• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

University of Minnesota Sexual Assault Case

Nice Squirrel

Contributor
Joined
Jun 15, 2004
Messages
6,083
Location
Minnesota
Basic Beliefs
Only the Nice Squirrel can save us.
http://www.startribune.com/sex-assa...ension-of-gophers-football-players/406564806/

A student's claim last September that she was sexually assaulted prompted the University of Minnesota to suspend 10 Gophers football players from the team, weeks after a criminal probe resulted in no charges.

Her accusations, documented through police reports and court testimony, ultimately led to a U committee's investigation and Tuesday's decision, more than three months after the Sept. 2 incident.

Now I have to run, but the crux is that the police and prosecutors need to prove "beyond a reasonable doubt" and the University (under the OCR Title IX Dear Colleague Letter of 2011 - and supreme court yadda yadda...) must use the lower bar “preponderance of the evidence.”

I'll let you folks discuss the case.
 

Derec

Contributor
Joined
Aug 19, 2002
Messages
21,835
Location
Atlanta, GA
Basic Beliefs
atheist
Yet another false accusation and of course the university is taking her side of the story even though there is no evidence she was raped vs. having consensual sex she regretted later.

"Preponderance of evidence" is too low a standard in these cases. Hopefully the Trunp administration will reverse this monumental mistake by the Obama administration, which mandated the lowest possible standard (rather than "clear and convincing proof" most universities used hitherto and continue to use for non-sexual misconduct cases) must be used.
 

KeepTalking

Code Monkey
Joined
Jan 15, 2010
Messages
4,641
Location
St. Louis Metro East
Basic Beliefs
Atheist, Secular Humanist, Pastifarian, IPUnitard
http://www.startribune.com/sex-assa...ension-of-gophers-football-players/406564806/

A student's claim last September that she was sexually assaulted prompted the University of Minnesota to suspend 10 Gophers football players from the team, weeks after a criminal probe resulted in no charges.

Her accusations, documented through police reports and court testimony, ultimately led to a U committee's investigation and Tuesday's decision, more than three months after the Sept. 2 incident.

Now I have to run, but the crux is that the police and prosecutors need to prove "beyond a reasonable doubt" and the University (under the OCR Title IX Dear Colleague Letter of 2011 - and supreme court yadda yadda...) must use the lower bar “preponderance of the evidence.”

I'll let you folks discuss the case.

This story brings to light a very serious issue, and that is that the University of Minnesota has an extremely stupid name for their football team. It would be a great name for their Golf team, however.
 

Nice Squirrel

Contributor
Joined
Jun 15, 2004
Messages
6,083
Location
Minnesota
Basic Beliefs
Only the Nice Squirrel can save us.
Yet another false accusation and of course the university is taking her side of the story even though there is no evidence she was raped vs. having consensual sex she regretted later.

"Preponderance of evidence" is too low a standard in these cases. Hopefully the Trunp administration will reverse this monumental mistake by the Obama administration, which mandated the lowest possible standard (rather than "clear and convincing proof" most universities used hitherto and continue to use for non-sexual misconduct cases) must be used.

Currently all pending legislation gives no standard and only removes the requirement for one. I suspect for star athletes the bar can be raised back to "not allowed to question until after player loses their eligibility" if one these bills pass.
 

Nice Squirrel

Contributor
Joined
Jun 15, 2004
Messages
6,083
Location
Minnesota
Basic Beliefs
Only the Nice Squirrel can save us.
http://www.startribune.com/sex-assa...ension-of-gophers-football-players/406564806/



Now I have to run, but the crux is that the police and prosecutors need to prove "beyond a reasonable doubt" and the University (under the OCR Title IX Dear Colleague Letter of 2011 - and supreme court yadda yadda...) must use the lower bar “preponderance of the evidence.”

I'll let you folks discuss the case.

This story brings to light a very serious issue, and that is that the University of Minnesota has an extremely stupid name for their football team. It would be a great name for their Golf team, however.

Eh? It comes from a pretty stupid cartoon:
The-Gopher-State-Nickname-Sweeny-Cartoon.png
 

KeepTalking

Code Monkey
Joined
Jan 15, 2010
Messages
4,641
Location
St. Louis Metro East
Basic Beliefs
Atheist, Secular Humanist, Pastifarian, IPUnitard
This story brings to light a very serious issue, and that is that the University of Minnesota has an extremely stupid name for their football team. It would be a great name for their Golf team, however.

Eh? It comes from a pretty stupid cartoon:
The-Gopher-State-Nickname-Sweeny-Cartoon.png

In that case, I am upgrading my rhetoric to "monumentally stupid".
 

KeepTalking

Code Monkey
Joined
Jan 15, 2010
Messages
4,641
Location
St. Louis Metro East
Basic Beliefs
Atheist, Secular Humanist, Pastifarian, IPUnitard
So... you were there, eh? Did she tell you it was okay?

Yeah, it's just another one of those she said/ten-guys-with-supporting-video-tape said situations.

How can we ever know who to believe.

Perhaps they were not suspended for sexual assault, but for breaking other school or team rules revealed by the video of the incident. These may include, but are not limited to, underage drinking, drug use, or video taping themselves performing a sex act.
 

dismal

Contributor
Joined
Dec 12, 2003
Messages
10,329
Location
texas
Basic Beliefs
none
Yeah, it's just another one of those she said/ten-guys-with-supporting-video-tape said situations.

How can we ever know who to believe.

Perhaps they were not suspended for sexual assault, but for breaking other school or team rules revealed by the video of the incident. These may include, but are not limited to, underage drinking, drug use, or video taping themselves performing a sex act.

Maybe, but that would seem to render this part of the story fake news:

A student’s claim last September that she was sexually assaulted prompted the University of Minnesota to suspend 10 Gophers football players from the team, weeks after a criminal probe resulted in no charges.
 

Jarhyn

Wizard
Joined
Mar 29, 2010
Messages
9,798
Gender
No pls.
Basic Beliefs
Natural Philosophy, Game Theoretic Ethicist
Perhaps they were not suspended for sexual assault, but for breaking other school or team rules revealed by the video of the incident. These may include, but are not limited to, underage drinking, drug use, or video taping themselves performing a sex act.

Maybe, but that would seem to render this part of the story fake news:

A student’s claim last September that she was sexually assaulted prompted the University of Minnesota to suspend 10 Gophers football players from the team, weeks after a criminal probe resulted in no charges.

Not really. If the claim is what brought to light the underage drinking, drugs, and pornography, it prompted the removal of them regardless of whether the claim was the deciding factor. It was the prompt for an investigation that led to the removal. It prompted the removal. Prompt prompt. Prompt.
 

dismal

Contributor
Joined
Dec 12, 2003
Messages
10,329
Location
texas
Basic Beliefs
none
Maybe, but that would seem to render this part of the story fake news:

A student’s claim last September that she was sexually assaulted prompted the University of Minnesota to suspend 10 Gophers football players from the team, weeks after a criminal probe resulted in no charges.

Not really. If the claim is what brought to light the underage drinking, drugs, and pornography, it prompted the removal of them regardless of whether the claim was the deciding factor. It was the prompt for an investigation that led to the removal. It prompted the removal. Prompt prompt. Prompt.

Yes, but using this to describe a suspension for underage drinking is a bit like a headline saying Abraham Lincoln died because of his love of theater.
 

Derec

Contributor
Joined
Aug 19, 2002
Messages
21,835
Location
Atlanta, GA
Basic Beliefs
atheist
Perhaps they were not suspended for sexual assault, but for breaking other school or team rules revealed by the video of the incident. These may include, but are not limited to, underage drinking, drug use, or video taping themselves performing a sex act.

Dismal has already shown that that is not so, but if it was, it highlights more female privilege. Did you know that if a female student alleges rape (even if falsely) she is immune from any punishment due to any other violations of the college rules such as underage drinking or drug use. It gives female students more incentive to cry rape.
 

laughing dog

Contributor
Joined
Dec 29, 2004
Messages
21,095
Location
Minnesota
Gender
IT
Basic Beliefs
Dogs rule
[
Dismal has already shown that that is not so
No, he has not.
, but if it was, it highlights more female privilege. Did you know that if a female student alleges rape (even if falsely) she is immune from any punishment due to any other violations of the college rules such as underage drinking or drug use.
You know this for a fact - that at every institution has the same rules. Then prove it.
It gives female students more incentive to cry rape.
Do you have to drink to make this stuff up?
 

Loren Pechtel

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 16, 2000
Messages
36,189
Location
Nevada
Gender
Yes
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
http://www.startribune.com/sex-assa...ension-of-gophers-football-players/406564806/

A student's claim last September that she was sexually assaulted prompted the University of Minnesota to suspend 10 Gophers football players from the team, weeks after a criminal probe resulted in no charges.

Her accusations, documented through police reports and court testimony, ultimately led to a U committee's investigation and Tuesday's decision, more than three months after the Sept. 2 incident.

Now I have to run, but the crux is that the police and prosecutors need to prove "beyond a reasonable doubt" and the University (under the OCR Title IX Dear Colleague Letter of 2011 - and supreme court yadda yadda...) must use the lower bar “preponderance of the evidence.”

I'll let you folks discuss the case.

The police decided not to charge them. That should be the end of it.
 

Tom Sawyer

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Jun 25, 2002
Messages
17,030
Location
Toronto
Basic Beliefs
That I'm God
The police decided not to charge them. That should be the end of it.
Why? Do the police decide whether or not football players violated team rules?

If the rule in question is "Don't rape people", then yes, they do decide that.

If the rule in question is "Wash your jock strap after each practice", then that's probably not a police matter.
 

Jarhyn

Wizard
Joined
Mar 29, 2010
Messages
9,798
Gender
No pls.
Basic Beliefs
Natural Philosophy, Game Theoretic Ethicist
Why? Do the police decide whether or not football players violated team rules?

If the rule in question is "Don't rape people", then yes, they do decide that.

If the rule in question is "Wash your jock strap after each practice", then that's probably not a police matter.
I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that one of their rules is 'don't do shit that makes the team and school look bad' or some variant on that theme. And being caught, on film, at a party with drug use, underage drinking, and HIGHLY questionable sex acts, qualifies. Because the definition of "what is ethically considered a 'rape'?" has frayed and arbitrary edges, and because this is a private institution, they have a right to have a different definition of what precisely qualifies it as one. And perhaps, for them, the questionable sex act caught on film qualifies as one, whereas in the eyes of the government it is not. It is not unlike a church excommunicating a member for some grave sin that does not otherwise exist in the eyes of the law. The church still has that right.

Now, there is some question of whether a state university may have different formal definitions of rape than the state itself; but because universities are generally afforded the power to set tighter standards of behavior in other regulations, they probably should get that right here, too.
 

Nice Squirrel

Contributor
Joined
Jun 15, 2004
Messages
6,083
Location
Minnesota
Basic Beliefs
Only the Nice Squirrel can save us.
Perhaps they were not suspended for sexual assault, but for breaking other school or team rules revealed by the video of the incident. These may include, but are not limited to, underage drinking, drug use, or video taping themselves performing a sex act.

Dismal has already shown that that is not so, but if it was, it highlights more female privilege. Did you know that if a female student alleges rape (even if falsely) she is immune from any punishment due to any other violations of the college rules such as underage drinking or drug use. It gives female students more incentive to cry rape.

That varies from from college to college. Brigham Young only decided twop weeks ago to stop punishing students coming forward with sexual assault violations who were assaulted while violating conduct codes against drinking, dancing, etc. (Yes there are schools that prohibit dancing and being alone with the opposite sex.)
 

KeepTalking

Code Monkey
Joined
Jan 15, 2010
Messages
4,641
Location
St. Louis Metro East
Basic Beliefs
Atheist, Secular Humanist, Pastifarian, IPUnitard
Perhaps they were not suspended for sexual assault, but for breaking other school or team rules revealed by the video of the incident. These may include, but are not limited to, underage drinking, drug use, or video taping themselves performing a sex act.

Dismal has already shown that that is not so,

He did no such thing, he only provided a rebuttal to my post, in which he contended that it would be fake news if what I posted was correct. His dismal post has already been addressed by another poster, showing that his contention is just the same bullshit we always expect from dismal, an attempt to turn things around on his perceived opposition, which nearly always fails.

but if it was, it highlights more female privilege. Did you know that if a female student alleges rape (even if falsely) she is immune from any punishment due to any other violations of the college rules such as underage drinking or drug use. It gives female students more incentive to cry rape.

Here is a relevant quote from the article that lead me to bring up the points in my previous post:

University President Eric Kaler wrote in a letter to donors Wednesday that football coach Tracy Claeys, with athletic director Mark Coyle’s support, decided to suspend the players from the team ahead of its Dec. 27 bowl game in San Diego.

They were suspended by the coach of the team, this indicates to me that they broke team rules. I doubt that the female student in this case was on the football team, so it would be hard for her to be suspended from the team for breaking team rules.
 

Tom Sawyer

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Jun 25, 2002
Messages
17,030
Location
Toronto
Basic Beliefs
That I'm God
If the rule in question is "Don't rape people", then yes, they do decide that.

If the rule in question is "Wash your jock strap after each practice", then that's probably not a police matter.
I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that one of their rules is 'don't do shit that makes the team and school look bad' or some variant on that theme. And being caught, on film, at a party with drug use, underage drinking, and HIGHLY questionable sex acts, qualifies. Because the definition of "what is ethically considered a 'rape'?" has frayed and arbitrary edges, and because this is a private institution, they have a right to have a different definition of what precisely qualifies it as one. And perhaps, for them, the questionable sex act caught on film qualifies as one, whereas in the eyes of the government it is not. It is not unlike a church excommunicating a member for some grave sin that does not otherwise exist in the eyes of the law. The church still has that right.

Now, there is some question of whether a state university may have different formal definitions of rape than the state itself; but because universities are generally afforded the power to set tighter standards of behavior in other regulations, they probably should get that right here, too.

If the punishments are for the first, I don't have much of an issue.

If it's the second, I do. Rape should mean having nonconsensual sex with someone and the determination of whether that happened should be a criminal matter handled by people who are trained to investigate crimes.
 

laughing dog

Contributor
Joined
Dec 29, 2004
Messages
21,095
Location
Minnesota
Gender
IT
Basic Beliefs
Dogs rule
Why? Do the police decide whether or not football players violated team rules?

If the rule in question is "Don't rape people", then yes, they do decide that.
Logically and operationally that is untrue unless the police also run the football team.
If the rule in question is "Wash your jock strap after each practice", then that's probably not a police matter.
Or any other rule the coach and university deems appropriate.
 

Derec

Contributor
Joined
Aug 19, 2002
Messages
21,835
Location
Atlanta, GA
Basic Beliefs
atheist
They were suspended by the coach of the team, this indicates to me that they broke team rules. I doubt that the female student in this case was on the football team, so it would be hard for her to be suspended from the team for breaking team rules.
They are still facing possible expulsion by the school administrator while the accuser is facing no consequences even if it turns out she was lying.
Emma "Mattress Girl" Sulkowitz was not expelled from Columbia. Not even Jackie Coakley was expelled from UVA. Making false rape allegations is a very safe way for women to take revenge for whatever reason.
 

Derec

Contributor
Joined
Aug 19, 2002
Messages
21,835
Location
Atlanta, GA
Basic Beliefs
atheist
That varies from from college to college. Brigham Young only decided twop weeks ago to stop punishing students coming forward with sexual assault violations who were assaulted while violating conduct codes against drinking, dancing, etc. (Yes there are schools that prohibit dancing and being alone with the opposite sex.)
If even BYU does it, then it is safe to assume this university does too. I think it's wrong for a female can escape punishment for school violation just by alleging rape. It gives her extra incentive to do so even if the sex was completely consensual or even if no sex ever took place (see Jackie Coakley false rape allegations at UVA). Caught underage drinking or doing drugs? Just say you were "raped" and they can't touch you. Also your use of "who were assaulted" implies that all such claims are true, which is certainly bullshit.
 

Jarhyn

Wizard
Joined
Mar 29, 2010
Messages
9,798
Gender
No pls.
Basic Beliefs
Natural Philosophy, Game Theoretic Ethicist
I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that one of their rules is 'don't do shit that makes the team and school look bad' or some variant on that theme. And being caught, on film, at a party with drug use, underage drinking, and HIGHLY questionable sex acts, qualifies. Because the definition of "what is ethically considered a 'rape'?" has frayed and arbitrary edges, and because this is a private institution, they have a right to have a different definition of what precisely qualifies it as one. And perhaps, for them, the questionable sex act caught on film qualifies as one, whereas in the eyes of the government it is not. It is not unlike a church excommunicating a member for some grave sin that does not otherwise exist in the eyes of the law. The church still has that right.

Now, there is some question of whether a state university may have different formal definitions of rape than the state itself; but because universities are generally afforded the power to set tighter standards of behavior in other regulations, they probably should get that right here, too.

If the punishments are for the first, I don't have much of an issue.

If it's the second, I do. Rape should mean having nonconsensual sex with someone and the determination of whether that happened should be a criminal matter handled by people who are trained to investigate crimes.

I disagree, because what constitutes consent is, while clear in many cases, fuzzy around the edges, especially when people are in impaired states. I doubt the law would consider some of the sex I've been involved in rape, but to me it was, and many others would probably agree with me. Other times, sex I've been involved in would see me as a rapist in the eyes of the law when no party involved would ever make such a declaration. Even the definition of what constitutes rape in the eyes of the law is a subject up for debate, and it has been for a very long time.

Saying that simply because the legal system for government has adjudicated something as not-rape does not establish for all parties that it wasn't. It means they can't be jailed or imprisoned. But that can't and should not deny other organizations the right to hold their own position on what the thing that happened ought be called.
 

laughing dog

Contributor
Joined
Dec 29, 2004
Messages
21,095
Location
Minnesota
Gender
IT
Basic Beliefs
Dogs rule
They were suspended by the coach of the team, this indicates to me that they broke team rules. I doubt that the female student in this case was on the football team, so it would be hard for her to be suspended from the team for breaking team rules.
They are still facing possible expulsion by the school administrator while the accuser is facing no consequences even if it turns out she was lying.
Emma "Mattress Girl" Sulkowitz was not expelled from Columbia. Not even Jackie Coakley was expelled from UVA. Making false rape allegations is a very safe way for women to take revenge for whatever reason.
You keep confusing "false" with "lie".
 

Derec

Contributor
Joined
Aug 19, 2002
Messages
21,835
Location
Atlanta, GA
Basic Beliefs
atheist
I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that one of their rules is 'don't do shit that makes the team and school look bad' or some variant on that theme.
And consensual sex makes the team and school look bad? If the school makes athelets who party and engage in sexual activity automatically suspect and subject to suspensions then that will harm their recruiting efforts. I.e. this heavy-handed treatment of male students is what is making the school look bad.

And being caught, on film, at a party with drug use, underage drinking, and HIGHLY questionable sex acts, qualifies.
But the girl was also at the party with drug use, underage drinking and questionable sex acts. Why isn't she facing consequences for her behavior? Oh yes, I forgot, she is "lacking in testosterone" so she can get away with things people who have testosterone can't. :rolleyes:

Because the definition of "what is ethically considered a 'rape'?" has frayed and arbitrary edges, and because this is a private institution, they have a right to have a different definition of what precisely qualifies it as one.
So you think they can randomly and arbitrarily decide what rape is? Rape has a meaning, if you start calling consensual sex "rape" the word loses any legitimate meaning.

And perhaps, for them, the questionable sex act caught on film qualifies as one, whereas in the eyes of the government it is not. It is not unlike a church excommunicating a member for some grave sin that does not otherwise exist in the eyes of the law. The church still has that right.
Let's say this university defines "rape" very loosely. But if the sex in question was consensual then both parties engaged in it freely. So if one is a "rapist", then so is the other. Why should females be given a free pass here?

Now, there is some question of whether a state university may have different formal definitions of rape than the state itself; but because universities are generally afforded the power to set tighter standards of behavior in other regulations, they probably should get that right here, too.
Including discriminating by gender how they apply those ridiculously restrictive standards?

- - - Updated - - -

You keep confusing "false" with "lie".
Unless they somehow did not know that they were making a false accusation, then the false accusations were most certainly lies.

But anything to excuse a female. You are such a white knight.
 

Derec

Contributor
Joined
Aug 19, 2002
Messages
21,835
Location
Atlanta, GA
Basic Beliefs
atheist
Saying that simply because the legal system for government has adjudicated something as not-rape does not establish for all parties that it wasn't. It means they can't be jailed or imprisoned. But that can't and should not deny other organizations the right to hold their own position on what the thing that happened ought be called.
As long as females (aka "those lacking testosterone") get away with whatever you do and only ever male students are punished for overly broad definitions of "rape" you mean?

Or are you advocating expelling female students for having consensual sex with a male student who regrets it at some later date?
 
Last edited:

Malintent

Veteran Member
Joined
May 11, 2005
Messages
3,651
Location
New York
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Perhaps they were not suspended for sexual assault, but for breaking other school or team rules revealed by the video of the incident. These may include, but are not limited to, underage drinking, drug use, or video taping themselves performing a sex act.

Dismal has already shown that that is not so, but if it was, it highlights more female privilege. Did you know that if a female student alleges rape (even if falsely) she is immune from any punishment due to any other violations of the college rules such as underage drinking or drug use. It gives female students more incentive to cry rape.

More evidence we live in a culture of Rape ACCUSATION.
 

laughing dog

Contributor
Joined
Dec 29, 2004
Messages
21,095
Location
Minnesota
Gender
IT
Basic Beliefs
Dogs rule
Unless they somehow did not know that they were making a false accusation, then the false accusations were most certainly lies.
Since you acknowledge the difference, unless you have indisputable evidence as to their state of minds, it is just another case of your anything to accuse a female. You are such a misogynist.
 

Tom Sawyer

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Jun 25, 2002
Messages
17,030
Location
Toronto
Basic Beliefs
That I'm God
If the punishments are for the first, I don't have much of an issue.

If it's the second, I do. Rape should mean having nonconsensual sex with someone and the determination of whether that happened should be a criminal matter handled by people who are trained to investigate crimes.

I disagree, because what constitutes consent is, while clear in many cases, fuzzy around the edges, especially when people are in impaired states. I doubt the law would consider some of the sex I've been involved in rape, but to me it was, and many others would probably agree with me. Other times, sex I've been involved in would see me as a rapist in the eyes of the law when no party involved would ever make such a declaration. Even the definition of what constitutes rape in the eyes of the law is a subject up for debate, and it has been for a very long time.

Saying that simply because the legal system for government has adjudicated something as not-rape does not establish for all parties that it wasn't. It means they can't be jailed or imprisoned. But that can't and should not deny other organizations the right to hold their own position on what the thing that happened ought be called.

I don't disagree with that in principle. What I disagree with is the use of university administrators with little or no training in investigative techniques being the ones making the determination of that. There's a reason that police go to a police academy before conducting investigations and DAs go to law school before determining whether or not to file charges. It's fine for them to have different standards, provided that there are qualified individuals determining whether or not those standards have been broken.
 

Derec

Contributor
Joined
Aug 19, 2002
Messages
21,835
Location
Atlanta, GA
Basic Beliefs
atheist
Since you acknowledge the difference, unless you have indisputable evidence as to their state of minds, it is just another case of your anything to accuse a female. You are such a misogynist.
Actually the burden is on you to show that the women making these clearly false accusations did not know they were false.
 

laughing dog

Contributor
Joined
Dec 29, 2004
Messages
21,095
Location
Minnesota
Gender
IT
Basic Beliefs
Dogs rule
Since you acknowledge the difference, unless you have indisputable evidence as to their state of minds, it is just another case of your anything to accuse a female. You are such a misogynist.
Actually the burden is on you to show that the women making these clearly false accusations did not know they were false.
You are the one making a positive claim that they are lying, not me. You are the one who needs to come up with the evidence to support your claim that they are lying because "false" does not equal "lie". So either put up or stop embarrassing yourself with your misogynistically driven claims.
 

Nice Squirrel

Contributor
Joined
Jun 15, 2004
Messages
6,083
Location
Minnesota
Basic Beliefs
Only the Nice Squirrel can save us.
That varies from from college to college. Brigham Young only decided twop weeks ago to stop punishing students coming forward with sexual assault violations who were assaulted while violating conduct codes against drinking, dancing, etc. (Yes there are schools that prohibit dancing and being alone with the opposite sex.)
If even BYU does it, then it is safe to assume this university does too.
Actually no. It's state law here that punishment for conduct cannot be meted out if it comes from an individual reporting a violent crime. It's also in the pending federal legislation.
 

Derec

Contributor
Joined
Aug 19, 2002
Messages
21,835
Location
Atlanta, GA
Basic Beliefs
atheist
Actually no. It's state law here that punishment for conduct cannot be meted out if it comes from an individual reporting a violent crime. It's also in the pending federal legislation.
Again, that gives an incentive to the female to make a false rape allegation because it shields her from any consequences for wrongdoing such as drug use or underage drinking.

But the left does not think false rape allegations are a problem, so they keep pushing policies that make false rape allegations more likely, not less.
 

Nice Squirrel

Contributor
Joined
Jun 15, 2004
Messages
6,083
Location
Minnesota
Basic Beliefs
Only the Nice Squirrel can save us.
Actually no. It's state law here that punishment for conduct cannot be meted out if it comes from an individual reporting a violent crime. It's also in the pending federal legislation.
Again, that gives an incentive to the female to make a false rape allegation because it shields her from any consequences for wrongdoing such as drug use or underage drinking.

But the left does not think false rape allegations are a problem, so they keep pushing policies that make false rape allegations more likely, not less.

The pending federal law is being pushed by conservatives. The state law had broad conservative support.
 

Derec

Contributor
Joined
Aug 19, 2002
Messages
21,835
Location
Atlanta, GA
Basic Beliefs
atheist
You are the one making a positive claim that they are lying, not me. You are the one who needs to come up with the evidence to support your claim that they are lying because "false" does not equal "lie". So either put up or stop embarrassing yourself with your misogynistically driven claims.

Making a false allegation is prima facie evidence of lying. If you somehow claim that these women did not know what they were doing (feminism infantalizes women by demanding they not be held accountable for their actions, see also the thread on the woman hiring a hit man) then the burden to prove this is on you.

- - - Updated - - -

This pending law is being pushed by conservatives.

Citation needed.
 

Derec

Contributor
Joined
Aug 19, 2002
Messages
21,835
Location
Atlanta, GA
Basic Beliefs
atheist
Citation needed.
H.R.3408 - Fair Campus Act of 2015

The summary does not seem to say what you say it says.
Fair Campus Act of 2015

This bill amends title I (General Provisions) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (HEA) to establish requirements with respect to sexual violence allegations at institutions of higher education (IHEs).

An IHE that receives HEA funds, except a foreign institution, must provide support services to affected students and annual training to relevant personnel.

This bill prohibits an IHE from imposing sanctions on a person, including a student organization (e.g., a fraternity or sorority), with respect to alleged sexual violence, except pursuant to a formal hearing in accordance with institutional disciplinary proceedings. It specifies due process requirements for such proceedings, permits an IHE to select the applicable standard of proof, and directs an IHE to publish applicable procedures in its student handbook.

An IHE may initiate an institutional disciplinary proceeding to impose certain interim sanctions (e.g., a class schedule adjustment).

It also prohibits an IHE from requiring a sorority or fraternity to: (1) admit members who do not meet membership requirements, or (2) waive its coverage exemption under title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972 (title IX prohibits sex discrimination in federally funded education programs and activities) as a disciplinary or punitive measure.
 

laughing dog

Contributor
Joined
Dec 29, 2004
Messages
21,095
Location
Minnesota
Gender
IT
Basic Beliefs
Dogs rule
Making a false allegation is prima facie evidence of lying.
No, it is not. It is prima facie evidence of a mistake. You are making possible false allegations that these women are lying. According to you, that is prima facie evidence that you are lying.

If you somehow claim that these women did not know what they were doing (feminism infantalizes women by demanding they not be held accountable for their actions, see also the thread on the woman hiring a hit man) then the burden to prove this is on you.
You are now resorting to childish babble. Someone may believe she or he has been raped. That is sufficient to mean the allegation, while false, is not a lie. This is basic reasoning.
 

KeepTalking

Code Monkey
Joined
Jan 15, 2010
Messages
4,641
Location
St. Louis Metro East
Basic Beliefs
Atheist, Secular Humanist, Pastifarian, IPUnitard
They were suspended by the coach of the team, this indicates to me that they broke team rules. I doubt that the female student in this case was on the football team, so it would be hard for her to be suspended from the team for breaking team rules.
They are still facing possible expulsion by the school administrator while the accuser is facing no consequences even if it turns out she was lying.

If they are facing disciplinary action for underage drinking, and/or drug use, and the female was not underage, not shown to have been drinking, or not shown to have used drugs in the video, then this is exactly what I would expect. There are too many ifs in this situation. It doesn't help either side, here on the board, that the coaches and administrators involved are citing privacy concerns to avoid providing any details at this point. These details may come out at some point, but right now we are left with too much to speculate on.
 

Malintent

Veteran Member
Joined
May 11, 2005
Messages
3,651
Location
New York
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
They are still facing possible expulsion by the school administrator while the accuser is facing no consequences even if it turns out she was lying.

If they are facing disciplinary action for underage drinking, and/or drug use, and the female was not underage, not shown to have been drinking, or not shown to have used drugs in the video, then this is exactly what I would expect. There are too many ifs in this situation. It doesn't help either side, here on the board, that the coaches and administrators involved are citing privacy concerns to avoid providing any details at this point. These details may come out at some point, but right now we are left with too much to speculate on.

I think the issue Derec is underscoring here is that IF the woman WAS engaged in various activities that WOULD get her expelled, then by her simply CLAIMING to have been raped at the time these activities were occurring, makes her immune to the penalties of her violations. The claim of Rape becomes a 'get-out-of-jail-free' card. And people like you eat it right up, creating America's Rape Accusation Culture whereby accusations serve as a tool to further support Female Privilege
 

laughing dog

Contributor
Joined
Dec 29, 2004
Messages
21,095
Location
Minnesota
Gender
IT
Basic Beliefs
Dogs rule
If they are facing disciplinary action for underage drinking, and/or drug use, and the female was not underage, not shown to have been drinking, or not shown to have used drugs in the video, then this is exactly what I would expect. There are too many ifs in this situation. It doesn't help either side, here on the board, that the coaches and administrators involved are citing privacy concerns to avoid providing any details at this point. These details may come out at some point, but right now we are left with too much to speculate on.

I think the issue Derec is underscoring here is that IF the woman WAS engaged in various activities that WOULD get her expelled, then by her simply CLAIMING to have been raped at the time these activities were occurring, makes her immune to the penalties of her violations. The claim of Rape becomes a 'get-out-of-jail-free' card. And people like you eat it right up, creating America's Rape Accusation Culture whereby accusations serve as a tool to further support Female Privilege
That is as an idiotic claim as the one that people like you are rape apologists for men.

The men involved in this situation are members of the U of Mn football team and the woman is not. These men agreed to abide by the rules of conduct for the U of Mn football team. These men are being disciplined by the football coach for perceived violations of those rules. Since the woman is not a member of the football team, she is not subject to their rules. No one has indicated what U. of Mn student conduct rules she may have broken. All that is alleged (as is the usual case from the usual suspects) is that the woman lied about all of this and she ought to be sanctioned for that lie.

I will say that the U. of Mn recently had some bad pr when a story broke out about a student who had been raped on campus and whose story was not taken seriously by either the police or campus officials. She persisted and finally with the help of an experienced ex-investigator broke the case open and her rapist (who was serial rapist on campus) eventually confessed and was convicted. As a result, I imagine U of Mn officials are sensitive about these situations and the public image of the U.
 

KeepTalking

Code Monkey
Joined
Jan 15, 2010
Messages
4,641
Location
St. Louis Metro East
Basic Beliefs
Atheist, Secular Humanist, Pastifarian, IPUnitard
If they are facing disciplinary action for underage drinking, and/or drug use, and the female was not underage, not shown to have been drinking, or not shown to have used drugs in the video, then this is exactly what I would expect. There are too many ifs in this situation. It doesn't help either side, here on the board, that the coaches and administrators involved are citing privacy concerns to avoid providing any details at this point. These details may come out at some point, but right now we are left with too much to speculate on.

I think the issue Derec is underscoring here is that IF the woman WAS engaged in various activities that WOULD get her expelled, then by her simply CLAIMING to have been raped at the time these activities were occurring, makes her immune to the penalties of her violations.

I know which hobby horse Derec is riding in this thread, and don't care to comment further about that particular issue. I am simply trying to show that there is much with this case that is unknown, and several possible reasons as to why them boys would be disciplined, but not the girl.

The claim of Rape becomes a 'get-out-of-jail-free' card. And people like you eat it right up, creating America's Rape Accusation Culture whereby accusations serve as a tool to further support Female Privilege

And people like you can go fuck themselves. I have been deliberately steering clear of that part of the thread, but my views on the subject are far more nuanced than you might imagine.
 

ronburgundy

Contributor
Joined
Dec 6, 2014
Messages
5,757
Location
Whale's Vagina
Basic Beliefs
Atheist/Scientist
Maybe, but that would seem to render this part of the story fake news:

A student’s claim last September that she was sexually assaulted prompted the University of Minnesota to suspend 10 Gophers football players from the team, weeks after a criminal probe resulted in no charges.

Not really. If the claim is what brought to light the underage drinking, drugs, and pornography, it prompted the removal of them regardless of whether the claim was the deciding factor. It was the prompt for an investigation that led to the removal. It prompted the removal. Prompt prompt. Prompt.

Such phrasing strongly implies that the accusation itself was THE causal factor and the only one worth mentioning. IF it was actually any of those other things, the the accusation would be a completely unnecessary and insufficient incidental event to what actually prompted their suspension.
IT would be, at minimum, a case of grossly dishonest journalism with the deliberate intent to mislead.

Also, if it was the filming of sex, then the University still recklessly over-stepped its authority since being filmed having sex is in no way illegal in the US, nor anything that a public University has the right to punish students for. While distributing porn in an uncontrolled manner that allows minors to access it is illegal, there is almost zero chance the University would have any evidence that all 10 of the men suspended were involved specifically in the distribution of the video, given that many of them unlikely knew the video was taken.
 

Loren Pechtel

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 16, 2000
Messages
36,189
Location
Nevada
Gender
Yes
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Why? Do the police decide whether or not football players violated team rules?

If the rule in question is "Don't rape people", then yes, they do decide that.

If the rule in question is "Wash your jock strap after each practice", then that's probably not a police matter.

Exactly. The charge is rape. If the police decided they didn't do it then the school shouldn't override that.
 

laughing dog

Contributor
Joined
Dec 29, 2004
Messages
21,095
Location
Minnesota
Gender
IT
Basic Beliefs
Dogs rule
If the rule in question is "Don't rape people", then yes, they do decide that.

If the rule in question is "Wash your jock strap after each practice", then that's probably not a police matter.

Exactly. The charge is rape. If the police decided they didn't do it then the school shouldn't override that.
You don't know if the police decided there was no rape, or if they decided they did not have enough evidence to pursue a rape charge.

The U. is entitled to make such decisions based on its own criteria unless or until it is over-ridden by a higher authority.

In this case, we do not know the reason(s) for the discipline. The discipline may be for actions other than the alleged rape.
 

KeepTalking

Code Monkey
Joined
Jan 15, 2010
Messages
4,641
Location
St. Louis Metro East
Basic Beliefs
Atheist, Secular Humanist, Pastifarian, IPUnitard
Maybe, but that would seem to render this part of the story fake news:

A student’s claim last September that she was sexually assaulted prompted the University of Minnesota to suspend 10 Gophers football players from the team, weeks after a criminal probe resulted in no charges.

Not really. If the claim is what brought to light the underage drinking, drugs, and pornography, it prompted the removal of them regardless of whether the claim was the deciding factor. It was the prompt for an investigation that led to the removal. It prompted the removal. Prompt prompt. Prompt.

Such phrasing strongly implies that the accusation itself was THE causal factor and the only one worth mentioning. IF it was actually any of those other things, the the accusation would be a completely unnecessary and insufficient incidental event to what actually prompted their suspension.
IT would be, at minimum, a case of grossly dishonest journalism with the deliberate intent to mislead.

Not if the journalist is just as much in the dark as we are. That seems to be the case here, as can be seen multiple times in the article:

linked article said:
(University President Eric) Kaler wrote. “While we strive to be transparent in all that we do, the fact is that, under the law, our students have privacy rights that we value and respect.”

linked article said:
The university’s statement said: “Due to privacy restrictions relating to student educational data, there is nothing further the University can share.”

The journalist knows that there was a sexual assault allegation, that there was a video of the alleged assault, and that there were team suspensions as a result of the University investigating the alleged assault and video, as well as possible further action against the students involved. Beyond that, the University is being very tight lipped about the details, and claiming that this is due to privacy restrictions.
 

J842P

Veteran Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2006
Messages
4,137
Location
USA, California
Basic Beliefs
godless heathen
That varies from from college to college. Brigham Young only decided twop weeks ago to stop punishing students coming forward with sexual assault violations who were assaulted while violating conduct codes against drinking, dancing, etc. (Yes there are schools that prohibit dancing and being alone with the opposite sex.)
If even BYU does it, then it is safe to assume this university does too. I think it's wrong for a female can escape punishment for school violation just by alleging rape. It gives her extra incentive to do so even if the sex was completely consensual or even if no sex ever took place (see Jackie Coakley false rape allegations at UVA). Caught underage drinking or doing drugs? Just say you were "raped" and they can't touch you. Also your use of "who were assaulted" implies that all such claims are true, which is certainly bullshit.

Generally, no one gets in serious trouble for underage drinking at UVA. Even the police will not bust you unless you are being belligerent.
 
Top Bottom