Rolling Stone "our trust was misplaced." UVA assault article retracted?

[swimmermom3]

I've been thinking that we tell our children that if they are assaulted or raped, it is nothing they did. That the fault of the crime is entirely the perpetrator's.

 

And yet, it's been implied more than once...if our sons don't want to be accused falsely of rape, all they have to do is keep it in their pants.

 

False Rape Accusation is a crime. It is fault of the perpetrator, not the victim. It can/could happen with no physical contact at all. IOW, someone can keep it in his pants and still be the victim of a crime.

 

We all know that's not just what they need to do. The "keep it in their pants" point is flip and simplistic at best, but it is also on the very same level as if you don't want to get raped, don't drink.

 

If you keep it in your pants and you don't drink, the likelihood of experiencing sexual assault or being blamed for it goes down, but it's not the whole answer in a very complex issue.

[LibraryLover]

I'm very fond of the "designated brain" concept. I went through a tough time my senior (college) year and a group of us started going out drinking on Friday night. The first time we all drank, and getting home was a bother, so after that we took turns being the designated driver and left the other cars on campus. Over the weeks, I realized that the designated driver was also the designated brain for the evening, saying things like, "You are SO not going home with her," " Let me check that receipt," "Crosswalk, dude," and "Yep, you can drive home now." We certainly socialized and had a good time, but someone played the guardian angel each night. I've talked to my ds about this.

 

No woman left behind.

[Bluegoat]

Alcohol is a huge problem in sexual assault on campuses.  I don't think anyone on this thread has denied that.

 

Who has been flaunting a feminist narrative about female sexual freedoms and male aggression on this thread? If someone expresses the idea that a drunk woman doesn't deserve to be assaulted, is that "feminist?" I would acknowledge that a woman who is drunk and is in the presence of drunk men is more likely to be assaulted.

 

I think that some people are taking as given certain assumptions about what is going on that come from a particular narrative.  For example, there is the "if men wouldn't force women to have sex against their will and obtain consent, we would solve the problem of rape".  there are I think quite a few assumptions packed in there.  One seems to be that stopping rape is primarily a matter of education.  That when rape or assault happens it is always because of someone who is being essentially predatory.  There seems to be a lack of recognition that sexuality and aggression have a biological link that can be made more likely to come out in some circumstances, like when executive function is chemically depressed.  Tthere is the assumption which has been shown clearly by a few posters that consent is always dead simple.  One of the most common and I think most damaging is that telling someone that they are responsible for their decisions means that you are saying they deserve what they get.  There seems an almost universal conspiracy to ignore that there is a group of women who really  like that particular kind of party scene, and that if they didn't, a lot of behaviors that people consider objectionable would not happen.  If groping women meant you never got laid,or no one came to your parties, it would be a lot less common.

 

So let's talk more about college drinking and men and women.  How many of the men in our personal lives can truly say that they have NEVER heard another guy say that they planned on/did get a girl drunk in order to have sex with her?  So if I say that I think placing the onus on the girl not to get drunk is not fair makes me a "feminist" (said like someone is licking dirt)?  How about teaching our guys that getting a girl drunk in order to increase your chances of "scoring" is kind of a crappy thing to do?  I think women should drink responsibly if they drink and I think guys should pour (if doing so or buying) responsibly.

 

Is it feminist to say that if a women who is drunk is responsible for putting herself in the way of being raped, then a man who drinks and rapes is equally responsible?

 

 

Let's go back to the Vanderbilt rape case.  The young woman went drinking with someone she thought was her boyfriend. They go back to the dorms and she becomes unconscious. Four guys assault her for 30 minutes, piss on her, and then dump her naked, unconscious body outside the dorm room face down. Five other guys walk past her, see her with the bruises on her back and do nothing.

 

Some of the guys are claiming they were too drunk to know what they were doing. If women have to be responsible for their drinking, then so do the men.

 

 

I think most people probably think that getting someone drunk to have sex with them is nasty.  Women also do this however, though probably somewhat less often.  Some people also get drunk so they can become relaxed enough to have casual sex.  I think in all cases it is very unhealthy behavior. 

 

As far as i know, no one thinks someone who rapes isn't responsible.  The level of responsibility may be different in different circumstances, with the extreme being someone so mentally ill as to not understand the act was wrong.  But i think an analogous example is better - what about someone who gets really drunk and isn't fit to make a decision about refraining from having sex from someone else who is drunk?  Yes, that person is responsible for his own actions, just as the other person is responsible for hers.

 

I think that a big error people make is imagining there is a sort of limited amount of responsibility attached to any incident, and if you place any on one party, it takes away from the other people to the other.  I think they are quite seperate.  If i choose to engage in risky sex with a lot of strangers, I am making a choice, and I might be failing in my responsibility of self-care.  I also might simply think that the benefits are worth the risk, and that i am willing to accept that possibility - i can live with that when I look at it clearly having suffered the worst possible outcome.  That choice would one hopes depend on how I feel about the potential consequences. 

 

None of that impacts at all in the responsibility of someone who decides to assault me - that person bears all the responsibility of that decision.  In both cases it is hard to objectivly measure real responsibility, because there are so many variables.  Maybe I neglect self-care because I was abused.  Maybe this guy is less responsible for rape because he is an addict and would not otherwise have made that decision (but then he may more responsible for being intoxicated if he could have guessed the possible outcomes.)  And then maybe the universiaty or society is responsible for not telling people what the risks are, or creating a particular social clinate, or whatever.  None of these add to or take away from the others.

 

Most of that IMO hasn't, or shouldn't, have any particular feminist angle.  But there is a feminist interpretation of sexual assault IMO - more than one actually -  that comes out of a particular type of feminist thinking.  Feminism isn't in my mind the same as egalitarian or even fair - it is a particular political/philosophical group and set of propositions, and a lot of the assumptions in pop feminism come out of those assumptions in a less than thoughtful way.  The idea that rape is non-sexual is an eample - that is an academic argument, and its always been controversial for a few reasons.  But a lot of pop feminists treat it like an established irrefutable fact.

[swimmermom3]

Nobody is tracking the data (afaik), first of all.

 

Secondly, I'm concerned about the future with attitudes being currently expressed that, essentially, it is better to publicize unsubstantiated accusations than to maintain skepticism until facts are checked.  And no, I do not have evidence of the future.

 

Thirdly, I'm supposed to be preparing an urgent report for work, so I can't spend a lot of time on this.  I did find a lot of stuff in a google search, but I am not sure which sources would be considered good and I didn't want to get into a tit-for-tat over that.  (And no, none of them were Fox News or Rush Limbaugh.  At least one rather long blog post about false accusations was on a feminist blog.  As you also said, it actually hurts rape victims when false accusations come to light.)

 

Finally, as has been stated many times, I do not believe documented evidence is required to back up every opinion expressed on here.

 

I missed this yesterday.

 

I know you don't want to document this, but could you please point me to any of the posts on here that suggest that it's okay to publicize unsubstantiated accusations that to maintain skepticism until facts

are checked. No one here is applauding Rolling Stone. Jon Stewart even skewered RS the other night, expressing disbelief that no heads rolled.

 

Can I play devil's advocate for a minute? You've been really polite in answering my questions and I do appreciate that.

 

If unsubstantiated claims were never published, would that mean there would be no public knowledge of purported events until there was an actual conviction?  Expulsions and convictions for rapes committed on college campuses are already almost none existent. If we can't talk about the problem, does it mean it doesn't exist?

 

That would certainly protect the reputations of all the men involved. The men would be in really great shape, but the "alleged" victims? The future victims? How is this equitable?

 

You did ask me for documented evidence in a post the above post and I have tried to comply. In fact, I felt like I needed about 6 baths last night. :tongue_smilie:

 

 

[*Lulu*]

I am going to take this point by point.

 

I think it comes from a small minority, but it is becoming more widely accepted among some groups, and I think what I find more worrying is that some of its talking points are being promoted as fact rather than an interpretation, and the people who are promoting the perspective are putting themselves forward as the representatives and gatekeepers of women's interests.

Could you elaborate on this a touch, I am not sure what positions you mean.

 

People who disagree are being told they are secret misogynists or apologists for rape culture. people who question whether rape culture is even a thing are accused of being "part of the problem".

People not recognizing the reality of rape culture is absolutely a problem. The way you frame it here makes me wonder if part of why there is talking past each other in this thread is because people are working with very different perceptions of the reality we opperate in?

 

What you are describing is actually not a double standard.and I don't think it is even entirely true. Protecting oneself from malicious behavior or risk is not equivalent to being asked not to do illegal immoral things.

 

We also expect men to make decisions to protect themselves from risk. Does anyone tell men who are into the gay club scene that they have no responsibility to protect themselves from risk, including the risk of violence? Sexual violence is not at all unheard of in that context. Or that all men should be careful about the kinds of places they go and activities they are involved in if they are risky? I think we probably expect that more of men than of women. And it isn't that we say they can't do risky things, or that they deserve it or it is their fault if they are victimized in some way - but we expect them to do it with their eyes open, as adults who know that some choices are riskier than others.

There are many kinds of violence that exist in the world. Sexual violence seems to be an area where it is most acceptable to place some/most of the blame on the shoulders of the victim instead of the assailant.

 

No one so far as I know says that it is ok for anyone to rape anyone, and there is a fair amount of attention given to sexual crimes against women. Sexual assault of men by women and other men is given pretty sort shrift though - the latter in particular is generally ignored, believed to be impossible, or ridiculed.

I agree that there is a problem with how sexual assault of men is treated. Although it should be noted that wide attention to sexual assault of women is a relatively recent phenomenon.

 

I think the groping culture is pretty classless, but for whatever reason some people like it.

Say what?

 

I have yet to meet anyone, male, female, gay, or straight, that is happy to have someone they are not involved with grope them. Sexual assault should not be confused with PDA.

 

I Personally don't think it was a bad thing that it was once something of a social taboo, but it seems to have been a freedom demanded by the sexual revolution. I think the gap between virile and slutty is fast going the way of the dodo though - among millenials it seems to be that both men and women are pretty much looked at similarly. I think some women - and probably men too - find it can actually be opressive, they feel trapped in that. I don't think that is necessarily some sort of double standard though - I think perhaps it is a reality that the sexual revolution failed to anticipate that people can feel trapped in freedom of sexual expression as well, because they perceive it as an expectation. Even back years ago when I was in the army, the sexual aggressivness and behavior of the female soldiers was comparable to that of the men, and I think plenty of the things that they did could have easily been considered assault.

Again, I am not sure I am following this thought. Could you elaborate?

 

I think in part the problem with this becomes one of social norms. If you have two groups of people who have different expectations for what is an appropriate interaction, it isn't going to work well, and there doesn't seem to be any good way to decide one set of expectations is better than another. So you are left telling people to just avoid places where they don't like the behavior.

[swimmermom3]

Let me be clear on something before I comment here. I'm not necessarily doubting the statistics that you included in this quote, but I have a question about their source. I want to know where the data about unreported rapes comes from. Specifically, how can you know if the rape occurred if it was never reported or went to trial or never subjected to any legal scrutiny? Including unreported rapes by definition is to include an accusation that has not been examined yet. The method of collecting this data is also important, as far as reliability and accuracy goes, and I don't really see any way to determine how the data was collected; the link appears to be dead. I don't understand how we can be sure of the accuracy of the data. Of course, in the context of any one individual rape this is an irrelevant point, but it does become relevant when we discuss the likelihood of our sons being accused as opposed to our daughters being assaulted.

 

If I understand correctly, the number of unreported rapes is extrapolated from the results of the handful of major surveys of rape on college campuses.

 

The person conducting the studies goes in and asks questions of a particular sample size on campus. These are men who are basically self-reporting. Women's perceptions of what has taken place have no part in the survey, I think. Please, if anyone finds something to contradict this interpretation, I'd love the link.

 

Again from the Michigan site:

 

 

Summary of Carr, J.L. and VanDeusen, K.M. (2004) Risk Factors For Male Sexual Aggression on College Campuses. J. Family Violence 19(5): 279-289.

• Surveys have consistently reported that college men acknowledged forced intercourse at a rate of 5-15% and college sexual aggression at a rate of 15-25% (Koss, Gidycz, and Wisniewski, 1987; Malamuth, Sockloskie, Koss, and Tanaka, 1991).

• The national survey of rape conducted by Koss et al. (1987) revealed that 1 in 12 college men committed acts that met the legal definition of rape, and of those men, 84% did not consider their actions to be illegal. 

• In a large study of college men, 8.8% admitted rape or attempted rape (Ouimette & Riggs, 1998).

Notice the language of the first bullet point. The use of "forced intercourse" versus "rape" in questions can change the results significantly. They mean the same thing, but men perceive them differently.

 

I liked the Michigan page because they used several different studies to put their information together. Remember this is a training document.

 

Another page that was really helpful comes from The US National Library of Medicine: "A Prospective Mediational Model of Sexual Aggression Among College Men"

 

The first couple of paragraphs may give you a better insight to the data collection process or at the very least provide you with more studies that have been done in the last ten years.

 

I don't know if this answers your question about unreported rapes, but I think it's about as close to the actual truth as we are going to get.

[SKL]

I missed this yesterday.

 

I know you don't want to document this, but could you please point me to any of the posts on here that suggest that it's okay to publicize unsubstantiated accusations that to maintain skepticism until facts

are checked. No one here is applauding Rolling Stone. Jon Stewart even skewered RS the other night, expressing disbelief that no heads rolled.

 

Can I play devil's advocate for a minute? You've been really polite in answering my questions and I do appreciate that.

 

If unsubstantiated claims were never published, would that mean there would be no public knowledge of purported events until there was an actual conviction?  Expulsions and convictions for rapes committed on college campuses are already almost none existent. If we can't talk about the problem, does it mean it doesn't exist?

 

That would certainly protect the reputations of all the men involved. The men would be in really great shape, but the "alleged" victims? The future victims? How is this equitable?

 

You did ask me for documented evidence in a post the above post and I have tried to comply. In fact, I felt like I needed about 6 baths last night. :tongue_smilie:

 

Does it really help true victims to have their case publicized in the media, particularly before trial?  If so, please explain why this is.

 

You seem to be implying that I want to protect rapists.  No, I want to protect non-rapists from false accusations.  There is a very big difference.

 

I was looking back at my past posts, because I couldn't remember exactly what got me started on the danger of tolerating false accusations.  It was someone's angry question: 'why is it always all about the men?'  I don't see how the discussion of campus rape has ever been "all about the men."  But the men are certainly the chief victims in a false accusation situation, which is what the RS article was, which is the whole topic of this post.

 

As for the statement that convictions for campus rape are almost non-existent, I don't know much about that, but I agree with the suggestion proposed earlier that rape accusations should not go through any special channels just because the rape location, victim, or perp are connected with a university.  They should be reported directly to police just like every other rape.

 

The media has no business sensationalizing an alleged rape before it has been tried in the courts (unless the perp is someone already in the public eye or in a position of public responsibility, like a politician or cop).  Let the cops and witnesses do their job.  I can't believe the media couldn't find one single campus rape conviction to sensationalize *after* the conviction.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

Does it really help true victims to have their case publicized in the media, particularly before trial?  If so, please explain why this is.

 

You seem to be implying that I want to protect rapists.  No, I want to protect non-rapists from false accusations.  There is a very big difference.

 

I was looking back at my past posts, because I couldn't remember exactly what got me started on the danger of tolerating false accusations.  It was someone's angry question: 'why is it always all about the men?'  I don't see how the discussion of campus rape has ever been "all about the men."  But the men are certainly the chief victims in a false accusation situation, which is what the RS article was, which is the whole topic of this post.

 

As for the statement that convictions for campus rape are almost non-existent, I don't know much about that, but I agree with the suggestion proposed earlier that rape accusations should not go through any special channels just because the rape location, victim, or perp are connected with a university.  They should be reported directly to police just like every other rape.

 

The media has no business sensationalizing an alleged rape before it has been tried in the courts (unless the perp is someone already in the public eye or in a position of public responsibility, like a politician or cop).  Let the cops and witnesses do their job.  I can't believe the media couldn't find one single campus rape conviction to sensationalize *after* the conviction.

 

The rub is trying to determine the line between reporting and sensationalizing.  Criminal cases are public records and I am very uncomfortable with allowing the media to report on some trials but not others.

 

[swimmermom3]

I understand that sometimes speaking out gets you a big fat nowhere. But not speaking out is just not an option if these predators are going to be brought to justice. Going to some half-baked magazine and complaining to the media is not really speaking out; going to the police and filing the report and being tenacious is the only thing that will ever truly bring those predators to justice. I understand the nature of rape is such that it is difficult to prosecute. But the fact it is difficult to prosecute still doesn't mean our criminal justice principles should be abandoned. We wouldn't abandon those justice principles in another type of crime that was difficult to find evidence, where it was difficult to find witnesses for, or difficult to prosecute.

 

The backlash on campus toward finding someone guilty of rape without any real evidence is really going to harm rape cases in the future, because people will see a man "convicted" on campus without any evidence and start to doubt all rape accusations. I agree that colleges should not be in the position of deciding these matters. I think colleges should not be in the position of deciding the guilt or innocence of someone accused of rape. Those cases should *automatically* be turned over to the local police; I mean automatically and without exception; there should be no internal campus review of felony crimes at all. That's not to say that the alleged victim shouldn't be offered counseling services by the college; they should. But if they're unwilling to press charges they need to understand that this case will not legally go forward. The colleges should be prohibited from expelling students who have not been proven guilty in a court of law. The federal government has put colleges in an untenable position by requiring them to report and *do something* about alleged rapes, while at the same time our justice system holds tight to the idea that someone is innocent until proven guilty. Those are two opposing ideas; you can't *do something* about a specific crime that you have no evidence for. But I am all for prevention and education on the matter.

 

 

Karen, I wish I were able to stand up and go "heck ya," but I just can't because researching for this thread has left me doubtful that our justice system as it is can make a difference. Actually, maybe it's not the system itself but our own attitudes?

 

The first article here is from Bloomberg and it talks the Vandenberg convictions. I think it is well done and worth the read in understanding what victims face:  The Downside of the Vanderbilt Rape Convictions.

 

The second article is from Huff Post and a study they did on campus punishment for rape. I know there is some concern that with the perceived growing trend to false rape accusations, young men will be unfairly punished. That could well be true with regards to the media, but it's not true on college campuses. The data collected by Huff Post comes from 32 college that voluntarily responded as well as public records. After reading the article, if you scroll down to where there is the forward arrow, you will be able to see the number of students the college found guilty and the number that were expelled. Williams College stuck in my mind because I think there was enough evidence to find 9 students over a couple of year to be guilty of rape and yet only one was expelled.

 

Fewer Than One-Third Of Campus Sexual Assault Cases Result In Expulsion

Remember that these are students that the school found guilty. So they have actively allowed someone they know has raped a student to return to campus. I suspect but have no proof that the if the school actually identified a student as guilty, it was probably not a mistaken case of sexual fumbling.

 

ETA: added link for Bloomberg article

 

[*Lulu*]

Does it really help true victims to have their case publicized in the media, particularly before trial? If so, please explain why this is.

 

You seem to be implying that I want to protect rapists. No, I want to protect non-rapists from false accusations. There is a very big difference.

 

I was looking back at my past posts, because I couldn't remember exactly what got me started on the danger of tolerating false accusations. It was someone's angry question: 'why is it always all about the men?' I don't see how the discussion of campus rape has ever been "all about the men." But the men are certainly the chief victims in a false accusation situation, which is what the RS article was, which is the whole topic of this post.

 

As for the statement that convictions for campus rape are almost non-existent, I don't know much about that, but I agree with the suggestion proposed earlier that rape accusations should not go through any special channels just because the rape location, victim, or perp are connected with a university. They should be reported directly to police just like every other rape.

 

The media has no business sensationalizing an alleged rape before it has been tried in the courts (unless the perp is someone already in the public eye or in a position of public responsibility, like a politician or cop). Let the cops and witnesses do their job. I can't believe the media couldn't find one single campus rape conviction to sensationalize *after* the conviction.

I don't know about where you live, but in our mid-sized city the only DUI, drug, assault, or non-felony crimes that make the front page are those where either the perpetrator or victim are high profile within the community.

 

Mayor gets mugged- front page news. Retired man in middle class neighborhood gets mugged- will show up as a number in the weekly crime stats.

 

And I wanted to point out your use of the wording, "true victim" is an example of the hundreds of small ways that sexual assault victims get the message that they bear responsiblity for what happened to them. (Unless they pass some litmus test of true rape which is subjective and constantly changing.)

[SKL]

I wanted to point out your use of the wording, "true victim" is an example of the hundreds of small ways that sexual assault victims get the message that they bear responsiblity for what happened to them. (Unless they pass some litmus test of true rape which is subjective and constantly changing.)

 

That's because you have made a biased assumption about my meaning.  I meant "true" as in someone not making up a story.

 

It is hard to hold a conversation if I have to worry about people assuming imaginary intentions when I'm speaking in plain English.  It would be nice if we could have the benefit of the doubt that nobody here thinks rape is OK, for starters.

 

[*Lulu*]

That's because you have made a biased assumption about my meaning. I meant "true" as in someone not making up a story.

 

It is hard to hold a conversation if I have to worry about people assuming imaginary intentions when I'm speaking in plain English. It would be nice if we could have the benefit of the doubt that nobody here thinks rape is OK, for starters.

 

A person fabricating a story is not a victim but a perpetrator.

 

I am assuming nothing about your intentions but telling you that your plain English can be hurtful.

 

Nobody thinks rape is okay.

 

If we did a show of hands across the US, who thinks rape is okay, only a handful of whack-a-doodles and perverse personalities would raise a hand. Yet when someone comes forward and identifies them-self as having experienced sexual assault, when we are no longer discussing hypothetical assaults, there are plenty of people who would never have raised a hand that will minimize and marginalize the victim without recognizing that they are doing it.

[swimmermom3]

 

 

Most of that IMO hasn't, or shouldn't, have any particular feminist angle.  But there is a feminist interpretation of sexual assault IMO - more than one actually -  that comes out of a particular type of feminist thinking.  Feminism isn't in my mind the same as egalitarian or even fair - it is a particular political/philosophical group and set of propositions, and a lot of the assumptions in pop feminism come out of those assumptions in a less than thoughtful way.  The idea that rape is non-sexual is an eample - that is an academic argument, and its always been controversial for a few reasons.  But a lot of pop feminists treat it like an established irrefutable fact.

 

I want to be perfectly clear that I understand what you are saying here before I respond. 

 

You are saying that rape is strictly a function of fulfilling a biological (sexual) need?  You are also saying that anyone who says otherwise, for example that anger towards women or a need for power or control is a component, is a pop feminist?

 

If an academic argument (developed from documented, peer approved studies conducted by professionals in the field) is not acceptable, what should be used?

[Catwoman]

Nobody here thinks 'true' rape is OK.

 

It's just the pesky she-asked-for-it kind they have a problem with.

Except that no one here has said anything like that.

[*Lulu*]

Except that no one here has said anything like that.

There has been language used that is in that vein and similar to what is often used by those who say it more forthrightly.

 

When the similarity in usage is pointed out it is taken as character assassination rather than a more neutral statement.

 

You can only handle so many pages of that before the snark, sarcasm, and snide remarks start slipping in.

[Catwoman]

Rubbish.

 

Listen, some posters like swimmermom are very good at being calm and gracious responders to endless amounts of equivocation on the issue. I am very grateful some people have these strengths.

 

Mine is identifying weasel words, and frankly, it gets boring hearing the same b/s trotted out by the same posters over and over again.

 

Back to the posters who can stay polite about it.

It seems as though you are going out of your way to identify "weasel words" so you can accuse people of having intentions that suit your purposes.

 

How about actually taking people at their words, not at what you "identify" as the super-secret hidden meanings behind their words?

 

These discussions will never be productive if you keep accusing other posters of having ill-intentioned motives.

[Catwoman]

There has been language used that is in that vein and similar to what is often used by those who say it more forthrightly.

 

When the similarity in usage is pointed out it is taken as character assassination rather than a more neutral statement.

 

You can only handle so many pages of that before the snark, sarcasm, and snide remarks start slipping in.

The problem is, once people start making those generalized snide and sarcastic remarks, the entire discussion tanks. If someone has a problem with a specific post, I think it makes sense to ask for clarification in the polite way in which you have done it, but the general snotty remarks and intentional searches for "weasel words" seem entirely out of place. (I don't think you have done that at all, Lu. :))

[swimmermom3]

Except that no one here has said anything like that.

 

What I (my personal interpretation) take from this thread is that we believe there are two camps.

 

There is the "No one deserves to be raped, but you (victim),  can go a long way in preventing it by not drinking, not engaging in premarital sex, or stooping to any of the sexually aggressive behaviors men often engage in" camp.

 

The other camp, which is where I guess I stand, feels a bit queasy when I read the above statement. It's difficult to explain, but I am certainly not advocating that women not take reasonable steps to avoid sexual assault. I think maybe the article that Word Nerd linked does a pretty good job of summarizing how I feel:

 

RAINN recommends a three-tiered approach when it comes to preventing sexual violence

on college campuses. A prevention campaign should include the following elements:

1. Bystander intervention education: empowering community members to act in

response to acts of sexual violence.

2. Risk-reduction messaging: empowering members of the community to take steps

to increase their personal safety.

3. General education to promote understanding of the law, particularly as it relates

to the ability to consent.

 

Under Point 2, which is what I think concerns many of us, this was written:

 

Risk Reduction

As anyone who has worked on rape prevention knows, risk-reduction messaging is a

sensitive topic. Even the most well-intentioned risk-reduction message can be

misunderstood to suggest that, by not following the tips, a victim is somehow to blame for

his or her own attack. Recent survivors of sexual violence are particularly sensitive to these

messages, and we owe it to them to use them cautiously.

Still, they are an important part of a rape prevention program. To be very clear, RAINN in

no way condones or advocates victim blaming. Sexual assault is a violent crime and those

who commit these crimes are solely responsible for their actions. That said, we believe

that it is important to educate members of a campus community on actions they can take to

increase their personal safety. In fact, we believe it’s irresponsible not to do so.

Over decades, it has been shown that risk-reduction messaging is an important component

of crime prevention overall. This approach has significantly contributed to reducing the

number of violent and property crimes. It has a similar value in sexual violence prevention.

Many institutions incorporate risk-reduction tips into their awareness messaging and we

encourage the federal government to support this type of messaging.ix Many respondents —

survivors, faculty, and others — to our survey on the issue of campus sexual assault (see

Appendix) endorsed this view as well. This recommendation is intended to impart tools of

empowerment, not victim blaming.

 

The part below the bold is the main point for the first camp and I think actually we can all agree on it. The part in bold is where some of us become uncomfortable. One of the main reasons victims do not report their assaults is that they do feel they are responsible at some level and they are embarrassed and ashamed. This is a common reaction even for victims who could have done absolutely nothing. This creates a Catch 22 in my mind.

 

This is why I also think working on Point 1 - Bystander Intervention -  is critical. Step 2 focuses primarily on what the victim can do. Step 1 is something everyone can do, especially because male peer group support is problematic in the encouragement of rape.

 

Bluegoat said she didn't agree that there was a double standard and I still maintain that there is one. Manhood in American culture is in part defined by sexual prowess, especially with young college males. If on one hand we say that sexual promiscuity is to be admired in the male, and virginity is to be admired in women, we have a math problem that we certainly hope doesn't involve the neighbor's sheep or the dog.

 

Now if the issue with "feminism" - however it's being defined these days -  is that we've made a mess of things by encouraging women to pursue the same sexual goals in the name of equality, I totally get that. But I am curious to know how people would feel about changing the dialogue and the expectations around men's perceived masculinity. Will someone scream that we are emasculating men if we don't expect them to have dozens of notches on the bedpost?

 

[swimmermom3]

I am adding two more articles for the sake of conversation:

 

On a Stanford Man Who Alleged Sexual Assault - This is from The Atlantic and it addresses (I hope) some of the concerns BlueGoat was expressing about sexually aggressive girls.

 

Stanford rape case: Roll of alcohol in sexual assaults debated  - I know they use the term "rape culture" at the end, otherwise, there are some interesting points

 

[SKL]

If I can't use the word "true" in a discussion about false allegations (the RS article), without being accused of slut shaming, then I'm out of this conversation.

[SKL]

Back to the posters who can stay polite about it.

 

:huh:

 

[swimmermom3]

If I can't use the word "true" in a discussion about false allegations (the RS article), without being accused of slut shaming, then I'm out of this conversation.

 

The term "true rape" is predominantly used in conservative media to represent stranger-on-stranger rape, a rape case that has received a conviction, and it often does not include sex with an unconscious person. The term "true rape" is often used to denigrate acquaintance rape down to the level of a misunderstanding.  Thank you for your clarification as to how you were using the term. For several of us, you were using outside of its standard meaning in this political climate.

 

Part of the the problem is that the statements for accountability are nearly the same in their wording as the statements for slut-shaming. They are so close that unless someone has clarified where they stand in the course of the conversation, it is very easy to misconstrue where someone stands.  Lulu addressed this in her following post:

 

There has been language used that is in that vein and similar to what is often used by those who say it more forthrightly.

 

When the similarity in usage is pointed out it is taken as character assassination rather than a more neutral statement.

 

You can only handle so many pages of that before the snark, sarcasm, and snide remarks start slipping in.

 

You have taken it as character assassination instead of trying to understand what is being said. I will try to give you an example of how careful I think we need to be with our language when discussing the victim's responsibilities.

 

Someone recently told me that she would tell her daughter not to drink, that if her dd drank and went with a guy, she would be responsible for what happened to her.  This sounds very similar to what several of you are saying. If I understand the intent correctly, it is to instill a level of personal responsibility in your child. 

 

I would NEVER say to my dd that if she drank and went with a guy, she would be responsible for what happened to her. Some of you have assumed that I wouldn't do that because as a liberal, I don't believe in personal responsibility or taking safety precautions. Oh for Pete's sake. I am willing to bet you something like 98% of the women on this board have had the whole conversation with their daughters ( of a certain age) about drinking, being safe, the dangers of casual sex, and not taking unnecessary risks, and we've done so regardless of what our political or religious beliefs are.  It's what parents do.

 

Here's why I wouldn't tell my dd that she was responsible for what happened. As a vulnerable young woman who is a little unsure of herself, she would take me literally at my word.  She would believe that she was responsible; it was her fault, that the assault happened.

 

She contributed to the chain of events or whatever else you want to say, but she is not ultimately responsible, the rapist is.  You all have said so yourselves.

 

In believing that she was responsible (the one in control), she would tell no one and she would be ashamed just as so many victims of assault are. The language we use in discussing sexual assaults (proven and alleged) needs to be thoughtful and sensitive. If it's not, we will undo any progress we have made in bringing more sexual assault cases out in the open.

 

That's because you have made a biased assumption about my meaning.  I meant "true" as in someone not making up a story.

 

It is hard to hold a conversation if I have to worry about people assuming imaginary intentions when I'm speaking in plain English.  It would be nice if we could have the benefit of the doubt that nobody here thinks rape is OK, for starters.

 

 

Please read the part in bold above and then read the part in bold below.

 

I am aware that history - and the present in some countries - was/is as you described (in the bold).  But we don't live in the past (or over there).  We live in the here and now.  Talking about past injustices as if they were happening right now is a distraction and only harms your credibility.

 

Nobody wants to hear that their friend / relative has been accused of rape, but today we have the ability to examine all kinds of forensic evidence that either didn't exist or couldn't be analyzed in the past.  We also have rules about how cases proceed which do a much better job of protecting the victim.  It's time to stop acting as if what was "happening for centuries and centuries" is how things are today.  (Besides, it's not as if nobody cared if women were raped in the past.  People were more likely to seek justice / protection on their own vs. trust the justice system.)

 

As for the income / value thing - that really is a whole separate topic.  It deserves to be discussed, but I don't want to get into it in this thread because I don't think it belongs here.

 

I do hope you are right about your sons not ever being accused, but if they do, at the rate things are going (with your apparent support), they might be effectively lynched before any real evidence is heard, and there might not be much sympathy for them once the truth comes out.  I recently read about what became of the Duke Lacrosse team members who were falsely accused.  Of course this is just one prominent example.  It is not OK.  Your son should not be asked to "take one for the team."  (And of course there are people who sit in jail for decades for being falsely accused and convicted of rape.  Could this happen to your son?)

 

Believe it or not, it is possible to be against both rape and false accusations at the same time.

 

I never said that my sons would never be accused falsely of raping someone. I said that statistically my dd was more likely to be sexually assaulted than my sons were to be falsely accused of rape. You assumed an imaginary intention regarding my statement, basically saying that I would support lynchings and violence in dealing with false accusations. That is a fairly long leap.

[SKL]

Does it really help true victims to have their case publicized in the media, particularly before trial?  If so, please explain why this is.

 

You seem to be implying that I want to protect rapists.  No, I want to protect non-rapists from false accusations.  There is a very big difference.

 

I was looking back at my past posts, because I couldn't remember exactly what got me started on the danger of tolerating false accusations.  It was someone's angry question: 'why is it always all about the men?'  I don't see how the discussion of campus rape has ever been "all about the men."  But the men are certainly the chief victims in a false accusation situation, which is what the RS article was, which is the whole topic of this post.

 

As for the statement that convictions for campus rape are almost non-existent, I don't know much about that, but I agree with the suggestion proposed earlier that rape accusations should not go through any special channels just because the rape location, victim, or perp are connected with a university.  They should be reported directly to police just like every other rape.

 

The media has no business sensationalizing an alleged rape before it has been tried in the courts (unless the perp is someone already in the public eye or in a position of public responsibility, like a politician or cop).  Let the cops and witnesses do their job.  I can't believe the media couldn't find one single campus rape conviction to sensationalize *after* the conviction.

 

This was intended to be a substantive post about the handling of rape accusations.  But that doesn't matter because I didn't check the PC stylebook before I posted.  The words "true" and "rape" must never appear (even far apart) in the same multi-paragraph post.  Even in a thread about admittedly untrue rape accusations.  (Uh oh, I just typed "true" and "rape" right next to each other.)

 

There is not one word in the above post that blames or shames rape victims.

 

FYI I was an assault victim, and I am able to see the words "true" and "rape" near each other without losing track of the substance of the conversation, and without assuming the other person thinks I am a shameless slut.

 

If people can't talk plainly about how rape allegations are dealt with, then effective solutions cannot be identified and implemented.  I care more about doing the right thing than talking about it in the most PC manner.

[SKL]

I never said that my sons would never be accused falsely of raping someone. I said that statistically my dd was more likely to be sexually assaulted than my sons were to be falsely accused of rape. You assumed an imaginary intention regarding my statement, basically saying that I would support lynchings and violence in dealing with false accusations. That is a fairly long leap.

 

I was talking about figurative lynchings, as in, what the media did to the Duke LaCrosse players.

 

You said you get hot under the collar when you hear people talking about false rape accusations.  I don't really understand that, but it could be interpreted as "screw 'innocent until proven guilty' when it comes to alleged rape."

 

You then went on to say that people don't seem to care much about the crime of rape, which is a little out there IMO.  If people didn't care about the crime of rape, there would be no RS article and no WTM thread to discuss.

[EmseB]

The term "true rape" is predominantly used in conservative media to represent stranger-on-stranger rape, a rape case that has received a conviction, and it often does not include sex with an unconscious person. The term "true rape" is often used to denigrate acquaintance rape down to the level of a misunderstanding.  Thank you for your clarification as to how you were using the term. For several of us, you were using outside of its standard meaning in this political climate.

 

Part of the the problem is that the statements for accountability are nearly the same in their wording as the statements for slut-shaming. They are so close that unless someone has clarified where they stand in the course of the conversation, it is very easy to misconstrue where someone stands.  Lulu addressed this in her following post:

 

 

You have taken it as character assassination instead of trying to understand what is being said. I will try to give you an example of how careful I think we need to be with our language when discussing the victim's responsibilities.

 

Someone recently told me that she would tell her daughter not to drink, that if her dd drank and went with a guy, she would be responsible for what happened to her.  This sounds very similar to what several of you are saying. If I understand the intent correctly, it is to instill a level of personal responsibility in your child. 

 

I would NEVER say to my dd that if she drank and went with a guy, she would be responsible for what happened to her. Some of you have assumed that I wouldn't do that because as a liberal, I don't believe in personal responsibility or taking safety precautions. Oh for Pete's sake. I am willing to bet you something like 98% of the women on this board have had the whole conversation with their daughters ( of a certain age) about drinking, being safe, the dangers of casual sex, and not taking unnecessary risks, and we've done so regardless of what our political or religious beliefs are.  It's what parents do.

 

Here's why I wouldn't tell my dd that she was responsible for what happened. As a vulnerable young woman who is a little unsure of herself, she would take me literally at my word.  She would believe that she was responsible; it was her fault, that the assault happened.

 

She contributed to the chain of events or whatever else you want to say, but she is not ultimately responsible, the rapist is.  You all have said so yourselves.

 

In believing that she was responsible (the one in control), she would tell no one and she would be ashamed just as so many victims of assault are. The language we use in discussing sexual assaults (proven and alleged) needs to be thoughtful and sensitive. If it's not, we will undo any progress we have made in bringing more sexual assault cases out in the open.

 

 

You know, I think there's a big, horrible difference between telling a girl she's responsible for what happens if she drinks at a frat party and gets assaulted vs. telling someone it might be unwise to get drunk under certain circumstances because it increases risk.  I'm not sure where you've seen the bolded assumed, because I'm pretty much as conservative as they come and I would never tell my daughter that she was responsible for someone assaulting her, intoxicated or not.  I don't think anyone here would tell their daughters what you're describing.  I think maybe, if a girl has been drinking, has been flirting with a guy all night and he thinks that meant he was going to get laid and really she just wanted some attention or to make out and it ended up in sexual assault...I think that girl is going to already be going through everything in her mind that she could have done differently without anyone telling her she's responsible for her own sexual assault.  I feel lucky that I don't know anyone in my own life that would write off their own daughter like that.

[Reefgazer]

You know, I doubt we'll be able to agree on this, and so be it.  But I have a problem with universities being the judge, jury, and executioner in any felony trial, including rape.  The proper venue for trying a felony case is a court of law, not the dean's conference room with people who may be biased, unfamiliar with evidence guidelines/not honoring a secure chain of command with physical evidence, and/or who willingly ignore the concept of innocent until proven guilty.  In that Huff post article (where the student guilt and expulsions were noted), the article says "Students found guilty of sexual assault by their universities...", and this is where I tune out the article and any points it tries to make, because universities should not have the authority to decide the guilt or innocence of anyone associated with a felony case that has lifelong serious repercussions for everyone involved.  In my mind, their "courts", opinions, and judgments are worthless in regard to crime; they have multiple competing interests here, at the very least.  If the alleged rapist is charged with a crime by law enforcement and found guilty, it would be proper and right for the university to expel him with a note on his record as to why.  But I have zero use for articles that treat university "courts" as worth anything.  I do believe this is where I and most posters on the board differ.  However, I don't see my opinion changing on that because throughout multiple discussions on the WTM on this topic, I haven't seen one post that convinces me that rape should be prosecuted in a place other than a court of law, or in a manner different from murder. 

 

Now this is my speculating with my gut feeling, with no evidence whatsoever:  In broader society (IOW, away from WTM boards), I suspect my opinion is probably in the majority, and this is why any discussion of universities taking action on alleged rape cases will meet with blowback and resistance.  Most people put a very high value on "Innocent until proven guilty" (in a real court), and any charade that attempts to mimic that is going to meet with opposition and less support for rape prevention programs that include those provisions.  A better option for reducing rapes on campus would be to take most of the suggestions from the article previously linked by Word Nerd, as well as enforce a federal law that mandates all felonies, including rape, be passed to the local police for prosecution.  Anything less than that means someone isn't really looking at rape as a crime on par with other felonies that are deserving of police intervention.  Add to that mandatory report-to-police law a rape-crisis advocate who must be made available to the alleged victim 24/7, and who accompanies her to the police station, hospital, and court.  This advocate should be a person who is an effective counselor, as well as someone who knows the ropes of the criminal justice system and can guide the accuser through a trial.

Karen, I wish I were able to stand up and go "heck ya," but I just can't because researching for this thread has left me doubtful that our justice system as it is can make a difference. Actually, maybe it's not the system itself but our own attitudes?

 

The first article here is from Bloomberg and it talks the Vandenberg convictions. I think it is well done and worth the read in understanding what victims face:  The Downside of the Vanderbilt Rape Convictions.

 

The second article is from Huff Post and a study they did on campus punishment for rape. I know there is some concern that with the perceived growing trend to false rape accusations, young men will be unfairly punished. That could well be true with regards to the media, but it's not true on college campuses. The data collected by Huff Post comes from 32 college that voluntarily responded as well as public records. After reading the article, if you scroll down to where there is the forward arrow, you will be able to see the number of students the college found guilty and the number that were expelled. Williams College stuck in my mind because I think there was enough evidence to find 9 students over a couple of year to be guilty of rape and yet only one was expelled.

 

Fewer Than One-Third Of Campus Sexual Assault Cases Result In Expulsion

Remember that these are students that the school found guilty. So they have actively allowed someone they know has raped a student to return to campus. I suspect but have no proof that the if the school actually identified a student as guilty, it was probably not a mistaken case of sexual fumbling.

 

ETA: added link for Bloomberg article

 

[Reefgazer]

This, exactly. 

 

This type of thing has come up in our neighborhood recently with a rash of petty crimes where people from outside the neighborhood troll the streets at night flicking car door handles to see which ones are unlocked.  They then steal anything they find in the car with an unlocked door.  On our neighborhood social media site, everyone is up in arms about it and asking "What can be done to prevent these crimes?"  Lock your flippin' car doors, people!  That doesn't mean you are responsible for the theft, just that you have a pretty easy way to greatly reduce your risk.  That is not the same as blaming the victim.  So this same conversation is being carried out regarding petty theft, as well.

You know, I think there's a big, horrible difference between telling a girl she's responsible for what happens if she drinks at a frat party and gets assaulted vs. telling someone it might be unwise to get drunk under certain circumstances because it increases risk.  I'm not sure where you've seen the bolded assumed, because I'm pretty much as conservative as they come and I would never tell my daughter that she was responsible for someone assaulting her, intoxicated or not.  I don't think anyone here would tell their daughters what you're describing.  I think maybe, if a girl has been drinking, has been flirting with a guy all night and he thinks that meant he was going to get laid and really she just wanted some attention or to make out and it ended up in sexual assault...I think that girl is going to already be going through everything in her mind that she could have done differently without anyone telling her she's responsible for her own sexual assault.  I feel lucky that I don't know anyone in my own life that would write off their own daughter like that.

 

[*Lulu*]

This was intended to be a substantive post about the handling of rape accusations. But that doesn't matter because I didn't check the PC stylebook before I posted. The words "true" and "rape" must never appear (even far apart) in the same multi-paragraph post. Even in a thread about admittedly untrue rape accusations. (Uh oh, I just typed "true" and "rape" right next to each other.)

 

There is not one word in the above post that blames or shames rape victims.

 

FYI I was an assault victim, and I am able to see the words "true" and "rape" near each other without losing track of the substance of the conversation, and without assuming the other person thinks I am a shameless slut.

 

If people can't talk plainly about how rape allegations are dealt with, then effective solutions cannot be identified and implemented. I care more about doing the right thing than talking about it in the most PC manner.

The problem is, once people start making those generalized snide and sarcastic remarks, the entire discussion tanks. If someone has a problem with a specific post, I think it makes sense to ask for clarification in the polite way in which you have done it, but the general snotty remarks and intentional searches for "weasel words" seem entirely out of place. (I don't think you have done that at all, Lu. :))

Point taken.

 

We do not speak in a vacuum.

 

http://www.snopes.com/politics/quotes/rapequotes.asp

[swimmermom3]

You know, I doubt we'll be able to agree on this, and so be it.  But I have a problem with universities being the judge, jury, and executioner in any felony trial, including rape.  The proper venue for trying a felony case is a court of law, not the dean's conference room with people who may be biased, unfamiliar with evidence guidelines/not honoring a secure chain of command with physical evidence, and/or who willingly ignore the concept of innocent until proven guilty.  In that Huff post article (where the student guilt and expulsions were noted), the article says "Students found guilty of sexual assault by their universities...", and this is where I tune out the article and any points it tries to make, because universities should not have the authority to decide the guilt or innocence of anyone associated with a felony case that has lifelong serious repercussions for everyone involved.  In my mind, their "courts", opinions, and judgments are worthless in regard to crime; they have multiple competing interests here, at the very least.  If the alleged rapist is charged with a crime by law enforcement and found guilty, it would be proper and right for the university to expel him with a note on his record as to why.  But I have zero use for articles that treat university "courts" as worth anything.  I do believe this is where I and most posters on the board differ.  However, I don't see my opinion changing on that because throughout multiple discussions on the WTM on this topic, I haven't seen one post that convinces me that rape should be prosecuted in a place other than a court of law, or in a manner different from murder. 

 

Now this is my speculating with my gut feeling, with no evidence whatsoever:  In broader society (IOW, away from WTM boards), I suspect my opinion is probably in the majority, and this is why any discussion of universities taking action on alleged rape cases will meet with blowback and resistance.  Most people put a very high value on "Innocent until proven guilty" (in a real court), and any charade that attempts to mimic that is going to meet with opposition and less support for rape prevention programs that include those provisions.  A better option for reducing rapes on campus would be to take most of the suggestions from the article previously linked by Word Nerd, as well as enforce a federal law that mandates all felonies, including rape, be passed to the local police for prosecution.  Anything less than that means someone isn't really looking at rape as a crime on par with other felonies that are deserving of police intervention.  Add to that mandatory report-to-police law a rape-crisis advocate who must be made available to the alleged victim 24/7, and who accompanies her to the police station, hospital, and court.  This advocate should be a person who is an effective counselor, as well as someone who knows the ropes of the criminal justice system and can guide the accuser through a trial.

 

I have another set of articles which I hope you do read, not because I am hoping to change your mind, but because I would like to discuss them. They look at the pros and cons of both systems. Taking rapes cases strictly through the legal system seems like it should be straight-forward, but it's not. I really dislike what the colleges have done on many counts, but I don't have much more faith in how the legal system has worked on this particular issue either. I'd like to talk about possible improvements, if you are willing.

 

If you had read the other article I linked, one of the problems is even if we take the process out of the schools, counseling would still be done there. With counseling comes some sort of reporting. The article addressed that when reporting goes up, funding goes down, because schools are protecting their reputations.

 

[swimmermom3]

Point taken.

 

We do not speak in a vacuum.

 

http://www.snopes.com/politics/quotes/rapequotes.asp

 

Add this from an Orange County Superior Court Judge Derek G. Johnson:

 

“I’m not a gynecologist, but I can tell you something,†the judge said, according to documents released Thursday. “If someone doesn’t want to have sexual intercourse, the body shuts down. The body will not permit that to happen unless a lot of damage in inflicted, and we heard nothing about that in this case.

 

"That tells me that the victim in this case, although she wasn’t necessarily willing, she didn’t put up a fight.â€

 

The judge, who has been on the Orange County Superior Court since 2000, also declared the rape “technical,†and not “a real, live criminal case.â€

 

 

 

[swimmermom3]

For anyone that is still reading, there is a long, but interesting article in Slate that addresses many of the concerns expressed in this thread with regards to false rape accusations and the lack of due process. In the process of outlining the young man's case, the article also addresses campus rape statistics and why they are flawed. It looks also at how recent federally mandated changes have affected colleges. 

 

The College Rape Overcorrection

 

I would have been sick to my stomach and outraged if this had been my son.

[Reefgazer]

Hmmm...maybe we are unsatisfied with the way rape has been handled in the courts and in the colleges because the nature of the crime makes it extremely difficult to prosecute regardless of the venue.  But I think another thread/continuing discussion here on ways to improve the reporting and prosecution of rape would be a great thread for discussion.  I just hope that posters who have a tendency to make assumptions and insult will stay out of it unless they can remain civil.

 

I actually did read the articles you linked  :) , but I tend to tune out and mentally sneer when I see universities' opinions given the weight of a court of law.  Regarding the issue of counseling:  It doesn't have to be done at the school, if reporting is an issue.  In fact, it would be ideal if the person taking the report and the person responsible for the counseling were not paid by the school or had their main office at the school.  Although an assault reported on campus will make its way into the crime stats regardless. 

 

ETA:  I actually think this will have to be clarified by the federal courts.  But since that will take a long time and a lot of lives on both sides could be ruined in that time, it would be wise for colleges to deal with it ASAP.

I have another set of articles which I hope you do read, not because I am hoping to change your mind, but because I would like to discuss them. They look at the pros and cons of both systems. Taking rapes cases strictly through the legal system seems like it should be straight-forward, but it's not. I really dislike what the colleges have done on many counts, but I don't have much more faith in how the legal system has worked on this particular issue either. I'd like to talk about possible improvements, if you are willing.

 

If you had read the other article I linked, one of the problems is even if we take the process out of the schools, counseling would still be done there. With counseling comes some sort of reporting. The article addressed that when reporting goes up, funding goes down, because schools are protecting their reputations.
 

 

[gardenmom5]

Add this from an Orange County Superior Court Judge Derek G. Johnson:

 

“I’m not a gynecologist, but I can tell you something,†the judge said, according to documents released Thursday. “If someone doesn’t want to have sexual intercourse, the body shuts down. The body will not permit that to happen unless a lot of damage in inflicted, and we heard nothing about that in this case.

 

"That tells me that the victim in this case, although she wasn’t necessarily willing, she didn’t put up a fight.â€

 

The judge, who has been on the Orange County Superior Court since 2000, also declared the rape “technical,†and not “a real, live criminal case.â€

 

I agree with him.  he's NOT a gynecologist.

 

it also reminds me of something whoppie Goldberg said in defending roman polanski.  "it's not like it was rape- rape."

both of them are disgusting.

[gardenmom5]

This is just mind boggling; I feel like we are being dragged back to medieval times. It rivals the idiocy of the Idaho rep who asked if women could swallow a tiny camera  to be viewed remotely by a doctor before allowing an abortion.

 

or the Georgia rep who wanted to disallow additional troops on guam because it might "tip over".  (and yeah, - he *was* serious.)

[SKL]

For anyone that is still reading, there is a long, but interesting article in Slate that addresses many of the concerns expressed in this thread with regards to false rape accusations and the lack of due process. In the process of outlining the young man's case, the article also addresses campus rape statistics and why they are flawed. It looks also at how recent federally mandated changes have affected colleges. 

 

The College Rape Overcorrection

 

I would have been sick to my stomach and outraged if this had been my son.

 

Thanks for posting this.  I hope people are able to take the time to look at it.

[LisaKinVA]

For anyone that is still reading, there is a long, but interesting article in Slate that addresses many of the concerns expressed in this thread with regards to false rape accusations and the lack of due process. In the process of outlining the young man's case, the article also addresses campus rape statistics and why they are flawed. It looks also at how recent federally mandated changes have affected colleges.

 

The College Rape Overcorrection

 

I would have been sick to my stomach and outraged if this had been my son.

Wow. I was just discussing this with a friend tonight.

[Bluegoat]

I am going to take this point by point.

 

Could you elaborate on this a touch, I am not sure what positions you mean

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I am going to take this point by point.

 

Could you elaborate on this a touch, I am not sure what positions you mean

 

It was mentioned in relation to what I was talking about with swimmermom that there are sets of propositions about teh nature of rape that are taken by faminist commentators as, essentially, assumptions about the nature of rape.  Many of them are controversial, and not obviously true, but in the public discussion they are very rarely presented as interpretations, or really even supported with any argument or evidence.

 

People not recognizing the reality of rape culture is absolutely a problem. The way you frame it here makes me wonder if part of why there is talking past each other in this thread is because people are working with very different perceptions of the reality we opperate in?

 

I think this is a good example.  90% of people who talk about "rape culture" have only a vague idea what they mean by it.  It isn't something that can be proven, it is a theory, or even a metatheory. There are all kinds of people, both feminists and non-feminists, who are critical of the idea or some parts of it.  And as a metatheory, it strongly influences the way people interpret information.

 

 

I agree that there is a problem with how sexual assault of men is treated. Although it should be noted that wide attention to sexual assault of women is a relatively recent phenomenon.

 

I don't know that I entirely agree with that.  It has generally been considered illegal and evil.  Some aspects of it were looked at differently, as in the case of married people, but I think that is not so much a matter of indifference to rape as a different perspective about what marriage is.  It wasn't talked about in a very public way, but I rather wonder if we haven't misinterpreted that somewhat.  There were quite a few social rules in place that I think were intended in part to control rape.  We tend to look at those today as attempts to control people's sexuality.  However, I think one could also argue that in the past, people were less likely to see the possibility of rape as something that could be controlled by some sort of public action or even strong social or religious taboo, and perahps also that it was a difficult crime to deal with legally because of its private nature and the effect on the victim of doing so.  So their solution, in part, was to make a set of strict social rules that made it more difficult for it to occur.  Whether or not that actually worked - for the poor less often I suspect - we could argue.  But I don't know that that was indifference so much as a different way of thinking about sexuality.

 

In some ways, it seems to me that we are coming along to something similar, with rather strict rules around contracting sexual situations in order to avoid potential problems. 

 

There are many kinds of violence that exist in the world. Sexual violence seems to be an area where it is most acceptable to place some/most of the blame on the shoulders of the victim instead of the assailant.

 

I don't actually think that is true in the west, though it is in some places. I think we are much more likely to place responsibility on the victim in other types of crime - if you make similar comments about rape it is considered evidence of victim blaming in a way that is quite different from pretty much any other crime I can think of.  I gave an example I think earlier, I know a man who was shot in the face by a guy trying to kill him.  Why?  Because he got in a fight with a biker in a bar.  He had hung out with outlaw bikers for many years.  I feel quite comfortable saying that his rather unwise lifestyle choices led up to his present situation, and I doubt many would disagree.

 

Say what?

 

I have yet to meet anyone, male, female, gay, or straight, that is happy to have someone they are not involved with grope them. Sexual assault should not be confused with PDA.

 

I can only say here, and I am not being snarky at all, that you aren't hanging out with the right people (not that you should start).   There are planty of party and club scenes where groping is a pretty common way for people to let each other know they are interested, and if they aren't they just don't respond because they are indifferent. The last dance at a popular hook up spot is typically a bunch of people, many of whom don't know each other, feeling eachother up, and hoping it is reciprocated. I don't think this is particularly surprising in a hook up culture - if sex is a very casual thing you regularly do with strangers, being groped is not that big a deal so long as it isn't aggressive. 

 

It's really hard to find any kind of numbers on this kind of thing in the gay club scene, but I think its the same or maybe even more common.  THis article was one of the few that I have even seen talk about it in terms of sexual assault, so obviously some don't like it, but the situation seems to be that it is taken for granted in that context is normal.  But really the most clear example I think is sex clubs and swingers parties.  People go to those places for pretty much groping people they are not in a relationship with and quite possibly don't know at all, may never meet again.  Some people are blase about sexual touching. 

 

Again, I am not sure I am following this thought. Could you elaborate?

 

My main point was simply that I think that among millenials, there is little difference between the attitude to men or women who engage in what some might describe as slutty behavior.  Some people approve and some don't, but in either case they tend to approve or disaprove regardly of gender.  I do see some people who have double standards, but that isn't always in favour of the man.

 

My secondary point is that the sexual freedom that comes from saying lots of casual sex, if consensual, can also feel aggressive to some people.  Whereas at one time there may have been a judgement that it was wrong, now the expectation may be that a casual attitude to sex is normal.  People can also feel judged by that, and if they believe it to be right but feel it makes them feel crappy, that can also be stressful.

[*Lulu*]

It was mentioned in relation to what I was talking about with swimmermom that there are sets of propositions about teh nature of rape that are taken by faminist commentators as, essentially, assumptions about the nature of rape. Many of them are controversial, and not obviously true, but in the public discussion they are very rarely presented as interpretations, or really even supported with any argument or evidence.

#1- Are you referring to the idea that rape is not about sex but about power? Could you link a reliable, academic anything where a qualified professional takes issue with that idea. No snark. I have worked with a lot of professionals in a lot of places and have never heard anyone raise a question about this premise.

I think this is a good example. 90% of people who talk about "rape culture" have only a vague idea what they mean by it. It isn't something that can be proven, it is a theory, or even a metatheory. There are all kinds of people, both feminists and non-feminists, who are critical of the idea or some parts of it. And as a metatheory, it strongly influences the way people interpret information.

#2- And 79% of statistics are made up on the spot. For me, when I talk about rape culture I am speaking from my personal experiences.

I don't know that I entirely agree with that. It has generally been considered illegal and evil.

#3- I repeat my thought from earlier in the thread: people are almost always against rape in theory but when presented with an actual situation are likely to minimize and gloss over the reality of what is before them.

Some aspects of it were looked at differently, as in the case of married people, but I think that is not so much a matter of indifference to rape as a different perspective about what marriage is.

#4- I think it is a piece of the overall picture of women's place and value in society. We are not even a full century out from women in the US being allowed to vote. Women as more than property is a relatively recent development when you look at the whole of human history.

It wasn't talked about in a very public way, but I rather wonder if we haven't misinterpreted that somewhat. There were quite a few social rules in place that I think were intended in part to control rape. We tend to look at those today as attempts to control people's sexuality. However, I think one could also argue that in the past, people were less likely to see the possibility of rape as something that could be controlled by some sort of public action or even strong social or religious taboo, and perahps also that it was a difficult crime to deal with legally because of its private nature and the effect on the victim of doing so. So their solution, in part, was to make a set of strict social rules that made it more difficult for it to occur. Whether or not that actually worked - for the poor less often I suspect - we could argue. But I don't know that that was indifference so much as a different way of thinking about sexuality.

#5- My experience of this is quite different. Rape makes people uncomfortable. There is a reason that most criminal cases of rape involve a stranger to the victim. If some unknown man attacks me everyone I know will rally and support me. (Even those who ask hurtful questions about where I was or what I was wearing will still be supportive.) But if I say a family friend that everybody knows and loves raped me.....that support may not be found. (My experience is that it WILL not be found in anyone who knows the perpetrator.)

In some ways, it seems to me that we are coming along to something similar, with rather strict rules around contracting sexual situations in order to avoid potential problems.

 

I don't actually think that is true in the west, though it is in some places. I think we are much more likely to place responsibility on the victim in other types of crime - if you make similar comments about rape it is considered evidence of victim blaming in a way that is quite different from pretty much any other crime I can think of. I gave an example I think earlier, I know a man who was shot in the face by a guy trying to kill him. Why? Because he got in a fight with a biker in a bar. He had hung out with outlaw bikers for many years. I feel quite comfortable saying that his rather unwise lifestyle choices led up to his present situation, and I doubt many would disagree.

 

I can only say here, and I am not being snarky at all, that you aren't hanging out with the right people (not that you should start). There are planty of party and club scenes where groping is a pretty common way for people to let each other know they are interested, and if they aren't they just don't respond because they are indifferent. The last dance at a popular hook up spot is typically a bunch of people, many of whom don't know each other, feeling eachother up, and hoping it is reciprocated. I don't think this is particularly surprising in a hook up culture - if sex is a very casual thing you regularly do with strangers, being groped is not that big a deal so long as it isn't aggressive.

 

It's really hard to find any kind of numbers on this kind of thing in the gay club scene, but I think its the same or maybe even more common. THis article was one of the few that I have even seen talk about it in terms of sexual assault, so obviously some don't like it, but the situation seems to be that it is taken for granted in that context is normal. But really the most clear example I think is sex clubs and swingers parties. People go to those places for pretty much groping people they are not in a relationship with and quite possibly don't know at all, may never meet again. Some people are blase about sexual touching.

#6- I would be very interested to see what the numbers are for sexual assaults in the situations you outline above and other situations. I have known a good number of women who have been raped and of those only a few were perpetrators that were strangers.

My main point was simply that I think that among millenials, there is little difference between the attitude to men or women who engage in what some might describe as slutty behavior. Some people approve and some don't, but in either case they tend to approve or disaprove regardly of gender. I do see some people who have double standards, but that isn't always in favour of the man.

 

My secondary point is that the sexual freedom that comes from saying lots of casual sex, if consensual, can also feel aggressive to some people. Whereas at one time there may have been a judgement that it was wrong, now the expectation may be that a casual attitude to sex is normal. People can also feel judged by that, and if they believe it to be right but feel it makes them feel crappy, that can also be stressful.

#7- I don't know about this. My rapes happened within a conservative Christian setting where the attitude toward sex was in no way casual. I have found the more traditional someone is in how they view sexuality the less likely they are to be supportive of the victim of a sexual crime.

[Reefgazer]

To the bolded:  This was common in the clubs and bars where I hung out even back in the 80s; common as in, nearly every weekend.  Being groped was not considered a big deal; it was more like testing the waters.  Now 30 years later and a bit wiser, I can see it was pretty icky, but then it was just routine.  But now it's icky because I wish I had had more self-respect to not expose myself to that behavior.  But 'ya know, that's on me; I knew how those places operated going in.

It was mentioned in relation to what I was talking about with swimmermom that there are sets of propositions about teh nature of rape that are taken by faminist commentators as, essentially, assumptions about the nature of rape.  Many of them are controversial, and not obviously true, but in the public discussion they are very rarely presented as interpretations, or really even supported with any argument or evidence.

 

I think this is a good example.  90% of people who talk about "rape culture" have only a vague idea what they mean by it.  It isn't something that can be proven, it is a theory, or even a metatheory. There are all kinds of people, both feminists and non-feminists, who are critical of the idea or some parts of it.  And as a metatheory, it strongly influences the way people interpret information.
 

I don't know that I entirely agree with that.  It has generally been considered illegal and evil.  Some aspects of it were looked at differently, as in the case of married people, but I think that is not so much a matter of indifference to rape as a different perspective about what marriage is.  It wasn't talked about in a very public way, but I rather wonder if we haven't misinterpreted that somewhat.  There were quite a few social rules in place that I think were intended in part to control rape.  We tend to look at those today as attempts to control people's sexuality.  However, I think one could also argue that in the past, people were less likely to see the possibility of rape as something that could be controlled by some sort of public action or even strong social or religious taboo, and perahps also that it was a difficult crime to deal with legally because of its private nature and the effect on the victim of doing so.  So their solution, in part, was to make a set of strict social rules that made it more difficult for it to occur.  Whether or not that actually worked - for the poor less often I suspect - we could argue.  But I don't know that that was indifference so much as a different way of thinking about sexuality.

 

In some ways, it seems to me that we are coming along to something similar, with rather strict rules around contracting sexual situations in order to avoid potential problems. 

 

I don't actually think that is true in the west, though it is in some places. I think we are much more likely to place responsibility on the victim in other types of crime - if you make similar comments about rape it is considered evidence of victim blaming in a way that is quite different from pretty much any other crime I can think of.  I gave an example I think earlier, I know a man who was shot in the face by a guy trying to kill him.  Why?  Because he got in a fight with a biker in a bar.  He had hung out with outlaw bikers for many years.  I feel quite comfortable saying that his rather unwise lifestyle choices led up to his present situation, and I doubt many would disagree.

 

I can only say here, and I am not being snarky at all, that you aren't hanging out with the right people (not that you should start).   There are planty of party and club scenes where groping is a pretty common way for people to let each other know they are interested, and if they aren't they just don't respond because they are indifferent. The last dance at a popular hook up spot is typically a bunch of people, many of whom don't know each other, feeling eachother up, and hoping it is reciprocated. I don't think this is particularly surprising in a hook up culture - if sex is a very casual thing you regularly do with strangers, being groped is not that big a deal so long as it isn't aggressive. 

 

It's really hard to find any kind of numbers on this kind of thing in the gay club scene, but I think its the same or maybe even more common.  THis article was one of the few that I have even seen talk about it in terms of sexual assault, so obviously some don't like it, but the situation seems to be that it is taken for granted in that context is normal.  But really the most clear example I think is sex clubs and swingers parties.  People go to those places for pretty much groping people they are not in a relationship with and quite possibly don't know at all, may never meet again.  Some people are blase about sexual touching. 

 

My main point was simply that I think that among millenials, there is little difference between the attitude to men or women who engage in what some might describe as slutty behavior.  Some people approve and some don't, but in either case they tend to approve or disaprove regardly of gender.  I do see some people who have double standards, but that isn't always in favour of the man.

 

My secondary point is that the sexual freedom that comes from saying lots of casual sex, if consensual, can also feel aggressive to some people.  Whereas at one time there may have been a judgement that it was wrong, now the expectation may be that a casual attitude to sex is normal.  People can also feel judged by that, and if they believe it to be right but feel it makes them feel crappy, that can also be stressful.

 

[MBM]

Your daughters can use an app to check up on friends and have themselves checked should they go to parties. My daughter designed one of them. :) Some are free and others are not.

[Joker]

This came across my news feed a bit ago.

 

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/crime-courts/2-college-students-charged-gang-rape-florida-beach-n339941

 

We really need to figure out why so many would stand around and do nothing? I don't get it. Who is raising these people? If it's not the parent's fault then where have we failed so spectacularly?

 

 

ETA: Other article discuss the fact that the girl thought she was drugged and wasn't sure what happened. She knew something happened but wasn't sure exactly what that was.

[swimmermom3]

Your daughters can use an app to check up on friends and have themselves checked should they go to parties. My daughter designed one of them. :) Some are free and others are not.

 

Last night dh and I were talking about what I have learned from this thread and he mentioned that there was an article in March's Esquire  magazine on the topic of what happens when you have two inebriated consensual partners and something goes wrong.

 

Occidental Justice: The Disastrous Fallout When Drunk Sex Meets Academic Bureaucracy

 

It was another well-written, but discouraging article. In this case, the young people around the  guy and girl, really did so many things right and everyone was checking up on the young woman. In fact, I was really impressed with her friends' diligence. Now I wonder if they had one of those apps.

 

That's so cool your daughter designed one.

[MSNative]

Last night dh and I were talking about what I have learned from this thread and he mentioned that there was an article in March's Esquire magazine on the topic of what happens when you have two inebriated consensual partners and something goes wrong.

 

Occidental Justice: The Disastrous Fallout When Drunk Sex Meets Academic Bureaucracy

 

It was another well-written, but discouraging article. In this case, the young people around the guy and girl, really did so many things right and everyone was checking up on the young woman. In fact, I was really impressed with her friends' diligence. Now I wonder if they had one of those apps.

 

That's so cool your daughter designed one.

Wow. That was a scary article. If the system really works like that, things need to change quickly. That is not justice for either of them.

[EmseB]

Last night dh and I were talking about what I have learned from this thread and he mentioned that there was an article in March's Esquire  magazine on the topic of what happens when you have two inebriated consensual partners and something goes wrong.

 

Occidental Justice: The Disastrous Fallout When Drunk Sex Meets Academic Bureaucracy

 

It was another well-written, but discouraging article. In this case, the young people around the  guy and girl, really did so many things right and everyone was checking up on the young woman. In fact, I was really impressed with her friends' diligence. Now I wonder if they had one of those apps.

 

That's so cool your daughter designed one.

 

This is what makes me question "yes means yes" laws and everyone stating it's a simple as "not raping people" or that consent is clear cut.  It is also appaling that Universities are allowed to have their own kangaroo courts like this.  I'm not sure why anyone thought it was a good idea to set up any kind of extrajudicial system for rape.  That is completely bonkers.

[unsinkable]

The latest:

 

UVA associate dean is suing Rolling Stone for defamation: http://news.yahoo.com/u-va-dean-sues-rolling-stone-over-debunked-165556896.html

Thanks, Karen. I hadn't seen this.

 

I have to think about this. I'm not sure how to take it...

[MSNative]

The Occidental college article got me researching. Thoughts? Regret = rape?

http://www.roanoke.com/news/education/higher_education/student-claims-he-was-expelled-from-w-l-for-consensual/article_5c28779e-a237-5e8d-b958-a1a2dadd83f1.html?mode=jqm

 

Here is an article that is referenced in the news paper above.

http://totalsororitymove.com/is-it-possible-that-there-is-something-in-between-consensual-sex-and-rape-and-that-it-happens-to-almost-every-girl-out-there/

[Hyacinth]

Regret = Rape? That's ridiculous. I can appreciate the sometimes grey area of who initiated, was there full consent, how drunk is too drunk, etc. But to say that regret is the same as rape? Too far. 

 

 

 

 

[Guest]

I remember my first day at college and they were going over what to do if there was a crime on campus (theft, vandalism, etc. Rape wasn't covered because that isn't an issue on a Catholic campus #funnynotfunny). I was shocked that I wasn't to contact police but "campus security". Most of the security guards were students!!

 

Why do colleges get to act like their own countries?? My advice to my kids will be to screw "security" and call the real police.

[Seasider]

Why they allowed it to go to press without any sort of fact checking, ...

I don't know about hamstringing, but to let it go to press without fact checking... That's not journalism.

[TechWife]

Why do colleges get to act like their own countries?? My advice to my kids will be to screw "security" and call the real police.

 

I have no idea! At my son's university, they actually have their own, real, certified police force. If the students call 911 that's where their call is routed. If they call the town police about something that happened on the university campus, they are told to call the university police.