Because "well, they were both drunk, so..." comes up so often in discussions about rape...

[Murphy101]

Not defending the dads character.....but I think the word choice was more about lack of vocabulary than intent to further demean the victim.

I haven't read it, so going on what I have read about it here...

 

The problem I have with it is it comes from a "my poor mistreated misunderstood baby boy is going to be so put out by this" stance rather than:

 

Sorrow for son's actions and deep belief it won't happen again.

 

Heck, if the dad had stated he still thought son was innocent, I wouldn't have liked it but I can understand and sympathize with a parent being in denial about such an awful thing. I can't fathom having to wrap my brain around accepting my son was a rapist either. But if I had accepted it? No way would we be making excuses for him and putting forth a boohoo attitude for him. Hard to dredge empathy for that.

Edited June 9, 2016 by Murphy101

[SKL]

Also remember that they are still denying that it actually was rape.  Son testified that he had consent.  So the dad's statement is not going to call it rape or any other decisively negative term.  Thus "action."

 

I'm more upset by the way he focuses on how wonderful the guy's life is supposed to be, without showing any concern at all for the other side of the equation.  It's all about how we can make sure my son isn't too affected by this incident - and implying he's already suffered too much.  Just way wrong.

[Paige]

I don't think his defenders are defending or minimizing the crime he was accused and convicted of, but that they don't believe he did it in the first place. I can sympathize with why they want to believe that. It's much easier to think he is being misunderstood and mistreated than to think that they have misjudged him, or worse, that anyone- even normally nice guys- can do these things.

[goldberry]

It has been a while, but I remember a survey report years back that said the top thing women said they wanted in a husband or partner was someone who didn't hit them.

 

I remember being stunned that this was a factor in enough relationships (first hand or observed) that it topped the list.

 

One of my nieces finally ended a very bad relationship that lasted for about 8 years.  She is dating someone new, and I asked if he was a good guy.

 

She said, semi-joking, "Well, he has his own car and he's never been in prison, so...."

 

It just made me so sad.  He did end up being a good guy though!

[Scarlett]

I haven't read it, so going on what I have read about it here...

 

The problem I have with it is it comes from a "my poor mistreated misunderstood baby boy is going to be so put out by this" stance rather than:

 

Sorrow for son's actions and deep belief it won't happen again.

 

Heck, if the dad had stated he still thought son was innocent, I wouldn't have liked it but I can understand and sympathize with a parent being in denial about such an awful thing. I can't fathom having to wrap my brain around accepting my son was a rapist either. But if I had accepted it? No way would we be making excuses for him and putting forth a boohoo attitude for him. Hard to dredge empathy for that.

I don't think anyone of his family believes it was rape. Because he is saying she consented.

 

Makes me queasy to think of my son doing something like that.

[Scarlett]

I heard a legal analyst this morning saying that the parole board...probation board?....some agency like that recommended a light sentence as well. The analyst said it was definitely a VERY light sentence and has every thing to do with privilege .

[Paige]

I have been talking about it with my 21 year old college student too. He is wondering how a male who found a single female victim can protect himself from accusation. His campus does have an expectation of Bystander Intervention, but he has met plenty of gals who lie to their parents about their partying, and doesnt want to be the convenient excuse, should he come across another one passed out on the lawn near a dorm.

Why is it complicated? Call 911, keep your clothes on,  and don't get your DNA in her and you're good. I don't think my DS or DH should do anything differently than my DDs or I would do and I don't believe there's an epidemic of good Samaritans being accused of assault.

[goldberry]

This article, "The Alcohol Blackout"  appeared earlier this year in Texas Monthly and tackles many of the issues discussed on this thread.  The author, Sarah Hepola, is an alcoholic who went to the University of Texas at Austin to do a report on campus drinking-to-blackout culture and sexual assault.  Very interesting read by a good writer--I'd like to read her book one day.

 

Interesting, thanks for sharing.

[Corraleno]

That has been brought up, but I don't think anyone responded. While there is racial inequality for sure, what the article fails to look at is the state laws. I looked them up and TN has much steeper minimum sentencing than CA. 

 

Another factor is that Batey's charges were more numerous and more serious than Turner's — in addition to digitally penetrating his victim both vaginally and anally, he raped her, put his penis in her mouth, anally raped her with a bottle, and peed on her. All while laughing and joking while his teammates recorded video of the assault.

 

There's no question that Turner should have gotten a much longer sentence for what he did, but IMO Batey got what he deserved.

[Carol in Cal.]

I agree it doesn't matter that it was only 20 minutes of his life. He should still pay for his crime. But my image of the dad was waaaaay different when I thought he was referring to the rape as 'getting some action'.

I agree with your interpretation of the 'action' phrase, BUT, later in his statement the dad says something like 'he has never been violent'.  If he had said, he has never been violent before' I might have been able to buy his comments, but in this context that statement really fried me.

 

ETA:  Here is the exact quote:  "He has no prior criminal history and has never been violent to anyone, including his actions on the night of January 17, 2015."  You know, because sticking your fingers into someone along with (presumably inadvertently) some local pine needles after forcibly removing their clothes isn't violent at all.

 

Or let's just look at a summary of the conviction:  "The Ohio native was convicted of assault with intent to commit rape of an intoxicated woman, sexually penetrating an intoxicated person with a foreign object and sexually penetrating an unconscious person with a foreign object."

 

Because, you know, that's not VIOLENT.  No, not at all.

 

I'm seething here.  Can you tell?

Edited June 9, 2016 by Carol in Cal.

[Murphy101]

Why is it complicated? Call 911, keep your clothes on, and don't get your DNA in her and you're good. I don't think my DS or DH should do anything differently than my DDs or I would do and I don't believe there's an epidemic of good Samaritans being accused of assault.

It's not that simple. She's passed out, from who knows what, when she looks up or someone passes by, all they see is the guy standing over her or leaning over her. Is he the hero or the villain? Witnesses are notoriously erroneous in their interpretation of events. Even the actual victim bc trauma, drugs/alcohol in their system, and more can affect how they perceive what is going on around them.

 

I think the key here for the swedes in this case was there were two of them. I encourage my sons, same as my daughters, to have friends or family around. Numbers help in so many ways. I would hope that even if alone, they would do the right thing, even if it meant it turned into a no good deed goes unpunished scenario. But numbers are just good to have.

 

This is going to be a topic of conversation in my house bc one of my sons is paid by the university to be a night escort. (I can't remember the name of the actual title.) But basicly, his job on campus will be to offer help and escort to anyone who asks and patrol his area for people who might need help. For example, they have call boxes just about everywhere. Outside all buildings and at exit and entrance to all parking lots/garages. People can use them to call 911 or to just say they'd like someone to walk with them to their dorm or wherever on campus between the hours of 6pm and 6am. And he will either walk or have a golf cart to come get them. For the most part, it's considered a cushy campus job bc most of the time they just sit at the call desk doing their homework. But I'm absolutely going to be asking me him what kind of training they offer and if they work in teams of at least two, which I think is just the smart thing to do.

Edited June 9, 2016 by Murphy101

[Bluegoat]

Can't believe I made it through all 14 pages of this thread--just wanted to share a couple of thoughts that haven't been touched on as best as I can remember.

 

People use the terms "sexual assault" and "rape" interchangeably and it drives me crazy.  Both, of course, are wrong, but there's just no comparing me getting my butt pinched getting on the bus for a field trip in 8th grade to the bodily invasion that happens in rape.  All forms of sexual assault are unacceptable, but the amount of trauma perpetrated on the victim varies too much for a single term to adequately characterize it imo.

 

This article, "The Alcohol Blackout"  appeared earlier this year in Texas Monthly and tackles many of the issues discussed on this thread.  The author, Sarah Hepola, is an alcoholic who went to the University of Texas at Austin to do a report on campus drinking-to-blackout culture and sexual assault.  Very interesting read by a good writer--I'd like to read her book one day.

 

Well, in some places there isn't a legal line between sexual assault and rape - rape is a kind of sexual assault and that is what you get charged with, not rape.   This sort of change was generally made for the opposite reason you're suggesting - it was so other types of serious sexual assult weren't just shurugged off as not the real thing.  Getting your butt pinched is not likely as serious as rape, but other kinds may be.  (And in some places, men aren't, by the legal definition, be raped by a woman even if they don't consent to sex, because they aren't being penetrated.)

 

That is an interesting article - and I would say what she describes is what I say both on campus and especially when I was in the army - drinking being used deliberately to make one's own consent less fraught.

[Matryoshka]

I agree. The whole time I was reading it I was like boo hoo. I dont know what a dad should say in that circumstance where he is begging for mercy......probably he should have told his son to admit blame and take his punishment.

If you want an example of how he could have worded a more appropriate apology, look at the link in a PP where someone 'fixed' his letter.

[SKL]

When I was 12, an old guy tried very hard to get me to drink some alcohol that he kept in his home, while grooming me for molestation.  I came very close to drinking some to prove I wasn't afraid.  Thankfully, I was afraid.  I wasn't sure why, though.  The guy did put his hands on me more than once, but I wriggled away.  I'm sure it would have been worse had he gotten me drunk.  Maybe this is one reason why I never dared to drink around people I didn't fully trust.

 

I told my kids about that incident, and I will remind them as many times as necessary.  It isn't about whether I would have been "bad" or "at fault" if I'd drunk, it's about whether I would have gotten away without more damage.  "Alcohol makes you stupid.  Alcohol makes you vulnerable.  Alcohol affects some people way more than others."  "If anyone tries to get you to drink alcohol before the legal age, they are up to something bad."  Eventually I will add that somebody might drug your drink even if you aren't drinking alcohol.

 

I also like the advice that sober sex is better.  (Or so I've heard.)  How to bring this up to my kids is another question.  :P

[ktgrok]

It's not that simple. She's passed out, from who knows what, when she looks up or someone passes by, all they see is the guy standing over her or leaning over her. Is he the hero or the villain? Witnesses are notoriously erroneous in their interpretation of events. Even the actual victim bc trauma, drugs/alcohol in their system, and more can affect how they perceive what is going on around them.

 

I think the key here for the swedes in this case was there were two of them. I encourage my sons, same as my daughters, to have friends or family around. Numbers help in so many ways. I would hope that even if alone, they would do the right thing, even if it meant it turned into a no good deed goes unpunished scenario. But numbers are just good to have.

 

This is going to be a topic of conversation in my house bc one of my sons is paid by the university to be a night escort. (I can't remember the name of the actual title.) But basicly, his job on campus will be to offer help and escort to anyone who asks and patrol his area for people who might need help. For example, they have call boxes just about everywhere. Outside all buildings and at exit and entrance to all parking lots/garages. People can use them to call 911 or to just say they'd like someone to walk with them to their dorm or wherever on campus between the hours of 6pm and 6am. And he will either walk or have a golf cart to come get them. For the most part, it's considered a cushy campus job bc most of the time they just sit at the call desk doing their homework. But I'm absolutely going to be asking me him what kind of training they offer and if they work in teams of at least two, which I think is just the smart thing to do.

 

I had that job as a freshman! It was a great job, although a bit boring. We carried a radio to radio in anything we saw, and a big heavy flashlight. Great job. 

[Carol in Cal.]

http://www.theonion.com/article/wealthy-teen-nearly-experiences-consequence-2551

[swimmermom3]

I think that there is a disservice done when we downplay the risks and dangers of attending a party like this.  This is not the same as getting together with a couple friends and having a bottle of wine.  It isn't the same as a small party where the host knows everyone there.  Part of the draw to the large college party is how anonymous it is - with the attendant sense that you can get away with things you wouldn't do around people who knew you.  Somewhere, saying that these kinds of parties often drew people who were looking to take advantage of people who had let their guard down became something that people said contributed to rape culture.  This is something I don't get.  

 

I admit that the 600+ posts are beginning to run together in my mind, so could you please show me the posts that downplay the risks and dangers of attending a party like this?

 

There were some implications that those who were not keen on hearing

 

"A young woman, who drank to unconsciousness, was raped in the wide open behind a dumpster by a varsity swimmer at Stanford"

 

paired with

 

"Well, the best thing to do to avoid rape is to avoid drinking, were modest clothing, avoid certain situations..."

 

were all in favor of binge drinking and the hook-up culture.

 

I saw about as much support for that as I did for Brock Turner.

 

The only conclusion I can come to on the last part in bold above after reading this thread and really thinking about it, is that it really does come down to perception.

 

Some women on this thread need to hear the above statements paired together. It makes sense to them to use a real person's rape and the specific circumstances as an instructional tool.

 

Other women on the the thread see the pairing and read the implication that the victim is in part responsible for what happened because they didn't follow the safety protocol.  They feel that the pairing in the same conversation diminishes the rapist's responsibility and could prevent victims from reporting the crime. That's the connection to the "rape culture."

 

Perhaps as SKL suggested, it's all about the individual's filter. 

 

Do we want to start another thread about the glamorization of binge drinking and the hook-up culture on college campuses?  I'd be up for that and I am curious to hear what you think is at the root of it.

 

It's a small segment of where rapes occur, but I think it's critical to us given the ages of our children.

 

 

[DesertBlossom]

This article, "The Alcohol Blackout" appeared earlier this year in Texas Monthly and tackles many of the issues discussed on this thread. The author, Sarah Hepola, is an alcoholic who went to the University of Texas at Austin to do a report on campus drinking-to-blackout culture and sexual assault. Very interesting read by a good writer--I'd like to read her book one day.

This article was really interesting. I've never consumed any kind of alcohol ever, so it was like peering into a different world.

 

The author admits that there is much to be learned about blackouts. But it left me wondering-- obviously after a blackout you can't remember what happened. But does that mean that during the blackout you really don't know what you're doing at the time? Maybe sort of in a way like people who are hypnotized who are not in control of themselves? Or is it that you just can't remember it afterwards? You were (to some degree anyway) in control of the choices you made, you just can't remember them?

 

If I understand it correctly, a woman experiencing a blackout can not give consent, even if she appears to be enthusiastically consenting. She won't remember that in the morning. But a person who commits some kind of violence during a blackout is still held responsible for their actions.

 

It seems like we have some conflicting ideas about blackouts and whether or not people should be held accountable for their actions during one.

Edited June 9, 2016 by DesertBlossom

[Anne in CA]

One reason rape occurs on college campuses is that rapists know that campus police are often inept. So first reporting to the campus police gives a rapist a lot of leeway. I have a friend whose employer's 19yo dd was raped on a college campus and when he was apprehended the rapist (who was on parole for other rape) was genuinely surprised he had been caught. He had been raping on campuses for years without reprisal. I believe he had been caught for another rape the one time he didn't rape on a campus. Unfortunately for him, the young woman in question was the daughter of an important person and the REAL police got involved. He was arrested within 24 hours and later convicted.

[swimmermom3]

I know it's not the same person, but everytime I see this guy, I am reminded of one particular swimmer.  He swam in the lane I was timing a couple times at the same meet.  Each time he came out of the water and asked his time - then he would swear loudly and pound his fist in anger.  The second time he did it I reported him to the head official.  

 

This was a swimmer from one of the top clubs in the area - one that had a reputation for prepping people for international level competition and college swim team positions.  It also had some incredibly arrogant swimmers who were frequently not kind or respectful to people working the deck.  It made me wonder if the convicted rapist swimmer came out of a similar team, where times counted more than character.

 

We spent years in club swimming on a team with swimmers at the national and Olympic trials level.  When our swimmers participated in high school swimming, I was embarrassed to be associated with some of the kids, the attitude was so arrogant.

 

It was easy for me to picture the kind of environment Brock Turner grew up in.  Although to be fair, on our team, the kids with attitude had it when they were really young.  The kids who had good attitudes and were gracious sportsmen were typically that way from the beginning as well.

 

[flyingiguana]

Was the victim really drunk?  Did she pass out because she was drunk?  I'm not convinced.

 

I haven't seen any reports of her throwing up.  Or having a hangover.  And unless she had a serious drinking problem, I find it unlikely that she would have gone to a party with a bunch of people she didn't know and end up drinking so much as to pass out.  Not at her age, with her experience.  And I'm guessing she didn't have a really bad drinking problem or the defense attorneys would have brought that out.

 

 If they were both just drunk, why did he feel the need to take her outside and behind a dumpster?  What was he trying to hide?  Who was he trying to hide it from?  Based on parties I have been to, it would have probably been acceptable to have sex right there at the party.  This looks like there was even more to it than a guy taking advantage of someone who got into a bad situation.  

 

I suspect he drugged her.  

 

He already looks like scum, but my guess is that he's even worse than the evidence the prosecution was able to present suggests.

 

This is not to say that all the other cases of guys taking advantage of passed out girls are any less awful than they are, but this particular case seemed really over the top.  I would guess we haven't even heard the worst of this particular case.  The only person who knows the worst is the attacker.  

 

Unfortunately, it will also not surprise me if we hear of him again -- when he ends up murdering his next victim.  

 

And given the over top nature of this case, and I'm even more surprised that people are blaming the victim.  

[hjffkj]

Was the victim really drunk? Did she pass out because she was drunk? I'm not convinced.

 

I haven't seen any reports of her throwing up. Or having a hangover. And unless she had a serious drinking problem, I find it unlikely that she would have gone to a party with a bunch of people she didn't know and end up drinking so much as to pass out. Not at her age, with her experience. And I'm guessing she didn't have a really bad drinking problem or the defense attorneys would have brought that out.

 

If they were both just drunk, why did he feel the need to take her outside and behind a dumpster? What was he trying to hide? Who was he trying to hide it from? Based on parties I have been to, it would have probably been acceptable to have sex right there at the party. This looks like there was even more to it than a guy taking advantage of someone who got into a bad situation.

 

I suspect he drugged her.

 

He already looks like scum, but my guess is that he's even worse than the evidence the prosecution was able to present suggests.

 

This is not to say that all the other cases of guys taking advantage of passed out girls are any less awful than they are, but this particular case seemed really over the top. I would guess we haven't even heard the worst of this particular case. The only person who knows the worst is the attacker.

 

Unfortunately, it will also not surprise me if we hear of him again -- when he ends up murdering his next victim.

 

And given the over top nature of this case, and I'm even more surprised that people are blaming the victim.

Drugs would have still been in her system depending on how long after the attack she had bloodwork done. Also, the only time I was ever pass out drunk I did not throw up or have a hangover the next morning so those details of the assault don't seem too out there to me.

 

Luckily, when I was pass out drunk I didn't pass out until I got home and was in bed with just dh at the house with me so I was safe.

[Corraleno]

Was the victim really drunk?  Did she pass out because she was drunk?  I'm not convinced.

 

I haven't seen any reports of her throwing up.  Or having a hangover.  And unless she had a serious drinking problem, I find it unlikely that she would have gone to a party with a bunch of people she didn't know and end up drinking so much as to pass out.  Not at her age, with her experience.  And I'm guessing she didn't have a really bad drinking problem or the defense attorneys would have brought that out.

 

 If they were both just drunk, why did he feel the need to take her outside and behind a dumpster?  What was he trying to hide?  Who was he trying to hide it from?  Based on parties I have been to, it would have probably been acceptable to have sex right there at the party.  This looks like there was even more to it than a guy taking advantage of someone who got into a bad situation.  

 

I suspect he drugged her.  

 

He already looks like scum, but my guess is that he's even worse than the evidence the prosecution was able to present suggests.

 

This is not to say that all the other cases of guys taking advantage of passed out girls are any less awful than they are, but this particular case seemed really over the top.  I would guess we haven't even heard the worst of this particular case.  The only person who knows the worst is the attacker.  

 

Unfortunately, it will also not surprise me if we hear of him again -- when he ends up murdering his next victim.  

 

And given the over top nature of this case, and I'm even more surprised that people are blaming the victim.  

 

Both the victim and the perpetrator were tested by police and yes she was drunk — her blood-alcohol content was three times the legal limit. His was twice the limit. He seemed significantly less impaired, despite the level of alcohol, possibly because he was a 6'3" athlete who was used to getting drunk on a regular basis, and she said that she hadn't been drinking much since she graduated from college, and she greatly underestimated her tolerance.

[poppy]

I admit that the 600+ posts are beginning to run together in my mind, so could you please show me the posts that downplay the risks and dangers of attending a party like this?

 

There were some implications that those who were not keen on hearing

 

"A young woman, who drank to unconsciousness, was raped in the wide open behind a dumpster by a varsity swimmer at Stanford"

 

paired with

 

"Well, the best thing to do to avoid rape is to avoid drinking, were modest clothing, avoid certain situations..."

 

were all in favor of binge drinking and the hook-up culture.

 

I saw about as much support for that as I did for Brock Turner.

 

The only conclusion I can come to on the last part in bold above after reading this thread and really thinking about it, is that it really does come down to perception.

 

Some women on this thread need to hear the above statements paired together. It makes sense to them to use a real person's rape and the specific circumstances as an instructional tool.

 

Other women on the the thread see the pairing and read the implication that the victim is in part responsible for what happened because they didn't follow the safety protocol. They feel that the pairing in the same conversation diminishes the rapist's responsibility and could prevent victims from reporting the crime. That's the connection to the "rape culture."

 

Perhaps as SKL suggested, it's all about the individual's filter.

 

Do we want to start another thread about the glamorization of binge drinking and the hook-up culture on college campuses? I'd be up for that and I am curious to hear what you think is at the root of it.

 

It's a small segment of where rapes occur, but I think it's critical to us given the ages of our children.

I guess??

 

Almost no one on this thread has said 'this man is wrong to have raped that girl' . Because *it goes without saying'*. It's obvious. It's something we all agree on.

 

Drinking yourself to unconsciousness at a party by yourself? Also a bad idea. Every single parent here would agree to talk to their kids about common sense measures on campus. For some of us that goes without saying. It's obvious. It's something we all agree on. This story does not make it more or less obvious than it was six months ago, a year ago.

 

For others it seems to be.... The point of this story? It can't go without saying. The attack is a prompt to talk to your kids , especially daughters . But. These aren't people who wouldn't have given the EXACT same warnings before . But now they have a visceral lesson in how to fail to follow the rules and get yourself raped. That is why -- to those of us who do not have to marry those thoughts together -- it feels like putting the victim of trial.

[Corraleno]

I heard a legal analyst this morning saying that the parole board...probation board?....some agency like that recommended a light sentence as well. The analyst said it was definitely a VERY light sentence and has every thing to do with privilege .

 

Yes, the probation officer — who was a woman — recommended a sentence of "less than a year" in jail. It sounds like she was rather charmed by Turner, citing his youth, his accomplishments, the huge volume of letters (39!) attesting to his good character (all from people who had only heard one side of the story; that poor Brock was victimized by a drunk girl who had consensual sex with him and then changed her mind), and that he had expressed sincere remorse (which anyone who has read his statement knows is untrue). She also totally misrepresented the victim's wishes, claiming the victim didn't want him to go to jail, which was absolutely not true. 

[swimmermom3]

Can't believe I made it through all 14 pages of this thread--just wanted to share a couple of thoughts that haven't been touched on as best as I can remember.

 

People use the terms "sexual assault" and "rape" interchangeably and it drives me crazy.  Both, of course, are wrong, but there's just no comparing me getting my butt pinched getting on the bus for a field trip in 8th grade to the bodily invasion that happens in rape.  All forms of sexual assault are unacceptable, but the amount of trauma perpetrated on the victim varies too much for a single term to adequately characterize it imo.

 

This article, "The Alcohol Blackout"  appeared earlier this year in Texas Monthly and tackles many of the issues discussed on this thread.  The author, Sarah Hepola, is an alcoholic who went to the University of Texas at Austin to do a report on campus drinking-to-blackout culture and sexual assault.  Very interesting read by a good writer--I'd like to read her book one day.

 

That was an excellent article. It's a long one, but the time was well spent, especially with regards to the information on black outs.

 

I've forwarded it to my 23 yo dd and am asking my two guys at home to read it as well.  Thanks so much for sharing this.

 

 

[Sebastian (a lady)]

I admit that the 600+ posts are beginning to run together in my mind, so could you please show me the posts that downplay the risks and dangers of attending a party like this?

 

There were some implications that those who were not keen on hearing

 

"A young woman, who drank to unconsciousness, was raped in the wide open behind a dumpster by a varsity swimmer at Stanford"

 

paired with

 

"Well, the best thing to do to avoid rape is to avoid drinking, were modest clothing, avoid certain situations..."

 

were all in favor of binge drinking and the hook-up culture.

 

I saw about as much support for that as I did for Brock Turner.

 

The only conclusion I can come to on the last part in bold above after reading this thread and really thinking about it, is that it really does come down to perception.

 

Some women on this thread need to hear the above statements paired together. It makes sense to them to use a real person's rape and the specific circumstances as an instructional tool.

 

Other women on the the thread see the pairing and read the implication that the victim is in part responsible for what happened because they didn't follow the safety protocol.  They feel that the pairing in the same conversation diminishes the rapist's responsibility and could prevent victims from reporting the crime. That's the connection to the "rape culture."

 

Perhaps as SKL suggested, it's all about the individual's filter. 

 

Do we want to start another thread about the glamorization of binge drinking and the hook-up culture on college campuses?  I'd be up for that and I am curious to hear what you think is at the root of it.

 

It's a small segment of where rapes occur, but I think it's critical to us given the ages of our children.

 

My comments were referencing general things I see in movies and news portrayal of teen/college/young adult life, not in reaction to specific comments here.

 

I think that there is a portrayal of the teen party scene as edgy, fun, exciting and a cool way to spend an evening, weekend or spring break.  I think that there is less of a discussion of the huge anonymous college party with regard to the risks and dangers is presents.  

 

I have seen discussions online (not necessarily here) where people assert that saying a party could be a risky place for a woman is contributing to rape culture.  I think that this attitude of downplaying the risks that these functions present does a disservice to women by setting them up to think that the event is one thing when it may well be another.

 

+++

 

At one point when my son was younger, I had to explain to him that there were people who would lie to him, lie about him and take his stuff, while feeling that their actions were acceptable and justified.  There are people who are self-serving, opportunistic, greedy and who enjoy taking advantage of other people.  Some of those type of people find that large, anonymous parties with lots of alcohol present them with opportunities to use other people for their own pleasure and gain.  That might be stealing money out of their purse or wallet.  It might be picking a fight with a weaker guy.  It might be assaulting a woman.  

[Greta]

This.  https://www.buzzfeed.com/tomnamako/joe-biden-writes-an-open-letter-to-stanford-survivor?bffbmain&utm_term=.sxJOl9jP0#.gdnDgoOeY

[swimmermom3]

I agree with your interpretation of the 'action' phrase, BUT, later in his statement the dad says something like 'he has never been violent'.  If he had said, he has never been violent before' I might have been able to buy his comments, but in this context that statement really fried me.

 

ETA:  Here is the exact quote:  "He has no prior criminal history and has never been violent to anyone, including his actions on the night of January 17, 2015."  You know, because sticking your fingers into someone along with (presumably inadvertently) some local pine needles after forcibly removing their clothes isn't violent at all.

 

Or let's just look at a summary of the conviction:  "The Ohio native was convicted of assault with intent to commit rape of an intoxicated woman, sexually penetrating an intoxicated person with a foreign object and sexually penetrating an unconscious person with a foreign object."

 

Because, you know, that's not VIOLENT.  No, not at all.

 

I'm seething here.  Can you tell?

 

Carol, I'd have to confess to ignorance here. I read the initial charges about "foreign object" and didn't realize that the perp's fingers count as a foreign object - although that makes sense.

 

I am only guessing, but I would bet there is a significant portion of men out there who would have no clue that "fingering" a very drunk/passed out woman, could be considered assault.

 

 

[goldberry]

 

I am only guessing, but I would bet there is a significant portion of men out there who would have no clue that "fingering" a very drunk/passed out woman, could be considered assault.

 

 

 

How is that possible?  Because he saw her a few minutes before when she wasn't passed out?  

 

A man walking out a night, sees a woman passed out, and thinks it would not be an assault to go stick his fingers in her?  But wait, it's okay because I was walking with her before she passed out..

 

There is no man I know who would not think that was assault.

Edited June 9, 2016 by goldberry

[Corraleno]

People use the terms "sexual assault" and "rape" interchangeably and it drives me crazy.  Both, of course, are wrong, but there's just no comparing me getting my butt pinched getting on the bus for a field trip in 8th grade to the bodily invasion that happens in rape.  All forms of sexual assault are unacceptable, but the amount of trauma perpetrated on the victim varies too much for a single term to adequately characterize it imo.

 

The problem is that the legal definition of rape varies enormously from state to state. In California, only "sexual intercourse" counts as rape — Brock Turner was convicted of sexual assault, not rape, because he used his fingers instead of his penis. Of course there's no comparing what happened to that girl with someone getting her butt pinched, but it is legally defined as sexual assault, not rape.

 

In Tennessee, rape is defined as any sexual penetration (anal, oral, vaginal) with any body part or physical object; hence Corey Batey's conviction on multiple rape charges. If he'd committed exactly the same crimes in CA, he would have only been convicted on one rape charge, and the rest would be sexual assault. In Tennessee, Turner would have been convicted on two counts of rape instead of sexual assault. Twenty-five states and D.C. don't use the word rape at all in their criminal codes —in those states, even forcible sexual intercourse is categorized as sexual assault, not rape.

 

The current FBI definition is â€œPenetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim.†I think that aligns pretty well with what most people would consider rape, regardless of the legal definition. 

[goldberry]

  "He has no prior criminal history and has never been violent to anyone, including his actions on the night of January 17, 2015."  

 

:confused1:  :confused1:  :confused1:   :ack2:  :ack2:  :ack2:

[goldberry]

  "He has no prior criminal history and has never been violent to anyone, including his actions on the night of January 17, 2015."  

 

:confused1:  :confused1:  :confused1:   :ack2:  :ack2:  :ack2:

 

DP, apparently one post was not enough to express my confusion and disgust!

Edited June 9, 2016 by goldberry

[poppy]

How is that possible?  Because he saw her a few minutes before when she wasn't passed out?  

 

A man walking out a night, sees a woman passed out, and thinks it would not be an assault to go stick his fingers in her?  But wait, it's okay because I was walking with her before she passed out..

 

There is no man I know who would not think that was assault.

 

I agree. Every man would know it is a transgression. Penetration is a pretty big boundary to cross.

[swimmermom3]

I guess??

 

Almost no one on this thread has said 'this man is wrong to have raped that girl' . Because *it goes without saying'*. It's obvious. It's something we all agree on.

 

Drinking yourself to unconsciousness at a party by yourself? Also a bad idea. Every single parent here would agree to talk to their kids about common sense measures on campus. For some of us that goes without saying. It's obvious. It's something we all agree on. This story does not make it more or less obvious than it was six months ago, a year ago.

 

For others it seems to be.... The point of this story? It can't go without saying. The attack is a prompt to talk to your kids , especially daughters . But. These aren't people who wouldn't have given the EXACT same warnings before . But now they have a visceral lesson in how to fail to follow the rules and get yourself raped. That is why -- to those of us who do not have to marry those thoughts together -- it feels like putting the victim of trial.

 

Many of the people who were for using the case as an instructional tool did say that Turner was wrong to have raped the girl.

 

I have had a difficult time in articulating why I personally don't like following "Annie was drinking heavily when she was raped" with "and we all know that drinking heavily can get you raped."  My personal filter still reads that as "Annie did the wrong thing and that is why she was raped." I feel my reaction to that physically, in my gut.

 

I do read the pairing of them in the same conversation in the way that you have pointed out above. Annie as a victim who is suffering real pain, who was assaulted by a criminal with no excuses whatsoever takes a backseat to Annie, the lesson on how to avoid being raped.

 

I know we need to talk about safety precautions and I know we need to talk about binge drinking for male and female, but this way seems weird and callous.

 

 

 

[Sebastian (a lady)]

Many of the people who were for using the case as an instructional tool did say that Turner was wrong to have raped the girl.

 

I have had a difficult time in articulating why I personally don't like following "Annie was drinking heavily when she was raped" with "and we all know that drinking heavily can get you raped."  My personal filter still reads that as "Annie did the wrong thing and that is why she was raped." I feel my reaction to that physically, in my gut.

 

I do read the pairing of them in the same conversation in the way that you have pointed out above. Annie as a victim who is suffering real pain, who was assaulted by a criminal with no excuses whatsoever takes a backseat to Annie, the lesson on how to avoid being raped.

 

I know we need to talk about safety precautions and I know we need to talk about binge drinking for male and female, but this way seems weird and callous.

 

 

 

A spin off thread seems like a good idea.

[swimmermom3]

My comments were referencing general things I see in movies and news portrayal of teen/college/young adult life, not in reaction to specific comments here.

 

I think that there is a portrayal of the teen party scene as edgy, fun, exciting and a cool way to spend an evening, weekend or spring break.  I think that there is less of a discussion of the huge anonymous college party with regard to the risks and dangers is presents.  

 

I have seen discussions online (not necessarily here) where people assert that saying a party could be a risky place for a woman is contributing to rape culture.  I think that this attitude of downplaying the risks that these functions present does a disservice to women by setting them up to think that the event is one thing when it may well be another.

 

+++

 

At one point when my son was younger, I had to explain to him that there were people who would lie to him, lie about him and take his stuff, while feeling that their actions were acceptable and justified.  There are people who are self-serving, opportunistic, greedy and who enjoy taking advantage of other people.  Some of those type of people find that large, anonymous parties with lots of alcohol present them with opportunities to use other people for their own pleasure and gain.  That might be stealing money out of their purse or wallet.  It might be picking a fight with a weaker guy.  It might be assaulting a woman.  

 

Got it!  Thanks for the clarification.

 

I have absolutely no problem talking about the risks these parties pose for women (and men) as its own discussion.

 

Do you remember the discussion on one of the other threads about the guy at Dartmouth who wrote about his drinking experiences there?  When you are taking off the enamel on your teeth from vomiting and everyone thinks it's normal, there is a serious problem.

 

My dd is not on a college campus, but has encountered in her age group a penchant for throwing various prescription drugs into a "candy bowl" at parties. That is an absolutely terrifying scenario. So is the increasing social acceptance of heroin. 

 

The article that brett_ashley linked offers many good starting points for a good discussion on binge drinking and the hook-up scene.

 

 

[Caroline]

You have articulated exactly what I am thinking. It makes me sick that in this thread, with that incredible statement from the victim, we are also talking about her "responsibility" and that she was an "idiot." (Yes, both were said on this thread. The responsibility came on the first page.) Her statement, which started this thread, has been overshadowed by "Why this will never happen to me because I'm not an idiot and I'm responsible and wouldn't get drunk around strangers" even while people are saying that it doesn't have to be a stranger.

 

 

Many of the people who were for using the case as an instructional tool did say that Turner was wrong to have raped the girl.

 

I have had a difficult time in articulating why I personally don't like following "Annie was drinking heavily when she was raped" with "and we all know that drinking heavily can get you raped." My personal filter still reads that as "Annie did the wrong thing and that is why she was raped." I feel my reaction to that physically, in my gut.

 

I do read the pairing of them in the same conversation in the way that you have pointed out above. Annie as a victim who is suffering real pain, who was assaulted by a criminal with no excuses whatsoever takes a backseat to Annie, the lesson on how to avoid being raped.

 

I know we need to talk about safety precautions and I know we need to talk about binge drinking for male and female, but this way seems weird and callous.

 

 

 

[zoobie]

Yes, the probation officer — who was a woman — recommended a sentence of "less than a year" in jail. It sounds like she was rather charmed by Turner, citing his youth, his accomplishments, the huge volume of letters (39!) attesting to his good character (all from people who had only heard one side of the story; that poor Brock was victimized by a drunk girl who had consensual sex with him and then changed her mind), and that he had expressed sincere remorse (which anyone who has read his statement knows is untrue). She also totally misrepresented the victim's wishes, claiming the victim didn't want him to go to jail, which was absolutely not true.

There are articles today on how he lied to her and the judge about his prior experience with drugs, alcohol, and partying. The investigators and prosecutors had the information to disprove his assertions, but it wasn't considered?

[swimmermom3]

I agree. Every man would know it is a transgression. Penetration is a pretty big boundary to cross.

 

Every man should know it is a transgression. I don't think that is how all men have been raised.

[Caroline]

Joe Biden has written a letter to the victim... (I didn't think it was political, so I am posting a link.)

 

http://www.bustle.com/articles/165919-joe-biden-wrote-an-open-letter-to-the-survivor-brock-turner-sexually-assaulted-it-is?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=owned&utm_campaign=bustle

[alisoncooks]

Forgive me if this has been posted but...what the heck?!

 

http://globalnews.ca/news/2751730/stanford-rape-case-brock-turner-expected-to-leave-jail-3-months-early/?utm_content=buffer36339&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer

 

:thumbdown:

 

(This was the first time I'd seen the 3 month number mentioned...)

Edited June 9, 2016 by alisoncooks

[Ravin]

It took a year and a half for this guy to get his very light sentence. Should Stanford have just let him remain a student, attending parties, swimming on their team, etc for a year and a half until the court ruled? Many people are saying that colleges should be leaving these matters to the courts. What should happen in the meantime?

Suspension pending charges, hearing to reinstate if acquitted, boot for a conviction.

[swimmermom3]

I agree. Every man would know it is a transgression. Penetration is a pretty big boundary to cross.

 

Every man?

 

From the National Conference of State Legislatures website:

 

All states are somehow involved in sex education for public schoolchildren.

As of March 1, 2016:

• 24 states and the District of Columbia require public schools teach sex education (21 of which mandate sex education and HIV education).
• 33 states and the District of Columbia require students receive instruction about HIV/AIDS.
• 20 states require that if provided, sex and/or HIV education must be medically, factually or technically accurate. State definitions of â€œmedically accurate" vary, from requiring that the department of health review curriculum for accuracy, to mandating that curriculum be based on information from “published authorities upon which medical professionals rely.†(See table on medically accuracy laws.)

Take a look at some of the legislation that has failed to pass.

This site offers a map of what states do not teach sex ed in schools.

 

That's a whole lot of kids that may be going off to college whose only source of information about sex ed is either their parents or their peers.  This may be okay or it may be a really bad thing.

 

I stand by my assertion that there could be a whole bunch of young guys out there who just don't get it when it comes to what sexual assault is.

 

Heck, there are a lot of old guys out there  who don't get it.

 

How about Ron Paul's comment about "honest rapes" and sending them to the emergency room for an estrogen shot?

 

Todd Aiken:  "If it's a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try and shut the whole thing down."

[FaithManor]

Okay, the Rand Paul and Todd Aiken comments are so awful that I vote those two off the island or volunteer them for a permanent biodome experiment in Antarctica.

[Joanne]

Carol, I'd have to confess to ignorance here. I read the initial charges about "foreign object" and didn't realize that the perp's fingers count as a foreign object - although that makes sense.

 

I am only guessing, but I would bet there is a significant portion of men out there who would have no clue that "fingering" a very drunk/passed out woman, could be considered assault.

 

 

 

?????????????????  :confused1: :crying: :cursing: :scared:

 

I refuse to believe that to be true.

[swimmermom3]

Okay, the Rand Paul and Todd Aiken comments are so awful that I vote those two off the island or volunteer them for a permanent biodome experiment in Antarctica.

 

For your reading displeasure:

 

20 Most Offensive Comments Made About Rape by Public Figures

 

I have been able to verify several of these from more mainstream sources, but I quit about half way through because it felt like playing in a cesspool.

 

My point again, is that if these figures are this ignorant, what can we expect from our young men?

 

I am asking this in all seriousness.  I would tend to think that many would understand what differentiates sexual assault, but I think where I live and my own background really facilitates that belief.

 

We don't think about areas with different belief systems or  socio-economic classes.

 

[Ravin]

My issue is that you can't say a woman isn't responsible (can't consent even if she says "yes") when she's drinking, but in the same circumstance a man is responsible (has to know that "yes" might not mean "yes") when he's drinking.

 

As has been stated many times, this doesn't apply to the case in the OP. I haven't seen anyone suggest that that rapist's guilt is mitigated by his alcohol consumption.

 

As for bringing up her drinking and his drinking, the OP did that.

The distinction in a rape is that one party does physical and psychological violence to the other. The psychological violence in rape is not the same as the shame of drunk regret. The harm to the victim is an element of the crime, implicitly if not explicitly.

[Ravin]

Isn't it sad how some will give it their all to supposedly keep females safe from transgendered males assaulting them in restrooms but we still have a tough time believing women when they actually are raped?

You mean transgender women.

[DesertBlossom]

This is an entirely different discussion, but the bathroom debate (for most people that I've heard discuss it) isn't about worrying that transgender individuals will assault someone in a bathroom. The worry is that a man could pretend to be transgendered for the sole purpose of being able to enter a women's bathroom without being kicked out. And there have been a couple incidents in the news, where a man has done just that. One I read was a guy at a homeless shelter claiming to be transgendered so he could have access to the women.

Edited June 11, 2016 by DesertBlossom