Drunk male, sober female, and yet he is still a "rapist" according to Amherst College

[Toni]

And yet feminism is all about giving women special right, privileges and protections based on them being female.

No, it's not.

He's changed his story, yes.

In what way? And why do you ignore the fact that she changed her story twice.

Go back and re-read articles and transcripts. He is not less consistent than she is.

I'm not ignoring anything. I haven't formed an opinion

Genitalia has nothing to do with what I believe or don't believe. Not mine, not theirs.

BS.

OK: I'll amend my statement. I think that insecurity over genitalia has affected the opinions of some posters.

It's not my particular problem. It's also not my particular problem that you are unable to read or understand that I have specifically avoided drawing any conclusions at all about this case, aside from noting that there are inconsistencies in both people's accounts and that both were under the influence.

Except that it is possible for a very drunk person to force sex--that is: rape someone who is not drunk. Or less drunk.

How when it was impossible for him to consent to the sex to begin with?

A and B are about to engage in sex. A is quite drunk but makes no objections. B realizes, after things are underway, that A is drunker than B realized and attempts to disengage from the sex, out of deference for what is right/legal. A refused to disengage and forces B to continue.

That's rape. Gender isn't an issue, actually.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

http://www.masslive.com/news/index.ssf/2015/05/former_amherst_college_student.html



And the actual lawsuit he's filed:

https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2...8jL/story.html?p1=Article_Related_Box_Article

Her story is not consistent. Why should we believe any of it??

His story is not consistent. Why should we believe any of it?

What changed in his story??

She changed her story, however, and even then it doesn't match reality.

 

[Derec]

Because why? Feminists have no husbands, fathers, brothers, sons? So men are just rounded up off the street and imprisoned for rape and all the feminists in the world rejoice?

Marilyn French, a prominent radical feminist: "All men are rapists and that's all they are"

Or how about this article by a radical feminist in the aftermath of the UVA false rape claim.
Why I Don’t Want To Hear Both Sides Of Rape Cases
What actually happened doesn't matter. What matter is that men are blamed even when innocent.

Why I Still Believe Rape Survivors

Again, damn the evidence as long as men are blamed. If any man says he didn't do it he is not "a real man" but a "boy". The possibility that the woman might be lying is not even acknowledged.

 

[laughing dog]

The only thing that's flaccid here is your apologetics for college administrators who expel male students without any evidence.

That is simply a false claim.

There is no reason to believe her claim of being forced into sex whatsoever.

Apparently the people who saw and heard all of the evidence thought differently. Yes it is possible that they were feminazis or haters of men. Of course it is possible that there were not misogynistic ideologues but reasonable and disinterested persons who weighed all of the evidence.

On the other hand, there is plenty of reason to think she is lying.

She may be lying. Then again, there is as much reason to think Mr. Doe is lying. Mr. Doe claims he was so drunk he passed out, but other witnesses dispute his claim.

Her conflicting statements. Her admission to a friend that 'she fucked' the male student.

It is entirely possible to "fuck someone" and then later have sex again. Which means it is possible to consent to have sex with someone, have sex, and then afterwards refuse to have more sex.

Hopefully it will be costly enough to Amherst to effect a change in policy. But I also think the federal government should be sued.

I certainly hope Mr. Doe sues everyone. Perhaps you should offer to be an expert witness for his lawyers.

After all, it is their ridiculous and sexist "Dear Colleague" decree that caused so many wrongful expulsions in the first place.

How many documented (by disinterested sources ) cases of expulsion have their been?

 

[Toni]

Because why? Feminists have no husbands, fathers, brothers, sons? So men are just rounded up off the street and imprisoned for rape and all the feminists in the world rejoice?

Marilyn French, a prominent radical feminist: "All men are rapists and that's all they are"

Please: This is a quote from the utterings of one of her FICTIONAL characters, not Ms. French's opinion. If one actually read the entire book, The Women's Room, it would be obvious that is not an opinion that Ms. French herself holds.

Really, Derec. At the very least, do a google search. Here's this, to get you started:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marilyn_French

At one point in the book the character Val says, "all men are rapists".[3] This quote has often been incorrectly attributed to Marilyn French herself.

Or how about this article by a radical feminist in the aftermath of the UVA false rape claim.
Why I Don’t Want To Hear Both Sides Of Rape Cases
What actually happened doesn't matter. What matter is that men are blamed even when innocent.

Yeah, you didn't bother reading that article, either. Just quoted a sensationalized headline, not written by the author of the piece and alleged that was the thesis of the article. Please learn the term 'click bait' and perhaps you might avoid such pitfalls. So, for you, what actually was written doesn't matter. What matters is whatever sensationalized headline was written to serve the piece up best as clickbait.

Why I Still Believe Rape Survivors

Again, damn the evidence as long as men are blamed. If any man says he didn't do it he is not "a real man" but a "boy". The possibility that the woman might be lying is not even acknowledged.

Yet another article you didn't actually read but posted anyway.

If you disagree with any particular point, please discuss. Otherwise, please remember the term (I've used it 3 times now): click bait and that if you want to know what the author is saying, you actually have to READ the article and not just the title, which was composed by someone else to generate more internet traffic. This is known as 'click bait.' (4).

Here, I'll make it easy for you:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clickbait

Clickbait is a pejorative term describing web content that is aimed at generating online advertising revenue, especially at the expense of quality or accuracy, relying on sensationalist headlines to attract click-throughs and to encourage forwarding of the material over online social networks. Clickbait headlines typically aim to exploit the "curiosity gap", providing just enough information to make the reader curious, but not enough to satisfy their curiosity without clicking through to the linked content.[1][2][3]

By 2014, the ubiquity of clickbait on the Internet had begun to lead to a backlash against its use.[3][4] Satirical newspaper The Onion launched a new website, ClickHole, that parodied clickbait websites such as Upworthy and Buzzfeed,[5] and in August 2014, Facebook announced that it was taking technical measures to reduce the impact of clickbait on its social network,[6][7][8] using, among other cues, the time spent by the user on visiting the linked page as a way of distinguishing clickbait from other content.[9]
See also
Look up clickbait in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.

Yellow journalism
Viral marketing
Listicle

- - - Updated - - -

His story is not consistent. Why should we believe any of it?

What changed in his story??

She changed her story, however, and even then it doesn't match reality.

Reading some of the links provided, he's variously expressed dismay and fear that he forced himself on her and also claims he has no recollection of the events. There are other discrepancies. You're a big boy: you can read links.

 

[Rhea]

I like the way you completely skip over all the posts that disprove this preposterous strawman. I notice you never responded to my post. Did that help you cling to your claim that "all feminists" do this and that?

Rhea what is your opinion on fromderinside's clearly sexist notions about men and women and rape?

Which thoughts. Post them and I'll comment. Did you or did you not notice that NO, NOT every progressive immediately jumped to a conclusion? Your claim that 'we" are somehow robots reading from a script is wrong. We may or may not end up agreeing on basic points, but there's no robot thing going on here for any of us.

 

[RavenSky]

Blackout is a failure of memory consolidation. It is not necessarily discernible from behavior. We talked about it before. It is funny how you and others will claim that "blackout" state in a woman should be enough to expel the male but not in this case.

He says that his roommate told him he'd "hooked up" the night before, but the roommate's testimony at the hearing doesn't say that. He talks about the walk across campus and how disjointed his memory of it is, but his buddy in the commons room (who acknowledges he was not with him earlier in the night and therefore has no idea how much the guy may have had to drink) says that he'd seen John Doe black-out drunk before, but didn't think he was that drunk on that night.

So he was able to consent because he's been even drunker on previous occasions?

And contrary to her being sober, she (& others) testifies that she was "tipsy" drunk. She doesn't claim "black-out" drunk, but doesn't claim "sober" either.

Even her message implies that he was significantly drunker than her. If the genders were reversed you'd insist that that was enough to expel him - why isn't it enough to expel her? Why was he expelled when he is the victim here?

Also, contrary to the claims by Derec in the OP, she never said the encounter was non-consensual from the beginning.

BS.

Jones’ original complaint alleges the oral sex had been nonconsensual the entire time. However, she later told an investigator that she performed oral sex willingly at the beginning and it became nonconsensual “’on a break’ during the sex act,” per Doe’s complaint. Documents say that Jones had asked Doe to stop but that he had forcibly made her continue.

So we have two stories she told the investigators and the third that she told a friend where she said she fucked him and makes no mention of him forcing himself on her. And yet you still believe her because feminism.

She always maintained that the encounter started consensually, and that it wasn't until John Doe started bragging about doing both roommates that SJ rescinded her consent. That seems very very plausible to me, and not at all the type of testimony we would expect to see from someone with "morning after regrets".

I think her supposed believability has more to do with her having a vagina than anything else.

I will say that both of them seem very believable to me. It would have been a very difficult decision.

I guess universities operate under the principle: if in any doubt, expel the male student.

1. It is clear that you did not read the transcript of the hearing. I did. I don't give a flying fuck what a newspaper said. I read their actual words.
2. Save your eye-rolling for something else, because I very clearly stated that I think this was a difficult one so I am not agreeing (or disagreeing) with the university on this one.

Seriously Derec, don't assume everyone else makes their judgements on individual cases based on predetermined biases just because you do.

 

[RavenSky]

His story is not consistent. Why should we believe any of it?

What changed in his story??

She changed her story, however, and even then it doesn't match reality.

The appearance that she changed her story arises from a THIRD PARTY'S interpretation of what she said. This was very clearly discussed during the hearing and is in the transcript (if you or Derc would be bothered to read it). SJ herself maintains that she has told the same story from the beginning.

The appearance that he changed his story ALSO arises from a THIRD PARTY'S interpretation of what he said. Specifically, he claims he was blacked out drunk that night and has no memory of events. A student advocate that HE REQUESTED TO MEET WITH recalls him telling her that he does have memories from that night including feeling like something bad had just happened and running from the room. JD himself insists that this is not what he said, that it is the advocate's interpretation of what he said, and that he maintained the same story from the very beginning.

Now, who is lying and why do you think so?

I personally believe that both SJ and JD are telling the truth (as they see it) and that in both cases the third party witnesses misheard. In other words, neither actually changed their stories. But if you are going to insist SJ changed her story because it differs from what a third party recollects, then the same applies to JD. You can't have it both ways.

 

[coloradoatheist]

I think we're almost to a point where college kids need to have an app on the form that provides a passcode for consentual sex so you can confirm either way.

This story is definitely a he/she said with nothing else to verify anything, which is the problem with rape.

However I also believe we need to change the statue of limitations of rape down to something small like a week or two and would have to provide some major reason if it goes longer than that.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

I think we're almost to a point where college kids need to have an app on the form that provides a passcode for consentual sex so you can confirm either way.

Why? So that you can give people the right to legally rape women who change their mind about the sex after filling out the form?

That's misogynism, dude.

 

[coloradoatheist]

I think we're almost to a point where college kids need to have an app on the form that provides a passcode for consentual sex so you can confirm either way.

Why? So that you can give people the right to legally rape women who change their mind about the sex after filling out the form?

That's misogynism, dude.

It's the point at where both parties decide that it's okay to have sex.

 

[Toni]

I think we're almost to a point where college kids need to have an app on the form that provides a passcode for consentual sex so you can confirm either way.

This story is definitely a he/she said with nothing else to verify anything, which is the problem with rape.

However I also believe we need to change the statue of limitations of rape down to something small like a week or two and would have to provide some major reason if it goes longer than that.

A week or two is really a very short time period, after a trauma. Given the number of sexual assaults that involve acquaintances, family friends, family members and trusted adults such as priests and coaches...yeah. Even if it is the old: a man grabbed me off the street as I was walking to church holding my King James Bible and dragged me into an alley and raped me, ripping my clothes and beating me about the face--that's a lot of trauma and a lot to process and it's not at all uncommon for victims to not actually process what happened or even try to conceal what happened for a while. Which only adds to the forensic difficulties, of course. But it's very common.

What I think would be an excellent idea is to help people develop more healthy attitudes about alcohol and alcohol consumption. And other drugs, too, probably. The fact that it is considered 'normal' for college kids to drink until they are black out drunk--normal according to other college kids and accepted for the most part by most of society just shrugs shoulders and says kids will be kids. Unfortunately, some of them end up dead and more end up only with damage from substance abuse, assault, sexual assault, bad grades, expulsion, etc.

 

[coloradoatheist]

I think we're almost to a point where college kids need to have an app on the form that provides a passcode for consentual sex so you can confirm either way.

This story is definitely a he/she said with nothing else to verify anything, which is the problem with rape.

However I also believe we need to change the statue of limitations of rape down to something small like a week or two and would have to provide some major reason if it goes longer than that.

A week or two is really a very short time period, after a trauma. Given the number of sexual assaults that involve acquaintances, family friends, family members and trusted adults such as priests and coaches...yeah. Even if it is the old: a man grabbed me off the street as I was walking to church holding my King James Bible and dragged me into an alley and raped me, ripping my clothes and beating me about the face--that's a lot of trauma and a lot to process and it's not at all uncommon for victims to not actually process what happened or even try to conceal what happened for a while. Which only adds to the forensic difficulties, of course. But it's very common.

What I think would be an excellent idea is to help people develop more healthy attitudes about alcohol and alcohol consumption. And other drugs, too, probably. The fact that it is considered 'normal' for college kids to drink until they are black out drunk--normal according to other college kids and accepted for the most part by most of society just shrugs shoulders and says kids will be kids. Unfortunately, some of them end up dead and more end up only with damage from substance abuse, assault, sexual assault, bad grades, expulsion, etc.

For someone under 18 yes, but over 18 no. If they are able to consent to sex then they are able to understand when it wasn't consensual and can report it to the college and authorities prior to the 2 weeks. She waited something like a year and a half.

 

[Toni]

A week or two is really a very short time period, after a trauma. Given the number of sexual assaults that involve acquaintances, family friends, family members and trusted adults such as priests and coaches...yeah. Even if it is the old: a man grabbed me off the street as I was walking to church holding my King James Bible and dragged me into an alley and raped me, ripping my clothes and beating me about the face--that's a lot of trauma and a lot to process and it's not at all uncommon for victims to not actually process what happened or even try to conceal what happened for a while. Which only adds to the forensic difficulties, of course. But it's very common.

What I think would be an excellent idea is to help people develop more healthy attitudes about alcohol and alcohol consumption. And other drugs, too, probably. The fact that it is considered 'normal' for college kids to drink until they are black out drunk--normal according to other college kids and accepted for the most part by most of society just shrugs shoulders and says kids will be kids. Unfortunately, some of them end up dead and more end up only with damage from substance abuse, assault, sexual assault, bad grades, expulsion, etc.

For someone under 18 yes, but over 18 no. If they are able to consent to sex then they are able to understand when it wasn't consensual and can report it to the college and authorities prior to the 2 weeks. She waited something like a year and a half.

I really don't agree. There is nothing 'magic' about turning 18 that suddenly allows you context and understanding and comprehension and there certainly is nothing about turning 18 that makes you more able to consider and decide to brave public knowledge of your assault and the often very real fall out from 'friends' and others when they learn your story, particularly since it is much more likely that the assault involves another one of their friends.

I haven't been raped but I have been sexually assaulted. It can take some time to process what happened and what the 'correct' or 'right' thing(s) to do are, how to handle the situation, who to tell, etc.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

His story is not consistent. Why should we believe any of it?

What changed in his story??

She changed her story, however, and even then it doesn't match reality.

Reading some of the links provided, he's variously expressed dismay and fear that he forced himself on her and also claims he has no recollection of the events. There are other discrepancies. You're a big boy: you can read links.

He has consistently said he doesn't recall the events. The dismay and fear are about the allegations of what he did.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

1. It is clear that you did not read the transcript of the hearing. I did. I don't give a flying fuck what a newspaper said. I read their actual words.
2. Save your eye-rolling for something else, because I very clearly stated that I think this was a difficult one so I am not agreeing (or disagreeing) with the university on this one.

Seriously Derec, don't assume everyone else makes their judgements on individual cases based on predetermined biases just because you do.

The transcript of a kangaroo court proves nothing. He wasn't allowed to investigate to prepare a defense, nobody else tried to, either--they were only looking for evidence of guilt. This is basically the situation grand juries operate under--and you know what they say about grand juries and ham sandwiches.

You are basically arguing that a grand jury should be allowed to convict.

- - - Updated - - -

I think we're almost to a point where college kids need to have an app on the form that provides a passcode for consentual sex so you can confirm either way.

This story is definitely a he/she said with nothing else to verify anything, which is the problem with rape.

However I also believe we need to change the statue of limitations of rape down to something small like a week or two and would have to provide some major reason if it goes longer than that.

I like the app idea. It demonstrates consent without actually recording the situation.

However, this isn't just a he-said/she-said. That text message says "fucked", not "was raped by".

 

[zorq]

The transcript of a kangaroo court proves nothing. He wasn't allowed to investigate to prepare a defense, nobody else tried to, either--they were only looking for evidence of guilt. This is basically the situation grand juries operate under--and you know what they say about grand juries and ham sandwiches.

You are basically arguing that a grand jury should be allowed to convict.

She is discussing the testimony in the transcript not the verdict.

Are you saying that the actual testimony of the accuser and the victim mean nothing in this case? Are you so convinced you know what happened that you don't even care what the accuser and the victim actually have to say about the matter?

WTF?

- - - Updated - - -

I think we're almost to a point where college kids need to have an app on the form that provides a passcode for consentual sex so you can confirm either way.

This story is definitely a he/she said with nothing else to verify anything, which is the problem with rape.

However I also believe we need to change the statue of limitations of rape down to something small like a week or two and would have to provide some major reason if it goes longer than that.

I like the app idea. It demonstrates consent without actually recording the situation.

However, this isn't just a he-said/she-said. That text message says "fucked", not "was raped by".

Quoting from the bible of "Only one thing can happen in any given evening" again? WHY NOT BOTH?

 

[Toni]

His story is not consistent. Why should we believe any of it?

What changed in his story??

She changed her story, however, and even then it doesn't match reality.

Reading some of the links provided, he's variously expressed dismay and fear that he forced himself on her and also claims he has no recollection of the events. There are other discrepancies. You're a big boy: you can read links.

He has consistently said he doesn't recall the events. The dismay and fear are about the allegations of what he did.

He's said he doesn't remember....yet clearly does remember some details. Inconsistently, yes, but that's not surprising

 

[RavenSky]

His story is not consistent. Why should we believe any of it?

What changed in his story??

She changed her story, however, and even then it doesn't match reality.

Reading some of the links provided, he's variously expressed dismay and fear that he forced himself on her and also claims he has no recollection of the events. There are other discrepancies. You're a big boy: you can read links.

He has consistently said he doesn't recall the events. The dismay and fear are about the allegations of what he did.

And SHE has consistently said that she initially consented, then later told him to stop.

Why do you assume she is lying and he is telling the truth?

 

[Toni]

His story is not consistent. Why should we believe any of it?

What changed in his story??

She changed her story, however, and even then it doesn't match reality.

Reading some of the links provided, he's variously expressed dismay and fear that he forced himself on her and also claims he has no recollection of the events. There are other discrepancies. You're a big boy: you can read links.

He has consistently said he doesn't recall the events. The dismay and fear are about the allegations of what he did.

And SHE has consistently said that she initially consented, then later told him to stop.

Why do you assume she is lying and he is telling the truth?

He has a penis. And testicles. And at least one Y chromosome. That makes him far more reliable.

D'oh.