Oh, don't try to back out of it now. Others had responded to your analogy long before I did.

Since I respect your opinions and views on this board, I chose to respond to you. I guess now, hind sight tells me I should have just ignored you. I'll consider it in the future.

Like I said, we all came to this conclusion on page 3, then you presented your rape comparison on page 4. The fraternity discussion was over and done with before you presented your rape example.

RIF. Go back and review my response to you on p.4 where the analogy first came up. I asked you to distinguish between how you thought he deserved to be assaulted here and how some might say a woman deserves to be raped for dressing a certain way.

The analogy was posed as a hypothetical for you to respond to to compare and contrast those situations for the sake of clarifying your position. Apparently, you simply decided that the two situations are similar.

You said this:

That's not out of context. It's apparently your position that such a woman is responsible for her own rape because she made some bad choices. I asked you to compare and contrast and you decided just to compare.

Kevin, just stop. Because, in the first place there was no need for you to even bring rape into this topic. The OT had nothing to do with rape.

YOU were trying to make the connection, and asked me my view. I told you.

You don't have to like it, agree with it, or support it. But, that was my example. Take from it what you want.

Again, the OT of this thread ended at page 3. YOUR analogy was on page 4, well after the OT had reached the end.

Sometimes no matter what a person does there are things beyond their control and there really is no way we can prevent any and all bad things from happening. I know victims who constantly self blame when in all reality there is no way to prevent being a victim because sometimes things just happen we can't avoid. I think it is great that people do what they can to minimize situations but there are times where it just isn't rational how and why things happen because there is no rhyme or reason.

Your classmate is a victim and a perp and not doing well in school isn't the kind of victim I'm talking about. She's just a dummy and it is obvious to other people but a lot of victims of sexual and other assault are just unlucky because the perp was there and they came along. People can make good decisions with bad consequences and bad decisions with no consequences. I look back at stuff I've done and wonder why I wasn't a victim but if I had been a victim it still wouldn't be my fault that someone else decided to take advantage of me or hurt me, that solely lies with them. A person who commits a crime against another is still responsible for their actions and some situations just are not preventable.

I think we're still discussing the topic. Sexual assault and physical assault cases like this (where there is one victim, one perpetrator) are both crimes in which the victim is not to blame.

Had this kid punched Adam Smith before Adam Smith decided to make the choice to violently and forcibly remove the kid from the party, THEN he might share some blame. Until then, not his fault.

Exactly my point, we can't have a victim without an action from a perp. Recognizing alcohol was involved still doesn't excuse the behavior, but it is a definite factor in making poor choices. I think there are a lot of poor choices by quite a few people here, especially when there are preventative measures like a guest list and security that are in place.

[QUOTE=VandalSquirrel;1998861]


For the classmate - she dropped out.

Right, but just because there were a lot of poor choices made doesn't excuse Smith in any way for beating this kid's ass. He's still 100% to blame.

OK, I've got one. Many moons ago, I was driving on a busy street in Pittsburgh. I decided to make a LEGAL left turn onto a side street. I checked, all was clear. Then a cop car came SPEEDING up the street - no flashers, no siren - and hit me on the right side as I was turning.

I was the one who got the ticket. When I inquired as to why - since the turn I made was perfectly legal - he said that I shouldn't be doing that on this busy street and that I shouldn't be surprised I got hit.

Does everyone like that one better?

Not really because there is no way you can prevent a officer of the law from being an idiot and using his privilege to focus the blame onto you. I argue that he is more at fault since he has training for handling a vehicle at high speed and made no indication of his presence or to avoid an accident.

Okay I have one. Pedestrian all in black, texting and listening to their headphones, darting out from nowhere on a dark stormy night on an unlit street no where near a crosswalk. Now that has elements of prevention on the part of a pedestrian and due care of a motorist driving with headlights on, alert, sober, and say below 25 doesn't mean the pedestrian isn't hit by a car, but they didn't do their part to be responsible while sharing the road. They didn't deserve to be hit but they also didn't take precautions that are expected nor were they a subject of opportunity. This has happened in my town and the driver is not found at fault when the behavior and actions of the pedestrian were assessed as a contributing factor.

We also have the dumbest bicycle laws, forreal, and most campus accidents are a result of a bicyclist or a skateboarder who speeds into traffic without giving due care and stopping while coming down a hill that is a pedestrian walk way and not for cars. Pedestrians get hit by people with a non-motorized mode of transportation and they also get cited for texting and being a hazard. There's responsibility and there's freak accidents. Sometimes shit just happens out of our control.

Kind of randomly about dressing:

Davide Chapelle.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2OBPa...eature=related

You've revealed the source of my turtleneck joke lol

I love this special

If you insist on going back to the original topic, there's a pretty clear line that needs to be crossed before a person is responsible for their own beating. That line is, generally, one of danger, intentional provocation along racial/ethnic/personal lines to an extreme level, assaulting someone else first without reason, and maybe a select few others.

Was this guy being provocative with his outfit? I suppose a little, although it seems more attention-grabbing than provocative (assless chaps might be more "provocative" but still wouldn't get to the level of "earning" it). But it didn't rise to the level of being personally or generally insulting or inflammatory - at that point, the guy isn't doing anything wrong. He's being himself- and if he "should have known better" than being himself, I don't really know how to describe to you how sad that situation is.

Oh, and you're blaming the victim. No matter how you couch it.

This thread is perplexing. There is so much redundancy and backpedaling. It's like a massive brain fart.

Here's one - a tragic example of not using good judgement, putting yourself in a dangerous situation, and your family forever feeling the consequence of your bad decision.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/mexican-pir...ry?id=11784598

The US State Dept has warned people not to travel in this area, the news is filled day after day about the dangers of the border towns, etc. You'd have to be blind, deaf and dumb to be unaware of the dangers that this couple took on.

So, what do they do? They go sight seeing in waters infested with pirates caught up in the drug wars.

I will not blame this couple, they were victims, not deserving to be attacked, and unfortunately, be killed. BUT, for Christ's sake, what were they thinking??? And, it's real easy to say, don't blame the victim, but who cares - the guy is dead and his wife is a widow and his parent's lost a son. And I know if it were my son who had been killed, while I was grieving, at the same time, I'd be asking, "What the hell was he thinking??"

Don't ask for trouble! Don't put yourself in harm's way! Use good judgement! Try to stay out of dangerous situation and places. If your gut tells you something aint kosher, leave the situation.

Just because noone should be victimized doesn't mean they won't. Bad things happen to innocent people all the time.

Are any of y'all going to go travel to Juarez any time soon? It's a great place to get pottery, and damnit, I'm not involved in drugs, I should have the right to go shop in Juarez if I want to. I shouldn't be victimized and possibly get caught up in a gun fight on the streets - so do I go? I don't think so.

Walking into danger is not that same as being the victim of unfortunate circumstances.

Yes, people need to practice caution, but if a perp decides to target you when you have a reasonable expectation of safety (ie. collegiate party), I don't see how you would be at fault.

Yes, people do fight at parties, but you don't go to a party with the expectation that you'll be assaulted. Just like you don't walk down the street with the expectation that you'll be raped. Just like you don't get into your car with the expectation that you'll be hit by another car.

Why do people act surprised when threads go in different directions?

Like this is a new phenomenon on GC.

But, if you go to a fraternity party dressed as a wizard in freakish colors, and it is not a costume event, and you are not the "crazy" member that everyone knows dresses and acts like the court jester, you should expect to be noticed, and not in a good way. Throw in alcohol consumption to an excessive degree, and it spells trouble.

If this boy were my son, I would be telling him, "Well, what in the hell did you expect?" I'd be pissed that my son was victimized, and looking for justice for him, but at the same time I'd also be pissed at my son for being an idiot.

That goes back to one of my original questions -- if everyone at this party was so offended by his style of dress, why was he allowed entry?

Not everyone guards the gates.

When I lived in the house, we had nights when the doors were left open so anyone could come in and we didn't have to deal with getting the door or giving them the code in.

Some rather unfortunate members of a sports team decided to come in, whence they were promptly kicked out.

Fair enough. When my organization had a house near campus, we'd often leave the doors unlocked for the same reason. That would make this situation the fraternity's fault, though, for not being more cautious with its guest list.

And the article says that his outfit was praised several times before The Wizard was assaulted. If someone came into my chapter's house in, say, a KKK get-up, there would not be enough time for said person to mingle and cause a scene. He'd be dealt with immediately.

That doesn't seem to be the case in this situation.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
October 26, 2010
Lexington, VA – Sigma Nu Fraternity is aware of media reports regarding an incident alleged to
have occurred at an off-campus residence near Emory University on October 23, 2010. These
reports state that an unnamed student has alleged that he was verbally and physically assaulted
by an individual who is an alumnus of Emory University and the Xi Chapter of Sigma Nu
Fraternity at Emory University.
“We are concerned by these reports and are working with leaders of our chapter and University
officials to learn as much as we can about the incident,” said Brad Beacham, Executive Director
of Sigma Nu Fraternity. “As an organization founded upon the Honor principle and dedicated to
the development of ethical leaders, Sigma Nu condemns acts of violence and disrespect.”
The Fraternity has confirmed that the social function at which the incident is alleged to have
occurred was a private function at an off- campus private residence. The function was not
sponsored by the Xi Chapter of Sigma Nu Fraternity and was attended by members and nonmembers.
Headquartered in Lexington, Va., Sigma Nu Fraternity was founded in 1869 at Virginia Military
Institute and currently has more than 180 active chapters and colonies on campuses throughout
North America.
###

If he wasn't invited he shouldn't have come in the first place.

You'd have to be a moron not to think it might happen though.

You missed the point. Of course accidents happen, but you don't go out thinking "Today's the day I'm going to get hit." That's why they're called accidents.

You don't go to parties thinking "I'm going to get beat up today" either.

Eh, if you go to a fraternity party you weren't invited to and run your mouth to one of the brothers, getting thrown out isn't that much of a stretch.

Being asked to leave isn't the same as being dragged out, beaten, and riddled with slurs.

Again -- if the fraternity members wanted this party to be exclusive, they should have 1) had a guest list or 2) had someone manning the door. Also, if The Wizard wasn't supposed to be there, he should not have been able to mingle long enough to cause a scene.

This thread is very circular.