Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Sexual Assaults in the militaryFollow

#52 Jun 05 2013 at 12:50 PM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
13,440 posts
To be fair (speaking as someone who gets much of their news from the CNN website) that kind of article was more the exception rather than the rule. I don't remember many sympathetic articles on there. Though there was discussion that if the men were found innocent, the work by Anonymous would make them guilty in everyone's eyes. That was kind of more of an anti-vigilante thing more than anything else though.

Edited, Jun 5th 2013 12:00pm by someproteinguy
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#53 Jun 05 2013 at 1:02 PM Rating: Decent
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,595 posts
Olorinus the Ludicrous wrote:
[
In all seriousness, Smash is absolutely right. The only real solution to rape is to get rid of rape culture which leaves people thinking it's ok to rape. I mean look at those Stuebenville football kids - they all seemed to genuinely think it was okay to drag an unconscious woman around raping her when they felt like it. They honestly seemed to think it was all good fun.
If your problem is 'rape in the US' and your goal is to bring down the numbers of rape in the US then sure, making sure all citizens know it's against the law to rape others is a good method - to start with anyways.

If your problem is that you're a **** 21 year old woman attending college and you want to avoid being 1 of 12 getting raped during your tenure - you have a lot of other options available to you.



____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#54 Jun 05 2013 at 1:03 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
One summary does not a media make. And I don't even read it as "sympathetic" as you seem to. Yes, they had bright futures. They threw it away. They fucked up. That doesn't make them victims, it makes them rapists and fools.

On the other hand, this isn't a topic I'm especially interested in beating into the ground so, sure, bad media.

Edited, Jun 5th 2013 2:04pm by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#55 Jun 05 2013 at 1:14 PM Rating: Good
****
9,526 posts
It doesn't anywhere say "they threw it all away" or anything like that though. It mentions they will be registered *** offenders, but once again, in a "aww poor boys" way. They barely even mention the victim, and don't mention at all what she was going through, or how this affected her. The men who broke the law are the sympathetic actors. The woman who was brutalized is all but ignored.

I get that you don't want to argue this, but this kind of media coverage (even if it was, as you seem to be suggesting from only one media outlet) is part of the problem. It creates a narrative of sympathy for the people who committed the crime. It makes it all about them in the exactly wrong kind of way. It doesn't ask tough questions. No where do they say "why would these young men with such bright futures commit such a horrible crime?" No where do they even seem to refer to them in a way that suggests they are aware these young men dragged an unconscious woman around to several different houses sexually assaulting her - and laughing at the thought of her being dead.

I mean seriously, these guys don't deserve an ounce of sympathy - yet they got a pound of it. Even if it was "just" CNN that had that kind of coverage, wouldn't you agree that's problematic? Don't you think that if anyone deserves sympathy and humanization it's the young woman who was violated? Yet not one gram of sympathy is given to her. No discussion is made of how she has to deal with the community hating her because somehow they think it is her fault for these young guys being creeps. No discussion of how the community tried to downplay the issue. No discussion on her emotional well being or how this experience will affect HER future. None at all.
____________________________
lolgaxe wrote:
When it comes to sitting around not doing anything for long periods of time, only being active for short windows, and marginal changes and sidegrades I'd say FFXI players were the perfect choice for politicians.


#56 Jun 05 2013 at 1:25 PM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
13,440 posts
What did you think of the rest of CNN's coverage of this case, outside of this one segment?
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#57 Jun 05 2013 at 1:31 PM Rating: Decent
******
49,907 posts
Olorinus the Ludicrous wrote:
I mean seriously, these guys don't deserve an ounce of sympathy
They made a huge mistake and their lives are ruined. Fuck 'em, death penalty.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#58 Jun 05 2013 at 1:38 PM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,595 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
Olorinus the Ludicrous wrote:
I mean seriously, these guys don't deserve an ounce of sympathy
They made a huge mistake and their lives are ruined. Fuck 'em, death penalty.

That's draconian. Just cut off their ******.
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#59 Jun 05 2013 at 1:39 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
12,281 posts
Elinda wrote:
lolgaxe wrote:
Olorinus the Ludicrous wrote:
I mean seriously, these guys don't deserve an ounce of sympathy
They made a huge mistake and their lives are ruined. Fuck 'em, death penalty.

That's draconian. Just publicly dip their genitals in acid.

____________________________
Shaowstrike (Retired - FFXI)
91PUP/BLM 86SMN/BST 76DRK
Cooking/Fishing 100


"We don't just borrow words; on occasion, English has pursued other languages down alleyways to beat them unconscious and rifle their pockets for new vocabulary."
— James D. Nicoll
#60 Jun 05 2013 at 1:43 PM Rating: Excellent
******
27,272 posts
This thread is in dire need of a derail.
____________________________
Theophany wrote:
YOU'RE AN ELITIST @#%^ AETHIEN, NO WONDER YOU HAVE NO FRIENDS AND PEOPLE HATE YOU.
someproteinguy wrote:
Aethien you take more terrible pictures than a Japanese tourist.
Astarin wrote:
One day, Maz, you'll learn not to click on anything Aeth links.
#61 Jun 05 2013 at 1:46 PM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
13,440 posts
Okay, what would you prefer to have dipped in acid?
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#62 Jun 05 2013 at 1:46 PM Rating: Good
******
49,907 posts
Technically, this is the derail.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#63 Jun 05 2013 at 2:36 PM Rating: Excellent
******
20,020 posts
Elinda wrote:
Olorinus the Ludicrous wrote:
[
In all seriousness, Smash is absolutely right. The only real solution to rape is to get rid of rape culture which leaves people thinking it's ok to rape. I mean look at those Stuebenville football kids - they all seemed to genuinely think it was okay to drag an unconscious woman around raping her when they felt like it. They honestly seemed to think it was all good fun.
If your problem is 'rape in the US' and your goal is to bring down the numbers of rape in the US then sure, making sure all citizens know it's against the law to rape others is a good method - to start with anyways.

If your problem is that you're a **** 21 year old woman attending college and you want to avoid being 1 of 12 getting raped during your tenure - you have a lot of other options available to you.





I'm assuming you mean this in terms of what constitutes rape, not actual confusion that rape is illegal? As in, what is and is not consent?

Because I definitely agree that's needed. Too many guys will accept the consent of a girl who is wasted. Or use any other ******** excuse to imply consent ("if she passed out in my house, she obviously wanted my **** in her!").

But increased punishments and rates of convictions have been shown, at least in the context of the military, to have no effect on the rate of rape. I don't know if that's true in the civilian sector, but rapists in the armed forces today are far more likely to face punishment, and the minimum punishments for all *** crimes have gone up quite a bit. I don't care enough to look up the actual statistics right now, but that's what I remember from coverage about yesterday's opening discussions.

And I'm not really surprised. Rape doesn't strike me as a risk vs. reward sort of crime. It's power play. These ******** have a need to prove their dominance, and I doubt anything but a direct threat of punishment would prevent that.
____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
#64 Jun 05 2013 at 3:20 PM Rating: Decent
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
35,381 posts
Since when did someone being drunk and saying yes to *** not count as consent?
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.


An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#65 Jun 05 2013 at 4:05 PM Rating: Good
****
9,526 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
Olorinus the Ludicrous wrote:
I mean seriously, these guys don't deserve an ounce of sympathy
They made a huge mistake and their lives are ruined. Fuck 'em, death penalty.


I never said that, but they certainly don't deserve to be coddled and cried over. It's highly doubtful that this was their first time doing this either. And how about the woman's life they ruined? Once again, it goes back to crying over the perpetrator rather than feeling for the person who was raped. It sends entirely the wrong message, but sure... poor little men finally got caught after raping multiple young women and now they have to face some very weak consequences. Waaa waaa.
____________________________
lolgaxe wrote:
When it comes to sitting around not doing anything for long periods of time, only being active for short windows, and marginal changes and sidegrades I'd say FFXI players were the perfect choice for politicians.


#66 Jun 05 2013 at 4:18 PM Rating: Excellent
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
16,937 posts
Uglysasquatch wrote:
Since when did someone being drunk and saying yes to *** not count as consent?


I think it's different if they had two drinks with dinner vs they are unconscious, lying in a pool of vomit.
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#67 Jun 05 2013 at 4:34 PM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
35,381 posts
TirithRR wrote:
Uglysasquatch wrote:
Since when did someone being drunk and saying yes to *** not count as consent?


I think it's different if they had two drinks with dinner vs they are unconscious, lying in a pool of vomit.
Yea, that's not drunk or wasted, that's passed out and unconscious.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.


An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#68 Jun 05 2013 at 4:42 PM Rating: Excellent
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
16,937 posts
It's a touchy subject... (to some).

I don't think it's rape if the woman had enough drinks to loosen her up. (Pun not intended). But I do think you don't have to wait until they are passed out before the ability to consent is long gone. But I'm sure there are plenty of people that disagree with any alcohol being involved. At least there was back when I was in college and the local Women's organization released a news letter on campus denouncing any amount of alcohol being used in pre-*** courtships. Sparking a few letter's to the editor from people for/against.

There's plenty of area between 0.00 and Alcohol Poisoning.

Edit:
And I'm talking alcoholic drinks, consumed by choice without hidden drugs, obviously.

Edited, Jun 5th 2013 6:50pm by TirithRR
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#69 Jun 05 2013 at 5:51 PM Rating: Decent
Supreme Lionator
*****
14,174 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
Olorinus the Ludicrous wrote:
I mean seriously, these guys don't deserve an ounce of sympathy
They made a huge mistake and their lives are ruined. Fuck 'em, death penalty.


Never known you to show sympathy for criminals before.

I suppose this is an issue close to your heart.
____________________________
“Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires.”
#70 Jun 05 2013 at 6:20 PM Rating: Decent
******
49,907 posts
Kavekk wrote:
I suppose this is an issue close to your heart.
"Guaranteed response."
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#71 Jun 05 2013 at 6:51 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,010 posts
Olorinus the Ludicrous wrote:
I get that you don't want to argue this, but this kind of media coverage (even if it was, as you seem to be suggesting from only one media outlet) is part of the problem. It creates a narrative of sympathy for the people who committed the crime. It makes it all about them in the exactly wrong kind of way. It doesn't ask tough questions. No where do they say "why would these young men with such bright futures commit such a horrible crime?" No where do they even seem to refer to them in a way that suggests they are aware these young men dragged an unconscious woman around to several different houses sexually assaulting her - and laughing at the thought of her being dead.


That was covered elsewhere though. The particular article linked was about sentencing and the effect it would have on the lives of the two men. And I got more of a warning to other young men not to do something so stupid and ruin their lives vibe from it than that they were downplaying it or feeling sorry for the offenders. The problem is that a lot of rapists in this sort of situation don't see what they're doing as rape. So demonizing rape and rapists doesn't really work as a deterrent.


idiggory, King of Bards wrote:
I'm assuming you mean this in terms of what constitutes rape, not actual confusion that rape is illegal? As in, what is and is not consent?

Because I definitely agree that's needed. Too many guys will accept the consent of a girl who is wasted. Or use any other bullsh*t excuse to imply consent ("if she passed out in my house, she obviously wanted my **** in her!").


Absolutely. The problem there is that we send mixed messages, not just from society and media, but also from those who get perhaps a bit too excessive in the cause of fighting rape. It would perhaps be useful to settle on some reasonable standards somewhere between "if a chick is drunk it means she wants to have ***" and "if you have *** with a woman who's consumed a single sip of alcohol, it's rape".


TirithRR wrote:
But I'm sure there are plenty of people that disagree with any alcohol being involved. At least there was back when I was in college and the local Women's organization released a news letter on campus denouncing any amount of alcohol being used in pre-*** courtships. Sparking a few letter's to the editor from people for/against.


Yup. That's honestly just not helping the issue at all, and quite possibly makes things worse. It's such an absolute (and stupid) rule that most people will disregard it entirely, which leans them more towards accepting the "drunk chicks want ***" side of things. Which, if we're approaching this from the "educate men so that they don't do this" side of the issue, is a really counterproductive thing to do. I agree that we can educate men about this, but it has to be done reasonably, and we have to also accept that it's not going to help in all cases. Education is only going to affect the subset of potential rapists who (as I pointed out earlier) don't realize that what they're doing is rape. But within that subset, it's only going to be effective if our messages are reasonable and workable.



And just to touch on something brought up earlier in the thread, for the other set of potential rapists, the equivalent of locking your car doors that Elinda proposed is still a really really good idea. Doesn't mean you can't go out for a drive, but don't make yourself an easy victim if you don't have to.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#72 Jun 05 2013 at 6:51 PM Rating: Excellent
******
20,020 posts
My understanding is that the legal limit for being considered drunk, .08 or .1 depending on the state, is what is used to define consent vs. non-consent.

Granted, a borderline case is impossible to prove after the fact. But for the most part, instances of alcohol-related date rapes likely occur at BACs much higher than that.

It's considered the point by which you are now mentally impaired. We tend to think of it that way, because we think about the deteriorated control of our bodies as the rational for deciding it's the drunk driving threshold, but it's also correlated with a massive reduction in our inhibitions and other rational processes. Those begin at a lower point, but this is when they start to get severe.

.12 is generally where the "wasted" symptoms would begin. That's relative to each person, and their own developed resistance, but your ability to make rational decisions will be seriously impaired at that point. You lose ability to absorb and process information, etc.

So legally, consent requires that a person be below the legal limit.

The problem, of course, is that it can be extremely difficult to prosecute this forms of rape regardless of how drunk you were. Assuming, at least, you don't have reliable witnesses regarding how drunk you were.

edit:

Quote:
Absolutely. The problem there is that we send mixed messages, not just from society and media, but also from those who get perhaps a bit too excessive in the cause of fighting rape. It would perhaps be useful to settle on some reasonable standards somewhere between "if a chick is drunk it means she wants to have ***" and "if you have *** with a woman who's consumed a single sip of alcohol, it's rape".


There is a clear threshold. It's not super easy to use, but it's clear. It's usually pretty clear when someone has reached the point they shouldn't be driving, legally. Same exact scenario.

As with all things, when in doubt, don't put your ***** in it.

Edited, Jun 5th 2013 8:55pm by idiggory
____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
#73 Jun 05 2013 at 7:00 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
35,010 posts
How about, if we're relying on witnesses, we judge based on obvious signs of consent rather than how drunk someone is. Because in your case, what happens if both parties are equally drunk, neither party says no, and both go off together to room and have ***? Do you charge someone with rape then because they had *** over some arbitrary legal limit?

I think it's a lot better standard to say that if someone is non-responsive, and is carried/staggered/dragged into a room for *** then that's rape. But if she drunk off her ***, flashing her boobs at the crowd, and yelling "Woo hoo! I'm gonna get laid!" while heading into a room with someone, it's consensual, no matter how drunk she is. Our legal system does not remove responsibility for our actions based on our level of intoxication. That ought to apply to consent to sexual activity as well.

Roofies and whatnot excepted of course.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#74 Jun 05 2013 at 7:05 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
35,010 posts
idiggory, King of Bards wrote:
There is a clear threshold. It's not super easy to use, but it's clear. It's usually pretty clear when someone has reached the point they shouldn't be driving, legally. Same exact scenario.


I disagree. It's pretty darn sexist to assume that men are able to make decisions when drunk and be held responsible for those decisions, but women are not and should not. Part of the flip side to sexual liberty is sexual responsibility. It's hypocritical to say that women are free to pursue sexual activities as they wish, but then assume that they aren't actually capable of making the same sexual choices that men are. Either you want a world where women are expected to be prim and proper and men gentlemen, or you accept the fact that it's ok for women to be sexual aggressive and men will allow them to be. Which means sometimes getting drunk and having *** with someone you later regret having *** with.

Cause if that's not the case, there's a couple fat chicks I'd like to charge with date rape.

Edited, Jun 5th 2013 6:07pm by gbaji
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#75 Jun 05 2013 at 7:12 PM Rating: Good
******
20,020 posts
Congratulations, this may be the longest you've ever made it into a thread without proving yourself to be a disgusting pig.

If neither party can consent, and there's no additional force (physical, chemical, or psychological*), then it isn't a rape. Or it's a double rape. Who knows. In either case, it's not a situation we prosecute for, for obvious reasons.

This does assume relatively equal levels of intoxication and no other factors. It also assumes no premeditation, etc. He can't decide he wants to rape a girl and get wasted just so that he has a defense. It's super hard to prove, and it's subjective. Which is precisely why we use juries.

But the basic rule of thumb is there. And it's literally only an issue if you're the kind of @#%^ who would wait until the absolute limit before deciding not to have *** with someone who might be unable to consent. It shows how little you care about the idea of raping someone.

Here's a rule of thumb: If you aren't sure she's sober enough, don't have *** with her, wait for her to come down more, etc.

Basically, don't be an opportunistic piece of sh*t.

[EDIT]

LOL @ gbaji making a mens rights post in response to something I literally never argued.

You're right - it IS sexist to hold that it's a rape when a sober man has *** with a drunk woman, but it isn't a rape when a sober woman has *** with a drunk man. I agree that it's rape.

I also agree that it's far less likely to be reported, that because we live in a culture that celebrates male sexuality it's unlikely to be seen as problematic by the victim. But it's still a rape - it was a purposeful sexual act with someone incapable of consenting while the assailant was in a position they could understand that distinction.

Edited, Jun 5th 2013 9:16pm by idiggory
____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
#76 Jun 05 2013 at 7:43 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,010 posts
Message has high abuse count and will not be displayed.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 64 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (64)