Gay Emory Student Dragged From Frat Party

[sigmadiva]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Not exactly. I said that the characterization of this being the gay fella's fault for dressing funny was akin to blaming the rape on the scantily clad woman. Yeah, a little simplistic, but not too over the top. Appearing a certain way absolutely never invites someone to commit battery or worse against you. Never. I didn't take the rape analogy and run with it, nor did I defend it.

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.

I had remarked also that I thought this chapter failed on several levels--both during the event where this could have all been prevented with a guest list, or even security enforcing some loosely defined dress code. I also remarked that the chapter failed to adequately circle the wagons after the event, the alumnus should have stayed quiet and referred everything to his personal legal counsel so he wouldn't say anything dumb (which he did) which could get him in worse trouble than he was already in.

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.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by sigmadiva

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

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:

If she went to a party with people she did not know, got isht-faced drunk and passed out,then woke up a realized she was raped,then yes, she should still press charges and those guilty should be prosecuted. But, in the end she made a bad choice that left her in that position.

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.

[sigmadiva]

Originally Posted by Kevin

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.

[VandalSquirrel]

Originally Posted by sigmadiva

1. I agree. If you go back to page 4, post #47, Kevin compared the OT of this thread to a woman getting raped. That is where it got off track on the whole rape issue.

2. I agree here too. My point being, in any circumstance, one can minimize their outcome by being aware and taking precautions. While in many cases you could be a victim, but by being as diligent as possible, you don't *have* to be a victim.

3. Yes and no. I think that if you always feel that no matter what happens to you is never your fault, (good or bad), then I think you are setting yourself up for a lifetime of disappointment. For the sometimes - sometimes you can take responsibility for your actions, sometimes you can't, you just have to be able to know and recognize when.

I knew this girl in grad school who never made much progress because whenever her project hit a snag, it was never her fault. She would *always* blame someone else for her problem. Example, her reports were never in on time, not her fault because 1. her garage door was not working that day, so she could not get her car out of the garage, or 2. when she tried to go to the computer lab to print her work, she had trouble getting access to her account, or 3. she could not come to class because she had a family emergency that just so happened to happen on the same weekend our school had a big football game.

All plausible circumstances, but by the middle of the semester, there was a definite pattern.

4. I think we came to this conclusion on page 3.

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.

[agzg]

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.

[VandalSquirrel]

Originally Posted by agzg

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.

[sigmadiva]

[QUOTE=VandalSquirrel;1998861]

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.... s[/b]

For the classmate - she dropped out.

[agzg]

Originally Posted by VandalSquirrel

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.

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.

[33girl]

Originally Posted by VandalSquirrel

sigmadiva -

I see where you are trying to go with this and I wish I could find a good example. I don't think sexual assault is the best one here, and I wish we could all find a better one that represents what you're getting at.

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?

[VandalSquirrel]

Originally Posted by 33girl

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.

[James]

Kind of randomly about dressing:

Davide Chapelle.

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

[knight_shadow]

Originally Posted by James

Kind of randomly about dressing:

Dave Chapelle.

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

You've revealed the source of my turtleneck joke lol

I love this special

[KSig RC]

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.

[DrPhil]

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

[srmom]

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.