So your answer is "no" - you don't pay any consideration whatsoever to the many many many cases of the women's claims being disregarding by the university. Thank you for verifying exactly what I expected from you.
-
Features
No Means Yes If You Know How To Spot It
- Thread starter AthenaAwakened
- Start date
So your answer is "no" - you don't pay any consideration whatsoever to the many many many cases of the women's claims being disregarding by the university. Thank you for verifying exactly what I expected from you.
Derec
Contributor
I am interested in evidence.
Derec
Contributor
It is bullshit to think that things like dragging a mattress constitutes evidence. If anything, it is contaminating what is alleged to be a crime scene.
Bullshit
It is bullshit to think that things like dragging a mattress constitutes evidence. If anything, it is contaminating what is alleged to be a crime scene.
Who said her carrying her mattress was "evidence"? No one. So you are calling bullshit on your own strawman? Well, I guess that's some sort of progress
Derec
Contributor
The articles written about it imply that pretty strongly.Who said her carrying her mattress was "evidence"? No one. So you are calling bullshit on your own strawman? Well, I guess that's some sort of progress
But I am glad to know that you don't think so.
The articles written about it imply that pretty strongly.Who said her carrying her mattress was "evidence"? No one. So you are calling bullshit on your own strawman? Well, I guess that's some sort of progress
But I am glad to know that you don't think so.
What mysterious articles "imply" that the mere fact of her carrying the mattress is "evidence" that she was raped? Please, do post the quotes with links back to the original sources.
Derec
Contributor
The articles written about it imply that pretty strongly.
But I am glad to know that you don't think so.
What mysterious articles "imply" that the mere fact of her carrying the mattress is "evidence" that she was raped? Please, do post the quotes with links back to the original sources.
The ones that take as granted that she was really raped but offer no evidence for it other than talking about her mattress stunt. Like this one by NY Times that focuses almost entirely on the mattress stunt, not on any evidence she was really raped.
A salient detail though is that she admits to having had consensual sex with the accused before. Interesting.
Furthermore the whole point of her stunt is to pressure Columbia into expelling the male student even though he has been found "not responsible" by a campus investigation. I.e. she is bitching because she didn't get her way. Coverage of this case makes it sound that any "not responsible" verdict is a salvo in the "war on women" and that men should automatically be expelled upon complaint.
Last edited:
Sabine Grant
Member
You seem to struggle with an evenhanded consideration regarding the reality that so many rape victims coming forward are not taken seriously. Worse, that so many will not come forward because they lack the assurance that the perpetrator will ever be prosecuted. You keep citing the same old examples of false accusations as if it demonstrates a gender based bias in the US justice system. While you never mention the heavy burden carried by rape victims who are not taken seriously or worse will not come forward for the reason I have stated.
Bronzeage stated a reality you are never willing to recognize as a reality. Not even by formulating evenhanded thoughts in threads revolving around "rape" topics.
I fully deplore false accusations for the following reasons :
1) The burden carried by an innocent person dragged through the mud of a trial. Even as found non guilty, that person's reputation is damaged.
2) How false accusers make us all, rape victims and now survivors who worked so hard to undertake recovery steps and reach healing (that is why we are called rape survivors) look like a bunch of potential liars who have nothing better to do than to ruin innocent men's lives.
The predominant issue in this nation has been and continues to be the high number of rape/sexual assault victims who never came forward. Contrary to you, I have had direct insights as to that persistent issue due to my years of being a trained mediator/facilitator for recovery/support groups. Both male and female sexual assaults/rape victims. What all those folks shared in common is that they did NOT trust the US Justice system to vindicate their claim. Aggravated by the reality that trauma victims ( and I will make it clear to you that sexual assaults are a trauma inflicted on a human being) cannot be expected to think rationally and somehow gather material evidence to support their reporting the crime committed against them.
How would you even have experienced that reality anyway?
Derec
Contributor
The problem is that in many rape cases there is no evidence, or at least not much of it. Those cases should not result in any criminal prosecution nor campus punishments.
Yes, if an actual victim doesn't think that there is enough evidence for her to get justice, not doing anything could be the right course of action for her (although she should know that a police investigation can uncover evidence she might not have thought about).
But not prosecuting due to lack of evidence doesn't mean that the system failed. On the contrary it performed properly as it is also there to protect due process rights of the accused. That's the best we can do in a world without omniscient observers.
What is your opinion on the thousands of rape kits that never get tested - the "evidence" that is left unexamined, hence the victim left with nothing to prosecute even though there was evidence, bit no one took it seriously. They were victimized, but no one at the police station cares enough to make the evidence into evidence. What is your opinion of that?
Derec
Contributor
I have stated in numerous threads over the years that I found that sort of neglect to be disgraceful and scandalous and should have serious consequences for the police departments in question. If a rape is not prosecuted just because collected evidence is not processed it is obviously a very different case to where there is no evidence because the accuser waited days or months to report it or where DNA evidence is irrelevant because sex itself is not a contested point.
Sabine Grant
Member
Essentially, I would fall under the same interpretation that I was not "really raped" because there was no material evidence I even could think of gathering when I was raped at the age of 17? You speak as if you have any understanding of the psyche of victims of sexual assaults/rapes. Short of any material evidence, let's all assume that the claiming party was not "really raped".
As to this :
What is "interesting " here is how your remark echoes a mentality which assumes that a pre existing sexual relationship means that the claiming victim could not have been not consenting to further sexual encounters. More interestingly, that is similar to conservative Christians who deny that a wife could be raped by her husband...because they are married and it implies a pre existing mutually consenting sexual relationship.At no time could that wife be considered a human being who has the right to say "no, I do not want to". The pre existing sexual relationship makes her then suspicious if she ever dares to confine in a family member that her husband sexually abused her that one time when she did not want to have sex with him. In fact, 2 cases of such reality I encountered among members in my support groups. 2 women trapped into their own family members dismissing their coming forward based on their pre existing sexual relationship with their husbands.
Shame on you for venturing into a statement which connects pre existing consensual to implying it is suspicious she would say no at any point of time.
The article does not, in any way, "take as granted" that she was raped. In fact, it specifically notes over and over that it is HER word. Moreover, the September 2014 article is about the performance art, and brings up other examples of performance art to compare/contrast.
Try reading news articles about the investigation instead.
Not at all "interesting" to whether she was raped or not on the night in question, but also not at all surprising that you, Derec, would crow about that small detail as if it meant something.
(ETA: Derec edited his post to change the word "interesting" to "salient". He is even more wrong with the word change. It isn't at all "salient" for the same reasons already pointed out by me and by Sabine.)
How come you didn't mention that she is the one who fully stated up front that she had consensual sex with this particular person twice before, and that she initially consented on the night in question. He, however, pinned her down for anal intercourse, and that this is what she objected to. It doesn't matter if she has previously consented to every possible form of sexual intercourse with this man... if she said "no" to anal intercourse and he did it anyway - that is rape. Do I really need to explain this to you Derec?
Togo, do you see why having a detailed, obvious to most people, common sense policy is necessary? Does anyone really need to be told that previous instances of consensual sex does NOT mean that all future and types of sex are automatically consented too? Does anyone really need to be told that either party can withdraw consent at any time? The very fact that Derec finds Emma's admission that she had two previous consensual sexual encounters with the male student "interesting" should show you why such policies are needed.
Furthermore, another detail in the article that you apparently did not find "interesting" enough to highlight is that two other female students had also reported this same male student for rape, and many more anonymously listed him as a campus rapist. Yes, Emma wants him gone from the campus, but she is not "bitching because she didn't get her way" as you so misogynisticly put it. She is highlighting what she believes was the University's failure to properly investigate the claims of multiple women against this specific man.
It is a fact that the majority of campus rapes are actually done by a very few predators. That is the irony in all of your hysterics about the poor victimized men. It isn't anywhere near most men that these policies are directed at, because most men would not pin a woman down and rape her anally despite her protests. But some men would, and those men usually rape many women before they are reported. Since most women don't report their rapes in the first place, I find it "interesting" that in this case we have three separate women reporting this same man, yet the university dismisses all three complaints.
And because it apparently needs to be said to you yet again, dismissing all three cases does NOT make any of the women liars or even mistaken. It only means that the university decided they did not have enough evidence to take action against the male student.
Derec
Contributor
It's not a question of her not being "really raped". She alleges a real rape (unlike say a hookup where she was moderately drunk). I have no idea if she was or not. However, there is no evidence that I have seen. It's "he said, she said" all the way. In her own account, published in Time, Emma relates how "he said she said" went down at the hearing. They both were allowed to present their version of events, which he did in some detail (fictional she claims).
No, it does not mean that at all. But we need a lot more than mere possibility of her not consenting to punish the accused.
The preexisting relationship doesn't preclude the possibility that it was rape, but it makes proving it that much messier and more difficult.
No, but marital rape has the same problem of proving the rape happened.
This is a blatant and disgusting strawman as nobody here thinks that!
Again, not being omniscient we have to go by evidence. Is it possible that she was raped? Sure, even with the preexisting relationship. Was she raped? Who knows, but it certainly wasn't proven by the 'he said she said' exchange.
Derec, you have really talked yourself into a corner on this one. Your original complaint was that anytime a female student files a complaint on campus, the poor male students are tossed off campus purely on her say so. Yet here you have brought up a case that totally disproves your contention. THREE different women claim this male student raped them, yet nothing has happened to that male student. He is still there.
You have proved yourself wrong with your own choice of example.
Sabine Grant
Member
Actually, folks who are actually genuinely concerned about the fate of rape/sexual victims who could not or did not come forward due to their lack of confidence and absence of their having material evidence to support their claim, those folks should be investing their efforts in supporting such victims and encourage them into seeking professional therapy or join a support group guiding them through all the necessary recovery steps.
That is the actual "best we can do". Rather than agenda driven babbling over the Internet which persistently polarizes on outcries of injustice targeting males or females.None of that ever resolves the burden carried by victims who did not come forward based on the reasons I have stated.
Just wondering : have you asked yourself to which extent your pre existing mentality dwelling on "she was not really raped" would influence your response as a human being to another if a female acquaintance were to confide in you , months after the fact, that a mutual male friend of yours and hers raped her? How much would it disable your willingness to direct her towards support and/or counseling?
Derec
Contributor
Typical "cover your ass" phrasing but it is clear from this and other such articles that the author believes the accuser.
Allegedly.
No need to explain as I agree with you here - including the very important word "if". She said that's what happened, he said it didn't. Without any other evidence what is the university to conclude, especially in light of a pre-existing sexual relationship.
It doesn't mean that they are automatically non-consensual just because a female alleges it or because she resorts to silly stunts either.
She says she did, he says she didn't.
First of all, I think that even you admitted that the level of explicitness necessary is different between a new couple and an established one, as the latter know each other's signals better.
What policy do you think would "help" in this case? Requiring a university to side with an accuser every time there is a "he said she said" case?
According to her, which is hearsay. How many, if any, actually complained to the university, rather than to her? How many went to the police, if any? What did they allege? All of this is either unknown or is coming from the Mattressgirl directly. As to the "anonymous" allegations, any safeguards against her and her friends stuffing the complaint box so to speak? It's not like something similar hasn't happened before, from the other direction.
There was a hearing. It was "he said she said". She said he raped her, he said they had consensual anal sex. He was found not responsible. She appealed and lost. Now she wants the university to reverse their decision because of her stunt.
And again, you are just assuming that she must be telling the truth.
Given how easy it is to expel male students that suggests major problems with these additional accusations, if they exist at all.
If there wasn't enough evidence then the decision was correct and the Mattressgirl should stop trying to reverse the decision with her stunts.
. You are a mind-reader, Derec? Because you certainly pretend to be. First telling me what I am thinking, now telling us what every author of every article on this topic *really* believes in spite of actual written and published words stating neutral terms.
Sabine Grant
Member
I think I had posted a link to the Columbia University "scandals" in the other thread revealing to which extent male students are not automatically subjected to penalties. Further, Jamies Winston, FSU Seminoles Quarterback accused party of a sexual assault allegedly having occurred close to 2 years ago now, to my knowledge has not been subjected to any penalties. The official investigation under Chapter 9 recently initiated by FSU is certainly not pointing towards any sanctions taken against Winston. Just so it is clear, his suspension for an entire game (Clemson/Seminoles) was NOT related to that investigation.