Graham case. Liberty and CNU officials said they are cooperating in that investigation, which has expanded beyond Graham to encompass two more unsolved attacks on women, including a violent sexual assault in Fairfax City in 2005 and the case of a young woman who went missing from Charlottesville in 2009 and later was found dead. Two people familiar with the Graham investigation said that the link is Matthew's DNA.
The previous accusations against Matthew — one at Liberty and another less than a year later at CNU — were investigated by police at the time, but neither resulted in a criminal charge. Internal university actions are shielded from public view by privacy protections for student records.
The most unrestricted opportunity for sizing up a security threat comes during student transfers, when schools are free to share educational records and ask — and answer — a much wider range of questions about a student that otherwise would be prohibited.
Yet even now, in the wake of the 2007 Virginia Tech shootings and amid heightened concerns about sexual assaults, many schools do not flag disciplinary sanctions on transcripts even if they are prepared to answer another school's potential questions, according to several experts on student records and federal privacy rules.
"Given what we know about the predatory nature of perpetrators of campus sexual assaults, it would be ideal if more colleges and universities had a more robust policy and process for tracking disciplinary actions when students transfer," said S. Daniel Carter, director of the 32 National Campus Safety Initiative, which was created after the Virginia Tech rampage. "As a practical matter, there is not an exhaustive review and not typically a request to send everything over."
Matthew left Liberty, in Lynchburg, Va., on the day that he was accused of rape in October 2002, and he enrolled at CNU, in Newport News, Va., the following January. A few weeks into the next football season — in September 2003 — Matthew was accused of sexually assaulting a CNU student on campus. A defensive lineman, Matthew formally left the football team and, after that, the university in October 2003.
CNU said Matthew's accuser sought an internal university disciplinary review, but school officials would not disclose the outcome of that process, citing privacy rules. Liberty would not say whether the university conducted an internal investigation that included the alleged victim in its case, citing privacy protections for student records. Such internal disciplinary outcomes are almost always kept secret.
Matthew's attorney, James L. Camblos III, declined to comment on the allegations at Liberty and CNU. "I am not aware of the particular details of either event. Therefore, I cannot comment on them," he said.
Limited details about the allegations against Matthew were released under federal and state laws that permit disclosure of crime reports.
At the time he was transferring, even more information could have been shared between Liberty and CNU, but that window to fully look into his history closed once the transfer was complete.
"The law does not prevent a school from disclosing an allegation of assault or criminal activity when a student is transferring. There is no legal barrier," said Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), a former prosecutor who has proposed legislation that would expand disclosures and investigations into campus threats and crimes.
But just as there is no ban, there is no requirement to share disciplinary information, Blumenthal said.
"That's one of the major failings we are trying to correct," he said. "A lot of the current criticism is well justified" about schools being lax in responding to on-campus problems. "It's not just second-guessing and applying hindsight."
Deciding how much information to share can be thorny for a school, particularly when a claim was unsubstantiated or involved a minor infraction that could haunt students for their academic careers, several experts on student privacy said.
Descriptions by Liberty and CNU of the processes in place during the period when Matthew was transferring show how disciplinary information and an assault allegation could fail to draw attention and then virtually disappear.
The rape allegation at Liberty and any disciplinary action against Matthew would not have appeared on a transcript sent to CNU, according to the standard procedures Liberty described.
Liberty's official transcripts show "on their face" that "they are the transcript of academic record," and that document "does not show if the student is not in good standing from a student disciplinary or conduct perspective," Liberty officials said in e-mails to The Washington Post.
To get a student's disciplinary history during a transfer, a school would have to request it specifically, ask what was alleged and request the results of any investigations, which Liberty's Student Conduct Office would provide, according to Liberty officials.
If Liberty administrators had involuntarily withdrawn a student during 2002, the student's record would show "official withdrawal" — a term that covers expulsions and suspensions for discipline but also would be used for a student who chose to withdraw for a medical reason or bereavement.
"Other than death or a student in a coma, though, Administrative Withdrawal is generally used for disciplinary separations," Liberty officials wrote. They said that they cannot say under what terms Matthew left the school.
When CNU dismisses students for academic or disciplinary reasons, "that is always placed prominently on the student's transcript," CNU President Paul S. Trible Jr. said. "Tragically, we have recently learned that is not done by many schools."
But there was a second avenue for delving into Matthew's history on campus.
As a transferring football player, Matthew faced a review of his eligibility to play under NCAA rules. The two universities appear at odds over what was presented about Matthew in "tracer forms" for athletes.
Trible said that before CNU accepts a transferring athlete, it requires signed statements from the athlete and from the athletics department he is leaving that say the player is in good standing with regard to academics and disciplinary matters.
"They would not be in uniform here otherwise," said Trible, who has led CNU for 18 years. "We follow that in every instance, and that has been the process in place since I've been here."
Liberty said it does not keep athletic transfer forms for longer than a decade and could not say what questions or follow-ups CNU might have asked in Matthew's situation.
But after hearing CNU's account to The Post, Liberty officials asked CNU for a copy of the tracer forms sent during the 2002-2003 period and said they were told that CNU no longer had the records. A CNU spokeswoman said the school could not provide additional documents or further information on that point.
Those behind-the-scene exchanges point to the heightened and renewed interest in Matthew's past.
With Matthew's arrest in Graham's case, Virginia State Police said they have a "forensic link" between Matthew and the disappearance of 20-year-old Morgan Harrington, who was found dead outside Charlottesville after she vanished in October 2009.
Should Graham's disappearance be directly related to Harrington's, it would suggest the work of a serial offender that also includes a violent sexual assault in Fairfax City in 2005. The FBI has said that Virginia authorities submitted forensic evidence in the Fairfax City case to the FBI's national DNA database, and that a search matched DNA from the Harrington investigation.
Matthew's alleged victim at Liberty declined to press charges, and no independent witnesses could be found to corroborate her account, so charges were not filed, said Lynchburg Commonwealth's Attorney Michael R. Doucette.
Liberty officials said they cooperated with the Lynchburg police investigation. A heavily redacted police report released to The Post in response to a public information request shows the alleged rape occurred the evening of Oct. 16, 2002, in "field/woods" and was reported in the early hours of Oct. 17. Liberty has said that incident occurred behind the Vines Center, a basketball arena and special-events facility.
Trible, the CNU president, said the school's police force investigated the allegation that Matthew committed a sexual assault on its campus. The alleged victim did not want to pursue a criminal case but did take part in a disciplinary investigation on campus, Trible said. Trible and other CNU officials declined to share the outcome.
Howard E. Gwynn, commonwealth's attorney for Newport News, said it is not possible for him to know whether an allegation from 2003 was brought to his office for review.
"As tempting as it is to throw caution to the wind and share everything Liberty University knows related to Jesse Matthew, we must respect federal law and try to not prejudice any ongoing criminal investigation," Liberty said in an e-mail. "We understand this may not be satisfactory to a public hungry for more details on this case, but we are satisfied that everything that needs to come out concerning Jesse Matthew and Liberty University will come out in due course and through legally permitted channels." [/quote]
allegations alone mean nothing. i don't think it's good public policy to force schools to disclose mere accusations. actual disciplinary actions is another matter, but i think schools disclose those.
So Mattress Girl carried her mattress through her graduation ceremony. Wonder if she'll take it to job interviews now.
Just a pillow would be a lot more manageable.
I could have used a pillow when Maya Angelou spoke at ours.
Quote from: derspiess on May 20, 2015, 11:46:31 AM
I could have used a pillow when Maya Angelou spoke at ours.
Raciss. :(
At least you had someone famous speak at yours. I had some dude named Gary Locke. I think he used to be the governor of Washington :whogivesafuck:
At both my graduations the speaker was the new incoming president or dean, which is like getting no one at all.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on May 20, 2015, 12:04:29 PM
At both my graduations the speaker was the new incoming president or dean, which is like getting no one at all.
:bleeding:
Actually the horrible poetry lady spoke at the commencement a year before mine. Georgie Ann Geyer spoke at mine. I liked her :)
Princesca had: Oprah. :cool:
:lol:
Quote from: Caliga on May 20, 2015, 11:56:59 AM
Quote from: derspiess on May 20, 2015, 11:46:31 AM
I could have used a pillow when Maya Angelou spoke at ours.
Raciss. :(
At least you had someone famous speak at yours. I had some dude named Gary Locke. I think he used to be the governor of Washington :whogivesafuck:
Wasn't he made ambassador to China?
Probably. He's of Chinese ancestry. :)
Quote from: derspiess on May 20, 2015, 12:13:35 PM
:lol:
Stedman's daughter Wendy was one of her classmates.
Shouldn't the mattress come with a trigger warning?
Quote from: Caliga on May 20, 2015, 12:12:14 PM
Princesca had: Oprah. :cool:
If I'd graduated a year later, I would have had Oprah. :weep:
For high school, I had Bill Belichick. :x
Quote from: Martinus on May 20, 2015, 12:37:16 PM
Shouldn't the mattress come with a trigger warning?
Yeah, would trigger me to GTFO of there. :)
Quote from: garbon on May 20, 2015, 12:59:34 PM
If I'd graduated a year later, I would have had Oprah. :weep:
For high school, I had Bill Belichick. :x
Cool. Was his speech about cheating your way to success in life?
My brother had Robert Byrd at his college graduation. Fucker spoke forever.
Quote from: Caliga on May 20, 2015, 01:04:41 PM
Quote from: garbon on May 20, 2015, 12:59:34 PM
If I'd graduated a year later, I would have had Oprah. :weep:
For high school, I had Bill Belichick. :x
Cool. Was his speech about cheating your way to success in life?
I think it would be a bit more nuanced than that...
Like, if you are good, you can have great success at what you do.
If you are good, and willing to cheat, you can do even better...
Sort of. I would be shocked if the cheating ever actually did the Pats much good. Sort of like how much breaking into the Watergate actually contributed to the defeat of McGovern.
I don't care if cheating helped them significantly or not. If you're already a successful team you should not need to cheat-- that actually pisses me off more than a mediocre team cheating to get an advantage.
Quote from: Valmy on May 20, 2015, 01:55:33 PM
Sort of. I would be shocked if the cheating ever actually did the Pats much good. Sort of like how much breaking into the Watergate actually contributed to the defeat of McGovern.
Considering how much the cheating has harmed their brand and image, I would think they are pretty bright and would not be cheating if they didn't think it was helping them.
The ball-deflating thing in particular seemed a dumb way to cheat- the other team's getting to throw the same balls at least some of the time, and it's not like deflating them magically only made it easier for the Pats to catch them; if anything, the Pats risked an unusually high chance of interceptions.
Actually, the balls are swapped out whenever there is a change of possession. Besides, Brady prefers them deflated. Each QB has his own preferences-- Aaron Rodgers likes his overinflated (he must have huge hands). Having the footballs essentially custom-fitted to the QB's preferences really does benefit the QB. No QB I'm aware of ever wants to use a "fresh" ball that hasn't been heavily conditioned.
Not sure how INTs would be affected.
Aren't brand new footballs that are straight out of the box really slick?
Quote from: MadBurgerMaker on May 20, 2015, 03:35:12 PM
Aren't brand new footballs that are straight out of the box really slick?
I wouldn't say *really* slick, but they are slick. To break them in typically they work them into non-QB parts of practice where they get scuffed and worn a little. And there is some kind of oil or something they are rubbed down with from time to time. The dude whose job it is to condition the balls always has red palms. Wonder if they stay stained like that all year.
Quote from: derspiess on May 20, 2015, 03:30:34 PM
Actually, the balls are swapped out whenever there is a change of possession. Besides, Brady prefers them deflated. Each QB has his own preferences-- Aaron Rodgers likes his overinflated (he must have huge hands). Having the footballs essentially custom-fitted to the QB's preferences really does benefit the QB. No QB I'm aware of ever wants to use a "fresh" ball that hasn't been heavily conditioned.
Not sure how INTs would be affected.
The theory is that "big arm" QBs like Rodgers likes a more highly inflated football because it spins more tightly on long passes, while more posession/short/middle passsing QBs prefer a softer ball that is easier to grip and they don't care as much about perfectl aerodynamics. At least that is what an NFL referee told me. I suspect it is mostly psychological though.
Although, being a college referee, I personally find NCAA/NFL football very large and very stiff when inflated to game pressure. Certainly if I were a QB, and when I played QB casually, I would never want to use a football inflated to 13 PSI. It is very hard and noticeably more difficult to palm.
Quote from: derspiess on May 20, 2015, 03:30:34 PM
Actually, the balls are swapped out whenever there is a change of possession. Besides, Brady prefers them deflated. Each QB has his own preferences-- Aaron Rodgers likes his overinflated (he must have huge hands). Having the footballs essentially custom-fitted to the QB's preferences really does benefit the QB. No QB I'm aware of ever wants to use a "fresh" ball that hasn't been heavily conditioned.
Not sure how INTs would be affected.
Yep. Every quarterback cheats and has the ball inflated to his preferred specification. The ones who don't aren't in the league. When the ref's cheated and set the NE balls to Brady's specs at halftime, he really played
much better. Only cheaters prosper.
Quote from: derspiess on May 20, 2015, 10:48:27 AM
So Mattress Girl carried her mattress through her graduation ceremony. Wonder if she'll take it to job interviews now.
Gay marriage will lead to her marrying her mattress.
Quote from: derspiess on May 20, 2015, 03:30:34 PM
Actually, the balls are swapped out whenever there is a change of possession.
Which is actually a fairly recent change in practice. Anybody hear what A.J. Feely said about this?
Quote from: garbon on May 20, 2015, 12:59:34 PM
Quote from: Caliga on May 20, 2015, 12:12:14 PM
Princesca had: Oprah. :cool:
If I'd graduated a year later, I would have had Oprah. :weep:
For high school, I had Bill Belichick. :x
:o Jealous!
Quote from: dps on May 20, 2015, 05:53:38 PM
Quote from: derspiess on May 20, 2015, 03:30:34 PM
Actually, the balls are swapped out whenever there is a change of possession.
Which is actually a fairly recent change in practice. Anybody hear what A.J. Feely said about this?
Cheating NE Patriots is now the new ACW hijack? :P
Quote from: Ed Anger on May 20, 2015, 05:10:42 PM
Quote from: derspiess on May 20, 2015, 10:48:27 AM
So Mattress Girl carried her mattress through her graduation ceremony. Wonder if she'll take it to job interviews now.
Gay marriage will lead to her marrying her mattress.
Or, apparently, a deflated football.
Quote from: Berkut on May 20, 2015, 02:15:13 PM
Quote from: Valmy on May 20, 2015, 01:55:33 PM
Sort of. I would be shocked if the cheating ever actually did the Pats much good. Sort of like how much breaking into the Watergate actually contributed to the defeat of McGovern.
Considering how much the cheating has harmed their brand and image, I would think they are pretty bright and would not be cheating if they didn't think it was helping them.
Bullshit, Nixon was pretty bright. They do it because they are over-competitive freaks who cannot help themselves.
And fuck branding and image. God I hate the NFL sometimes. They are football teams not widget firms.
IIRC, Nixon wasn't involved in the initial Watergate break-in at all. Just the cover-up.
I love how off-topic this thread has gone. :lol:
Were we really going to spend 20 pages talking about some weirdo attention whore who carries a mattress around? :sleep:
Quote from: derspiess on May 20, 2015, 03:30:34 PM
Actually, the balls are swapped out whenever there is a change of possession. Besides, Brady prefers them deflated. Each QB has his own preferences-- Aaron Rodgers likes his overinflated (he must have huge hands). Having the footballs essentially custom-fitted to the QB's preferences really does benefit the QB. No QB I'm aware of ever wants to use a "fresh" ball that hasn't been heavily conditioned.
Not sure how INTs would be affected.
That's why I threw the "some of the time" qualifier in there. I realize half of the game balls are from the other team- I'm just saying that the gambit could just as easily have resulted in more frequent changes of possession. When Brady throws an underinflated football, it's easier for every receiver, not just the Pats', to catch. Basically, easier downfield play, but easier picks, too.
And with that, I'm pretty much done with my part in the Pats conversation. Guess it is the new ACW hijack. :P
Quote from: Caliga on May 21, 2015, 09:45:57 AM
Were we really going to spend 20 pages talking about some weirdo attention whore who carries a mattress around? :sleep:
Appears to have stayed on topic for 30+ pages before it was resurrected. :hide:
Quote from: Berkut on September 30, 2014, 11:36:54 AM
If the youn g lady in question is 100% correct about the facts of the case (ignoring for the moment her actions in response to those facts around stuff like not being able to be bothered to go to the cops initially, or pursuing it afterwards" then to some degree her actions are very defensible.
*She* at least knows the truth of what happened, and she can be pretty damn certain she was assaulted, if not raped. Finding out that similar things had happened to others exacerbates her position, and justifies even more her actions.
However, that doesn't change the fact that her actions are basically extra-legal. She went through the legal process, and did not get the outcome she wanted, so she is basically trying to get the outcome she wants outside the legal system. That can be, in some cases, pretty supportable. Hell, I read "A Time to Kill".
But for those of us who are NOT her, we have a very different standard to judge all this - for her efforts to be considered supportable, there is a ridiculously high bar she has to cross, since in fact she DID have access to legal remedy, and those remedies had an outcome, and she is basically asking us to set aside that outcome and join her in her vigilantism. That is a far, FAR cry from asking us to support the victims of sexual assault and rape, and that is where, I think, me and Jacob part ways.
Given that she is asking for some very extraordinary support, she provides very poor justification. I cannot see a travesty of justice here, I cannot see a system that I look at and think "Yeah, the system itself is grossly unjust, so we should in fact support her efforts outside that system". She was the alleged victim of a crime. Do all alleged victims of crimes have the right to publicly shame those they accuse and ask for MY support in hounding that person out of school?
I mean, sure, they can ask, but most of the time my answer is going to be "No, I won't support that, and don't think anyone should support that".
Huh, looking at the evidence now this bitch was completely full of shit and made it all up for attention. Disgusting.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/02/03/columbia-student-i-didn-t-rape-her.html
Quote
From the article:
"On Aug. 29, two days after the alleged rape, Nungesser messaged Sulkowicz on Facebook to say, "Small shindig in our room tonight—bring cool freshmen." Her response:
lol yusss
Also I feel like we need to have some real time where we can talk about life and thingz
because we still haven't really had a paul-emma chill sesh since summmmerrrr
On Sept. 9, on a morning before an ADP meeting, it was Sulkowicz who initiated the Facebook contact, asking Nungesser if he wanted to "hang out a little bit" before or after the meeting and concluding with:
whatever I want to see yoyououoyou
respond—I'll get the message on ma phone
On Oct. 3, Sulkowicz's birthday, Nungesser sent her an effusive greeting; she responded the next morning with, "I love you Paul. Where are you?!?!?!?!" Nungesser claims that these exchanges represent only a small portion of their friendly communications, which also included numerous text messages."
http://dailycaller.com/2015/04/24/the-text-of-the-mattress-girl-lawsuit-will-shock-you/
Quote"fuck me in the butt" — Emma Sulkowicz, to her "rapist"
So did the guy ever get kicked out?
Quote from: Alcibiades on May 21, 2015, 11:46:12 PM
Huh, looking at the evidence now this bitch was completely full of shit and made it all up for attention. Disgusting.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/02/03/columbia-student-i-didn-t-rape-her.html
Quote
From the article:
"On Aug. 29, two days after the alleged rape, Nungesser messaged Sulkowicz on Facebook to say, "Small shindig in our room tonight—bring cool freshmen." Her response:
lol yusss
Also I feel like we need to have some real time where we can talk about life and thingz
because we still haven't really had a paul-emma chill sesh since summmmerrrr
On Sept. 9, on a morning before an ADP meeting, it was Sulkowicz who initiated the Facebook contact, asking Nungesser if he wanted to "hang out a little bit" before or after the meeting and concluding with:
whatever I want to see yoyououoyou
respond—I'll get the message on ma phone
On Oct. 3, Sulkowicz's birthday, Nungesser sent her an effusive greeting; she responded the next morning with, "I love you Paul. Where are you?!?!?!?!" Nungesser claims that these exchanges represent only a small portion of their friendly communications, which also included numerous text messages."
http://dailycaller.com/2015/04/24/the-text-of-the-mattress-girl-lawsuit-will-shock-you/
Quote"fuck me in the butt" — Emma Sulkowicz, to her "rapist"
Niceguy chode smashes campus slut with a lot of crazy thrown in and she turns into a psycho stalker when he gently cuts off their relationship. A tough lesson for a young man.
Quote from: Alcibiades on May 21, 2015, 11:46:12 PM
Huh, looking at the evidence now this bitch was completely full of shit and made it all up for attention. Disgusting.
:hmm:
I'd be more inclined to say that we don't know what happened. Clearly he's lawsuit is going to be setup to make her look bad. :D
Quote from: garbon on May 22, 2015, 07:03:28 AM
Quote from: Alcibiades on May 21, 2015, 11:46:12 PM
Huh, looking at the evidence now this bitch was completely full of shit and made it all up for attention. Disgusting.
:hmm:
I'd be more inclined to say that we don't know what happened. Clearly he's lawsuit is going to be setup to make her look bad. :D
Maybe Haven Monahan did it. :lol:
Always save your texts. There was a similar situation at a place I worked where a guy was being accused of rape and he took out his phone full of texts from her trying to get him to have sex with her and he turning her down.
Not saying that is what happened here, I don't know anything, but just saying.
I guess he was also a niceguy chode as well according to Legbiter since clearly if he knew better he would have...beat the shit out of her or whatever he proposes one should do if a woman propositions you. 'A text? Fuck that slut is dead!'
Quote from: Valmy on May 22, 2015, 08:00:08 AMI guess he was also a niceguy chode as well according to Legbiter since clearly if he knew better he would have...beat the shit out of her or whatever he proposes one should do if a woman propositions you. 'A text? Fuck that slut is dead!'
Er, I'm simply saying Paul Nungesser missed a lot of red flags about Mattress Girl because of his young age. A dude and his friends casually ran through her (she complains to niceguy Paul about how one of them gave her an STD) but poor kind-hearted Paul who hung out with her and gave her a shoulder to cry on gets stalked, wrongfully accused and socially ostracised.
Mattress Girl will probably turn this into a career.
What's a chode?
Quote from: Valmy on May 22, 2015, 08:00:08 AM
Always save your texts. There was a similar situation at a place I worked where a guy was being accused of rape and he took out his phone full of texts from her trying to get him to have sex with her and he turning her down.
I wonder what the enviornment will be like once our sons hit college age. Hovering selfie drones will be required gear when dealing with women. :lol:
Quote from: Legbiter on May 22, 2015, 08:13:45 AM
niceguy Paul
Anybody nicknamed Nice Guy is likely to be a prick.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwiki.tarantino.info%2Fimages%2FNiceGuyEddie.jpg&hash=4a0eae4c21e3c009e137068a583be9641413e02f)
Eh, his only crime was being naive. There but for the grace of God, etc.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on May 22, 2015, 08:15:55 AM
What's a chode?
A dick. According to Mike Judge, it's an abbreviated and anglicized form of "chorizo".
Quote from: Legbiter on May 22, 2015, 08:28:14 AM
Eh, his only crime was being naive. There but for the grace of God, etc.
Multiple girls have accused him and he was prosecuted before.
Quote from: Legbiter on May 22, 2015, 08:13:45 AM
Er, I'm simply saying Paul Nungesser missed a lot of red flags about Mattress Girl because of his young age. A dude and his friends casually ran through her (she complains to niceguy Paul about how one of them gave her an STD) but poor kind-hearted Paul who hung out with her and gave her a shoulder to cry on gets stalked, wrongfully accused and socially ostracised.
Mattress Girl will probably turn this into a career.
The joke was related to the fact I didn't understand why he was a 'niceguy chode' and what lessons he would have learned besides the fact that this woman is a horrible human being. I have hung out with people and given them shoulders to cry on without them carrying around mattresses. Presuming this version is true that seems bit bizarre to me. What worldly wisdom would prevent people from shitting all over basic social contracts? Especially if gently turning them down is the crime. He saved the evidence, that strikes me as what one would need to do if one was worldly wise.
I have seen the horrifying idea passed around that since it is so hard to prove rape we should just assume everybody accused is guilty since the number of people who falsely accuse is so minuscule. Um while I agree that is a problem this solution seems to very...prone to creating other problems. Also if rape is indeed hard to prove how can we know that the assumption, that the number of false accusations is indeed so small it can be ignored, be proven? If this guys version of events is accurate well that kind of blows that idea out of the water...if the Duke Lacrosse thing did not also do so.
Quote from: Queequeg on May 22, 2015, 08:42:42 AM
Quote from: Legbiter on May 22, 2015, 08:28:14 AM
Eh, his only crime was being naive. There but for the grace of God, etc.
Multiple girls have accused him and he was prosecuted before.
But those were not independent accusations. One was even solicited by the university "investigator." He was never prosecuted.
But why let mere facts stand in the way of a good story?
Quote from: Valmy on May 22, 2015, 08:45:38 AM
I have seen the horrifying idea passed around that since it is so hard to prove rape we should just assume everybody accused is guilty since the number of people who falsely accuse is so minuscule. Um while I agree that is a problem this solution seems to very...prone to creating other problems. Also if rape is indeed hard to prove how can we know that the assumption, that the number of false accusations is indeed so small it can be ignored, be proven? If this guys version of events is accurate well that kind of blows that idea out of the water...if the Duke Lacrosse thing did not also do so.
it is based on one of the worst misuses of stats i have ever seen. The basis for this "small percentage" is that the false accusation percentage is equal to the number of accusations proven false in court divided by an estimate of the number of cases of rape (including unreported cases).
if you take the total number of cases resolved by the legal system as the denominator, false rape accusations are about one in four, IIRC.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on May 22, 2015, 08:15:55 AM
What's a chode?
What, there exists slang so obscure Yi doesn't already know and use it? :cool:
Quote from: grumbler on May 22, 2015, 08:50:16 AM
it is based on one of the worst misuses of stats i have ever seen. The basis for this "small percentage" is that the false accusation percentage is equal to the number of accusations proven false in court divided by an estimate of the number of cases of rape (including unreported cases).
if you take the total number of cases resolved by the legal system as the denominator, false rape accusations are about one in four, IIRC.
The fall-back position of the "assume guilt" crowd is always "well, why would anyone want to make a false accusation and bring all that attention upon herself?" Which is kind of one of those questions that answers itself.
Quote from: Valmy on May 22, 2015, 08:45:38 AMI have hung out with people and given them shoulders to cry on without them carrying around mattresses.
There's an app for that nowadays.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e8teRxOSNHs (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e8teRxOSNHs)
Quote from: Legbiter on May 22, 2015, 10:24:35 AM
Quote from: Valmy on May 22, 2015, 08:45:38 AMI have hung out with people and given them shoulders to cry on without them carrying around mattresses.
There's an app for that nowadays.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e8teRxOSNHs (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e8teRxOSNHs)
Um I am married. And even when I wasn't I would never hang out with anybody who:
1. I was dating
2. I wanted to date
3. Was a close acquaintance of somebody in the previous two catagories.
I have a very strong opinion on not shitting where I eat.
Quote from: Legbiter on May 22, 2015, 10:24:35 AM
Quote from: Valmy on May 22, 2015, 08:45:38 AMI have hung out with people and given them shoulders to cry on without them carrying around mattresses.
There's an app for that nowadays.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e8teRxOSNHs (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e8teRxOSNHs)
Seems like the kind of thing the seduction community would be up in arms about. See women are just always playing games!
Quote from: Valmy on May 22, 2015, 10:30:35 AM
Quote from: Legbiter on May 22, 2015, 10:24:35 AM
Quote from: Valmy on May 22, 2015, 08:45:38 AMI have hung out with people and given them shoulders to cry on without them carrying around mattresses.
There's an app for that nowadays.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e8teRxOSNHs (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e8teRxOSNHs)
Um I am married. And even when I wasn't I would never hang out with anybody who:
1. I was dating
2. I wanted to date
3. Was a close acquaintance of somebody in the previous two catagories.
I have a very strong opinion on not shitting where I eat.
Just funnin with ya Valmy. :hug: Figured we could do a Paul and move on from Mattress Girl.
Valmy, you would never have hung out with anybody you were dating? How does that work?
Quote from: derspiess on May 22, 2015, 11:29:32 AM
Valmy, you would never have hung out with anybody you were dating? How does that work?
Who said it worked? On the other hand, if he was shitting where he was hanging out, it was probably better not to try to date any of the women he hung out with.
Quote from: derspiess on May 22, 2015, 11:29:32 AM
Valmy, you would never have hung out with anybody you were dating? How does that work?
I meant not hang out with them as friends. You didn't get invited to hang with my friends until you are in a relationship with me. I certainly did not want to meet their friends either but I usually had to be submitted for approval if she decided she liked me. Hated that.
Quote from: Queequeg on May 22, 2015, 08:42:42 AM
Quote from: Legbiter on May 22, 2015, 08:28:14 AM
Eh, his only crime was being naive. There but for the grace of God, etc.
Multiple girls have accused him and he was prosecuted before.
Apparently this chick got his ex-gf to say he was abusive - which was completely dropped, and some random girl saying that he tried to aggressively kiss her at a party, which she later retracted.
:rolleyes:
Quote from: grumbler on May 22, 2015, 11:33:54 AM
Quote from: derspiess on May 22, 2015, 11:29:32 AM
Valmy, you would never have hung out with anybody you were dating? How does that work?
Who said it worked? On the other hand, if he was shitting where he was hanging out, it was probably better not to try to date any of the women he hung out with.
It worked great.
Once I dated somebody connected to people I knew. The date did not go well. So then things were awkward. A policy was born.
Quote from: Valmy on May 22, 2015, 11:36:13 AM
It worked great.
Once I dated somebody connected to people I knew. The date did not go well. So then things were awkward. A policy was born.
No shitting except in toilets?
Quote from: grumbler on May 22, 2015, 12:08:52 PM
Quote from: Valmy on May 22, 2015, 11:36:13 AM
It worked great.
Once I dated somebody connected to people I knew. The date did not go well. So then things were awkward. A policy was born.
No shitting except in toilets?
:lmfao:
That has never been my policy.
Well then, I'd suggest you should stop shitting outside of toilets. :mad:
Quote from: Valmy on May 22, 2015, 11:34:53 AM
I meant not hang out with them as friends. You didn't get invited to hang with my friends until you are in a relationship with me. I certainly did not want to meet their friends either but I usually had to be submitted for approval if she decided she liked me. Hated that.
I think I'm more confused now.
Quote from: Tonitrus on May 22, 2015, 12:48:55 PM
Well then, I'd suggest you should stop shitting outside of toilets. :mad:
It's popular in India.
Quote from: derspiess on May 22, 2015, 12:49:09 PM
I think I'm more confused now.
What part confuses you? It couldn't be more straightforward or simple :hmm:
Quote from: Tonitrus on May 22, 2015, 12:48:55 PM
Well then, I'd suggest you should stop shitting outside of toilets. :mad:
Sometimes you just have to go.
Quote from: Valmy on May 22, 2015, 12:52:01 PM
Quote from: derspiess on May 22, 2015, 12:49:09 PM
I think I'm more confused now.
What part confuses you? It couldn't be more straightforward or simple :hmm:
Here's what I think I read...
You don't hang out with anyone you date. So how do you date if you don't hang out?
Then you said "You didn't get invited to hang with my friends until you are in a relationship with me." I guess I get this part.
Then "I certainly did not want to meet their friends either but I usually had to be submitted for approval if she decided she liked me." When I dated, ideally her friends and my friends got along great as a big group. I can't think of too many times there were friends of hers I didn't get along with. Not sure I see the big issue with meeting friends & whatnot.
Quote from: derspiess on May 22, 2015, 12:59:12 PM
Here's what I think I read...
You don't hang out with anyone you date. So how do you date if you don't hang out?
I am talking about before we go on the date and/or decide if we like each other. The video I was addressing was concerning a guy hanging out with and being clingy with somebody who was not even interested.
Once she is my girlfriend well then that is entirely different. I guess I just figured that was obvious from the context.
QuoteWhen I dated, ideally her friends and my friends got along great as a big group
I am talking about we just went on one date. I barely know this person and I am not even sure if she is into me or if I am into her. Suddenly her friends are showing up to get their approval of me. I presume you actually wanted to know if you liked the girl before everybody is hanging out together.
I think I got what you meant - you would not feign friendship in the hope of winning sex.
Quote from: Malthus on May 22, 2015, 01:08:26 PM
I think I got what you meant - you would not feign friendship in the hope of winning sex.
I read it as not letting the separate worlds collide until you're sure you won't get involved in an interplanetary war.
Quote from: Tonitrus on May 22, 2015, 01:10:04 PM
Quote from: Malthus on May 22, 2015, 01:08:26 PM
I think I got what you meant - you would not feign friendship in the hope of winning sex.
I read it as not letting the separate worlds collide until you're sure you won't get involved in an interplanetary war.
You both are correct.
Quote from: Valmy on May 22, 2015, 01:05:24 PM
I am talking about before we go on the date and/or decide if we like each other. The video I was addressing was concerning a guy hanging out with and being clingy with somebody who was not even interested.
Once she is my girlfriend well then that is entirely different. I guess I just figured that was obvious from the context.
Got it. I didn't watch the video so I guess I missed the context.
Quote
I am talking about we just went on one date. I barely know this person and I am not even sure if she is into me or if I am into her. Suddenly her friends are showing up to get their approval of me. I presume you actually wanted to know if you liked the girl before everybody is hanging out together.
I get that as well. Of course, her friends are going to judge you whether you went on just one date with her or are in a serious relationship.
I don't remember a whole lot of situations where her friends didn't already know me. So in my case I was already pre-approved most of the time.
I can only remember one girlfriend's friend that I didn't get along with. She tried to get us to be nice to each other and I made an effort but this gal would aggressively start arguments with me on politics and feminism and whatnot. Wasn't til a lot later that I found out the bitchy friend was a cousin of the guy the girl I was dating broke up with in order to date me. So yeah, she was never going to accept me.
So mattress girl has put out a porn tape that's as a art presentation or something.
Quote from: HVC on June 05, 2015, 08:15:23 AM
So mattress girl has put out a porn tape that's as a art presentation or something.
Actually not too surprising - with graduation the level of attention she was getting must have decreased significantly.
Wow, talk about contributing to rape culture.
Also read that she's "infuriated" by people calling her "Mattress Girl".
Quote from: derspiess on June 05, 2015, 08:22:38 AM
Wow, talk about contributing to rape culture.
Oh? Is it rape porn?
She went full Sheehan. You never go full Sheehan.
Quote from: Valmy on June 05, 2015, 08:23:17 AM
Quote from: derspiess on June 05, 2015, 08:22:38 AM
Wow, talk about contributing to rape culture.
Oh? Is it rape porn?
From the description in the article I read, that's exactly what it is.
Quote from: Valmy on June 05, 2015, 08:23:17 AM
Quote from: derspiess on June 05, 2015, 08:22:38 AM
Wow, talk about contributing to rape culture.
Oh? Is it rape porn?
yeah. She claims its not a reenactment of the event (ie she wants everyone to know its a reenactment). I guess the best why to prove you would never stage a rape to get attention is to stage a rape to get attention.
Sometimes you just have to laugh to keep from crying.
Boner: active
Engaging search program.
On my phone I found the site where she posted the video. The video won't run due to server issues (probably overloaded) but the comments section is hilarious.
The site is www.cecinestpasunviol.com
I don't see anything NSFW on the page itself except for the video, which at least on my phone would not run.
:wacko:
It wouldn't load for me either. I am going to carry my iPad around everywhere now.
My friend said it won't load for him either.
Quote from: DGuller on June 05, 2015, 08:38:44 AM
My friend said it won't load for him either.
Your friend...wears a track suit, does actuary stuff and works for the GRU?
YOU PEOPLE MAKE ME SICK!!!111
But seriously if anybody does watch it post a review.
Quote from: Ed Anger on June 05, 2015, 08:40:08 AM
Quote from: DGuller on June 05, 2015, 08:38:44 AM
My friend said it won't load for him either.
Your friend...wears a track suit, does actuary stuff and works for the GRU?
:mad:
Quote from: Valmy on June 05, 2015, 08:41:29 AM
YOU PEOPLE MAKE ME SICK!!!111
But seriously if anybody does watch it post a review.
i previewed this morning. It's porn. Bj, sex, and then crying.
*edit* her crying, not me lol
:lol:
So she skipped the notorious bunghole sex scene.
Quote from: derspiess on June 05, 2015, 08:32:40 AM
The site is www.cecinestpasunviol.com
Means "this is not a rape" if somebody was wondering.
PS: "rape-rape" in this context, to be precise.
So I'm wondering if she's going to just chalk the entire thing up to performance art-- "Okay like I wasn't raped but this is totally how it would have been if I had. Just trying to raise awareness and stuff."
Quote from: HVC on June 05, 2015, 08:51:22 AM
i previewed this morning. It's porn. Bj, sex, and then crying.
hott?
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1.kym-cdn.com%2Fphotos%2Fimages%2Fnewsfeed%2F000%2F126%2F314%2F3cd8a33a.png&hash=98722dafafe8c8e2fe02b53186d2dd4692159f84)
Quote from: HVC on June 05, 2015, 08:26:43 AMI guess the best why to prove you would never stage a rape to get attention is to stage a rape to get attention.
A review of her sex tape.
QuoteIn preparing for this review, my researcher had to watch Emma Sulkowicz, a.k.a. "Mattress Girl," perform fellatio on an overweight man eleven times. He tells me that he is now seriously considering homosexuality.
...Good porn never starts with a pop quiz so we're off to a poor start with the site's bizarre and incomprehensible statements which reach for, but fail to grasp, profundity. Sulkowicz's inner nine-year-old is never far from the surface: questions she asks visitors include "Do you think I'm the perfect victim or the world's worst victim?" and "Do you hate me? If so, how does it feel to hate me?"
http://www.breitbart.com/big-hollywood/2015/06/05/mattress-girl-emma-sulkowicz-just-released-a-sex-tape-heres-my-review/ (http://www.breitbart.com/big-hollywood/2015/06/05/mattress-girl-emma-sulkowicz-just-released-a-sex-tape-heres-my-review/)
I don't know if this chick is HOTT or not, and frankly, no matter how good-looking she is, I have no desire to watch her sex tape.
If she was actually raped, this is just profoundly sad and messed up, and I want no part of it.
If she wasn't actually raped, she's detestable, because making false accusations of rape (or any other crime, for that matter) is pretty damn evil.
Quote from: Legbiter on June 06, 2015, 07:46:01 AM
http://www.breitbart.com/big-hollywood/2015/06/05/mattress-girl-emma-sulkowicz-just-released-a-sex-tape-heres-my-review/ (http://www.breitbart.com/big-hollywood/2015/06/05/mattress-girl-emma-sulkowicz-just-released-a-sex-tape-heres-my-review/)
QuoteAnd, just as her mattress fiasco damaged the real victims of rape by making it harder for women everywhere to report crimes and be believed, so too does this narcissistic sociopath's latest pseudo-intellectual endeavour make life worse for other women.
Bullshit. That is completely nonsensical. If people were virtuous there would be no need for justice in the first place. The very assumptions that underlay our society is that some people are bad people. How could the assumptions that we created our whole society for being rational damage that society in some way? It is assumed and expected some women will be vile. It is also understood most women are not. Weird that a right wing site would spout this kind of Rousseauian nonsense.
I'm surprised to learn somebody other than Raz reads that site.
Quote from: Valmy on June 06, 2015, 12:01:19 PM
Bullshit. That is completely nonsensical. If people were virtuous there would be no need for justice in the first place. The very assumptions that underlay our society is that some people are bad people. How could the assumptions that we created our whole society for being rational damage that society in some way? It is assumed and expected some women will be vile. It is also understood most women are not. Weird that a right wing site would spout this kind of Rousseauian nonsense.
I didn't look at it that deeply. I just figured the harm was that the more people claim it falsely, the more likely the real ones will not be believed.
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on June 06, 2015, 01:12:10 PM
I didn't look at it that deeply. I just figured the harm was that the more people claim it falsely, the more likely the real ones will not be believed.
We expect a certain percentage to falsely report. Otherwise we would just lock up everybody accused.
Quote from: Valmy on June 06, 2015, 01:15:55 PM
We expect a certain percentage to falsely report. Otherwise we would just lock up everybody accused.
I think the fear is that high-profile cases of false reporting will make people think that percentage is higher that it really is, with the result that actual victims face additional skepticism.
Well, I didn't expect this outcome.