Gay Emory Student Dragged From Frat Party

[sigmadiva]

Originally Posted by Drolefille

No.

She is never responsible for being raped.

Never.

NEVER FUCKING EVER.

The "sympathy" she gets should NEVER be based on what she was wearing and where she was. What the fucking hell.

Honestly, that is how I feel. Yes, I'd feel bad for the girl, but at the same time I'd shake my head and ask 'what was she thinking??'


No, it is never right for anyone, male or female, to get raped for any reason under any circumstance. That is why use of good common sense on a situation is prudent. You just don't have to put yourself in certain situations.


But then, I think I know where you are coming from Drole - do what ever the hell you please, and if you get in trouble, blame someone else. I guess you, Drole, feel that people don't have to take responsibility for their own actions - it is always someone else's fault.

[agzg]

Originally Posted by sigmadiva

Honestly, that is how I feel. Yes, I'd feel bad for the girl, but at the same time I'd shake my head and ask 'what was she thinking??'


No, it is never right for anyone, male or female, to get raped for any reason under any circumstance. That is why use of good common sense on a situation is prudent. You just don't have to put yourself in certain situations.


But then, I think I know where you are coming from Drole - do what ever the hell you please, and if you get in trouble, blame someone else. I guess you, Drole, feel that people don't have to take responsibility for their own actions - it is always someone else's fault.

It's always someone else's fault, meaning, like, the perpetrator's fault, that they raped someone?

Sounds about right to me.

[sigmadiva]

Originally Posted by agzg

It's always someone else's fault, meaning, like, the perpetrator's fault that they raped someone?

Sounds about right to me.

You are right, and I agree with you. But, if you are going to put yourself in harm's way - don't be surprised if you get harmed.

Let's take it to a less reactive example:

Just about every time it rains in Houston it floods. We don't need much rain for the streets to fill with water.

The weather man comes on TV and says "Stay where you are. Don't go out. The streets are flooded. It is dangerous."

But hey, I'm out of Cap'n Crunch cereal, and by gosh, by golly, I want my cereal NOW!!! So I go out in my car, trying to drive on flooded streets, and my car gets stuck, it floods with water.

So, using Drole's logic, I should blame the weather man for ruining my car.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by sigmadiva

But hey, I'm out of Cap'n Crunch cereal, and by gosh, by golly, I want my cereal NOW!!! So I go out in my car, trying to drive on flooded streets, and my car gets stuck, it floods with water.

Or you are driving for less stupid reasons (i.e. work and family) and can't get out of your driving obligation.

Originally Posted by sigmadiva

So, using Drole's logic, I should blame the weather man for ruining my car.

You are using a victimless and noncriminal act of nature as an analogy. I generally don't describe people caught by inclement weather as "victims" because nature cannot victimize. Pick an analogy dealing with people on both the victim and the perpetrator side of the equation.

As I stated in my first post about victim precipitation, analyzing victim precipitation is not the same thing as victim blame. What you're doing is more along the lines of victim blame because you keep saying "I guess it's all someone else's fault." You want the victims to share some of the blame. The notion that some rape victims should've been smarter is why victims of rape and sexual assault who feel that they were being stupid do not come forward. We already know that there are ways to reduce the probability of any type of victimization; and there are campus efforts to teach students about being smarter and more aware of their surroundings. Teaching people to protect themselves is not the same thing as telling them they were essentially idiots because they were careless.

Everyone has been careless at some point, ranging from leaving products unattended or not fully paying attention to our surroundings as we walk to the car. And we should all thank God that a motivated offender either wasn't around or didn't take us up on that opportunity. Had a motivated offender seized that opportunity, we would see how we could've done some things differently to reduce the risk but the blame remains 100% with the offender. I cringe when some defense attorneys ask the victim "what were you doing in the first place? Didn't you know....."

ETA: The only time when the blame doesn't lie 100% with the offender, and this is also an example of victim precipitation, is when the victim and the offender had an equal risk of victimization. For instance, if someone brings a gun into an otherwise nonlethal argument and the person with the gun ends up getting shot, which happens quite often. The person who brought in the gun could've easily been the offender but ended up as the victim.

[sigmadiva]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

Or you are driving for less stupid reasons (i.e. work and family) and can't get out of your driving obligation.

Umm....I take it you've never driven in Houston with flooded streets.

True story: I think it was earlier this summer, as usual, we had a quick, hard rain, and the streets flooded. A woman and her daughter were caught driving in the rain and the highway underpass they were on flooded. The daughter got out and left the car. She tried to urge her mom to leave, but the mom would not leave her car. Sadly, the mom drowned because she would not leave her car.

That is when I shake my head and ask why.

You are using a victimless and noncriminal act of nature as an analogy. I generally don't describe people caught by inclement weather as "victims" because nature cannot victimize. Pick an analogy dealing with people on both the victim and the perpetrator side of the equation.

I picked that analogy just to show how narrow-minded I feel Drole's logic is. It is so black and white. There are reasons behind why things happen, and understanding the reason helps to understand the why.

As I stated in my first post about victim precipitation, analyzing victim precipitation is not the same thing as victim blame. What you're doing is more along the lines of victim blame because you keep saying "I guess it's all someone else's fault."

No, you, Drole and agzg are saying it is someone else's fault. I said the the gay guy has to share some of the blame because he put himself in a situation he did not have to. The fraternity guys were wrong too. I just don't think this incident would have ever happened if the gay guy just did not show up.

You want the victims to share some of the blame. The notion that some rape victims should've been smarter is why victims of rape and sexual assault who feel that they were being stupid do not come forward. We already know that there are ways to reduce the probability of any type of victimization; and there are campus efforts to teach students about being smarter and more aware of their surroundings. Teaching people to protect themselves is not the same thing as telling them they were essentially idiots because they were careless.

To the bold: that has been my whole point! Thanks for saying it too! If you know the ways to prevent from being a victim, then practice them. I'm not saying that you will never be a victim of something at some point, but you can definitely reduce your chances.

Everyone has been careless at some point, ranging from leaving products unattended or not fully paying attention to our surroundings as we walk to the car. And we should all thank God that a motivated offender either wasn't around or didn't take us up on that opportunity. Had a motivated offender seized that opportunity, we would see how we could've done some things differently to reduce the risk but the blame remains 100% with the offender. I cringe when some defense attorneys ask the victim "what were you doing in the first place? Didn't you know....."

Well, that is a fair question. Because I would want to know too. How much did you know, and when?

ETA: The only time when the blame doesn't lie 100% with the offender, and this is also an example of victim precipitation, is when the victim and the offender had an equal risk of victimization. For instance, if someone brings a gun into an otherwise nonlethal argument and the person with the gun ends up getting shot, which happens quite often. The person who brought in the gun could've easily been the offender but ended up as the victim.

I agree.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by sigmadiva

I picked that analogy just to show how narrow-minded I feel Drole's logic is. It is so black and white. There are reasons behind why things happen, and understanding the reason helps to understand the why.

Do you think you're in the grey area because you are talking about victims sharing the blame? You aren't just talking about understanding why things happen.

Originally Posted by sigmadiva

I just don't think this incident would have ever happened if the gay guy just did not show up.

It is obvious that incident wouldn't have happened with that particular guy if he had not been there. Got it. What isn't obvious is the overstating of that obvious and the "share some of the blame" aspect of it all.

Originally Posted by sigmadiva

To the bold: that has been my whole point!

No, it wasn't. And if you felt a EUREKA moment when you read that in my post, you REALLY haven't been reading my posts.

Re-read my posts about the difference between analyzing victim precipitation (which researchers and practitioners do everyday) and victim blame (which is what you were doing).

Originally Posted by sigmadiva

Well, that is a fair question. Because I would want to know too. How much did you know, and when?

Thus the difference between what you were saying and what I was saying.

Originally Posted by sigmadiva

I agree.

If you agree with that then you are contradicting yourself. You went from saying the fraternity guys were wrong (which we all agree about) to saying this "gay guy" should've known better. If you understand that the "gay guy" didn't put the fraternity guys at equal risk of victimization (he was outnumbered even if he was being annoying), you understand how the blame cannot be shared. The same logic applies to rape. Rape victims do not place the rapists at equal risk of victimization--there's no competition to see who can rape whom first.

[33girl]

Originally Posted by sigmadiva

You are right, and I agree with you. But, if you are going to put yourself in harm's way - don't be surprised if you get harmed.

Let's take it to a less reactive example:

Just about every time it rains in Houston it floods. We don't need much rain for the streets to fill with water.

The weather man comes on TV and says "Stay where you are. Don't go out. The streets are flooded. It is dangerous."

But hey, I'm out of Cap'n Crunch cereal, and by gosh, by golly, I want my cereal NOW!!! So I go out in my car, trying to drive on flooded streets, and my car gets stuck, it floods with water.

So, using Drole's logic, I should blame the weather man for ruining my car.

Actually, you should probably blame the store that is staying open in the face of the weatherman and everyone else advising people to stay the @#$% indoors, and enticing you out with its yummy Captain Crunch. The store is implicitly saying by its actions "it's OK for you to drive even if you pass Noah on the way."

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by 33girl

Actually, you should probably blame the store that is staying open in the face of the weatherman and everyone else advising people to stay the @#$% indoors, and enticing you out with its yummy Captain Crunch. The store is implicitly saying by its actions "it's OK for you to drive even if you pass Noah on the way."

And blame the employers who are not required by law to shut down because of the weather or aren't sympathetic to the plight of the flooded employee.

What about those darn children who may need to be picked up during a flood? Nature doesn't announce its wrath.

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by sigmadiva

Honestly, that is how I feel. Yes, I'd feel bad for the girl, but at the same time I'd shake my head and ask 'what was she thinking??'


No, it is never right for anyone, male or female, to get raped for any reason under any circumstance. That is why use of good common sense on a situation is prudent. You just don't have to put yourself in certain situations.


But then, I think I know where you are coming from Drole - do what ever the hell you please, and if you get in trouble, blame someone else. I guess you, Drole, feel that people don't have to take responsibility for their own actions - it is always someone else's fault.

Seriously, fuck off.

No one is responsible for rape but the rapist. A woman should not have to dress a certain way or have to avoid certain neighborhoods to not get raped.

You can say my name 12 more times in your next post and I'll still tell you you're part of the fucking problem.

Originally Posted by sigmadiva

So, using Drole's logic, I should blame the weather man for ruining my car.

Yes, being raped is exactly like a flood. Women should have to be on guard for surprise rape all the time. I mean if they mess up, they basically deserve it right? They really should take responsibility and not be so rapable. Always asking for it.

Originally Posted by sigmadiva

I picked that analogy just to show how narrow-minded I feel Drole's logic is. It is so black and white. There are reasons behind why things happen, and understanding the reason helps to understand the why.

So when a woman is raped by her boyfriend, that's also her fault? A wife by her husband? If the woman is wearing jeans is it impossible for her to have been raped because she obviously had to help the guy take her jeans off and that means she wanted it? She was raped by an ex, but they'd had sex before so it's ok right?

Or is it only when they're walking down the street in a short skirt that they're asking for it? Or drunk at a party?

You're right, asking people to take responsibility not to rape people is the wrong answer here.

No, you, Drole and agzg are saying it is someone else's fault. I said the the gay guy has to share some of the blame because he put himself in a situation he did not have to. The fraternity guys were wrong too. I just don't think this incident would have ever happened if the gay guy just did not show up.

No, the guy does not deserve any blame for being assaulted.

Originally Posted by agzg

I don't think the kid needed to be choked out or dragged out of the party. He may have been kicked out but he didn't ask or need to be assaulted.

And no, it's never the victim's fault ever in cases of rape, EVER. I don't care if he or she dressed provocatively. I don't care if he or she drank too much. I don't care if he or she went to the rapist fraternity house. I don't care. It's never the victim's fault.

It's not this kid's fault he got his ass beat. At all. And the kid who did it took the opportunity just like a rapist would his or her victim. He picked on someone he saw as vulnerable or weak. Period.

Just because there are ways a potential victim can decrease the probability they're attacked doesn't mean it's their fault, IN ANY WAY, if they weren't using them at the time.

People need to keep their hands to themselves.

The flooding analogy is a major fail.

Everything you said.

[sigmadiva]

Originally Posted by Drolefille

Seriously, fuck off.

Nah. You're my favorite SK!!!

No one is responsible for rape but the rapist. A woman should not have to dress a certain way or have to avoid certain neighborhoods to not get raped.

In a perfect world, she should not have to. In an imperfect world, she should exercise caution.

There is a neighborhood near mine that is known for gang activity, drugs, prostitution, you know, all the vices. Yeah, I've got every right to be out on any street at any time of day, even in this neighborhood. Now, knowing what goes on there, would it be wise for me just to drive around because I want to? No. Nothing can stop me, but it would still be a pretty stupid idea.

You can say my name 12 more times in your next post and I'll still tell you you're part of the fucking problem.

Great! I'll say your screen name during Halloween and see what I can dredge up from the cemetery.

Yes, being raped is exactly like a flood. Women should have to be on guard for surprise rape all the time. I mean if they mess up, they basically deserve it right? They really should take responsibility and not be so rapable. Always asking for it.

No, being raped is not like a flood. But for obvious reasons it is a very hot button issue that really had nothing to do with the original topic of this thread. I used the flood analogy as a silly ploy to divert the conversation from a sensitive issue. I guess you missed that part. No problem....

So when a woman is raped by her boyfriend, that's also her fault? A wife by her husband? If the woman is wearing jeans is it impossible for her to have been raped because she obviously had to help the guy take her jeans off and that means she wanted it? She was raped by an ex, but they'd had sex before so it's ok right? Or is it only when they're walking down the street in a short skirt that they're asking for it? Or drunk at a party?

No, none of that is alright. I've said so previously. All I said was that a woman should use good judgment in her actions, if she can control them. Being falling down drunk at a party to me is not good judgment. She has made herself very vulnerable. Not a good idea.

There are situations that you can control. If so, take control.

You're right, asking people to take responsibility not to rape people is the wrong answer here.

Huh???

No, the guy does not deserve any blame for being assaulted.

He does not deserve all of the blame, but he did walk into a situation that did easily escalate.

It's like picking a fight, then getting mad 'cause you got your @$$ kicked.

[sigmadiva]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

And blame the employers who are not required by law to shut down because of the weather or aren't sympathetic to the plight of the flooded employee.

What about those darn children who may need to be picked up during a flood? Nature doesn't announce its wrath.

Actually, if you watch the animals, then yes, nature does announce its wrath.


And, psst.... I don't know if you have noticed, I've been trying to let you have the last word, as you often like.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by sigmadiva

Actually, if you watch the animals, then yes, nature does announce its wrath.

And for the rest of us who don't sit around watching animals.....

Originally Posted by sigmadiva

And, psst.... I don't know if you have noticed, I've been trying to let you have the last word, as you often like.

Should I have noticed that? I like for people to stop typing when the discourse no longer interests them. Help yourself.