Okay, so you ARE saying that ALL allegations have to result in charges and guilty findings.

We've looked at a very specific claim, with a specific set of facts. An example. There is nothing problematic with saying every allegation should be taken seriously and examined thoroughly AND then looking at a specific claim and saying no, that wouldn't be considered rape. That's what colleges are doing all over the country. If you think we should just ajudicate EVERY claim as guilty of rape, why don't you just come out and say it?

People such as myself? You mean like the administration at the ultra-liberal Swarthmore?

You are hopefully better at reading than that.


You said "such as the facts presented..." which implies that you are making a general statement from the Swarthmore example.

It is not as though you are not "calling it rape" based on a full investigation. You are not "calling it rape" based on particular details for which you find implausible. Again, your "silent consent" and your disbelief in "silent victims".

. No, it implies what I am actually saying, not whatever the heck it is that you keep trying desperately but incoherently to imagine I am saying - that all allegations should be taken seriously, and investigated thoroughly, and that some of them, based on the particular facts of each individual case, will turn out to not be rape.

. Well, duh, that's obvious. All we have to go on are what the magazine published.

People at colleges all over the country are having to make judgement calls and decisions (ours happen to be theoretical and without consequence for anyone). I'm not sure what your point is? I would not find the male student in that scenario guilty of rape. Neither did Swarthmore. You would., although you never did say what the punishment should be. So what is your point again?

Swarthmore did find him responsible for sexual assault (the administrative equivalent of guilty). He was expelled.

Wait... You ARE making a general point from the Swarthmore example. So you agree with me. Ohhhhh, you almost had yourself confused there.

But now that you know that the Swarthmore incident resulted in punishment. Now what?

Isn't it cool how your devil's advocate from that other thread conveniently disappears?

That you conflict yourself and, the sad part, are unaware of the conflict.

Are you sure about that? Might be another case from the magazine article?

My reading of it is that she went to the Dean and then said that she never heard back from the Administration.

.

Your mixing apples and oranges isn't very coherent to whatever the heck you are trying to say.


.

What a reach, don't strain yourself. With swarthmore example, I laid it out as a thought experiment. And specifically said lets stipulate that these are the facts.



. And I'm sure that if I asked you to specify the conflict, that you'd just ignore in your typical passive aggressive fashion, so I won't bother.

Been trying to figure out what you are grasping at Dr. Phil.

I think you are trying to say that by not agreeing with a more expansive definition of rape that I am being dismissive of some claims? Is that it?

You'll have to show me where in the article it says that.

Are you pretending to have struggled to grasp this? How unfortunate.


Swarthmore update:

http://articles.philly.com/2014-12-04/news/56689201_1_new-information-assault-honors-student

I am not opposed to his filing a lawsuit if he maintains he was wrongfully accused and wrongfully punished by the school. As I said many threads ago, schools sometimes expel students to save their reputations even if an official investigation would yield inconclusive or find false allegations. This sometimes even happens when the accuser recants. Unfortunately, many of the accused in the bolded instance are unable to sue the school. I know one man in particular to whom this applies.

Continuing with the passive aggressive posting I see. THAT'S unfortunate.

Is that suppose to be proof that this is the same student in the example I gave from the Phillymag story? It's clearly not the same case.

Honorgal, please learn the definitions of words and phrases if you insist on their use. I beg of you.

There is nothing passive aggressive about finding it unfortunate that you have missed one of the points that many of us have been making to you in various threads. It is fine to disagree. It is not fine if the point goes over your head, post after post after post. That is perplexing.

It IS perplexing, I agree. Why not just say "yes, that is the point I was trying to make"?

Is that suppose to be the same case that we were discussing earlier, the one that I posted as a "thought experiment"?