Universities Under Investigation Re: Handling Sexual Assault

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by honorgal

This is quite ironic.

And yet accurate—and applicable to all sides of a debate.

[honorgal]

More evidence of how out of hand things have gotten, from a most unlikely source:

http://www.ncherm.org/wordpress/wp-c...HERM-Group.pdf

Brett Sokolow is a lawyer who is considered the "godfather" of the legal theory and cases linking campus sexual assault with Title IX. For him to be pushing back is surprising, to say the least.

In addition to the eye-opening factual scenarios he relates, I found the paragraph at the top of page 6 resonates.

Very reminiscent of the daycare sexual molestation panic in the 1980's.

[DrPhil]

Back to where it was pages ago....

[ASTalumna06]

Originally Posted by honorgal

And I have a hard time taking seriously the argument (made repeatedly and more shrilly in the last few years by feminists, the media, politicians, etc and obviously bought fully by some of the folks here) that there is a "rape crisis" when practical suggestions that could prevent future "rapes" are dismissed as victim blaming and icky.

Interesting, seeing as how you're the only one here carrying on and on about this "crisis"...

[AGDee]

Originally Posted by ASTalumna06

Interesting, seeing as how you're the only one here carrying on and on about this "crisis"...

I pointed out to her pages ago that she was the only one who used that term in this thread.

I would be hard pressed to find anybody who thought a false accusation was ok. People who make false accusations only make it worse for real victims because it reinforces the idea that victims are not really victims. It's a horrific thing to do to the man being accused and to all of the rest of us as well. I can't even imagine anybody here disagreeing with that point.

The fact remains that there are far fewer false accusations than there are unreported rapes. And statistics say that a rape occurs every 2 minutes in this country. A significant number of those go unreported because society is so harsh on the victims.

[honorgal]

Originally Posted by AGDee

I pointed out to her pages ago that she was the only one who used that term in this thread.

I would be hard pressed to find anybody who thought a false accusation was ok. People who make false accusations only make it worse for real victims because it reinforces the idea that victims are not really victims. It's a horrific thing to do to the man being accused and to all of the rest of us as well. I can't even imagine anybody here disagreeing with that point.

The fact remains that there are far fewer false accusations than there are unreported rapes. And statistics say that a rape occurs every 2 minutes in this country. A significant number of those go unreported because society is so harsh on the victims.

When this is so commonly representative of the typical college campus victim, I predict society will continue to be harsh:

But in the midwinter of 2013, Sendrow says, she was in her room with a guy with whom she’d been hooking up for three months. They’d now decided — mutually, she thought — just to be friends. When he ended up falling asleep on her bed, she changed into pajamas and climbed in next to him. Soon, he was putting his arm around her and taking off her clothes. “I basically said, ‘No, I don’t want to have sex with you.’ And then he said, ‘Okay, that’s fine’ and stopped,” Sendrow told me. “And then he started again a few minutes later, taking off my panties, taking off his boxers. I just kind of laid there and didn’t do anything — I had already said no. I was just tired and wanted to go to bed. I let him finish. I pulled my panties back on and went to sleep.”

http://www.phillymag.com/articles/ra...ssaults/?all=1

I find it hard to believe anyone would want their college age daughters to accept this message of passivity, ambivalence and victimhood that's being pressed by today's feminists. What a mockery.

[SydneyK]

Originally Posted by honorgal

I find it hard to believe anyone would want their college age daughters to accept this message of passivity, ambivalence and victimhood that's being pressed by today's feminists. What a mockery.

Why the crusade, honorgal? Clearly, you feel a need to discuss this ad nauseam, but why you feel such a need is beyond me. No one here has said they want their college age daughters to accept this message; no one here (but you) has labeled this situation as a 'crisis'; no one here (but you) keeps bringing up (bumping) the discussion just to figuratively say, "there's nothing to see here, so stop talking about it!" I just don't get it. Do you need to get something off your chest? Did one of your sons get falsely accused of rape or something?

I'm not trying to be combative, I'm just trying to understand where you're coming from. When someone gets on a soapbox the way you have, they tend to provide some background for perspective. Otherwise, it just seems like an unwarranted rant.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by DeltaBetaBaby

Originally Posted by MysticCat

....

[SydneyK]

^^ Oh, yes. That's right. I had forgotten about her trollhood.
Thanks, Dr. Phil.

[honorgal]

Originally Posted by SydneyK

Why the crusade, honorgal? Clearly, you feel a need to discuss this ad nauseam, but why you feel such a need is beyond me. No one here has said they want their college age daughters to accept this message; no one here (but you) has labeled this situation as a 'crisis'; no one here (but you) keeps bringing up (bumping) the discussion just to figuratively say, "there's nothing to see here, so stop talking about it!" I just don't get it. Do you need to get something off your chest? Did one of your sons get falsely accused of rape or something?

I'm not trying to be combative, I'm just trying to understand where you're coming from. When someone gets on a soapbox the way you have, they tend to provide some background for perspective. Otherwise, it just seems like an unwarranted rant.

Hmmm, I guess I assumed, from the subject matter of this board that some posters were at least tangentially interested in today's college campuses. The navel gazing is interesting, to say the least.

And I'm going to assume that you are being deliberately obtuse by mischaracterizing what I'm saying (figuratively or not) that there's "nothing to see here so stop talking about it." The media and activists keep insisting there is a crisis, ad nauseum. (ie, the reaction to Miss USA). The federal government is reacting to "the crisis" in typical fashion....more nonsensical regulations, more beauracrats, more sensitivity training, more money spent on fluff that drives up the cost of tuition. Does one have to have a hidden agenda to react negatively to that?

For the record, I don't. Two sons and neither of them have ever been accused of anything. I do have a perspective that some of you probably don't have, having a front row seat to a college campus environment.

[DrPhil]

Honorgal doesn't know how many people in this thread have front row seats to a college campus environment. Anyway, can I ask that this thread not repeat the last 13 pages. We get it. We get it. Whatever it is, we get it. Is there a newer point to make that can be presented in a manner that actually generates (friendly or unfriendly) discussion?

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

Anyway, can I ask that this thread not repeat the last 13 pages. We get it. We get it. Whatever it is, we get it. Is there a newer point to make that can be presented in a manner that actually generates (friendly or unfriendly) discussion?

I can't help it; I'm going to try one more time.

Originally Posted by honorgal

And I'm going to assume that you are being deliberately obtuse by mischaracterizing what I'm saying (figuratively or not) that there's "nothing to see here so stop talking about it." The media and activists keep insisting there is a crisis, ad nauseum. (ie, the reaction to Miss USA). The federal government is reacting to "the crisis" in typical fashion....more nonsensical regulations, more beauracrats, more sensitivity training, more money spent on fluff that drives up the cost of tuition. Does one have to have a hidden agenda to react negatively to that?

No, one doesn't have to have a hidden agenda to react negatively to things one perceives are wrong or misguided. But the way you express your negative reaction—the constant (and dismissive) references to unnamed but obviously sinister "activists" and "feminists," the random link-dropping, the mantra-like refrain that "they" claim there is a "crisis" supported by things like reference to an article about the Miss USA situation, where none of "them" actually make that claim—all suggest someone who is not objective and who has an agenda that if not hidden is at least personal or part of some other agenda.

But I'll bite: Exactly how is the federal government reacting with more "nonsensical regulations" and more beauracrats? Specifics, please.

[DrPhil]

LOL. I think that was discussed pages ago.

[DeltaBetaBaby]

Originally Posted by honorgal

I do have a perspective that some of you probably don't have, having a front row seat to a college campus environment.

Anyway......

As for anything new, Dr. Phil, two things:

1) Five schools added to the list: University of Alaska system, the University of Delaware, Elmira College in New York, the University of Akron in Ohio and Cisco Junior College in Texas.

2) Some schools have released responses. At least one school is claiming this is just a routine audit:

http://news.iu.edu/releases/iu/2014/...tigation.shtml

[honorgal]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

I can't help it; I'm going to try one more time.

No, one doesn't have to have a hidden agenda to react negatively to things one perceives are wrong or misguided. But the way you express your negative reaction—the constant (and dismissive) references to unnamed but obviously sinister "activists" and "feminists," the random link-dropping, the mantra-like refrain that "they" claim there is a "crisis" supported by things like reference to an article about the Miss USA situation, where none of "them" actually make that claim—all suggest someone who is not objective and who has an agenda that if not hidden is at least personal or part of some other agenda.

All I can do is reiterate my position.

There's nothing sinister about feminist activists. They exist. Particularly on college campuses across the country. And they have been and continue to advocate for changes to the way college administrators process claims under Title IX and the Clery Act. This is simply a fact.

In order to gain traction and shape public opinion, they have vastly inflated the scope of the "problem" and conflated the small number of serious assaults with the much more typical instances that are represented by the example at Swarthmore. This is not some new technique, activists have been known to distort and exaggerate. One would hope that the media would report the facts a bit more objectively, but we shouldn't hold our breath, and they obviously haven't on this subject. Google "college rape crisis" and you get 12 million hits.

IMO, the policy changes that have been made and are continuing to be made are a dangerous erosion of due process for the accused. The fact that they are being made as a reaction to a distorted and exaggerated issue makes it all the more disturbing that we are jettisoning such fundamental underpinnings of our concept and tradition of justice.

A) One may have a different opinion and not be concerned with due process. B) Or one may think that it's worth it to erode due process for the accused, because this crisis is so severe that it calls for something drastic. To the extent that I can, I'm attempting to highlight the faulty logic of B) because if there is no crisis, we certainly don't need to take such drastic measures.

There's no hidden agenda other than I'm expressing my opinion on a message board where someone posted on the topic. I think the policy changes will do a lot of harm and negligible good. And that's usually what happens when a solution is devised for a non-problem.