LafayetteLady
Posts: 7683
Joined: 5/2/2007
From: Northern New Jersey
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: samboct
Hi LL
I'm beginning to really question the hate crimes limitations on speech. I think this thread has shown how quickly speech can become criminalized- it's a slippery slope, and it leads to prosecuting people for their thoughts. Its clear that in the search for a hate crime- whether or not one actually exists- both second amendment rights and privacy rights are getting trampled. Not to mention that the university is showing a remarkable lack of spine in this matter. With respect to your comments about drunkenness and freshman- yep, you're right- but I also have a lot of trouble with a drinking age of 21, but the ability to be drafted and get killed for your country at 18. Doesn't sit well with me- never has. Feel free to change drunken to foolish, and we can table the discussion about whether alcohol was a factor or not.
The reason you might be questioning it is because from the above, you obviously don't understand what a "hate crime" is. This isn't about "hate speech," but rather about a type of sexual harassment/potential intimidation/frat boy entitlement/possible terroristic threads. When you learn the difference, it might alter your assessment, although as this thread has gone on, I truly doubt it.
As for whether it was drunken or simply foolish, the concept you are promoting of "kids do stupid things" or "boys will be boys" doesn't fly. Hasn't for several decades.
quote:
We have very different definitions of loyalty. I've made sacrifices for friends and consider it a character trait I'm proud of- so do my friends. I'll give the nod to the kids who won't rat someone out, and remind you that the MSM does have a tendency to distort peoples interviews on occasion. However, I can respect your opinion in this case- just don't happen to agree.
You are right, we don't agree here. The difference is that for me, any respect I *might* have for someone is eliminated when they confuse "loyalty" with "ratting someone out." This isn't covering for a friend who lied to his parents saying he was studying when he went to a party.
quote:
In terms of education- having taught some in college, I can tell you first hand that there's a big difference in the maturity of freshman and seniors. Still seems to me that the college has an obligation to educate the kid, first and foremost. Students get expelled for crimes- they get disciplined for poor judgement. Clearly, this kid is perhaps a bit more of a challenge to educate than some others, but that's what colleges get paid the big bucks for, isn't it? Had he actually raped someone- well, then yes, he should lose his chance at an education at this institution- but for sending out a stupid question? Doesn't seem like the punishment fits the crime.
Read my posts again. I never said the boys should be expelled. I said they should have to live in the dorms, be on academic probation, lose scholarships, participate in fund raising against violence on campus. Which one of those appears to be "expulsion" to you?
There is a huge difference in maturity between a 17/18 year old and a 22/23 year old. Having taught college isn't necessary to reach that conclusion.
quote:
Here's my summary- along with a bit of history on the subject...
30 years ago, there was a very similar debate between feminists, (largely populated by lesbians) and the rest of the Brandeis campus concerning violence toward women. The feminists were up in arms about the one good party at the school, where joints were thrown from rooftops, and a porno film was shown.
The bolded part seems to be where the giant disconnect between you and the rest of the posters is. You don't see a problem that defining a "good party" involves porn and joints thrown from the rooftop. I also highly doubt that feminists on campus consisted of "mostly lesbians," and the strongest "feminist" movements were more than 30 years ago, which was 1981.
quote:
What I have learned from this thread...
1) Many women still view rape as a simple crime which can and should be solved using the legal system.
Crimes are handled by the legal system. It really is that simple.
quote:
2) Even using an example from my own life, at some personal cost, did not cause these women to rethink their position.
Why would it? Your example was an attempt to show how much you pay attention and to try to say that other men who don't pay attention to what is going on with their partner, i.e. actually looking at her damned face, shouldn't be held accountable because the girl didn't verbally say "no."
Honestly, the "personal cost" to you is the result of the rest of the ridiculous crap that you posted.
quote:
3) That women continue to want to dominate the discussion around rape, excluding men, unless those men are in lockstep with their own positions. This is an ideological strait jacket and is clearly one of the major factors in why there has been no progress on this subject in three decades. In short, there's been great consensus building, but no mechanism to point out that the consensus is wrong.
There has been massive progress legally regarding rape. The fact that the progress has mostly been to protect victims obviously doesn't sit well with you. Oh well. DNA technology has also progressed leaps and bounds since 1981, and has effectively (although not totally) assisted in preventing wrongful prosecution.
quote:
4) That people on the front lines in the legal system acknowledge that rape is a complex problem and is not amenable to a legal solution, but this knowledge has not made it into the social consciousness.
I have read the "data" you provided attempting to support this. It is bullshit. Yes, date/aquaintence rape is a complex issue, but it doesn't negate the necessity or value of prosecution.
quote:
7) That if the actual number of rapes is indeed an order of magnitude higher than convicted stranger rapes and current acquaintance rapes- then our penal system cannot deal with the influx of inmates this represents.
Sadly, when more people are committing crimes, they still need to be dealt with. Your concept of "educating" date rapists and forgiving their "foolishness" or inability to stop or notice what is going on is ridiculous.
quote:
8) That most do not recognize that the debate about the number of rapes creates a challenge for the legal system, to which it has responded by raising the burden of proof to the point that it presents a very high barrier to obtaining convictions. This leads to the continued notion that the victim is on trial, not the rapist. More surety and better data with wide scientific and societal acceptance on the nature of rape would lead to higher conviction rates for rapists.
The burden of proof in a criminal proceeding has always been "without reasonable doubt," that burden has not been raised. What has changed is that the defense is largely no longer permitted to introduce the victim's sexual history as a defense to the crime. In other words, it doesn't matter if she fucked the whole football team willingly in a gang bang and then walked down the street naked, if she didn't want to have sex with the guy on trial, that is the only thing that matters.
So in a sense, you are correct there that there is still a myth that the "victim" is on trial, but there are obviously complexities there that the general public, and you, do not understand.
quote:
Suggestions to move forward:
2) Acknowledge that the current zero tolerance for rape campaign has been a failure and needs drastic overhaul.
So in your opinion, some times we should tolerate rape? Seriously?
quote:
3) Acknowledge that acquaintance rape cannot be dealt with on a solely legal basis, that education has been a critically overlooked component. By its nature, acquaintance rape is complex, and cannot be dealt with by simple litmus tests.
4) Toss out existing rape crisis centers and education which is based on criminalizing men and start with a clean slate.
5) Men need to be incorporated into the educational process from the beginning, and with an equal voice.
6) Reinvigorate academic institutions to study the problem and push for additional scholarship that does not have a feminist bias. We cannot right past wrongs with current education, we can only provide a better environment for men and women to communicate more clearly so that the crime of rape is prevented, rather than punished.
About the only thing I have managed to figure out from your posts is that it is frightening you taught at a college campus, you obviously have a very misguided view of what rape is, and any children that you may have raised are likely in need of some serious counseling. Your "history" of feminism is woefully lacking and showing quite a bit of bias.
|
RE: Name who you would like to rape on campus - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread