Click because even headless riders can be conspiracist.
Do you remember once upon a time when he was trying to pretend to be some sort of liberal; and, yet, here he is↑, bringing us Janet freakin' Bloomfield.
Title IX under review
- Thread starter ElectricFetus
- Start date
Click because even headless riders can be conspiracist.
Do you remember once upon a time when he was trying to pretend to be some sort of liberal; and, yet, here he is↑, bringing us Janet freakin' Bloomfield.
So you eject then? Look seriously, why can't we just have a discussion? Does everything I say trigger you to the point of just slander and eject? I'm seriously not even trying.
When I argue with alt-righters who tell me hitler did nothing wrong, I say "and how!' and we joke around, we get along, talk about the finer points of Mein Kamp, and then I drop the bomb about how us jews rightfully rule the world... cast line, throw boat in reverse and just troll, baby troll. They call me names, I get a troll boner, it is all fun.
But with you I just want a discussion, sane and rational and all you do is get triggered and scream troll and eject from any argument with slander. At least your smart enough not to call me sexist or misogynist anymore, all you do is give me these weak "your making no sense, ignorant ignorant - eject"
Oh so all those cases there are lies then? If a neo-nazi says 2+2=4 is that a lie too?
Oh and there is the "you're not a liberal" angle from you, you might as well say "you're a poop dood head!" Nothing will convince you otherwise so why should I care what you think of me again? This is why we have trump, because of people like you ostracizing everyone and anyone that questions your beliefs. You're not the grand arbiter of liberalism, certainly not after your candidate prove to be a total fucking loser and lost to a pig boar!
Posters that advertise that women at a party are screwable if you get enough alcohol into them, for example. Posters that claim that after six drinks, "any orifice will do." (Yes, a frat really printed that one.)
Are you serious? If no one presses charges, sexual assault is not a problem?
People like yourself are the reason we have problems at colleges across the US.
Good! If we can take money out of your pocket (and out of the pockets of people like you) to stop rape, then I am all for that. And if you hate it - all the better, since you are part of the problem. Want it to stop? Make it happen.
Hey, prohibition worked so well.
Click because even headless riders can be conspiracist.
Do you remember once upon a time when he was trying to pretend to be some sort of liberal; and, yet, here he is↑, bringing us Janet freakin' Bloomfield.
Honestly, he makes it out like we're talking about Satanic ritual abuse, or The Devils of Loudun, or something.
Yeah so? Can't the university say "take those down!" See having such posters is not a violation of federal law, if it was I would say "call the police", that is purely within the universities discretion, violations of federal law should not be.
If you don't press charges then in the eye of the law no sexual assault occured, this is why I advocate that if your sexual assaulted GO TO THE POLICE. Tell me why should a women not press charges if she has been sexual assaulted?
Yeah asexual fury cartoon fappers are the real problem! If everyone choose my life style there would not be a rape, sexual assault or even sexual harassment problem, but alas I live before my time.
Stop rape? How the fuck is kicking rapist off campus stopping rape? They will just rape OFF CAMPUS, young women that are not going to college have a higher rate of rape then college going women. You are solving nothing, just wasting money.
You can't compare a country to a campus. A university is a place for learning, study and debate, not a place for wild parties and gang bangs.
Very good! Now you're getting it. Yes, they could, and it would be a very good idea for them to do so. To do so they'd have to have a policy on such posters and promulgate that. Title IX provides them guidance in doing that.
I don't know. However, only about a third of rapes are reported to the police. That does NOT mean that the other two thirds are fake - nor is it OK to ignore them. Colleges can and should take steps to reduce the incidence of all sorts of rape and sexual assault, not just reported rapes.
Perhaps rephrase in more standard English?
If everyone chose your approach to sexual assault in general there would be far more sexual assault.
Again, English please.
Of course you can. Historically prohibiting alcohol doesn't work at the country OR the college level.
Yeah but vulgar posters are not sexual assault. This is about university having the authority to prosecute sexual assaults. No one here is disagreeing that colleges have the authority to remove posters in dorms and frat houses.
Who said they were fake? The problem I'm pointing at is if they are not reported, then rapist get away, much needs to be done to get women to report to the police so that rapist are actually brought to justice, imprisoned and/or castrated, society protected.
The problem of false accusations is best dealt with by police and the legal system that provides the accused with a fair and impartial system, with a lawyer, and a standard of beyond reasonable doubt. A college kangaroo court on the other hand does not.
Agree, but within the bound of its jurisdiction. I would say an emphasis on "GO TO THE POLICE" should be drilled into them, not just for college but for life. Heck I have called police twice this year over road rage on a round about (fucker was blocking the road so he could yell and flip off the car behind him) and a witnessing a car accident.
My sex life consist of masturbating to pornography of animate cartoon ponies.
Ok so the "go to the police!" approach would cause far more sexual assaults how?
grammar errors were corrected, go back and read read it.
You provide no evidence for the college level, nor do I care because that is not the topic I made this thread about.
Good, still more progress! And removing them helps REDUCE THE INCIDENCE of sexual assault. If they hear that students are being groped, they would do well to:
- go after such posters
- add awareness programs/seminars/outreach campaigns
- encourage people who have been assaulted to go to the police
- increase policing of parties and other events where assault might be common
I agree; women should report assault. Usually they do not.
However, preventing such assault is more important than getting people to report it after the fact.
Sure, and that's something else they can use their power as college administrators to encourage.
OK, good for you.
Dealing with them after the fact is less effective than preventing them. It's a pretty simple concept.
If you have a lot of smoking going on at your school, and that results in a lot of lung cancer, what's more effective in terms of protecting students?
"Go to the doctor if you have lung cancer!"
"Stop smoking!"
Here's some of my own evidence -
When I started college the drinking age was 18. About 3/4 of the school was legal to drink, and the remainder could get alcohol pretty easily. There were some alcohol-related incidents but they were pretty minor.
Then the drinking age went to 20, then 21. And suddenly most of the school wasn't legal to drink. So the campus went (effectively) dry. And all the problems that used to occur in view of other people started occurring behind closed doors, and in places far away from campus. More people drove to go drinking. Alcohol related incidents went up significantly, and those incidents became a lot more serious.
Yes I have no disagreement, but the university trying people for sexual assault is the problem, not the taking down of such poster.
Wwwwhhhhhhyyyyy?
Disagree completely, by not reporting it the rapist rapes again and again, CAUSING MORE SEXUAL ASSAULT. Most rapes are causes by a small percentage of sexual predators, identifying them as soon as possible and imprisoning them (which only a court of law can do) is the best option.
How do you intent to prevent such assaults?
Sure, and that's something else they can use their power as college administrators to encourage.
Oh it is!
Yeah but how?
I don't see why one can't do both, worse would be to have non-doctors at the school do the surgery.
And that is the university's problem? Again this is about what schools should deal with and what police should deal with.
So you'll google "why women lie about rape," but you won't google that?
And you wonder why people don't take you seriously? And why they think you're a creepy, misogynistic troll, for that matter.
Here's one of many thousand links:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/rape-victims-report-police_us_57ad48c2e4b071840410b8d6
Last edited:
Aaah but I don't wonder these things, because I don't care what you think of me.
But if you must, do you know what a leading question is?
And now we come to the core issue, people like you, think that police are bad at sex crimes and your solution is not to fix the police, but to instead demand the education department implement kangaroo courts out of a misappropriation of Title IX?
See, the thing is that you're not even trying to make sense. Honestly, nobody knows what to do with stuff like that because nobody knows what it means, and it sure as hell turns out to be too much to ask that you explain where it comes from. It's like you're just making shit up at random, and trying to answer would be one thing, except you've already made it quite clear that there are no useful outcomes down that pathway. People aren't going to put in the effort for a cheap troll who can't be bothered to have a sincere clue about anything.
So basically you put your fingers in your ears and proclaim "I can't understand you, lalalalala"? Here i'm saying in as simple words as possible: have all sex assault crime be handle by police, report all sexual assaults to police, do not have colleges determine guilt for sexual assault.
No one is arguing that they should hold criminal trials. But they can (and should) get involved at the level of disciplining (including expulsion) students who participate in situations that lead to assault.
For example, let's say a frat guy gets drunk one night and starts handing out roofies to his friends. They slip them into women's drinks - and two women end up raped. Now, none of the other guys will testify that the frat guy gave them roofies, and none of the women remember what happened - and they don't want to press charges. However, five students go to the dean with evidence that the frat guy was handing out roofies. One of them hands the dean a roofie that he was given.
Should the school ignore this? In my opinion they should not, and expulsion would be a good decision even if he is not found guilty of any crime.
For a great many reasons, all of which have been discussed, documented and analyzed to death. You may not understand/agree with/condone any of these reasons; all that matters at this point is that those reasons exist.
So if you had a daughter, you would rather she be raped and report it than avoid the rape to begin with?
Wow.
And by avoiding rapes, you reduce rapes. That's not really subject to debate.
Should women report rapes? Yes. Should we, as a society, prevent them to begin with? Yes - and that's far more important.
- go after people who advertise sexual availability of women at parties
- add awareness programs/seminars/outreach campaigns
- encourage people who have been assaulted to go to the police
- increase policing of parties and other events where assault might be common
So you think "go to a doctor when you get lung cancer" is just as effective at preventing lung cancer than "stop smoking?"
When their rules cause the problem - yes, it is.
sculptor
Valued Senior Member
expulsion would be a good decision even if she is not found guilty of any crime
ok
if that seems sexist, it's because your original was also.
And, therefore, a violation of article IX
If your saying putting up posters that violate school policy, sure, if your saying provided alcohol to a party on campus or affiliated fraternity, in which accusations of sexual assault occurred and on a dry campus, yes certainly! If they hand out illegal drugs, like roofies, which are ILLEGAL and the possession, trafficking, and distribution of which is a VIOLATION OF FEDERAL LAW then the school should immediately hand the student over to the police, pause the student education until either found innocent in a court of law or serves their sentence. The school should not be deciding guilt and punishment for CRIMES, only for violations of school policy that are not also state and federal law. For when a school punishes someone for a crime they were not tried for or even found innocent of it leads to very large law suits, for the school is violating the accused rights.
Imagine a school was told a student was performing witchcraft, specific accusations of eating of babies, fucking children, all while prancing naked around a satanic bound fire that used living animals as kindling, now the school decides to punish that student with expulsion, the student though goes to the courts filing suit, objecting that no one filed charges against the student, no evidence of such claims was provided and the accused was given no opportunity to defend themselves. Do you think the school is in the right?
No no and no, those reasons must be dealt with so that the rate of reported sexual assault to police increases greatly, so that sexual assault can be dealt with by proper agency, under the law, not ad hoc, inappropriate agency, out of the law.
Silly fallacy, if I had a daughter, which I never well for I have not had sex without the use of protection and I no longer have sex at all, other then with anime characters, I would want her to live forever immortal happiness, but since that is impossible I will settle for be good within our society, be pratical, and report all crimes. But back to the core of your fallacy: hat specifically are you suggest be done to avoid rape, be specific, if I is a sound idea I will agree, if on the other hand it is violation of peoples rights for which they will turn around and vote for the likes of Donald Trump just to spurn you, then no.
Again, how do you plan to avoid rape?
Again, how do you plan to avoid rape?
Sure
Agree and already being done, next.
Did I not say that already? Is that not the center for my argument?
Agree! What is the fucking problem?
No, read what I said, suggesting we should have schools performed unlicensed surgery is not a solution. Have all the lung cancer prevention you want, abolish cigarettes on campus, what ever, but when lung cancer does happen, go to a doctor.
What rules are causing the problem, name them, let us review them.
Last edited:
In my example the police have no evidence. So they release him. He goes back to partying.
Should the school still do nothing? Even though the dean knows, beyond a reasonable doubt, that this guy is passing out roofies?
OK. In my example, "no drugs at parties" is a school rule.
You can sue for anything. I could file a very large lawsuit against you for violating my right to free speech. Should you therefore stop posting?
If they have evidence of such murder and pedophilia? Damn right they would be in the right - and indeed they would be morally bankrupt if they did not act against the student.
Let's make it personal. A friend of yours who is staying with your family kills a child in the street; you see him do it. You go to the police. They say "sorry, he denies it, and you are the only witness. And he claims that you are a little crazy anyway; you post online about masturbating to cartoon ponies."
Would you still let him stay with you?
I didn't ask you that.
I said that preventing such assault is more important than getting people to report it after the fact. You disagreed completely. Do you disagree even if it was your own daughter who was at risk of rape? Would it be more important to you to keep her safe, or to let the rape occur so she could report it afterwards?
A great many ways including
- go after people who advertise sexual availability of women at parties
- add awareness programs/seminars/outreach campaigns
- encourage people who have been assaulted to go to the police
- increase policing of parties and other events where assault might be common
Let's try this; perhaps this will be easier for you to read.
- go after people who advertise sexual availability of women at parties
- add awareness programs/seminars/outreach campaigns
- encourage people who have been assaulted to go to the police
- increase policing of parties and other events where assault might be common
I didn't ask you that.
If your goal is to prevent lung cancer, is the advice "go to a doctor when you get lung cancer" just as effective at preventing lung cancer than "stop smoking?"
Funny. I actually feel like I have a clearer understanding of ElectricFetus's stance after that post--though, not as a consequence of him actually clearly articulating himself. The thing is, I just noticed that I copied my link in post #50 incorrectly: it's just a dead link. So he only read the title and concluded:
So as I'm reading him, EF is solely concerned with the civil rights of the accused here--as he has plainly stated several times. The civil rights of the victims are
(and this is inference: he's made no clear statement on this; rather, he has simply repeatedly rejected reasons why people do not report rape to the police, etc.)
of no concern to him.
And here is the corrected link:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/rape-victims-report-police_us_57ad48c2e4b071840410b8d6
sculptor
Valued Senior Member
Can the rights of the accused and the accuser both be protected evenly/equally?
We are all biased, so too the people who have to deal with these allegations.
Is it more like a pendulum ride where first the accuser is dismissed, then believed then dismissed, then believed...................etc
(see Gary Dotson mentioned in #13 above)
"innocent until proven guilty", or convicted on a whim of the societal pendulum?
We are all biased, so too the people who have to deal with these allegations.
Is it more like a pendulum ride where first the accuser is dismissed, then believed then dismissed, then believed...................etc
(see Gary Dotson mentioned in #13 above)
"innocent until proven guilty", or convicted on a whim of the societal pendulum?
Last edited: