Title IX under review

[parmalee]

What Should I Do for a Person Who Is Having a Seizure?

• Loosen clothing around the person's neck.
• Do not try to hold the person down or restrain them. This can result in injury.
• Do not insert any objects in the person's mouth. This can also cause injury.
• Reassure concerned bystanders who may be upset and ask them to give the person room.
• Remove sharp objects (glasses, furniture, and other objects) from around the person to prevent injury.
• After the seizure, it is helpful to lay the person on their side to maintain an open airway and prevent the person from inhaling any secretions.
• After a seizure, the person may be confused and should not be left alone.
• In many cases, especially if the person is known to have epilepsy, it is not necessary to call 911.
  [*]Call 911 if the seizure lasts longer than 5 minutes, or if another seizure begins soon after the first, or if the person cannot be awakened after the movements have stopped. If you are concerned that something else may be wrong, or the person has another medical condition such as heart disease or diabetes, you should contact a doctor immediately.

http://www.webmd.com/epilepsy/guide/first-aid-seizures#2-2

(Bolding mine.)

Of course, you would likely know all of this if, in fact, you did teach in a public or private institution.

 

[ElectricFetus]

Please, by all means, show us that the Department of Education prosecutes rape accusations.

I did, I provided links and I provided quotes and I provided a seminars on the topic. Universities (which are managed by the department of education, as least if they want to get federal funds) prosecute rape accusations via university tribunals, with the ultimate punishment of mere expulsion, which they provide heavy handed and without due process. Don't believe me here is some more links:

In April 2011, the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights sent out a “Dear Colleague Letter” that outlined steps that colleges must take to respond to sexual assault on campus. This letter called for sensible reforms such as increased training for victims' advocates, more partnerships with rape-crisis centers, and bystander awareness to teach men to intervene if they see a woman who is about to be victimized. But the letter also ordered colleges and universities to investigate and adjudicate students’ reports of sexual assault, even if the alleged victim decides not to have a medical exam or report the incident to the police. Colleges that do not take the steps recommended by the Office for Civil Rights will lose federal funding and be referred to the U.S. Department of Justice for litigation. --- http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2014/07/13369/

"The schools, upon receipt of the Dear Colleague letter and looking at its requirements, weren't completely sure of exactly how to comply, and so in many cases they did more than they necessarily needed to do," says Jeannie Suk, a Harvard Law professor and outspoken critic of the campus tribunals. "They kind of in a sense over-complied. Now, they bent over backwards, and then that's when they put in place -- kind of in a hurry -- these procedures that now don't respect fair process."--- http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/22/us/campus-sexual-assault-tribunals/index.html

"Some 50 challenges lodged by accused students are now in the pipeline; that's up from about a dozen just two years ago. Even one of the more brazen lawsuits, which claims a kind of reverse discrimination in federal court, recently logged a rare (albeit preliminary) legal victory. The case, against Washington and Lee University, argues that overzealous administrators, who are using Title IX to crack down on gender discrimination and sexual assault, are actually violating the federal law at the same time by systematically discriminating against men. Most such cases filed in federal court have failed to get out of the box, but a judge allowed the claim against Washington and Lee to at least survive a first hurdle."--- http://www.npr.org/2015/10/15/44608...f-campus-rape-legal-victories-win-back-rights

Do you need me to educate you some more?

• "ALL cases of rape should be tried by a court of law, not a college tribunal, do you disagree or agree?"​

False dichotomy, a fallacious invention that you have shown yourself utterly incapable of supporting.

How is it a false dichotomy, explain. Are you saying we should both have a court trials and college tribunals? Explain what the other option is.

The make-believe is the most apparent problem. Your formulation attends punishing rapists with expulsion; if a student commits a rape on campus or in functional relationship to the school, and is found guilty in a court of law, or admits to the behavior and pleads down, then please explain to us why the university should not expel the rapist?

Sure they can expel the student then, simply have it as school policy "If you are found guilty of a federal crime while a student of this university, you are automatically expelled" no need to waste anyones time in forming a tribunal. In such as case the school does not prosecute or adjudicate, merely lets a court of law do that for it, as it should ideally do. Again my problem is with schools expelling students who are not tried by a court of law.

Of course, you would likely know all of this if, in fact, you did teach in a public or private institution.

No I was never trained is such a thing, just chemical safety, handling and chemical waste management. And guess who we are told to call first in event of a major spill, yes that right, 911.

So you don't even understand what "except" means?

So you refuse to argue the point of this thread? and reduced to simplest one line zingers and ad hominiums... I win.

 

[ElectricFetus]

Another Judge Speaks out about overzealous use of title IX for sexual assault:

 

[Randwolf]

The incident I described a few pages back was actually the second police beating I've received. The first came about because I made the mistake of having a seizure in the vicinity of a cop. I came to with my hands cuffed behind my back and blood all over me. All the other witnesses seemed to recognize that I was having a seizure, the cop? Who the fuck knows what he was thinking. Strangely, cops beating up epileptics is a surprisingly common occurrence.

While I do not have firsthand experience, my significant other of seven years was epileptic - there was a time in a bar where she was seizing and I'm trying to clear the surrounding furniture...

Shortly the cops arrive and I recall screaming at them to leave her alone, she wasn't deliberately wrecking the place. Thankfully the circumstances allowed us to depart peacefully (the specific cops that responded weren't complete fascist morons, she was a young, white, attractive female, I wasn't (particularly) intoxicated and so forth) but it was close, they were looking for an excuse to push it...

I'm not sure why they arrived or who called them but I have some empathy - or sympathy - or something - for your experience. You would think that cops would have at least an hour of training involving seizures. Or not, perhaps there are budgetary constraints (right, the money is allocated for military grade hardware because that's more applicable to their day-to-day work).

 

[parmalee]

No I was never trained is such a thing, just chemical safety, handling and chemical waste management. And guess who we are told to call first in event of a major spill, yes that right, 911.

Uhhhm... we were talking about a "friend" suffering an "epileptic episode" as I recall, what's this about a "major spill"? Can you not even keep track of, or comprehend, your own statements?

So you refuse to argue the point of this thread? and reduced to simplest one line zingers and ad hominiums... I win.

What exactly is the point of this thread? You've repeatedly backpedaled, fabricated strawmen, and demonstrated a profound misunderstanding of the differences between criminal and civil litigation, and shown that you have no understanding of how an institution enforcing it's own rules is in no way the same as the proceedings of a court of law.

 

[parmalee]

I'm not sure why they arrived or who called them but I have some empathy - or sympathy - or something - for your experience. You would think that cops would have at least an hour of training involving seizures. Or not, perhaps there are budgetary constraints (right, the money is allocated for military grade hardware because that's more applicable to their day-to-day work).

Even were they not informed about epilepsy and a variety of other related medical conditions, surely they would recognize such as being without nefarious intent-- for instance, maybe they thought my thrashing about was a product of PCP or angel dust or something; regardless, why respond with force? Attempts to restrain? Sure, that might be reasonable. But throwing punches? What the fuck?

 

[ElectricFetus]

Uhhhm... we were talking about a "friend" suffering an "epileptic episode" as I recall, what's this about a "major spill"? Can you not even keep track of, or comprehend, your own statements?

"major spill" = what I am trained to deal with to some degree at work

"friend" suffering an "epileptic episode" = Happened at my home

Your claiming I should be trained to deal with "epileptic episodes" no I'm not, that has never happen to me at work, my work does not expect it to happen, I am not train in such a thing.

What exactly is the point of this thread? You've repeatedly backpedaled, fabricated strawmen, and demonstrated a profound misunderstanding of the differences between criminal and civil litigation, and shown that you have no understanding of how an institution enforcing it's own rules is in no way the same as the proceedings of a court of law.

Primarily the point of this thread is to test my arguments, and so far no one has brought forth a good reason for why universities must persecute and adjudicate sexual assault cases instead of police.

 

[parmalee]

"major spill" = what I am trained to deal with to some degree at work

"friend" suffering an "epileptic episode" = Happened at my home

Your claiming I should be trained to deal with "epileptic episodes" no I'm not, that has never happen to me at work, my work does not expect it to happen, I am not train in such a thing.

Again: can you not even keep track of, or comprehend, your own statements?

Primarily the point of this thread is to test my arguments, and so far no one has brought forth a good reason for why universities must persecute and adjudicate sexual assault cases instead of police.

Thanks for proving my point.

 

[sculptor]

Message
Messenger

tactics or strategy
confusion

message and/or meta-message
confusion
Laing's decoding the communication in the seemingly confused response to "ladder" of a "schizophrenic patient" of another psychologist.

within any communication
resides a message

“swollen foot” had eyes but could not see

If we could but understand(decode) the message
does it really matter who the messenger is?

 

[ElectricFetus]

Again: can you not even keep track of, or comprehend, your own statements?

Perhaps you are the one not comprehending my statements.

Thanks for proving my point.

OK, so do you have a argument for why universities should persecute and adjudicate sexual assut cases instead of police?

 

[parmalee]

Message
Messenger

tactics or strategy
confusion

message and/or meta-message
confusion
Laing's decoding the communication in the seemingly confused response to "ladder" of a "schizophrenic patient" of another psychologist.

within any communication
resides a message

“swollen foot” had eyes but could not see

If we could but understand(decode) the message
does it really matter who the messenger is?

EF’s M.O. here is essentially to present a very much convoluted form of the double bind.

He interprets the universities' enforcement of their own rules as somehow being preemptive, or even as subverting, the procedure of the criminal justice system. This is not, in fact, AT ALL the case. All educational institutions—and all employers, as per Title VII—are obliged to respond to reports of sexual assault. The involvement of the criminal justice system is entirely independent of this.

What EF fails to account for—and this is consistent with his posting history—is the victim, an individual of sound mind and agency. A victim cannot be compelled to report an offense to the police—and very sound and valid reasons for NOT doing so are myriad. His fantasies about raping children, torturing animals, eating babies, and murder are all wholly irrelevant here, as the victims in these instances do not possess the legal status or faculties (as in being alive, in the case of murder) to represent their own interests. Compelling a living victim, of sound mind, to report to the police is a violation of their civil rights.

So it would seem that EF’s position is that universities should not enforce their own rules, operating in accordance with Title IX, and instead hand over all evidence of sexual assault to the police—without consent of the victim—and oblige the victim to report said assault to the police—also in violation of their civil rights.

Effectively, no matter what course of action the victim chooses to take (or not take), their civil rights will be violated in one way or another.

 

[ElectricFetus]

He interprets the universities' enforcement of their own rules as somehow being preemptive, or even as subverting, the procedure of the criminal justice system. This is not, in fact, AT ALL the case. All educational institutions—and all employers, as per Title VII—are obliged to respond to reports of sexual assault. The involvement of the criminal justice system is entirely independent of this.

Yes and that is the problem: why should schools be forced to prosecute and adjudicate sexual assault? If the criminal justice system is involved then I see no reason why they need to, at best they could decide a suspected rapists who is under criminal investigation should have his residency suspended until his criminal investigation concludes. Having the schools decide who is and is not a rapist independent of the law means many while be wrongly slanders and have their educations and futures ruined and will sue the schools (and are winning in case after case) and worse that rapist will not be going to jail merely be expelled, and worse rich students will have their assaults swept under the rug while the victim is told by the school nothing happened.

What EF fails to account for—and this is consistent with his posting history—is the victim, an individual of sound mind and agency. A victim cannot be compelled to report an offense to the police—and very sound and valid reasons for NOT doing so are myriad.

How about future victims? How about not letting a rapist lose on them? If you knew someone was a serial killer but you did not want to tell the police because of "valid reasons" fuck you. And if there are "valid reasons" for not telling the police, then that is a problem that needs to be fixed with the police, not by the department of education.

His fantasies about raping children, torturing animals, eating babies, and murder are all wholly irrelevant here, as the victims in these instances do not possess the legal status or faculties (as in being alive, in the case of murder) to represent their own interests. Compelling a living victim, of sound mind, to report to the police is a violation of their civil rights.

What I'm forcing them now? If they don't want to that fine, then nothing will happen. You want to provide an alternate means for them to report to, who will punish outside the justice system, resulting in pathetic punishments for depraved individuals or a legal kerfuffles for the truly innocent that cost university millions of dollars.

So it would seem that EF’s position is that universities should not enforce their own rules, operating in accordance with Title IX, and instead hand over all evidence of sexual assault to the police—without consent of the victim—and oblige the victim to report said assault to the police—also in violation of their civil rights. Effectively, no matter what course of action the victim chooses to take (or not take), their civil rights will be violated in one way or another.

Yes the university should hand over all evidence to the police, but if the accuser does not want to press charges, then nothing happens. If you witness a rape and tell the police you, are not violating the victims civil rights.