The rape victim's website, where do you stand? - The Newsroom (2012) Discussion

[–] tetrahex 10 years ago

What you "imagine" isn't enough.

Just look at the figures feminists cite. 1 in 4? 1 in 4? Would you even dare send your daughter to college if it really was true?

Feminists have created an atmosphere of hysteria and fear over this issue, which has blown it all out of proportion.

Why? Because this is what gets gender studies majors their jobs, they have to justify their existence.

And false rape charges aren't common? Or are they. In an atmosphere where crying rape is incredibly damaging and comes with little legal repercussion, human nature dictates that if there is a situation where someone can take advantage, some will do so.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2014/12/05/rolling-stone- retracts-uva-story/19954293/
Just a few days ago that story in rolling stone was retracted about the U.Va accusation.
Lena Dunam of girls even isn't above making a false charge for sympathy.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r7aUv27ASww
Meg Lanker Simmons a prominent feminist blogger made rape threats against herself even, and even being caught in the act, she got a slap on the wrist and is attending law school
http://dailycaller.com/2013/10/12/wyoming-hate-f-hoaxer-adds-to-checke red-criminal-past-now-attends-law-school/

And there is this imfamous case.
http://totalfratmove.com/public-oral-sex-at-ohio-university-blows-up-o n-social-media-rape-alleged/
A woman was being orally "serviced" in public by a guy, obviously enjoying it, she was upright and fully conscious, if a bit drunk perhaps, as was the guy, but even though passerbys took video and photos of the incident, guess what she did the next day out of shame? I guess being a "good girl" she decided it would be better for her to be the "victim" rather than someone who makes bad decisions. So she cried rape.

Even one of the most famous cases, Jamie Leigh Jones, you know the KBR military contractor case which was always a top topic for feminists a few years back when talking about sexual misconduct in the military. Turned out her story was a lie, none of it added up, let alone her claims of being so abused she had torn muscles and the rest, and she had a past of making up such things as well. This was the key case, the proof that horrible things were happening, yet it turned out to be a lie, and of course the media swept it under the rug.

http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/2i49q2/debunking_the_1_in_ 5_myth_a_case_study_at_clemson/
"Okay so I'm gonna do a personal post on my university, Clemson University in Clemson, SC.

A bit about Clemson within the frame of men's rights:

Clemson just started Women's/Gender Studies as a major in the philosophy department and is headed by a radical feminist philosophy professor that gives literature such as Dworkin and Valenti as course material (I've taken one of her classes myself). She helped spearhead a campaign during the 2012-13 academic year with the 1 in 5 statistic as it's core.

A bit of demographic info:
Clemson has a total of 16,931 undergraduate students, according to College Portraits. Of those students, 7,775 are female and 9,156 are male for percentages of 46% and 54% respectively.

The Clemson University newspaper, the Tiger, recently released what the university calls "the Clery Report" which compiles "all crime statistics on campus as well as in the surrounding area". It also gave the numbers of other local in-state universities as well. Here is a photo I took of the print copy of the most recent Tiger published.

The Tiger reported that there were only 4 "forced sex offenses" in official police reports both on campus and in the surrounding area (including Clemson city police, Pickens/Anderson/Oconee County sheriffs). So there's 4 sexual offenses reported total for the year 2013.

Now, typical feminist literature and caterwauling repeats "Oh there are hundreds of rapes and assaults that are unreported!!!" ad nauseum. I'm not going to debate the presence of unreported offenses as I'm sure there are, but I'll be generous to the feminists and say there were 200 unreported cases.

A bit of math gives us 204 total offenses in the year 2013. That's with me being generous. 204/7,775 = 0.02623794

Multiply that by 100, and you get 2.6237% of female students at Clemson are victims of sexual offenses at Clemson. That's closer to 1 in 50 than 1 in 5.

Myth busted.
"

So even if you believe some of their extreme claims, and actually do the math, the claims are still wrong.

Rape stats hyperbole- 200% of all women are now rape victims
bane666au
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QsiPxSxYa9s

False rape accusers are the “real victims”
bane666au
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KqUmRjRFGXk

Feminism has really become something akin to a hate group. If any other group of people made their goal to promote false statistics to smear another group no matter how much it was rebutted, they would be called for what they were, bigoted, and perpetuators of hate. Just do this for another group, say..black people. Just claim that because being against crime is good, its ok to make up statistics about black people and crime. 1 in 4 black men are going to murder someone in their lifetimes. Don't believe me? How can you be against stopping murder!

So right now, there is a hysteria around the issue, a rush by white knights to "protect the women", and feminists to claim rape is everywhere. In that atmosphere, false charges will be made by damaged and malicious people. There is sexism afoot but its not the kind people usually claim exists. Right now its benevolent sexism, which places women on a pedestal, they can't do horrible things because that is unthinkable, but why wouldn't that be thinkable if they are just human beings, human beings are capable of anything, so as such, women as equal people are capable of evil as much as men are. And when given incentives and tools to abuse people through the system with little repercussion, such people will take advantage of that power to damage other people. And I'd even go as far to say that women are more likely to use such indirect methods of violence against others because it is more their natural tendency when engaging in bullying behavior in any sphere. Girl bullies tend not to just smack people in fist fights but to destroy their victims socially. And with the current hysteria, we are enabling some of the worst aspects of female behavior.

The basic principle stands, better to let a guilty man go free than to convict an innocent person. The lower you let the standards go, the less anyone believes any real accusation. And it really is at that point now, because the standards of rape have slowly slide to the point where feminists in their surveys are including things like inappropriate touching or just being made to feel uncomfortable as rape, people stop taking their claims seriously. Remember Jullian Assange? Wasn't he claimed to have raped two women because he lied about contraception? When feminists take it down that slippery slope, they leave real victims stranded in an ocean of false and dubious claims, and then no one can sort one from the other, and everyone suffers.

This current hysteria really has to stop. Its no different from the pedophilia hysteria, where if an 18 year old sleeps with his 16 year old girl friend he becomes a sex offender for life, cluttering any online map of "sex offenders" in your area until it has no meaning. People are scared of real rapists, or real pedophiles that touch actual children. When the system fueled by hysteria puts the label of sex offender onto a kid that sends a sext message to their girlfriend, things just have gone off the rails, and people have lost touch with what the law is supposed to be about. No different from rape, this hysteria has done nothing but toxify gender relations on campus's to the point where things like "yes means yes" exist. Feminists have made women afraid of everything, and if you think about it, places like saudi arabia are almost the ultimate incarnations of feminist desires. The women are protected from the male gaze, and since all men are presumed rapists, women aren't allowed to leave the home without permission or escort or whatever.

TEACH THEM NOT TO RAPE!
Thunderf00t
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1T0GcHM0s4o

rape apology vs false allegations
RazorBladeKandy2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G8mcH-qc0L8

Rape, Rape and more Rape
manwomanmyth
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dwQO0-njh38

Male Freedom and Female Security
ThatCynicalCynicism
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GNmRU1oHNcA

The False Allegation Epidemic
manwomanmyth
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CvBt7Ry16uM

False Rape Claims - MGTOW
Sandman
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6lZOENdSCMA

More on rape shield laws
bar bar
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gRzqPjmFgCM

Casual accusations of rape have even hit atheism...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l-eNn6S9hXA

And if you want to see just how far feminism can take this, look at the EU, in this case..spain
http://www.avoiceformen.com/feminism/government-tyranny/spanish-femini st-establishment-is-shaking/

All these abuses happen because we don't live in a "rape culture", we in fact live in a culture of default "we must protect the women!" So more and more ridiculous demands are being met, more and more irrational laws are passed. And more and more the relations between the genders is poisoned, at this point we have a growing movement called mgtow where men are just swearing off having long term relationships with women, its just not worth it.

reply

[–] kendrah66 10 years ago

Yes, your estimating the number of unreported rapes COMPLETELY busts a "myth."

"REAL rapes?" Is that like legitimate rapes?

I'm not saying no one ever makes up a rape charge, but there are way more who don't report it because of the sort of slut-shaming and bullying that goes on when girls implicate popular boys who have raped them.

Fwiw, when my daughter went to college, I told her never to go into a guy's room alone unless she intended to have sex with him. I was very trusting when I was that age (going to a guy's room to talk or make out with no intention of it going any further), and fortunately, I happened to be friends with nice guys and a little sister for a very fraternity (which did not, btw, prevent at least two guys -- one of whom eventually came out as gay -- from SAYING they'd slept with me when they hadn't, not quite the violation of a rape, but pretty upsetting). There were definitely frats that had the opposite reputation on my campus. There was a gang rape at one of the major state universities in my state when I was in college as well as an instance of frat guys telling girls they had to perform sexual favors to be a little sister at the other large university in my state. So I think it is important that young women not have a false sense of security or take unnecessary risks. I don't think that is blaming the victim so much as not making stupid mistakes, similar to not going around with your cell phone in your back pocket or not walking alone in a parking lot at night (both of which I also told my daughter not to do). But there are definitely bad guys in the world, and to think that there are rampant instances of women coming out publicly and subjecting themselves to the torture that comes with it is ridiculous.

I do agree that an anonymous Internet site makes it too easy to make a false report -- MUCH easier than doing so in person (with all the attendant issues I mention above) would be.

I really hope, since you are so passionate about this, you are talking about this at your school in non-anonymous situations. It's good for girls to know who to avoid.

reply

[–] AnonymousBoy 10 years ago

That woman seemed to really dislike men. Or at least disliked the idea of being in a relationship with a man.

This is exact quote from her:

"Do you want to hear the advice I get? I mean this is real advice. In pamphlets. 'Say you have a boyfriend.' 'Wear a wedding ring.' I'm supposed to protect myself, from a man, by pretending I'm the property of another man."

So her logic is that having a boyfriend or a wedding ring literally equates to being the property of a man.

And we're supposed to believe she's good and honest? The person that thinks you're a slave if you're in a relationship with a man?

reply

[–] zootie 10 years ago

I wouldn't say that she started thinking she would be a slave if she was in a relationship, just that some of the advice she was getting implied that. From a common advice she was getting, she would have to be (or act as) property in order to be protected from rape. That this was an accepted social norm. And in some circles, women are not only subservient to men, but they depend on men for protection (so acting as being taken is an accepted defense mechanism).

Many victims of rape would probably develop a hate of men in general. She is traumatized, and looking to lash out. The character was rather rational for her estate of mind (for the sake of having a dialog on TV).

reply

[–] dudestein 10 years ago

But that's screwy. That advice is to help prevent guys hitting on women and has nothing to do with sexual assault.

As if a person prone to force himself on a woman cares if she is in a relationship. Guy's looking to hook up or for short term relationships will look for a ring.

reply

[–] Robert-132 10 years ago

Before I begin, an important disclosure: I am a published fantasy author who was driven out of the Toronto-area convention circuit in part by a false allegation of stalking. I know this because when I was invited back, I pointed out that this needed to be sorted, and they couldn't find any evidence the original complaint had ever existed. To this day, I will not even contemplate going to a convention in that area.

(To add some further context, prior to this particular convention I had just taken a major personal blow - no, I won't say what it was - and I was fragile enough that I wasn't in a state to socialize with anybody who wasn't a very close friend. So, this complaint came at a time when I was doing the equivalent of a turtle impression.)

All that said, everything Don said is true. And he's 100% wrong.

What happened to me was an injustice, not a violation. What happened to the victim in the episode was first a violation, followed by a series of injustices. She has the right to speak out, to be heard, and if her website will help others who have similarly suffered, then it is the right thing to do. Period.

Injustices and abuses will happen. Any system or law meant to protect anybody will at some point be abused or misused. This is just due to the fact that not all people are honest. But, if something built for the greater good - such as the website - might be abused, that is not a reason to get rid of the website.

Injustices from false accusations will occur, but they can be fought. Denying a voice to somebody who desperately needs it is by far the greater injustice.

reply

[–] irc_addicts 10 years ago

But is NOT denying them a voice. They still have the right to be heard just NOT the right to libel anyone they feel like at any time they feel like it. AND with NO comeback on them what so ever.

So some woman does'nt like the garde she gets from a male professor. She then goes to this website and makes a false accusation. The proff has his life ruined and losses his job, his wife and family and for what? Even if later its showen he was innocent the damage is all ready done.

If you are ok with this website would you also be ok with one where men post about how good/bad woman are and who is to be avoided.

This website would be a VERY bad idea. As it would be abused by every woman who has any issues with men.

Sarchasm (n): The gulf between the author of sarcastic wit and the person who doesn't get it

reply

[–] Robert-132 10 years ago

You know what? I've started this post three different times, in three different ways, trying to explain just how wrong you are.

But, every single time, I just come back to the same reaction probably being the right one - telling you to pull your head out of your hindquarters and to get an "effing" clue.

So, yeah. Pull your head out of your hindquarters and get an "effing" clue.

And keep in mind, this is coming from somebody who HAS been on the receiving end of a false allegation of stalking.

reply

[–] irc_addicts 10 years ago

How about you take your own advice and do the same thing. A false allegation of stalking is NO WHERE near the same as one of rape. Do your self a favour and buy a dog and name him clue so you have one.

Sarchasm (n): The gulf between the author of sarcastic wit and the person who doesn't get it

reply

[–] Robert-132 10 years ago

You know what - this will be my last post on this. Perhaps it will give you a sense of how wrong you are.

I want you to imagine that a cop - a cop who is very, very well connected, well regarded, and effectively untouchable as nobody will do anything against him - has just beaten you. Badly. You've suffered multiple fractures, every bone in your hand has been broken, and there is nothing you can do about it. If you go to the police, you'll be ignored. If you tell the press, they won't believe you, or give you the time of day. And, if they do print your story, the cop may come back and beat you again, or worse.

That's the sort of position that the rape victim in the show was in. A false accusation is an injustice. It hurts, it causes damage, but it is not even close to an actual rape.

And if you can't see that, then that's your problem.

reply

[–] irc_addicts 10 years ago

And if you can't see how much damage a website where ANYONE can say ANYTHING about ANYONE with NO comeback AT ALL could do. Then YOU are the one with the problem. Are you really THAT stupid to think it would'nt be abused and very badly at that

The problem I and I think most people would have have is we have ONLY have HER word for it. We don't actually KNOW or have any evidence apart from HER word if she was raped. I'm sorry but the sheer amount of false rape claims now being made is seriourly effecting the validity of REAL rape claims as maybe the case in her case.

Unlike you and the feminazis I'm NOT prepared to hound or perscute ANYONE. I also will NOT lock up them up if they have NOT been found guilty in a court of LAW. Now I know you lot would love to be able to convict people in the court of public opinion but thats NOT justice or fair. But of course that does'nt matter to you now does it.

Sarchasm (n): The gulf between the author of sarcastic wit and the person who doesn't get it

reply

[–] Robert-132 10 years ago

"Unlike you and the feminazis I'm NOT prepared to hound or perscute ANYONE."

And between the persecution complex you've displayed (funny thing - I'm somebody who actually HAS been persecuted, and I don't have the fears you do) and the use of the word "feminazis" in that sentence, I now know everything I need to know about you.

Welcome to my ignore list.

reply

[–] irc_addicts 10 years ago

And this is excalty rhe reply I expected from you lot. You know NOTHING about me or in deed much of anything else.

Sarchasm (n): The gulf between the author of sarcastic wit and the person who doesn't get it

reply

[–] Maccfan 10 years ago

Ok, now imagine you end a relationship with someone because you don't think it's working out. Then they post on a website that you had sexually abused them, you get fired from your job, your friends either stop being your friend or at best look at you differently. You now worry that finding a new partner will be difficult because they might look on this site. You worry about going out in public because what if people have seen you on that site. Your neighbours have seen you on the website so start making comments whenever you leave the house.

There is nothing you can do because the website has been allowed, you can't go to the police because there is nothing they can do. You can't go to the press because nobody wants to defend an accused abuser, and if they do print your story and then she could go public also and more people become aware of the story.

That's the sort of position a innocent accused person could be.

I agree that an actual rape is much worse than being accused of something you didn't do, however being able to accuse anyone and have them seen as guilty is not the answer.

We might as well say why do we bother with going to court, we should just assume everyone who is accused is guilty and send them all to prison because what you're saying is punishing innocent people is worth it if we catch all the guilty people. In my opinion the ends don't justify the means.

And if you can't see that, then that's your problem.

reply

[–] Robert-132 10 years ago

And you didn't read the fullness of my initial post, including the part where I explained that I had been on the receiving end of a false complaint. It wasn't rape, but it was in that general category. Guilty until proven innocent? Been there. Unable to get anybody to allow you to address the complaint because of the declared fear of the "victim"? Been there. Nowhere you can go? Been there.

If it hadn't been for somebody who wasn't involved in the false complaint inviting me back to the convention and looking into it, I would never have discovered that there was no record of the complaint existing in the first place. And I still don't feel comfortable even thinking about going to another convention again.

You say "That's the sort of position an innocent accused person could be in." Well, I've been there, done that, got the T-shirt, and got driven out of the community for what has now been over a decade. You, I think, have not been through anything like this.

Any system built for the greater good WILL be abused. Call it the sociopath factor, if you want. But to refuse to build those systems because they one day will be abused is wrong-headed. You accept the risk, and when abuses arise you deal with them. You moderate posts, you remove accounts once falsehoods are detected. It does damage, but if somebody was intent on making that false complaint, the venue wouldn't matter anyway.

In something like a forum for rape victims/survivors, where the members may live with a fear of retaliation, anonymity is important. It's easy to talk about how people should be held accountable for what they say when you're not in fear of retaliation, or suffering from psychological trauma. When that is the only way you can feel as though you can safely come forward, or gain closure? It's different.

(And I know THIS because I used to work in social housing, where I was bound by a non-disclosure agreement when it came to the tenants due to the fact that some of them had fled abusive spouses and the like. So, I've dealt with these issues too, albeit more on a professional than personal level.)

You don't shut down the courts because some people perjure themselves. You don't stop making laws to protect people because some sociopaths will hide behind them. And you don't shut down forums for the victimized to come safely forward without fear of retaliation because some people will level false complaints.

reply

[–] Maccfan 10 years ago

Yes I did read your entire post, you were accused of something that put you in a difficult position and made you feel uncomfortable, and you're right, I have never been in that situation, and I hope that I never am in that situation, but does this mean I can't end a relationship due to fear she'll take it badly and brand me an abuser.

There are a lot of disgusting people out there who will create fake claims and post on websites like this to take down ex partners or just people in general that they don't like.

I agree that the true victims of the original crimes should have a voice, they should be able to talk about what happened to them and they should get to see the abuser punished for what they have done. I just don't think something as easily manipulated as the internet is the right place for it.

I don't have experience of being accused of committing a crime, but i do have experience of being the victim of a crime, luckily for me they were send to prison for what they did. Had they got away with what they did I would definitely want the world to know what he had done and I probably would have used a website like this, but despite this I still disagree that a website like this should exist, because although I would have used it to show the world an excuse for a man who had got away with something disgusting a lot of people wouldn't use it for revenge.

reply

[–] Robert-132 10 years ago

Yes I did read your entire post, you were accused of something that put you in a difficult position and made you feel uncomfortable, and you're right, I have never been in that situation, and I hope that I never am in that situation, but does this mean I can't end a relationship due to fear she'll take it badly and brand me an abuser.

Well, no, it doesn't mean that at all. While there are crazy people out there, the odds are good that if somebody you're involved with isn't manifesting lunacy while you're dating, they're not going to manifest lunacy after the break-up.

You can't live your life in fear. There's just no joy or benefit in that.

I'll tell you (and, well, everybody reading) something about what happened to me - I was left with no recourse, I lost a community I very much enjoyed being a part of (and I now know the degree to which it was deliberately taken away from me), but once it happened, it became clear that it was something that a PERSON had done to me. It was personal. I had made an enemy - somebody who had taken an otherwise fair system and the people around me and played them all like a pipe.

And as damaging as it was, that made it just another dispute to fight. Unfair as all hell, but it wasn't some random thing that came out of the blue. It was one of those things that you take on the jaw, and then you fight back as best you can, and hope you can come out with your dignity intact. And then, life goes on...it's good at doing that, I've noticed. You pick yourself back up, and you rebuild.

And that's how I could tell you hadn't been through it. From what I've seen, I get the feeling that those of us who have been victims of false accusations are pragmatic about it, not fearful, or paranoid. And as somebody who was denied justice at some cost to me, I would never deny it to somebody else.

reply

[–] neerood 10 years ago

Actually if someone slanders and libels you, there's several avenues you can take.

Plenty of false accusers have been caught and punished.

Granted, it's an uphill battle but your statement that there's nothing you can do is as false about the accused as is it about the accuser.

reply

[–] philfeeley 10 years ago

Now I know you lot would love to be able to convict people in the court of public opinion but that's NOT justice or fair.

OJ was.

reply

[–] monkey_1371 10 years ago

Would like to add that one of the tenants of our judicial system and America's common law is Blackstone's formulation..."It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer"

Benjamin Franklin stated it as, "it is better 100 guilty Persons should escape than that one innocent Person should suffer".

John Adams
"It is more important that innocence should be protected, than it is, that guilt be punished; for guilt and crimes are so frequent in this world, that all of them cannot be punished.... when innocence itself, is brought to the bar and condemned, especially to die, the subject will exclaim, 'it is immaterial to me whether I behave well or ill, for virtue itself is no security.' And if such a sentiment as this were to take hold in the mind of the subject that would be the end of all security whatsoever"

reply

[–] justwrite3 10 years ago

It's a worthy discussion with no perfect solution.

The one aspect that I think has been ignored way too much in this discussion and makes the biggest difference is the lack of an appropriate response by campus law enforcement and administration to allegations of rape. Organizations are far too willing to protect themselves instead of protecting victims, and when it comes to universities, there are far too many instances of the administration and campus police not responding to rape allegations because they fear that acknowledging that rape occurs on campus would be damaging to the university's reputation.

What is needed is a university environment where every rape allegation is investigated, female students are educated about how to protect themselves and the campus support system in place for them in case an assault does happen, and male students are educated about respecting women and that taking advantage of an intoxicated woman could land them in jail on a rape charge.

Reducing the occurrence of rape and actually investigating rape charges instead of sweeping them under the rug would eliminate the need for a site that names rapists in uninvestigated cases.

reply

[–] irc_addicts 10 years ago

We don't know in this case that they did'nt give an appropriate response. All we hear is her side of the events. Its entirely possable they looked into it and found they could'nt do anything as it was a case of one persons word vs another or in this case two other. Are we suppose to automaticly belive a womans story and disbelive a man's? No DA would bring a case if thats all it was. As they would lose pretty much every time.

After what happend with the rolling stone article are you supprised that they don't do as much as maybe they should?

I agree all claims SHOULD be investigated but no one should be named UNTIL they have found there is a case to answer. And both sexs should be educated on what to and NOT to do. This should include advice to woman that false calims of rape WILL NOT tollerated.

Sarchasm (n): The gulf between the author of sarcastic wit and the person who doesn't get it

reply

[–] cdz6969 10 years ago

Here's the problem:

Any girl who is pissed off at a guy for dumping her or cheating on her and put him on this site just to mess with him. It's like one of those neighborhood online sex offender list except that it's not he police who's putting out the information, it can be anyone and there's no accountability. Thus anyone who is innocent can not only file suit against the naming party, but against the website itself and seek damages. Especially if the naming party recants their story.

Also if there's an actual rapist who is named, he could easily lie and also file suit against the naming party as well as the site owner since no court ever found him guilty. Imagine how much worse it will be for a victim of rape to now be forced by the courts to pay this jerkoff $$$

Jesus would support Universal Health Care

reply

[–] zootie 10 years ago

We come in too late into the equation. A real solution goes back into education and societal changes, that men are more respectful of women and less obsessed with "scoring".

In general, (as society) we should err on the side of caution, and "do no harm". While it attempts to right an injustice, and while it might prevent some rapes (by being a deterrent by publishing names of likely rapists for women to check and men to fear being listed), there is far more potential for abuse of the site to bring considerable harm to other innocents.

Having a site allowing for anonymous aggregation of claims of rape lends itself to abuse. Either she should limit the site only to her own attackers (which would force them to sue her to try and probe libel to try and take the site down, which would give her a day in court), or to come up with a vetting process (ie, non anonymous posts/cases, at least vetted by a referring law enforcement officer or journalist with a reputation to uphold, but even that would be difficult to manage and would likely prevent her from healing).

reply

[–] HarveyManfredSinJohn 10 years ago

I have been on the receiving end of false allegations before and seen my life suffer as a result (I hasten to add the false allegations were nothing anywhere near as severe as rape, or even sexually-related).

However, despite my terrible personal experiences, how can anyone expect a person who has been raped and let down by the authorities to care about the 'damage' such a site will cause? They have already been victimised and I don't see how anyone can thus lecture them on how they should behave under the circumstances. They have every reason, and IMHO, every right, to bring everyone's attention to the person who raped them.

reply

[–] neerood 10 years ago

Amazingly, and perhaps curiously, every post so far has ignored a fundamental weakness in this plot line.

The victim claims her airtight case was laughed off by three layers of authorities.

If we ignore how unlikely that actually is and accept it as fact, then that would be - by far - the bigger story.

Why did 3 levels of authority commit gross misconduct in ignoring rape allegations? And why did a news and controversy seeking organization like ACN not see that?

The answer of course is that couldn't be what happened. It's a false detail meant to set the stage premise that this particular victim has no choice but to publish. Without the false premise, she's a vigilante automating the publication of probable libel.

reply

[–] zootie 10 years ago

It wasn't airtight. Far from it. She was under the influence of drugs. All physical evidence of sex, inebriation, and diminished capacity would be explained away as consensual, and her testimony discredited - any defense attorney would argue that she doesn't remember (enthusiastically) consenting, and even if she wasn't in full use of her faculties, that neither were the frat boys themselves (and they weren't qualified to discern she wasn't able to really consent).

It becomes a case of "she said, they said", so it wouldn't be surprising that several authority levels shirked at prosecuting the case. More so because rape legislation tends to be weak (with a high burden of proof), and general presumption of innocence.

Don saw it. That's why he doesn't want her on the show. He knows it will get ratings, but it won't help her (or Justice) in any way, and will only rise her visibility and expose her to even more abuse.

reply

[–] neerood 10 years ago

Don't straw man me,it's she (and through implication, the world in which the characters reside) that thinks her case is airtight. So if we accept this, then the question is how did 3 layers of law enforcement, all of whom are just as charged up as the activists on this board, decide not to take the allegation seriously?

I'm with you. Her over consumption of drugs and alcohol reduces the veracity of her memory. But that's arguing the actual case, and what's actually at issue is why 3 layers of law enforcement supposedly didn't just drop the ball, the didn't even touch or see the ball.

reply

[–] justwrite3 10 years ago

Why did 3 levels of authority commit gross misconduct in ignoring rape allegations? And why did a news and controversy seeking organization like ACN not see that?

The answer of course is that couldn't be what happened.

You may have missed it, but I discussed this in my earlier post in the thread. It is entirely plausible that those in positions of authority at universities would try to sweep rape allegations under the rug in order to protect the reputation of the university. It is unfortunately a common theme for many organizations to take a position that protects the organization over one that protects a victim, whether it be rape on college campuses, sexual abuse in the Catholic church, GM manufacturing cars that they know have a deadly flaw, or many other similar situations.

reply

[–] neerood 10 years ago

Let's break down your thesis. Supposedly the politically correct liberal elites running the university inexplicably act 180 degrees opposite of their inclination. It's a stretch, but OK.

But that doesn't have any bearing on the rank and file campus cops, at least several of whom probably dislike rape just like you and I, because they're not animals.

So what do they have to gain burying this in some global conspiracy? Same with the layers of city police. Many of them live their entire careers itching to nail some entitled jock rapists. What makes them join the Bilderberger conspiracy all of a sudden?

And then the district attorneys. What's in it for them to preside over a giant cover up? They surely know the voting district public sentiment is that rape is bad, and that DA's who get chummy with rapists stop being DA's pretty quick.

No, the part about every cop and lawyer in town turning their back on the poor girl is not believable.

There might have been an eventual trial in which there may or may not have been adequate evidence. But the idea that everyone conspires to cover up most rapes isn't reality based.

reply

[–] justwrite3 10 years ago

In many cases, the victim goes to the school administration, doesn't get help from them, and it ends there. No campus police, no local police, no DA.

I'm not sure how campus police works compared to local police. But the sad fact remains that law enforcement has a track record of not following up as they should on sexual assault cases, whether it be from the point of initial contact discounting the victim's story, not having the necessary resources (rape kits, for example) to get physical evidence, not having the resources to process evidence, or law enforcement being reluctant to pursue cases where the necessary evidence can no longer be collected (it's been days, the woman took a shower, etc.) or there is mitigating evidence (the woman was intoxicated, was on a date with the man, or went willingly into the room where the alleged assault occurred).

I don't see why the DA would be involved if the case is never referred to them by law enforcement, but my understanding is that these cases are difficult to try because it can be turned into "he said, she said" or the woman's character is put on trial more than the alleged assault.

In general, I don't think it's a grand conspiracy. I think each element -- school administration, law enforcement, and DA -- has its own motivations for not wanting to move the case forward, in many cases. I didn't think this was in dispute.

reply

[–] neerood 10 years ago

No. Contrary to your claim that "many" school administrations ignore rape victims, most of them are currently on high alert for such situations and if anything, they're tending towards over-reacting because of the current public revulsion. Perhaps you can supply a list of a few dozen schools that you know practice this policy, since you've claimed it's "many" that should be easy.

And besides, her story was that the campus police did nothing, not the school administration. The notion that the campus failed to take a report is far-fetched, although I'm sure there's a case or two out of every million in which that happened.

Then she claimed the city police did the same. So now we have far-fetched squared.

But that's not enough. Next we're told the district attorney - when notified of a rape plus extreme and grievous negligence and misconduct at two levels of law enforcement - did nothing. This is highly unlikely.

But even giving it the one in million chance that all three super unlikely events occurred, then that would be the basis of a massive news story, or more realistically, a series of national news stories.

reply

[–] zootie 10 years ago

The problem is that even if the other levels are more inclined to prosecute, by the time they're involved, the evidence and testimony has been mangled due to the inexperience of the campus police and university review board. Not to mention that it can be argued that the university would want to try and bury it.

A university (and its campus police) has a built-in conflict of interest in wanting to keep things quiet to avoid affecting their enrollments, and to try and mediate and mitigate "youthful indiscretions" and to prevent such incidents from destroying young lives (not to justify rape as such, just how it is sometimes argued in these settings). From their perspective, they are playgrounds for over-developed children away from their parents, testing their limits, sometimes going too far. Yet, I don't really have a list of cases (someone else might be better informed).

Putting aside Rolling Stone's "A Rape on Campus" article, it seems that we see such conspiracies a couple times a year in news headlines, but we seldom follow the criminal case or, even then, know what really happen. Sometimes, they amount to nothing or are blown out of proportion (or are false, as the Duke lacrosse case - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duke_lacrosse_case). Sometimes they show institutional cover-ups (in the same level as the Sandusky and the Catholic Church pedophile scandals)

The point of having a "campus police" is due to the confluence of different jurisdictions. The university is (many times) a private entity, so normal police would have limited access (and the public at large shouldn't have to be taxed to provide private security to such institutions), and large portion of the population in the area are minors whose parents aren't readily available and the university is acting as guardians (ie, normal police involvement would complicate matters in routine discipline incidents).

reply

[–] neerood 10 years ago

First, I won't bother refuting your claim that campus investigations are usually mangled. For fun let's say you're right. That means the problem is low investigation quality by campus police, a fairly easy problem to define and fix. You seriously want to skip that simple step and proceed straight to pure lawless vigilanteism?

Second you're wrong that universities are incented to cover up a sex assault allegation. What purpose could it serve, since every aware person already knows sex assaults occur, including on campus. The institutions DO however have mammoth risk of being caught for even one small cover up. That's never been more true than it is today. Any and all schools these days prefer to over-react than under-react.

Your blurb about campus police is messed up. State, local, and other police definitely can and do exercise their appropriate jurisdiction on college campuses.

reply

[–] justwrite3 10 years ago

High-profile examples of universities ignoring sexual assault are Penn State with Jerry Sandusky and Florida State with Jameis Winston. There is lots of information available about both cases.

At Penn State, Sandusky was convicted and several university figures were convicted of perjury, suspended, forced to resign, or fired. Numerous people, including those legally obligated to report suspected sexual assault to the authorities, neglected to do so. They knew about Sandusky's activities, yet only took the step of saying Sandusky couldn't bring boys onto the campus, a provision they failed to enforce, thereby allowing Sandusky to continue sexually abusing boys both on and off campus.

Jameis Winston hasn't been convicted of anything in relation to the rape charge, but one thing that can be said is that Florida State (along with the Tallahassee Police Department) has hampered the investigation.

http://www.foxsports.com/college-football/story/jameis-winston-florida -state-tallahassee-police-hindered-investigation-documents-101014

As far as the involvement of campus police and local police:

-- The victim had injuries consistent with sexual trauma and identified Winston by name, but Tallahassee police didn't get a DNA sample from Winston, interview him, or obtain video of the alleged assault taken by a teammate. The investigation was conducted by Officer Scott Angulo, who worked on the side for the Florida State athletics booster club.

-- The second-highest ranking officer in the campus police department ran interference with another reporter seeking information about the allegations, terming them a "rumor" that he was glad he could "dispel."

-- Campus police officials were involved in updating Florida State administrators on the case and helping formulate the school's public relations response in the first days after the explosive story became public.

We know about Penn State and Florida State because they've come to light due to media scrutiny resulting from the involvement of athletics, but they clearly show that universities and the campus and local police that have a close relationship with them will take measures to sweep sexual allegations under the rug.

Having said that, I do think that you have a point that college administrators are more likely than ever to err on the side of caution and report rape allegations brought to their attention. My point is that there is a longstanding history at universities of putting a priority on the university's reputation over victims. My sense is that various groups raising awareness about sexual assault on campus has led to more universities doing the right thing, especially when they see the huge hit the university can take when not dealing with the issue properly blows up in their face.

It's a complex issue. My point all along has been to point out this one aspect that wasn't being discussed elsewhere in the thread. Rape is not reported or investigated as much as it should be for many reasons, and this is one of those reasons. Proper action by universities could go a long way to prevent sexual assault to begin with, provide victims the support they need, and punish perpetrators.

reply

[–] dudestein 10 years ago

The cases you site speak as much to the power of fame, money and corruption that professional and collegiate Football wields as it does to law enforcement's inability to devote resources to violent sex crimes against women. College football has become the monstrous tail wagging the Dog of College administrations all over the country.

Forgotten is the Ben Rothlisburger case in Pittsburgh. That was the power of the NFL. If the Ray Rice event of assault wasn't on video, his original suspension of 2 games would of stood. But worse yet, it DID have video, but that video was not made public. So, for all of us it was out of sight, out of mind. But that video got out, and a pathetic ass covering by the NFL Commissioner failed because anyone with a clue would know you cannot punish someone for the same event twice especially when you are dealing with Labor rules Collectively bargained and ranging in the millions of Dollars.

reply

[–] neerood 10 years ago

Thanks for stepping right on the trap door. The fact you're naming offenders (or suspects) is proof that these cases weren't completely ignored. And you didn't name any schools or police forces with a policy of rape cover up, because there aren't any. There are some rare and thus newsworthy occasions where the system is imperfect.

reply

[–] justwrite3 10 years ago

Thanks for stepping right on the trap door. The fact you're naming offenders (or suspects) is proof that these cases weren't completely ignored.

So how am I supposed to have evidence of cases that never found the light of day? What I provided were cases where university administration was shown to ignore and/or cover up sexual assault cases. The fact that they ultimately have become public doesn't invalidate that fact.

If your intent is to lay "trap doors," let's end this right now. I'm merely attempting to engage in an honest, civil conversation on a difficult subject.

And you didn't name any schools or police forces with a policy of rape cover up, because there aren't any.

(Bold emphasis mine.) Of course there aren't any schools or police forces with an open policy of rape cover-up, just like the Catholic church didn't have a policy of pedophilia cover-up. The people within these institutions made decisions to protect the reputation of their institution above all else. These decisions are indefensible, but I don't see why you have such a difficult time acknowledging that this occurs considering the long history of all types of institutions where this type of thing has occurred.

There are some rare and thus newsworthy occasions where the system is imperfect.

To me, it's a naive position to say that these are isolated incidents and that the only ones that have occurred are the ones that eventually became public, but at least you've taken the step of acknowledging that they do occur, which you previously said wasn't possible.

I think part of the problem is that you think that the only way this occurs is by all parties getting together at their weekly conspirators meeting and deciding that they're going to cover up sexual assaults, and of course that's ridiculous. But that's not how this works. It's far more subtle than that.

Students at colleges do crazy things, and I expect that administrators do talk about these and decide that it's not in the university's best interest to publicize everything. That establishes a gray area where one factor that has been discussed over and over is protecting the university reputation.

Where things fall apart is not when the university has a policy of covering up sexual assault, but when the university doesn't have a policy about it or has one but doesn't properly train their staff about what to do if a student comes to them with a potential assault case. It's further complicated by the nature of many sexual assaults that have mitigating circumstances (woman was intoxicated, on a date, put herself in a bad position, openly blames herself, doesn't report it until days later, and so on). Without clear direction that you must do A, B, and C whenever a student reports something that could be sexual assault, people too often make poor ethical decisions. I don't see why you find this so implausible.

reply

[–] neerood 10 years ago

You say "let's end this now" but then contradict by going on and on for pages.

You engaged by making the contradictory claim that a problem exists through a systematic and coordinated cover up by all levels, then proceed to list examples that disprove your own thesis.

Then you draw an incorrect comparison to the Catholic Church, who in fact did have formal coverup procedures, personnel, and budget in place.

And finally, you fail to recognize how the proper functioning of any one outlet undoes your whole conspiracy. All it takes is for any one of these to accept the sex assault allegation and it becomes formalized. An allegation may or may not eventually become a conviction, or a conviction may or may not produce a stiff enough penalty for your liking. But to advocate lawless and dangerous vigilanteism is not a civilized way to address such perceived weaknesses in the justice system. It sounds like what you really should be seeking is incremental improvement in the justice system, not to bypass it by committing other crimes.

reply

[–] justwrite3 10 years ago

You say "let's end this now" but then contradict by going on and on for pages.

Did you not notice the "if" part of what I said?

If your intent is to lay "trap doors," let's end this right now. I'm merely attempting to engage in an honest, civil conversation on a difficult subject.

But based on your most recent post, yeah, I'm done with this.

reply

[–] neerood 10 years ago

Not really, since you made two more posts after "I'm done with this."

If you can't give an honest answer to why not solve the root issue of flaws in the justice system, we're probably better off if (when?) you go away.

reply

[–] sluggr-2 10 years ago

We know about Penn State and Florida State because they've come to light due to media scrutiny resulting from the involvement of athletics, but they clearly show that universities and the campus and local police that have a close relationship with them will take measures to sweep sexual allegations under the rug.

i.e. follow the money.

Sorkin covered a similar scenario on Sports Night.

I think my percentage of Chimp DNA is higher than others. Cleaver Greene

reply

[–] bbrown2676 10 years ago

Why did 3 levels of authority commit gross misconduct in ignoring rape allegations? And why did a news and controversy seeking organization like ACN not see that?

The answer of course is that couldn't be what happened. It's a false detail meant to set the stage premise that this particular victim has no choice but to publish. Without the false premise, she's a vigilante automating the publication of probable libel.

What I don't understand about your argument is why would this be a plotline? Why write a story about a girl who is maybe lying about being raped? All indications say that this plot won't show up in the next episode.

Doesn't it make more sense that the plotline is about the unintended consequences of the internet?
That even a website created to shine a light on horrible abuse and to give a voice to the voiceless can be used as a weapon to harm the innocent?

Which has been the theme of every single story this season...that the internet is extremely dangerous and that people need to be careful every time they are using it?

reply

[–] sluggr-2 10 years ago

Why did 3 levels of authority commit gross misconduct in ignoring rape allegations? And why did a news and controversy seeking organization like ACN not see that?

http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2011/01/neil_goldschmidt_ sex_abuse_vic.html

There is growing evidence that this very newspaper sat on the story for almost 25 years and finally only reported on it because a more recent, and competing publication, decided to run it. The depth of the coverup and the years of ensuing political manipulations and blackmail is staggering. I don't even trust the weather from this paper anymore.

One of the reasons that the mainstream media fears the internet is their loss of control over a story. Given what I've seen in the last 10 years, I'm more likely to trust and internet source than the local rag, and that blame lies squarely on the shoulders of the local rag which chose to lose its credibility for political expediency.

I think my percentage of Chimp DNA is higher than others. Cleaver Greene

reply

[–] neerood 10 years ago

Except victims aren't "voiceless". There's a massive justice infrastructure set up for victims to be heard.

Sometimes (thankfully rarely) that system doesn't work.

So the real problem is helping the justice system work a little bit better, not creating a lawless and dangerous vigilante system.

reply