Surprised this hasn't been posted yet.
QuoteVirtually all details of the horrific gang rape at a University of Virginia fraternity detailed in an engrossing Rolling Stone article last month are now either disputed our outright debunked. A terrific Washington Post investigation—which includes an interview with Jackie, the accuser—casts serious doubt on the narrative Jackie told to Sabrina Rubin Erdely, the author of the original Rolling Stone piece.
In light of these developments, Rolling Stone is no longer standing by its story. In a statement to readers, Managing Editor Will Dana wrote:
In the face of new information, there now appear to be discrepancies in Jackie's account, and we have come to the conclusion that our trust in her was misplaced. We were trying to be sensitive to the unfair shame and humiliation many women feel after a sexual assault and now regret the decision to not contact the alleged assaulters to get their account. We are taking this seriously and apologize to anyone who was affected by the story.
The "affected" parties include many at the University of Virginia. The college administration, which had assumed the allegations were true, responded to the story by suspending all fraternity activities and promising more vigorous policing of the campus's party scene.
But according to The Washington Post, Phi Kappa Psi, the fraternity that Jackie insisted hosted the party where she was raped on September 28th, 2012, will assert that no such event took place and that none of its members worked at the university's swimming pool that semester—a detail important to the story, since Jackie had claimed that her date to the party, a key perpetrator in the assault, was a co-lifeguard.
According to WaPost, Jackie's friends no longer believe that she was truthful about what happened to her:
A group of Jackie's close friends, who are sex assault advocates at U-Va., said they believe something traumatic happened to Jackie but have come to doubt her account. They said details have changed over time, and they have not been able to verify key points of the story in recent days. A name of an alleged attacker that Jackie provided to them for the first time this week, for example, turned out to be similar to the name of a student who belongs to a different fraternity, and no one by that name has been a member of Phi Kappa Psi.
Reached by phone, that man, a U-Va. graduate, said Friday that he did work at the Aquatic Fitness Center and was familiar with Jackie's name. He said, however, that he had never met Jackie in person and had never taken her on a date. He also confirmed that he was not a member of Phi Kappa Psi.
Emily Renda, a friend of Jackie's and survivor of sexual assault who was quoted in the initial story, now tells WaPost that she feels misled:
Renda said on Thursday that Jackie initially told her that she was attacked by five students at Phi Kappa Psi on Sept. 28, 2012. Renda said that she learned months later that Jackie had changed the number of attackers from five to seven.
"An advocate is not supposed to be an investigator, a judge or an adjudicator," said Renda,a 2014 graduate who works for the university as a sexual violence awareness specialist. But as details emerge that cast doubt on Jackie's account, Renda said, "I don't even know what I believe at this point."
"This feels like a betrayal of good advocacy if this is not true," Renda said. "We teach people to believe the victims. We know there are false reports but those are extraordinarily low."
There is much more of this in the full Post story.
In light of all this new information, it's impossible to say what exactly happened to Jackie. But it's clear that her story, as told to Erdely, is false. Not slightly false, or partly false, but false. And if Rolling Stone had done its job, the magazine might well have determined that before such a journalistic catastrophe unfolded.
Read my previous report on the UVA situation—one of the earliest stories to express skepticism of Rolling Stone—here.
http://reason.com/blog/2014/12/05/uva-rape-story-retracted
Why would that be news?
So because the guy's not a member of the frat, they consider the whole story debunked? :huh: Surely people who aren't members visit the house from time to time. :hmm:
The number of attackers thing, I'm willing to give her the benefit of the doubt. Maybe the other two were just kind of on the sidelines.
The evidence mentioned in the article doesn't seem sufficient to declare "But it's clear that her story, as told to Erdely, is false. Not slightly false, or partly false, but false."
Quote from: Martinus on December 05, 2014, 05:58:40 PM
Why would that be news?
Yeah I am not sure why everyone is picking this up.
Quoteas a sexual violence awareness specialist
When you need this at a university, you have to many entitled frat boys.
Rolling Stone isn't even worthy to line a bird cage.
Quote from: Norgy on December 05, 2014, 06:37:45 PM
Quoteas a sexual violence awareness specialist
When you need this at a university, you have to many entitled frat boys.
I would think it's more a function of too many entitled angry women's studies majors.
Of course you would.
You win.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on December 05, 2014, 06:56:12 PM
You win.
You seem to be throwing the towel in early a lot these days.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on December 05, 2014, 06:48:27 PM
I would think it's more a function of too many entitled angry women's studies majors.
QuoteErdely's 2011 story for Philadelphia Magazine, in which a woman alleged to have been raped by her gynecologist, was nominated for an American Society of Magazine Editors award. A 2012 story for Rolling Stone, alleging purported bullying of gay students in Minnesota, was similarly nominated.[1] Erdely's 2013 Rolling Stone story "The Rape of Petty Officer Blumer" chronicled the alleged drugging and rape of a U.S. Navy female petty officer by three U.S. Army soldiers.
Only thing worse than a bad freelance journalist is a bad freelance journalist (Penn) with an agenda. Hers apparently happens to be rape-rape. And Slate, the Washington Post and the LA Times have been questioning this writer's story since last week. That's right, the Slate you all know and loathe, was at the forefront of the "Uh, really?" crowd.
QuoteErdely admits she set out to find a sexual assault story at an elite school. She looked at lots of other colleges, but none "felt quite right," in the words of a Washington Post media column on the piece. But UVA — which Erdely would go on to describe in the Rolling Stone article as a school without a thriving "radical feminist culture seeking to upend the patriarchy" — was just right.
Erdely wouldn't tell the Washington Post if she made an effort to corroborate the story with Drew, let alone the pledges. Bizarrely, she won't even say whether she knows the rapists' real names. She seems more eager to talk about public policy than the facts she reported.
This is what happens when professional journalism dies; bad, shitty journalism takes its place.
That being said, UVA is full of entitled douchebags, and all fucking frats should fucking hang.
Wrongful accusations would never occur in the transparency society. Just saying.
I worked with a nice UVA grad. Golfed with another UVA law group who was a bit of a douche.
Also, eugenics initiatives would also eventually lower the ratio of rapists in the population.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on December 05, 2014, 07:06:03 PM
That being said, UVA is full of entitled douchebags, and all fucking frats should fucking hang.
Got blackballed at Towson eh?
Quote from: Valmy on December 06, 2014, 12:51:39 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on December 05, 2014, 07:06:03 PM
That being said, UVA is full of entitled douchebags, and all fucking frats should fucking hang.
Got blackballed at Towson eh?
Meh, UVA thinks it's Ivy League, and it's surrounded by that same sense of patriarchal entitlement, only southern fried.
The fact that frats are involved is just more gravy.
Between this and #gamergate it seems to me that the biggest "stories" involve journalists writing about journalists. What a narcissistic bunch of losers.
Quote from: Norgy on December 05, 2014, 06:37:45 PM
Quoteas a sexual violence awareness specialist
When you need this at a university, you have to many entitled frat boys.
I would think this is an euphemistic way of describing CdM and Ide. :P
I don't get it.
Quote from: Ideologue on December 05, 2014, 07:09:27 PM
Wrongful accusations would never occur in the transparency society. Just saying.
Not sure which would be worse - having other people watch me having sex, or me watching other people having sex.
Quote from: Martinus on December 06, 2014, 03:53:56 AM
Quote from: Ideologue on December 06, 2014, 03:52:17 AM
I don't get it.
That you watch a lot of kinky porn. :P
The correct response was "Yes you do," and I say "Not often enough. :( "
QuoteNot sure which would be worse - having other people watch me having sex, or me watching other people having sex.
It's not how it works. It all just goes into a hard drive. In the event of a complaint, investigators as well as lawyers for the state and the defendant and the judge would have access to the requested files.
People watch too many movies, all of which embrace unrealistic elements so they can depict interesting imagery, and many of which are propagandistic in nature. They think it's going to be an army of hundreds of thousands of voyeurs--yeah, right. Like there'll ever be jobs in this country again. :rolleyes:
Didn't these idiots learn anything after that Duke lacrosse rape hoax?
Quote from: Legbiter on December 06, 2014, 05:05:10 AM
Didn't these idiots learn anything after that Duke lacrosse rape hoax?
No.
Was listening to the news on the radio on the way home and heard about this. The NPR journalist they were interviewing said that the problem is the agreement Ederly made, to basically take "Jackie"'s narrative at face value and not check with the other person the narrative is about essentially is intentionally getting one side of a story and goes against "everything we learn in journalism school and all the real standards of journalism." His opinion was if your source only was willing to talk to you or be part of the piece on that stipulation, you should have simply not used her as the central narrative work of the piece. He felt the piece still highlights a lot of serious problems at UVA (and UVA is under like Federal scrutiny from ages ago because of its poor handling of fraternity rapes, regardless of the veracity of this instance), but that Ederly destroyed any chance for the article to have value by doing sloppy journalism on the center piece emotional hook of the article.
Quote from: Martinus on December 06, 2014, 03:49:18 AM
Between this and #gamergate it seems to me that the biggest "stories" involve journalists writing about journalists. What a narcissistic bunch of losers.
That's a qualified expert opinion right there, folks!
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on December 06, 2014, 02:16:50 PM
Was listening to the news on the radio on the way home and heard about this. The NPR journalist they were interviewing said that the problem is the agreement Ederly made, to basically take "Jackie"'s narrative at face value and not check with the other person the narrative is about essentially is intentionally getting one side of a story and goes against "everything we learn in journalism school and all the real standards of journalism." His opinion was if your source only was willing to talk to you or be part of the piece on that stipulation, you should have simply not used her as the central narrative work of the piece. He felt the piece still highlights a lot of serious problems at UVA (and UVA is under like Federal scrutiny from ages ago because of its poor handling of fraternity rapes, regardless of the veracity of this instance), but that Ederly destroyed any chance for the article to have value by doing sloppy journalism on the center piece emotional hook of the article.
So, it's the same situation as with the Ferguson shooting - i.e. there is a systemic problem but this particular case is not the best poster case for it.
Yet you have idiots on one side who say there is no problem. And idiots on the other side who want to make this a poster case for the problem.
The Economist has published a quality, balanced article debunking the college rape hysteria. It takes to task both the UVA tall tale, bogus statistics as well as the amateur hour that is the universities' internal adjudication processes and responses to sexual assault claims.
http://www.economist.com/news/united-states/21635500-folly-letting-amateurs-handle-serious-crimes-professors-judges (http://www.economist.com/news/united-states/21635500-folly-letting-amateurs-handle-serious-crimes-professors-judges)
QuoteRape and sexual assault in America have declined sharply since the mid-1990s, to 1.1 per 1,000 women per year (see chart). And students are no more likely to be assaulted than non-students of the same age, according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics (though its numbers are somewhat out of date). Yet activists insist that American campuses—and especially fraternities—nurture a "rape culture".
They often cite an estimate that one woman in five will be sexually assaulted during her time in college, which comes from a report prepared for the Justice Department in 2007. Sceptics doubt this estimate, noting that it was based on a small sample (an online survey of two universities) and used a broad definition of sexual assault, which included everything from rape to any kind of "unwanted sexual contact", as well as any encounter where one party was too intoxicated by alcohol or drugs to give informed consent.
QuoteStudents on both sides of the fence have complained that these amateur tribunals are inept. A lawsuit this year alleged that Columbia University unfairly allowed perpetrators to remain on campus. Meanwhile male students at Vassar, Duke, and the University of Michigan have sued their schools, claiming that campus committees found them guilty of sexual misconduct when they were innocent. At Harvard 28 law professors recently criticised the university's new sexual-assault procedures as lacking "the most basic elements of fairness and due process".
Sounds reasonable although the line on intoxication is a bit troubling. Sure, if it is the case of someone being drunk so they go ahead with a sexual encounter they would probably not go ahead with if they were sober - that's not rape in my book. But, if we are talking about someone being effectively passed out cold and were sexually used by someone else - then it is quite clearly rape.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on December 06, 2014, 03:14:48 PM
You're a Delaware grad. A UVA grad wouldn't let you park his car.
Because of the Patriarchy and stuff?
Quote from: derspiess on December 08, 2014, 03:21:05 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on December 06, 2014, 03:14:48 PM
You're a Delaware grad. A UVA grad wouldn't let you park his car.
Because of the Patriarchy and stuff?
Yup. Snot-nosed little shits, they are. Ah, magnolias.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on December 08, 2014, 03:21:36 PM
Quote from: derspiess on December 08, 2014, 03:21:05 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on December 06, 2014, 03:14:48 PM
You're a Delaware grad. A UVA grad wouldn't let you park his car.
Because of the Patriarchy and stuff?
Yup. Snot-nosed little shits, they are. Ah, magnolias.
Well, it didn't keep them from accepting me into their Graduate program for International Relations.
Quote from: derspiess on December 08, 2014, 03:24:25 PM
Well, it didn't keep them from accepting me into their Graduate program for International Relations.
It's still a university. I hear they like money.
There is no prestige inherent to any degree not offered by the Ivy League. They're the only schools worth going to. Well, that and all med schools and many engineering schools.
derweiß pledged Klanna Klanna Klanna.
Quote from: Ideologue on December 08, 2014, 03:49:56 PM
There is no prestige inherent to any degree not offered by the Ivy League. They're the only schools worth going to. Well, that and all med schools and many engineering schools.
Stanford, Chicago, MIT...
Stanford is Ivy, right?
Who?
In set "some engineering schools.". :)
Quote from: Ideologue on December 08, 2014, 03:56:53 PM
Stanford is Ivy, right?
Who?
You have just lost all credibility when it comes to commenting on issues of higher ed. :P
Quote from: Baron von Schtinkenbutt on December 08, 2014, 04:09:06 PM
Quote from: Ideologue on December 08, 2014, 03:56:53 PM
Stanford is Ivy, right?
Who?
You have just lost all credibility when it comes to commenting on issues of higher ed. :P
He lost it a long time ago. He's been running up his credibility line for a while.
Quote from: Ideologue on December 08, 2014, 03:56:53 PM
Stanford is Ivy, right?
You realize the Ivy League is an actual league of schools that compete in sporting contests, right? :P
Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Columbia, Penn, Dartmouth, Brown and Cornell.
Oh well. Then I guess Stanford's no good. Sorry, garbon.
WTF
Quote from: Ideologue on December 08, 2014, 04:19:54 PM
Oh well. Then I guess Stanford's no good. Sorry, garbon.
I'm very disappointed in you that you didn't know Stanford is not Ivy.
edit: In fact, I reminded you of that fact, as recently as September of this year.
It's Ivy-equivalent. Not Chicago tho. Midwest losers. Good history department, but haha, what difference does that make?
Quote from: Ideologue on December 08, 2014, 05:30:39 PM
It's Ivy-equivalent. Not Chicago tho. Midwest losers. Good history department, but haha, what difference does that make?
Its getting a bit tiresome. Not as bad as Grumbler's routine but getting close.
Quote from: Martinus on December 06, 2014, 05:23:39 PMSo, it's the same situation as with the Ferguson shooting - i.e. there is a systemic problem but this particular case is not the best poster case for it.
Yet you have idiots on one side who say there is no problem. And idiots on the other side who want to make this a poster case for the problem.
It's a lot different than Ferguson, no one riots over sexual assault. But anything touching on race, there will be demonstrations at a minimum.
This case is actually more of a journalism news story now, campus sexual assault just isn't a super exciting topic to most people and the Rolling Stone having to post a retraction is really the story now.
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on December 08, 2014, 06:13:54 PM
Quote from: Martinus on December 06, 2014, 05:23:39 PMSo, it's the same situation as with the Ferguson shooting - i.e. there is a systemic problem but this particular case is not the best poster case for it.
Yet you have idiots on one side who say there is no problem. And idiots on the other side who want to make this a poster case for the problem.
It's a lot different than Ferguson, no one riots over sexual assault. But anything touching on race, there will be demonstrations at a minimum.
Well these guys do. :D
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/25/burmese-buddhists-riot-muslim
Quote from: Ideologue on December 08, 2014, 05:30:39 PM
It's Ivy-equivalent. Not Chicago tho. Midwest losers. Good history department, but haha, what difference does that make?
Uh.
What the fuck are you talking about, you ignorant piece of shit?
I was bored at work.
It's true I don't know much about Chicago. :) They do have a good history dept. Their law school is... pretty good. It's really good for a law school--whatever the hell that means.
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on December 08, 2014, 06:13:54 PMIt's a lot different than Ferguson, no one riots over sexual assault. But anything touching on race, there will be demonstrations at a minimum.
This case is actually more of a journalism news story now, campus sexual assault just isn't a super exciting topic to most people and the Rolling Stone having to post a retraction is really the story now.
Yes, Jackie isn't really the story as much as that RS journalist is. Female hysterics & attention-seekers are ten-a-penny but that journalist has written similar articles in the past which seem to be the same sort of feminist porn fiction that the RS retracted.
Quote from: Ideologue on December 09, 2014, 01:39:20 AM
I was bored at work.
It's true I don't know much about Chicago. :) They do have a good history dept. Their law school is... pretty good. It's really good for a law school--whatever the hell that means.
Next time you are bored, imitate someone smarter and more entertaining than CC, okay? His "I'ma combine arrogance and stupidity in one package because Londo says it's efficient" schtick doesn't amuse for long, even when he does it. :hug:
Quote from: Queequeg on December 09, 2014, 12:32:54 AM
Quote from: Ideologue on December 08, 2014, 05:30:39 PM
It's Ivy-equivalent. Not Chicago tho. Midwest losers. Good history department, but haha, what difference does that make?
Uh.
What the fuck are you talking about, you ignorant piece of shit?
Chicago sucks, you Persian loving faggit.
Quote from: Ed Anger on December 09, 2014, 09:48:57 AM
Quote from: Queequeg on December 09, 2014, 12:32:54 AM
Quote from: Ideologue on December 08, 2014, 05:30:39 PM
It's Ivy-equivalent. Not Chicago tho. Midwest losers. Good history department, but haha, what difference does that make?
Uh.
What the fuck are you talking about, you ignorant piece of shit?
Chicago sucks, you Persian loving faggit.
He seems to be crying a lot. I'd be fine if someone wanted to tell me that Stanford was a school for losers. :)
I mean, you guys always lose the big ball game with Harvard.
Quote from: Ideologue on December 09, 2014, 09:56:16 AM
I mean, you guys always lose the big ball game with Harvard.
You might be thinking of Yale. :unsure:
All in the Ivy League, was the joke. :P
And Dunham is now getting stick for her rape claim at Oberlin. And her book publisher is already shitting bricks.
Delicious. :licklips:
Quote from: Ideologue on December 09, 2014, 10:18:57 AM
All in the Ivy League, was the joke. :P
Well that's not really in the same vein as the negative comments you made about Chicago that lead to Spellus emotional outburst. :P
Neither, here nor there, but Stanford's big game is vs. another non-Ivy (Berkeley).
Quote from: Ed Anger on December 09, 2014, 10:25:54 AM
And Dunham is now getting stick for her rape claim at Oberlin. And her book publisher is already shitting bricks.
Delicious. :licklips:
Yeah, now they're saying Barry is a pseudonym :lol:
Quote from: garbon on December 09, 2014, 10:26:24 AM
Neither, here nor there, but Stanford's big game is vs. another non-Ivy (Berkeley).
As both of those schools award athletic scholarships, they would crush Harvard if they played them.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on December 09, 2014, 10:41:59 AM
Quote from: garbon on December 09, 2014, 10:26:24 AM
Neither, here nor there, but Stanford's big game is vs. another non-Ivy (Berkeley).
As both of those schools award athletic scholarships, they would crush Harvard if they played them.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/23/sports/financial-aid-changes-game-as-sports-teams-in-ivies-rise.html?pagewanted=all
In 2011, it was noted that per some other means, the caliber of their athletes was increasing.
QuoteThe Ivy League does not award athletic scholarships, but led by endowment-rich members like Harvard, Yale and Princeton, the conference has spent hundreds of millions of dollars in additional need-based aid — with most of the universities all but eliminating student loans and essentially doubling the size of grants meant for middle-income families.
The financial-aid enhancements have had a profound effect on the quality of athletic recruits. Rosters are now fortified with top athletes who would have turned down the Ivy League in the past because they would have been asked to pay $20,000 to $30,000 per year more than at other colleges.
"We're seeing a significant change in the caliber of the student-athlete," said Steve Bilsky, the University of Pennsylvania's athletic director, one of more than 50 Ivy League administrators and coaches interviewed. "It's not even the same population because the pool has widened. We see a considerable number of student-athletes turning down athletic scholarships from places like Stanford, Northwestern or Duke to come to Penn."
Andy Noel, Cornell's athletic director, said: "Eighty percent of our best recruits in the current freshman class would not have come here 10 years ago because we couldn't match other schools' offers. The impact has been enormous. And will continue to be."
A public school? :o
I was just looking up acceptance rates. Wow things have gotten tough. Stanford was 12% when I got in, now it is down to 5%!
Harvard went undefeated this year. :o Course, their games were against other Ivies and Georgetown. :hmm:
I think this is an excellent idea. :lol: :lol: :lol:
QuoteGreek Gangs
States should treat rogue fraternities as criminal organizations and seize their assets.
By Colin Downes
Yes, it's from Slate.
Last month, the University of Virginia suspended all fraternity activities in response to allegations of rapes at the Phi Kappa Psi fraternity. In September, the University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, suspended Tau Kappa Epsilon while police investigated claims that brothers had drugged women at a party and marked the hands of their victims with red X's to indicate their vulnerability. The University of Texas at Arlington Sigma Phi Epsilon house was closed down after three reported sexual assaults this summer. Delta Kappa Epsilon's Yale chapter is in its fourth year of a five-year suspension that followed an episode in which pledges paraded through a residential quad chanting, "No means yes; yes means anal."
While the problem of campus sexual assault is complex, one thing is clear: Some fraternity chapters—call them rogue chapters—are operating so far outside the boundaries of acceptable behavior that they pose an active threat to university communities. They control spaces that students warn their friends not visit alone on a Friday night. They are repeat offenders that foster a culture of permissiveness toward sexual violence.
Law enforcement officials have an unutilized tool at their disposal to combat rogue fraternities: They can treat these organizations as criminal street gangs under state law and seize their assets.
While treating frats like gangs might seem a strange way to frame the issue, consider the law in my home state, Virginia. Rogue chapters would easily meet the Virginia Code's three criteria for a criminal street gang. Such a group must have as "one of its primary objectives or activities the commission of one or more criminal activities." Second, it must have an "identifiable name or identifying sign or symbol." And, third, its members must have "individually or collectively engaged in the commission of ... two or more predicate criminal acts, at least one of which is an act of violence."
With respect to the first element, it's abundantly clear to even a casual observer of Greek life that one of the primary activities of many fraternities is illegally supplying alcohol to minors. I live on the University of Virginia grounds, and each weekend I can watch from my front porch as the waves of humanity roll down from the first-year dorms and crash on Frat Row—rather than bars, where a state crackdown has made it harder for underage students to pass off their fake IDs. The outsize role fraternities play in the social life of universities is staked, in part, on their ability to provide social spaces that enable underage drinking far from the scrutiny of university administrators or law enforcement. Rogue chapters use their control over provision of alcohol to minors as leverage, enabling members to prey on vulnerable young women.
The second element, identifiable signs or symbols, is easily satisfied. Not only do fraternities have clearly identifiable names, but college campuses are blanketed by sweatshirts and ball caps emblazoned with distinctive Greek letters that pick out members of different fraternities as surely as gang colors. Members of Greek organizations sometimes even display hand signals that the uninitiated can confuse for gang signs (especially when the appearance of the person signing better fits their preconceived image of a gang member).
A fraternity chapter whose members have engaged in multiple acts of sexual assault would also satisfy the final criterion, criminal acts of violence. In the 1980s and '90s, states faced a rising tide of gang violence. Anti-gang statutes were implemented to give law enforcement officials tools to deal with groups where criminal prosecutions were hindered by entrenched cultures of silence and witness intimidation. Prosecutions of sexual assaults committed by members of rogue fraternities face similar challenges. Bonds of personal and institutional loyalty discourage cooperation or reporting by members of the fraternity, and the uniquely stigmatizing character of sexual violence discourages victims from pressing charges.
If a fraternity satisfies the definition of a criminal street gang, the state of Virginia can seize any real property used in substantial connection with its criminal acts or recruitment activities. Fraternity houses serve an important role in the criminal activities of rogue fraternity chapters. They insulate the chapter from supervision and oversight. They function as the venue for flagrantly flouting state laws relating to underage drinking, supplying alcohol to minors, and, in the context of rushing and pledging, hazing and recruitment. They also serve as vehicles for systematically subjecting women to sexual assault. The state has a powerful tool to disrupt the activities of groups whose egregious misconduct makes them closer in spirit to organized criminal enterprises than student clubs. It can take their fraternity houses.
Asset forfeiture has certain advantages relative to criminal prosecutions. First, an action of this kind highlights the dimension of collective responsibility involved in an organization where the culture has become pervasively toxic. Criminal prosecutions on their own can allow the group to cast the accused as isolated bad apples. Seizing a fraternity's house emphasizes the institutional character of the problem. Moreover, as a civil action, the commonwealth would only need to prove its case by preponderance of the evidence—a "more likely than not" standard. By contrast, criminal prosecution is held to the higher "beyond reasonable doubt" standard.
Last, seizing the house also immediately benefits the community by removing the danger posed by a rogue fraternity chapter's activities from the college's social universe. It's worth noting that Virginia law recognizes the broad community interest in stopping houses from being used for gang activities. Any "responsible citizen" of the state can file suit to declare a house used for such activities a nuisance and force its closure. A responsible state would take on the job itself.
So SJW's want to use RICO to purge people who's lifestyles they disagree with? :hmm:
This is the SJW in question.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.law.virginia.edu%2Fimages%2Fnews%2Ff12%2Fdownes_0089.jpg&hash=2e6ba3096d8cbe48979fa81dceafadd10e234b78)
He and CdM are both just jelly haters. :yucky:
Quote from: Legbiter on December 09, 2014, 02:42:43 PM
So SJW's want to use RICO to purge people who's lifestyles they disagree with? :hmm:
This is the SJW in question.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.law.virginia.edu%2Fimages%2Fnews%2Ff12%2Fdownes_0089.jpg&hash=2e6ba3096d8cbe48979fa81dceafadd10e234b78)
He and CdM are both just jelly haters. :yucky:
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fc2.nrostatic.com%2Fsites%2Fdefault%2Ffiles%2Fuploaded%2Fpic_related_121813_Pajama-Boy-The-Obama-Machines-Id.jpg&hash=677cf923d2407acdaece74e236c9a0a165e9b629)
:lol:
Is there a German word for having a face that just seems to invite a fist?
Oh Lord, Pajama Boy.
Quote from: Legbiter on December 09, 2014, 03:00:00 PM
:lol:
Is there a German word for having a face that just seems to invite a fist?
A fist, and an forced entry warrant breach.
Quote from: Ed Anger on December 09, 2014, 03:05:49 PM
Quote from: derspiess on December 09, 2014, 03:04:15 PM
Oh Lord, Pajama Boy.
AKA "Jacob". No last name given.
:lol: at the last bit.
This thread also depresses me, because Legbiter, despite being morally incorrect, is happier. Probably thanks to a solid math education. Or maybe that's Viking. Whatever.
Quote from: Legbiter on December 09, 2014, 03:00:00 PM
:lol:
Is there a German word for having a face that just seems to invite a fist?
Faggot? :P
Quote from: Ideologue on December 09, 2014, 03:19:45 PM
This thread also depresses me, because Legbiter, despite being morally incorrect, is happier. Probably thanks to a solid math education. Or maybe that's Viking. Whatever.
I don't get this. Even though most of you are heathens and/or on the wrong political side, I wish you all happiness.
Quote from: derspiess on December 09, 2014, 04:20:50 PM
Quote from: Ideologue on December 09, 2014, 03:19:45 PM
This thread also depresses me, because Legbiter, despite being morally incorrect, is happier. Probably thanks to a solid math education. Or maybe that's Viking. Whatever.
I don't get this. Even though most of you are heathens and/or on the wrong political side, I wish you all happiness.
No you don't.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on December 09, 2014, 04:21:51 PM
No you don't.
What makes you say that? If I thought that little of most of you, I wouldn't be here.
It's not political.
What a bizarre thing. (http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/u-va-students-challenge-rolling-stone-account-of-attack/2014/12/10/ef345e42-7fcb-11e4-81fd-8c4814dfa9d7_story.html) You know who should be the most angry at this girl? Real rape victims.
:huh: WTF are they protesting? Rolling Stone's retraction?
Quote from: derspiess on December 09, 2014, 04:20:50 PM
Quote from: Ideologue on December 09, 2014, 03:19:45 PM
This thread also depresses me, because Legbiter, despite being morally incorrect, is happier. Probably thanks to a solid math education. Or maybe that's Viking. Whatever.
I don't get this. Even though most of you are heathens and/or on the wrong political side, I wish you all happiness.
That's one of the things I like about you. It is never personal.
Tim can eat a shit pie topped with more shit and Ide's whipped cream.
He can have it. I don't like whipped--
Ohhh.
Quote from: Ideologue on December 10, 2014, 10:51:07 PM
He can have it. I don't like whipped--
Ohhh.
Wait, so you aren't going to let him have it? :angry:
Has a better texture than whipped cream, anyway.
Meanwhile...
QuoteThe heartbreaking moment a Kenyan girl is sold into marriage
Washington Post
In a village about 50 miles from Marigat in Baringo County, Kenya, among a tribe that practices genital mutilation as a rite of womanhood, a teenage girl is sold into an arranged marriage. Her price is 20 goats, 10 cows and a few camels, paid to her family over several weeks. And her reaction is heartbreaking.
Dressed in bright-colored clothes and ceremonial beads, she tries to escape, balling up a fist and kicking her bare feet from the ground when a man picks her up from behind and pulls her away from her home. The scene, which unfolded over the weekend in the Pokot tribe, was captured and described by Reuters photographer Siegfried Modola. His photos document a Pokot tradition in which parents give away their daughters, usually at the start of adolescence. The girls are sold for a dowry and married to men in the tribe.
The girl's family claimed she didn't know about the arrangement her father made with her future husband, Reuters reported. If they told her, they feared, she would run away. A group of men from the tribe came to collect her and led her to a two-day ceremony in the village.
Within the Pokot tribe, female circumcision is seen as a girl's transition to womanhood. Although it's now illegal in Kenya, the tribe still allows it and, in fact, forces all girls to do it before marriage. The practice is also known as female genital mutilation (FGM) and, in many countries, is considered a human rights violation. It can lead to severe bleeding, infections, infertility and death. Some 125 million girls and women in 29 countries in Africa and the Middle East have experienced it, according to the United Nations.
Earlier this year, Kenya created a prosecution unit and a hotline for girls and women to report such abuse.
"If we get this information beforehand, it will actually assist in prevention of the practice because we can organize our officers on the ground to raid the place and rescue the girls," Christine Nanjala, head of the anti-FGM prosecution unit, told Thomson Reuters Foundation.
In October, Modola shot a series of photos in rural Kenya documenting Pokot's circumcision ritual.
"They believe when a girl is circumcised, she is an adult and she is ready to get married," anti-FGM advocate Rebecca Chebet told WXYZ-TV. "Now girls as young as nine are getting circumcised because their father wants a dowry."
Photos here:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/12/11/heartbreaking-photos-capture-moment-kenyan-girl-is-sold-into-arranged-marriage/?tid=pm_national_pop
Damn, Seedy. You're awfully insensitive to other equally valid cultures.
Anyway, I made it as far as the pic showing the razor blade and stopped.
So, how are you fixed for blades?
It looks like the WaPo has dug up even more information on Jackie. For one, it appears that she actually created a fake boyfriend her freshman year. She told several of her friends (including a male friend, "Randall" whom she appears to have been interested in) that she was dating an upperclassmen. She produced fake text message from him, used a random student's (whom she had never met, but I guess found his picture on Facebook) picture as evidence of her beau and etc. Based on what her friends say, she did all of this to try and make Randall jealous, so that he would direct his amorous attentions to Jackie.
Additionally it appears likely (though not confirmed) that "Randall" was the male friend that Ederly claims she tried to interview, but who had responded via email that he couldn't speak out of loyalty to his fraternity. Randall says he would have been happy to speak to Rolling Stone, regardless of his fraternity association, and that he had never been contacted. That means it's quite likely Jackie sent Ederly to a fake email address run by Jackie herself, not Randall.
FWIW Randall, who reports on what appears to be Jackie's borderline mentally ill level of deception on various issues, also says he was Jackie's friend and he was there the night she was assaulted. He said that she claimed she was forced to have oral sex, she was not covered in blood (the RS narrative is she was gang raped on broken glass, and was covered in a shredded, bloody dress when she hysterically told her friends about it, friends who, due to association with the fraternity system told her not to report the rape) but that she did seem legitimately traumatized. So was Jackie sexually assaulted? I say it's possible. Was she gang raped by 7 dudes in an elaborate rape porn narrative that the Rolling Stone reported on? I don't think so, based on what we know. But even a nutter can be the legitimate victim of a sexual assault, and of course any sexual assault is very bad, even if the victim is generally a liar about other things and for various reasons decided to vastly exaggerate the nature of the assault.
WaPo made a really good point, Ederly investigated dozens of campus sexual assaults. Most of them were all very vanilla "same narrative" stories, largely "girl gets too drunk at a frat party, wakes up and realizes she was date raped." Those are all tragedies, but also "not pulp fiction." Jackie's story was basically rape horror porn, a young girl brutally gang raped on a pile of broken glass and then told by her closest friends not to report anything because her friends had greater loyalty to the fraternity system than to her. WaPo says if Ederly had all this information on tons of other campus rapes, all of which followed a common narrative, and one that was extraordinary stuff, she should have done a lot of due diligence on the outlier story to verify it. Instead it seems Ederly just started drooling at the mouth and rushed to press with it, doing not even the base amount of fact checking journalistic ethics requires.
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on December 12, 2014, 10:50:28 AM
WaPo made a really good point, Ederly investigated dozens of campus sexual assaults. Most of them were all very vanilla "same narrative" stories, largely "girl gets too drunk at a frat party, wakes up and realizes she was date raped." Those are all tragedies, but also "not pulp fiction." Jackie's story was basically rape horror porn, a young girl brutally gang raped on a pile of broken glass and then told by her closest friends not to report anything because her friends had greater loyalty to the fraternity system than to her. WaPo says if Ederly had all this information on tons of other campus rapes, all of which followed a common narrative, and one that was extraordinary stuff, she should have done a lot of due diligence on the outlier story to verify it. Instead it seems Ederly just started drooling at the mouth and rushed to press with it, doing not even the base amount of fact checking journalistic ethics requires.
Oh yeah, she finally found the douchebag porridge to be just right at UVA. It had to be the right crime with the right victim, but it doesn't work without the right school.
It's looking more and more like Rolling Stone's fuck-up was not blacklisting Erdely after 2011. Apparently, another of her Rolling Stone articles (on sex abuse by the clergy in Philadelphia) is in hot water for not vetting sources and relying almost unilaterally on a guy who seems to have fabricated every incident of rape he reported.
This woman needs to get out of investigative journalism, stat.
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on December 10, 2014, 08:48:05 PM
What a bizarre thing. (http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/u-va-students-challenge-rolling-stone-account-of-attack/2014/12/10/ef345e42-7fcb-11e4-81fd-8c4814dfa9d7_story.html) You know who should be the most angry at this girl? Real rape victims.
I've never seen anyone been so politely characterized as a relentless, psychopathic liar. Yet WaPo never just outright says it, just matter-of-factly tiptoes around that glaring observation. :hmm:
Quote from: Legbiter on December 12, 2014, 02:07:33 PM
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on December 10, 2014, 08:48:05 PM
What a bizarre thing. (http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/u-va-students-challenge-rolling-stone-account-of-attack/2014/12/10/ef345e42-7fcb-11e4-81fd-8c4814dfa9d7_story.html) You know who should be the most angry at this girl? Real rape victims.
I've never seen anyone been so politely characterized as a relentless, psychopathic liar. Yet WaPo never just outright says it, just matter-of-factly tiptoes around that glaring observation. :hmm:
I think the Post is less willing to let its ass show than you, is all. For instance, you are willing to use the phrase "psychopathic liar' when the post would probably use the actual term, "pathological liar." But, in order to do that, they would probably feel obliged to use the term's actual meaning, unlike you, who can make up the meaning for your made-up words.
The Post has a lot to answer for, but, at least, it is not you.
Eh, psychopathic and liar are both real words, so not made up. Maybe you meant "made up terms?" But even then, his term has logical consistency, no reason it doesn't make sense to use those two words that way if you believe this Jackie woman is a psychopath. I rule it was not a violation. ~fin
:blink: WTF
Quote from: 11B4V on December 12, 2014, 06:37:17 PM
:blink: WTF
I had this very reaction to your Guardians of the Galaxy review. :D
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on December 12, 2014, 07:18:54 PM
Quote from: 11B4V on December 12, 2014, 06:37:17 PM
:blink: WTF
I had this very reaction to your Guardians of the Galaxy review. :D
I know, I had to be "that" guy. :P
Quote from: grumbler on December 12, 2014, 03:40:29 PMI think the Post is less willing to let its ass show than you, is all. For instance, you are willing to use the phrase "psychopathic liar' when the post would probably use the actual term, "pathological liar." But, in order to do that, they would probably feel obliged to use the term's actual meaning, unlike you, who can make up the meaning for your made-up words.
The Post has a lot to answer for, but, at least, it is not you.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.gifize.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2013%2F01%2FCoca_Cola_Hamster_drole.gif&hash=b2bdb59bc905de26cb52ce80e3f70e7cada3447a)
Since when does psychopathic liar mean pathological liar?
I think G-man is saying, a psychopath can be/is a pathological liar. But there's no such term as a psychopathic liar. *SHRUGS*
Quote from: Ideologue on December 05, 2014, 07:09:27 PM
Wrongful accusations would never occur in the transparency society. Just saying.
But, we have the moat transparent administration evah!!