Who is Althouse? * View only LAW posts * Contribute * Use my Amazon Portal
Is there a war on men tag?
God help me, NPR!Politicizing rape and trying to connect it in some way to the intrinsic nature of football is something the wimps and nerds have been trying to do for as long as football has existed.The feminist rape hysteria is the most damnable, treacherous and dishonest part of that cursed and stupid ideology. Careful what you wish for. Over the long run rape hysterias are paid back in full with revenge. See the Russian army and its systematic rape of German women at the end of WWII.It's a long cycle that has occurred, probably, thousands of times in human history. The cycle is so long that it is transparent to us in our short lives.
"She's a human being, and what has happened to her is inhuman," says Gordon. "It takes a valley to raise a child, so she's all of our child."**facepalm**
You are held accountable for your actions. Maybe some people in the World -- this is not a problem local to Steubenville -- do not adhere to that precept.
I'd have gone with carte blanche, myself.Were the victim that drunk, any of the usual holds would have sufficed.
Alcohol plus hormones with a dash of bravado. What could go wrong?
robinintn:I second that motion.This is the same corruption which pervaded the sexual harassment craze of the 80s. The activists, advocates, and entrepreneurs resorted to extrapolation from the individual to the collective and managed to taint half the human population. This is nonsense.Actually, this is the same corruption which pervades most human and civil rights enterprises. If it was about intrinsic value and individual dignity, then they would not be so quick to devalue and denigrate it.
I read the article and some of the comments to the article. One person tried to point out that it is a good idea to teach your children (particularly girls) not to get passed-out drunk at parties with football players. The immediate push-back to that bit of common sense was predictable but unfortunate. It's all about "you're blaming the victim!" The boys in this case were pigs. The girl did something incredibly risky and is now paying the price. The type of behavior on display in this case (boys and girls) is the result of the feminist message that's been around for decades: women are your equals, men, and they shouldn't be put on pedestals or treated with special care, and women, you can have sex whenever and wherever you choose because it's your body.Chickens coming home to roost...
Alcohol plus hormones with a dash of bravado. What could go wrong? Exactly. This is why kids need parents, even when they are old enough to have adult-like bodies and urges. Where were any of these kids' parents?
Everyone is personally accountable, but an issue here is: when do onlookers intervene? The onlookers are also human beings who are accountable.Do you think only active evil matters? What about inaction?I'm not saying that we should blame those who fail to act instead of the direct actors. That isn't the point.
JulieC. I agree. The horrible moment in the story was when "she got in the car with the athletes." Bad move. When did girls stop traveling in pairs?
Professor. "Passive" evil promotes the active. Any kid present could have stopped this. We have hollowed out conscience.
They're only failing when there is a negative outcome for a female. They don't give a shit about laws slanted against males or bias against males in schools, on the job, etc. The only purpose of men upon the Earth is to serve females.
What a sad story that is. I feel awful for the girl, because chances are if she's the kind of girl who's passed-out drunk at a party at 16, she had issues already*, and now this. And I also wonder about the boys--it's not like rape is new, but I really have to wonder about the ubiquity of porn these days and the effect it has on these boys.(*Yes, I know, teenagers will be teenagers, but I was one once, and the girls with effective parents generally weren't the ones willing to do absolutely anything for male attention, like "Ha ha look how silly I am drunk!")
One person tried to point out that it is a good idea to teach your children (particularly girls) not to get passed-out drunk at parties with football playersIt's also a good idea to teach young men not to rape women.
And the onlookers who knew what they were seeing was wrong and didn't have the courage to intervene--that will poison their minds for the rest of their lives. Sad all around.
It's also a good idea to teach young men not to rape women.I get so tired of hearing this, especially from liberals who have been preaching if it makes your privates feel good, do it for the last fifty goddamn years.
As the parent of two teenagers, I am stunned at what some kids will put up on Instagram, or text to one another. I've seen pictures of girls and boys drunk, or smoking pot. I've been told about the girl who enjoys texting nude pictures of herself to boys. One boy took photos of a girl trying on underwear and posted the photos to Facebook. They were in 8th grade. She thought the attention was great and he couldn't understand why it was a problem.Good grief!
Erika, Anyone could be that girl, even a girl with NO ISSUES. Learning how much you can handle/drink is something by trial and error. And no one drinks just one or two drinks at a party. Some girls and women just can't drink, especially if they under 110 pounds. Funny how once you turn 21, everyone begins to drink responsible. I wish we could change the binge drinking culture in America.
Garage - we also teach people that it's a crime to rob people's houses. But most of us with common sense also lock our doors and many invest in alarm systems.
Young men know not to rape women. There''s no healthy-minded young man who did this. It isn't all young men and this isn't the norm.
On the plus side, it is worthwhile to note that the rapists were racially integrated. There was a time in America when rape gangs were strictly segregated. In some ways this could be interpreted as a sign of social progress.
when do onlookers intervene? The onlookers are also human beings who are accountable.Agreed. With some kind of bystander education - so they learn if what they're seeing meets the legal definition of rape, they do everything they can to step in and stop it. My guess is most don't clearly know what this is and, thus, are reluctant to act.
garage mahal said...It's also a good idea to teach young men not to rape women.We do. And they were not ignorant of of the law either. Yet they still committed rape even though they knew it was immoral and illegal.So how is "teaching" criminals going to change anything?I can teach (and have taught) women to protect themselves. Want to not be raped? Don't get drunk. Ever. Don't go to teenage parties. Ever. Be sober, pay attention to your environment, and assume many of the people around you don't have your best interest at heart. When you get old enough, get a conceal carry license and practice weekly.I can teach (and have taught) men to protect others. Want to prevent rape (and assault and murder)? Keep your friends sober. Treat handsy drunk guys as scum. Take the drunk girl home. Even if her 'boyfriend' gets pissed. Even if she gets pissed. If you aren't going to fight to keep people safe, call the cops and bust the party. Find out were a party is going to be? Call the cops and bust the party.Anyone over the age of 20 has personal stories of raped and dead kids due to not standing up for each other. Man up and kick peer pressure in the balls. Being sober and caring for each other isn't a crime.
I note NPR, in its blistering concern, is worried about "the case continues to spur debate over teen drinking, sex, football culture", but nowhere about morals or "no blame, no shame" culture that might make young people think this is OK.Erika said...It's also a good idea to teach young men not to rape women.I get so tired of hearing this, especially from liberals who have been preaching if it makes your privates feel good, do it for the last fifty goddamn years.Precisely. They created the culture to make lots of illegitimate kids, but they also want to appeal to the feminazis.Can't have it both ways.
None of you, including Althouse, know what actually happened. Neither does NPR. Reading an article on NPR doesn't adequately inform you of what happened.Events like this exist is a haze. Nobody will ever know precisely what happened.
Kit said...My guess is most don't clearly know what this is and, thus, are reluctant to act.My guess is that we don't encourage positive violence enough. Don't we want our police officers to be violent in a positive way (rush head first into danger, tackle down a guy with a gun, etc)?It would be better if we encouraged and trusted the best of our kids to kick the crap out of the worst. Instead from birth we encourage them to stand aside, do nothing, and call for help. And that last part will not survive negative peer pressure. So, in their mind, we have only taught them that not being bad is good enough.Oddly, one of the best places for this is sports. Coaches should encourage their most moral kids to stand up for the weakest. They should especially go over this after games (and before the party starts). Tell the kids to stay home and let the coach know where the party will be. And then the coach should go with the police to bust it up.
FTAA: 'And that's what worries Juanita Lucci, who was at lunch at a downtown restaurant"I don't want to just say football players, but all young males — we're failing somewhere if they think this is the norm,"Just EXACTLY how many young males does she think feel this way?It's appalling that she is willing to imply that young men view rape as the norm and she should be ashamed of herself for her bigoted views.
Learning how much you can handle/drink is something by trial and error. Not to mention that sometimes something gets slipped in the drink. I had a friend who I had seen drink ridiculous amounts of alcohol go downstairs at a bar one night and came back completely unable to speak, walk unaided, etc... I echo the thing about traveling in pairs. Girls with sense still do that (although it's possible this girl didn't know anybody at the party - there was something about her being from WV?). when do onlookers intervene? I agree this is the most disturbing thing. It seems like there weren't just a couple witnesses, there were lots of them. As for why she got in the car with them, reading between the lines it's possible she was already really, really out of it.
NPR is too damned stupid to occupy my time, but I did notice in a cursory reading of the article that a "rape trial" is under way.In other words, an allegation of rape exists, but nobody's been convicted.A lot of lawyers post here. You haven't noticed this detail?
In my experience, nothing makes people quite so determined in their stupidity and sanctimony as rape allegations.Always best to shut the fuck up when you really don't have a clue what happened.As in this case.
The Marine veteran in Milwaukee with a concealed carry permit saved a lady being beaten to death by an ex-boy friend by pulling his gun and calling the police for the required 20 minutes to show up. That Sheriff knows of what he speaks.In a wild drunken teen age party the implied consent to be sexual is there. That same reason is why Spring Break exists in Florida and Texas. But stopping bad guys is seldom rewarded. I wonder why?
Its high time we recognized the primal and sometimes violent nature of sex. We try to ignore it, then when alchohol unleashes it - we act surprised.Teenage "invincibility" + hormones + alcohol + group psychology (aka "safety in numbers") = increased chance of sexual violence.I used to get shit faced drunk as a young teenage girl. It is only sheer luck something like this did not happen to me. Like a few posters have said: our failure to teach kids about the darker side of sex, which feminists cannot legislate out of existence...Leads to young women thinking this can't happen to them. Not that they are to blame, but if you have a better awareness of the nature of sex - you might more careful.The older I get the more I understand the importance of putting a little bit of fear regarding sex into the hearts of young people.
The press is also never quite as stupid, avaricious and downright malicious as when it tries to sell readership with rape hysterias.I thus discount all rape hysterias reported by the press as most likely to be partly or entirely fraudulent.
Young men know not to rape womenObviously, that isn't the case.
Shouting Thomas said...In other words, an allegation of rape exists, but nobody's been convicted.We can at least know that "drunk sex" happened. If the legal definition of rape is met, then these discussions are merited.For me "drunk sex" between teens is enough to go on a warning tear. For guys and girls. There have been lots of guys who wake up the next day no longer a virgin. And didn't remember what happened. And sometimes with an STD.They were legally raped by the girl. Nothing usually happens though. Because society doesn't allow for the thought of women raping men. Oh well.Either way ... stay sober kids!
@garage mahalteach young men not to rape...[caveat]If I can believe NPR [/caveat, then the case is mostly whether the young woman was drunk enough to make the sexual event technically-nonconsensual.I doubt the young men are confused on the question of whether it is acceptable to use physical force to coerce a sober women into sexual intercourse.They were likely confused on the question of where (on the scale of intoxication) a woman become unable to meaningfully give consent to intercourse.Which puts things into a sticky territory. There are lots of social/sexual interactions that are lubricated by alcohol. Especially at parties.Are we to teach them to avoid alcohol? Avoid sexual behavior even while mildly buzzed? (Think of the "buzzed driving is drunk driving" posters, and apply as needed...) And how does that interact with the cultural pattern that wants to minimize restraint on sexual behavior?
You know the outcome of this trial in advance, garage?How do you know that a rape was committed?
They were likely confused on the question of where (on the scale of intoxication) a woman become unable to meaningfully give consent to intercourse.Wasn't she passed out? I swear there was something in this article about calling her a 'dead girl' in one of the videos. That seems like passed out to me. I think anyone might be able to figure that one out. Passed = completely and totally unable to give consent.
The Biden Rule would have helped here. As usual instead of covering up what was done to the passed out innocent little girl, the crowd videoed it and sent copies out.NB: When raping under age passed out females always confiscate and erase all cell phones.
The girl was stupid to get passing-out drunk and leave herself vulnerable. That isn't blaming the victim, just pointing out an unfortunate fact.That said, the boys were wrong to take advantage of the situation and allegedly rape her. They were incredibly stupid to take photos of the incident and share them. If convicted of rape, life as they know it is over for them. They're facing not only jail time but life as a convicted felon and sex offender.And the onlookers are moral cowards for not trying to stop it.
Shanna,What if she planned this event in concert with the boys long before she even drank?
I'm an old sinner, so maybe I know some things the rest of you folks don't.I like bad women. Have my entire life.I've known women who plan gangbangs in advance in concert with their boyfriends or husbands.They then get drunk purposesly to, shall be shall, grease the wheels.
That should read "shall we say," not "shall be shall."And, I've also heard tell of women who plan ahead for a gangbang, suffer a bout of guilt afterward, and declare that it was a rape in the aftermath.In other words, it's a good idea to wait out the decision of the jury, isn't it?
Renee, the point is that a sixteen year old should not be experimenting to see how much she can drink, particularly in the company of peers with questionable judgement, for safety reasons that are glaringly obvious. This particular girl was not mature enough to handle alcohol responsibly, starting with the fact that she should not have been drinking at ALL. You're right that crap happens and kids with sensible parents go off the rails, but come on--you have kids, and you were one once too. You know as well as I do that the teenagers who are statistically and anecdotally more at risk for doing stupid-ass things like getting passed-out drunk and thinking that those hot football players are perfect gentlemen who have only your best interests at heart are not the ones with mature, involved parents. Yes, there are exceptions, but I'm talking about patterns.
Let me clarify. Girls who think stupid things like I described at the end of my second paragraph come from good homes too, but the difference is that they have parents who are paying enough attention and have enough sense to know where they are, know who they are with, and to make sure they do not wind up in a situation like that poor kid in Ohio. IN GENERAL.
How do you know that a rape was committed? There was an accusation. Women never lie about rape.
I can, in fact, imagine a completely different scenario from the one all of you are imagining.Here's my theoretical scenario. I suggest you remember the wild tale of Tawana Brawley as you read it. This is all just how I imagine it might have happened.1. The girl was in on the planning of the party, before she was drunk.2. The boys took and circulated pics and movies.3. The girls' family found out about the free-for-all and came down on her like a ton of bricks.4. In a panic, she invented the rape story.Could have happened that way, too, right?
What if she planned this event in concert with the boys long before she even drank? Shouting, I think once someone passes out all bets are off. They should be left alone. I don't care what you said before hand. Which is all speculation anyway. Look, I mentioned my friend who I think was drugged because her reaction to alcohol was not usually so strong. I didn't let the guy she was with take her home. I don't care if she would have had sex with him willingly. At that moment, she was incapable of deciding.
There was an accusation. There was some pretty damning video, as I understand it. Kids today video everything. I don't know how far it went, but regardless she was too drunk (or drugged) and they took advantage.Maybe I am old fashioned, I don't care. That says nothing good about any of them. Somebody should have taken her home. (and I haven't seen it mentioned in the articles, but there were other girls at this party, right? They are equally at fault for not stepping in).
@ST,I can, in fact, imagine a completely different scenario from the one all of you are imagining.Here's my theoretical scenario. I suggest you remember the wild tale of Tawana Brawley as you read it. This is all just how I imagine it might have happened.1. The girl was in on the planning of the party, before she was drunk.2. The boys took and circulated pics and movies.3. The girls' family found out about the free-for-all and came down on her like a ton of bricks.4. In a panic, she invented the rape story.That is kind of scary.One question is: did young men and young woman have any sort of pre-party or pre-intoxication agreement to have a wild time together?Another question: can all onlookers, male and female, be brought to trial on a charge of being accessory-to-an-ongoing-sexual-assault?I mean, if we want to convince kids to not stand around and cheer for the the football players nailing the drunk party-girl, then this sounds like a method that can be used.
Perhaps I'm an outlier but I pretty much knew by puberty that it was morally, ethically and dangerously wrong to rape a girl too drunk to give consent.Dangerously?Because if her father did not whup my ass within an inch of my life I absolutely knew that my father and two uncles would. Not to say that if that potential negative reinforcement was not an option that I would have gone berserk. The difference between a man and an animal is that animals are not expected to control themselves.Civilization eh? What a thing.
@ STThe thing that makes me disbelieve that potential scenario is the video they took of carrying her around to be assaulted. I can believe a lot of things but I frankly do not believe that there are any girls would be entranced by such a scenario that involves them being dragged from room to room.
Obviously, that isn't the case.Knowing not to do something is not the same thing as not doing it.There's no one who thinks it ok to rape. They just do it anyway because they want to.
garage mahal said...Young men know not to rape womenObviously, that isn't the case.IF so, we blame the Democrats who run the schools and the teacher unions who don't teach these kids government, we blame the Democrats who run the media who teach kids "If it feels good, do it" and "Who are we to judge?", and we blame the Lefties who run the churches like they're the Ten Suggestions instead of the Ten Commandments.
The causative issue here is neither attributable to male nor female. The issue is a philosophy (i.e. principles) which denigrates individual dignity and devalues human life, from conception to grave.Instead of teaching boys to respect girls, or whites to respect blacks, etc., the general principle which should be taught is to respect individual dignity, irrespective of incidental features.Unfortunately, it is profitable to exploit differentials and gradients. It is profitable to exploit vices, including greed, lust, envy, etc. This is the cause of dysfunction. When streams of dysfunction converge, then we have events, including: murder, rape, fraud, and other forms of involuntary exploitation.It doesn't help individual and societal development when we have civil leaders who sponsor and profit from this nonsense.In any case, boys and girls just want to have fun. We dream of material, physical, and ego instant (or immediate) gratification. The dysfunction converges when we are promised this outcome (i.e. a beachfront property in Hawaii, pot of gold at the end of the rainbow) without regard for the constraints of reality.There is an implication here, but I will leave its discernment to your selective imagination.We need to make better choices.
when do onlookers intervene? The onlookers are also human beings who are accountable.Groupthink is a very powerful force at that age, and it can be incredibly hard to have the courage to go against the flow, even when it's the right thing to do.And that's before the alcohol starts flowing.
You folks need to get out more.The thing you're not able to conceive is that there are women out there who crave a ton of sex.I'm here to tell you they exist. I've always liked such women because I've always craved a ton of sex, too. They find me or we find one another.How does a woman who craves a ton of sex find it without getting the hell beat out of her? This is quite a dilemma.Women who crave a ton of sex are even more hidden from view and denied that gays once were. And, if orgies are to be called off as soon as one participant reaches a state of total intoxication, orgies would never occur. Since the beginning of human existence orgies and intoxication to the point of unconsciousness have gone together. I quote as proof Jim Morrision from Crystal Ship.Before you slip into unconsciousness I'd like to have another kissAnother flashing chance at bliss Another kiss, another kiss
The thing that makes me disbelieve that potential scenario is the video they took of carrying her around to be assaulted. Being overwhelmed by a group of men is a common fantasy of women who crave a ton of sex.I'm just guessing about what might have happened. So are you.
It seems to me that if girls get a pass for getting drunk and having no personal responsibility, then why do we ask boys who are drunk to have personal responsibility? They are drunk *too*, after all.Is the girl too drunk to consent? Is the boy too drunk to make that determination?But heaven help us if we try to insist that young people should stay sober or that young people shouldn't have sex at drunk parties. After all, nothing wrong with that, right?
"I don't want to just say football players, but all young males — we're failing somewhere if they think this is the norm," she says. "And I'm not just blaming the boys, either. See, I think they have a sense of, nothing's going to happen, or no holds barred, 'We can do what we want.' "I think she's groping towards expressing the thought that maybe all that teenage sexual license isn't such a good thing. In which case I quite agree.Shouting Thomas's scenario doesn't necessarily seem implausible to me (what do you really think is going to happen if you're a young girl and you get completely blotto at a party with no chaperones? Do you honestly expect the boys to be gentlemen?) but that doesn't make the boys' behaviour much less reprehensible. It does a little, just not much. Even in its debased form, the general rule (don't take advantage of dead drunk girls) is pretty bright line and easy to follow.
Re: Synova:It seems to me that if girls get a pass for getting drunk and having no personal responsibility, then why do we ask boys who are drunk to have personal responsibility? They are drunk *too*, after all.Because all that gender equality rubbish is for the thick headed. Young men ought to be taught to behave properly towards women, even when women behave utterly disgracefully. After all, they need that retrogrde chivalric decency most when they are behaving disgracefully.Women can do as they like, but let's not be letting down the side here. Life's not fair.
I'm still unclear what physical evidence there is that sex took place. I've heard mention of a video, but just a mention, that's all. Was she medically examined afterwards?
I just saw Megyn Kelly on Fox talking to two lawyers about this case. On the negative side for the boys involved, there is lots of photographic evidence and witnesses. On the negative side for the victim, she apparently told several friends before the party that she planned on having sex with the football players. [Not sure if that meant the entire team, or just selected players.] Right now this is just a hearing before a judge, but when it gets to a jury I'm assuming all of this will factor into the outcome since jurors aren't going to be able to compartmentalize all of this stuff (to use one of the lawyer's terms) the way a judge can.
Gee, that is what popular culture tells them. And if their parents or church leaders try to tell them otherwise, they are told to ignore their parents and church leaders because they are old-fashioned, out of date, and don't really mean it when they tell them to not engage in recreational sex (there sure wasn't any love involved in what those boys did to that girl) and girls want is as much as boys.
Anthony - according to the report I saw, there isn't any bruising, etc. She may have "only" been digitally penetrated.
Thanks, Julie C.
One of the more amazing things I've witnessed is this transformation in which we now view gay male sex, and the promiscuity built into it, as normal,But we still have a hard time imagining that women who simply like a lot of sex with a lot of men might exist.Try for a moment to imagine such a thing.Our tendency to imagine saintliness and lack of interest in sex in women is hilarious.
ST, you're getting into weird territory here. I know you love to talk about your Old Whoremaster(tm) ways and how everyone needs to be more sexually openminded because you just had so much fun blah blah blah, but the truth of the matter is that many, many women who crave abusive, humiliating sex are sexual abuse survivors. It's not an oooh-la-la kinky thing; it's a sad reflection of past victimization. You're suggesting that maybe, just maybe, this CHILD was so gosh darn kinky that she set all this up ahead of time because she craved deviant sex. Even if that were the case, which while not technically impossible but seems to need an application of Occam's Razor, it would be terribly sad. Emotionally healthy teenage girls do not daydream about and carry into reality being gangbanged, videotaped, and publicly humiliated.
Re: ST:But we still have a hard time imagining that women who simply like a lot of sex with a lot of men might exist.It's easy to imagine they might exist -- we've got English words used specifically for such women, after all. Whether they apply here, though, is a little more questionable, as the video evidence allegedly shows the girl "drifting in and out of consciousness." And the description of the girl as "dead" suggests unconsciousness.My baseline assumption is that people generally want to experience sex when they're, you know, conscious and able to enjoy it. Though I suppose there may be people whose tastes differ.
You've mischaracterized my views completely, Erika.I don't know how to put this to you any other way than bluntly, so I will.The twats of some women vibrate at a higher frequency than yours and demand more stimulation. Sexual desire exists across a broad range. Some women have a "hot box."No, the fact that a women exists at one end of that spectrum of desire is not necessarily a manifestation of abuse or pathology.In fact, relating this to gay sex again, I'd say you're acting as a "bigot" here. I say that with amusement. I known sexually abused women who withdrew into celibacy.
And, yes, Balgefor, we call women who crave a lot of sex with men "whores."It is precisely this extraordinarly punitive attitude that makes it difficult for a woman to satisfy this desire without facing violence or ridicule.
As I remember it, the ethos of my era allowed for copping a feel, but intercourse was not something a gentleman would do. But back then nobody had tattoos either.....The past is a different country. So is the land of young people. This incident seems very strange and foreign and alienating.
And the description of the girl as "dead" suggests unconsciousness.Indeed. ST, is it really your default assumption that some women are they just really wanting it when they are [b]unconscious[/b]? That's what the videos, the only evidence we really have, show. And even if it were true that this particular girl was all out for that, that doesn't absolve any bystanders who didn't know her of letting this go on. I said earlier, I don't care what decisions someone would make stone cold sober - if I saw someone so drunk that they were unconscious or close to I would try to remove them from the situation. They can sleep with whoever they want once they've regained consciousness.
So, without reference to this case, suppose a woman is a whore and she engages in this type of conduct and hopes that it remains private.What does she do when she is unmasked and ridiculed in public and before her family?
Re: ST:And, yes, Balgefor, we call women who crave a lot of sex with men "whores."No, "whores" are the ones who get paid for it -- the heightened insult comes from the implication that the target is selling herself for money. "Slut" is the word. Or "slatternly," "loose," etc.
Women are particularly fierce, as you can see in these comments, about their denial that women who like a lot of sex with men exist.It's part of the herd consensus building that women do around sexual conduct.Women who have a low sex drive really despise women who have a hot box. The woman with a hot box threatens to market value of women with low sex drives.This is an area of bitter hostility among women.
I stand corrected to some extent, Balfegor.Some women who are sluts find it convenient, and safe in fact, to operate as whores.So, there is some overlap.
Re: ST:What does she do when she is unmasked and ridiculed in public and before her family?The same thing furries do when they're unmasked, I assume. Hide their faces in shame. We all have things we don't want to see in public. The thing to do in that case is to take extensive precautions to avoid those things becoming public.Maybe it comes out nevertheless, but if you've tried to keep it private, decent people avert their eyes and pretend they don't see anything. Like averting your eyes from a man who has forgotten to zip up.
I did not know any girls in high school who were capable of planning an orgy. I did, however, know some high shool football players who were quite arrogant and overbearing in their dealings with lesser mortals.
Amusingly, not long ago the American Psychiatric Association labeled homosexuality as a pathology most likely caused by abuse.
It's also a good idea to teach young men not to rape women.We don't know that they did.I'm certainly not going to assume they did. Too many of these so-called rape scandals turn out to be bullshit.
"Mike Rebar, who runs a used-appliance store downtown, says people outside have been willing to believe the worst of the old steel town with a proud high school football tradition."Old steel town? Fuck, yeah! His name's Mike fuckin' Rebar!!
as the video evidence allegedly shows the girl "drifting in and out of consciousness." And the description of the girl as "dead" suggests unconsciousness.The news article says that still photos, not video, show the girl "drifting in and out of consciousness". How a still photo can show someone is unconscious is anyone's guess.The "so dead" line is a second-hand account of a video allegedly recorded by an unnamed athlete, who may or may not have been anywhere near the party, after the events were over. For all we know it was made by some student who heard the girl got raped while passed out and decided to joke about it.We've seen too many cases where the initial reports of these events turn out to be total bullshit leaked by the prosecutors. I want to hear about actual evidence of rape, and the news article mentions no such evidence.
If we grant everyone their point we still end up with a crime. If the girl was in on it it became a crime when she passed out, if the boys had sex with her while she was unable to consent it was a crime.The chances that the truly guilty will be identified and punished fairly are pretty slim. I'll bet this kind of thing goes on in every community every year with very little consequence. It's unfortunate for these particular kids that this has become such a media circus. I'd say it's worth it if it changed anything, but it won't.
If the girl was in on it it became a crime when she passed out, if the boys had sex with her while she was unable to consent it was a crime.If they had sex with her after she passed out, sure. If they had sex with her while she was conscious but in the middle of a blackout period -- or if they had sex when she was drunk and she invented the blackout story out of embarassment -- then there's no rape.Well, legally it might still be rape, since only men get held responsible for the choices they make while drunk. But morally, it wouldn't be rape.
ShoutingIs there any particular virtue in having a "hot box" compared to being frigid? Maybe it's a persons preference only. Is there an acceptable middle ground warm but discriminating box?
I don't think a woman chooses to be frigid or to have a hot box, or to be discriminating.Why do you assume that a woman who has a hot box would not be discriminating as well? Why do you assume that she would do other than to learn how to find lovers she admires and trusts?If the scenario I've suggested in regard to this young woman is true, then what happened would suggest that she is young and inexperienced and that she's managing her needs in a very awkward and potentially damanging way.The woman with the hot box who matures successfully learns how to manage her desires and her life in a sane and safe way.
The use of the word "acceptable" is at the core of this discussion.I have never built my sex life with a view toward "acceptance" by anybody but the woman I'm involved with.Unlike the gay activists, I'm not looking for approval either.
The question that I ask is why the girl got so drunk. Yes, it might have been through no fault of her own, but I think the odds are against that. One of things that we seem to be seeing on college campuses, and, yes high schools and even middle schools, is binge drinking by young women. A lot of it. While the guys often just drink beer, the girls are shooting hard liquor, made more palatble through fruity flavoring, etc. Esp., I think, vodka drinks and flavored vodka. Maybe freeze it first, or make it into jello shots. A lot of ways to get around the harsh taste of hard alcohol.Used to think that the girls were just naive, but several years ago read a book titled, I think, Queen Bees and wannabes. Something like that. And the author explained that for a lot of these girls, the alcohol gives them license to have sex, when otherwise they would be considered sluts for doing so. Oh, they just got drunk, and it happened. Something like that. Much better for a teenager worried, at least a little bit about her reputation, than going with the overt intent of having sex.But, the fact that so many of the young women do have sex when drunk should be enough for them to know that this is a fairly weak excuse. Also, yes, girls can easily avoid this sort of thing in high school by just not going to those parties, or to not have anything to drink when the do. And, a lot of them by college seem to have worked out a good buddy plan - for example, a lot of sororities seem to have "sober sisters" policies, where say 1/4 of the girls stay sober and watch out for the others at parties where alcohol is served. Not perfect, but does work pretty well.
It appears that everybody here is worried primarily about the girl in question being "ruined."Anybody out there worried about the possible ruination of the boys involved?Why is your sympathy going in either direction?
I don't see anybody worried about her being 'ruined'. I see people worried about her being abused. I think you are reading your own stuff into all of this. This isn't about her wanting to have sex, this is about whether she was unconscious/so out of it that she was quite clearly unable to consent. That is the only question here. We weren't there, we don't know all the details, but your scenario of some sort of pre planned orgy seems far less likely than any others I've read.
Well, Shana, the getting drunk at a rowdy party of football players indicates to me a certain interest in sex.Are you advocating "Antioch Rules?"How do you know that it wasn't about her wanting sex? That seems to me to be the crucial question.
This would never have happened in my high school. You could never get more than maybe 2 young idiots back then to go along with something like that without someone stopping it out of guilt, chivalry, fear, or compassion. And those 2 guys would have to be the 2 worst assholes in the entire town who just happen to be there alone with her.It sure as hell would never have happened in my presence, or anybody I hung out with. The culture has seriously degraded, and it's not just one cause, but a combination of many working in tandem. Even in times of war, American men have always been better than this. What are we doing to our boys? We sure aren't making them into men. They just grow into hormone powered children. Maybe because our culture says that they aren't women and they can't be men, because men are bad. What's left?
"Anybody out there worried about the possible ruination of the boys involved?"Well if it happened, then the boys already were ruined, or it wouldn't have happened.
It's interesting that you reject the term acceptable. You are one of the commenters here that is least likely to accept any version but your own. Or is it just that you have a strong opinion about everything and can't resist sharing it. In any case I am concerned about the consequences to both the boys and the girl in this case and in any case where lives are ruined at such a young age. Kids are faced with ruinous choices when they are much too young to make them partially because of the sexualization of our society.
"The twats of some women vibrate at a higher frequency than yours and demand more stimulation. Sexual desire exists across a broad range. Some women have a "hot box.""3/14/13, 3:10 PMOhhhhh, ST, I'm blown away by your "wisdom". ;)
You said it bagoh. That is the point we need to make over and over. Guilt, chivalry, fear and compassion are very needed right now.
Ohhhhh, ST, I'm blown away by your "wisdom". ;)Thanks, Inga. I figured you would be.
If she was drunk, a man would have stepped up and stopped it, even if she was consenting. Men enforce standards. Men protect women, even from themselves. Unfortunately, I can hear a woman's voice telling me to shut up, because I have no right to such power over a woman, drunk or not.
Feminists might swoon over your definition of a man bagoh, but history and common sense define manliness the same way you do.
Baggy, no you've got it wrong, most women probably would like that "protectiveness", but also don't want to feel like they owed their protected special favors afterwards. BUT he may be rewarded for his efforts, on her terms.
Minus the "special favors," I ain't doing no "protecting."
Being a decent kind caring human being is always the best way to attract other humans, in my experience.
I prefer being an ogre, Inga. It's more fun.
ST, for everything there is a season.
I'm not having much trouble attracting other humans.In fact, I wish about half of the ones I'm attracting would get the fuck away from me.I told you, I'm quite garrulous and sociable.
"Baggy, no you've got it wrong, most women probably would like that "protectiveness",..."Perhaps in the real life situation, but that isn't where boys learn how to react and behave like men. They learn it from the culture, and the culture is all about women needing more power and men having less. You can't have it both ways. If you want men to take charge and protect you, then you can't tell them to mind their own damned business, and get in touch with their feminine side instead. They aren't built to do both, and neither are women, but that second part is the only part that grates, isn't it?
Hey ST, there's someone out there for everyone. Usually older folks like us slow down a bit, but whatever rocks your world. As for me, and as the Pointer Sisters sing, " I want a lover wirh a slow hand, a tender touch..."
Argggg, * with*
I don't know about Slow Hand, but Cool Hand Luke did not appreciate the hot box.
Re: Shouting Thomas:Well, Shana, the getting drunk at a rowdy party of football players indicates to me a certain interest in sex.I . . . don't think a generalised interest in sex is sufficient. Just because a girl comes to a party interested in maybe having sex with someone doesn't mean that when she's dead drunk you can assume she's consented to have sex with anyone who happens by. Pretty sure the standard is a little more particular than that.Now, maybe she consented to sex (or digital penetration) with the two boys here before she became so drunk she couldn't consent. Or maybe she retained enough consciousness to consent through the whole affair. There may be room for reasonable doubt here. But even if the boys can raise reasonable doubt, one hopes they are ashamed of their behaviour.
Isn't there a clear problem if these guys didn't think this would be shameful? They didn't mind being videoed doing this. Those recording it didn't think it embarrassing to be standing by letting it happen, and then embarrassing her by distributing it. They had so little regard for themselves, the girl, their own group, even their own reputations. Something is seriously broken here.
Guilt, chivalry, fear and compassion are very needed right now."From men. Women get a free pass on their bad behavior. Who knows that chivalry made demands on women's behavior, not just the men's? Not many, it seems.Chivalry is dead because it became a one-way street.
It should be shameful for a woman to go to a party with drunk men and get drunk herself.
The problem for young men in dealing with young women is that young women like to pretend that things just "happen" to them sexually.That way, if things go seriously wrong, they can blame it all on the man or men. Feminism has only accentuated this tendency, because it has reinforced in young woman the notion that, when things go wrong in a sexual encounter, the blame automatically accrues to the man or men.Young women, in my experience, almost never know precisely what they want, or know how to signal precisely what they want.
Shame is a powerful tool. As a Jewish (and German) mother, I used it when warrented to reign in my teenagers. It worked, they feel quite guilty even as adults, when they forget to call me regularly.:) Heh.
Something is seriously broken here. You bet there is. It's going to get worse before it gets better, because those who see what went wrong don't want to fix it. The rest have no idea why it went wrong and don't really want to know. It's better just to round up the usual suspects.
I don't exempt women from any shame in the matter. Liberal women should be ashamed of what they have done to sexualize our culture. It's been a bad trade off. We'd all be better off if we decided to respect and honor and dignify life for everyone instead of separating out each small difference.
Shame is a powerful tool.Shame is built in, Inga. It's God's way of telling us to consider carefully how our actions affect other people.I really think that gays are making a big mistake in attributing the shame they feel about their sexuality to the censure they feel coming from other people. That shame will not be cured with the societal approval they seek. They are making a mistake, and we are making a mistake in buying into their error.That shame is innate. It doesn't have to control you, but it is intended to get your attention.
Bag, you sound like my husband (and my dad, and my uncles). And he's raising our son to have similar principles. And that's the heart of it--an honorable man does what's right. Has little to do with whether the recipient of your help is grateful or rewards you afterward or whatever. It's about what sort of man one chooses to be.
Wyo Sis, it is just liberal women who have sexualized our culture. ST most certainly isn't a liberal.
Nor is he a woman.
You can see what is going on and try to fix it and still not be able to fix it. The best most of us can do is fix ourselves and those we have any power to influence.
I think ST needs to change his handle to 'hot box' or the name of his band maybe. 'Shouting Thomas & The Hot Boxers'.Vibrating at a higher frequency since 2010. See if Terry Gross at NPR will do an interview.
I think that when we remember our younger selves we remember far nobler selves than actually existed......It's very difficult to journey through youth without making a damned fool of yourself. I was never a participant or observer of any rapes, but, my God, I did many impulsive, inconsiderate, foolish, wicked things and was a passive witness to many more.
ST, I'm not passing judgment on you, but I won't allow liberal women to take the brunt of the blame for the sexualization of our culture.
ST, against my better judgement:What I said:that many, many women who crave abusive, humiliating sex are sexual abuse survivorsYou'll notice that I said nothing about women with a high sex drive. I said that women who are in abusive sexual situations are generally not there because they are so gosh-darn hot box Susie Bright sex positive, it's because they have sexual and emotional issues. I don't care if you think differently about sex than I do, but it is annoying when you miss the point.
This sexual utopia isn't going as well as planned.But I'm sure it'll all improve once grade schoolers are taught about fisting, dental dams, and crossdressing.
It's just liberal women who have sexualized our culture in that particular way. The idea that women can be like men and that being like a man is the only way to be equal. The contempt for what has been traditionally a man's role in keeping society from disintegrating.It takes out a particularly needed piece of the whole, and there is no way to fill it.
Exactly Erika. We do the righ thing because we are honorable, have morals, have a sense of right and wrong and guilt for doing what we know is wrong. Those who do the right thing because they expect a reward have missed the lesson and flunked the test.
Society hasn't become any more sexualized than it ever was. I'm a lifelong student of Henry Miller. People were doing the same damned things 100 years ago that they're doing today. Porn has brought it more out into the open, maybe.People don't act sexually based on such silly things as "sexualization" of the society. People operate sexually on deeply felt needs and compulsions.So, I call bullshit on all of you.
But, Inga, you are the one who suggested there would be a sexy little reward.
I like "Shouting Thomas & the Hot Boxes!"But, I doubt if the Old Dawgz will go for it.I'm going to be doing some solo stuff. Maybe they'll back me up under that name.
And, Susie Bright, is a fucking idiot.
"[A]n honorable man does what's right"And do honorable young women go to parties with drunk football players and get drunk themselves? Knowing every woman would love to have the attention of virile men (especially football payers), I tell my daughter not to go to parties with them where there is drinking. I don't care what her age is.Look, girls like football players. Most girls want to fuck them. Football players know this. Why is any of this shit surprising?Honor, like chivalry, is a two way street. That drunk girls have sex is no surprise when most girls have no honor. They just want cock from the BMOC. We are a nation of players and sluts. The hangers-on are the ones who hold the iPhones and take the pictures.
Pushing self,esteem and getting rid of shame haven't quite had the intended effect, either.Oh well. Isn't it time to mock a Catholic?
Wyo Sis, women don't get a pass, they are equally responsible to teach morals to their children, as you know., AND keep our society from disintegrating. Parents whether they are liberal or conservative, IF they are decent people, know this and raise their children accordingly. I am a liberal woman, I raised four moral children.
Pogo, that kind of shit is not allowed. It's too sensible.To get a glimpse of what the ladies are doing, check out this website for women who want to milk an NBA player for his sperm, marry him for a while, and divorce him before he goes bankrupt.
many, many women who crave abusive, humiliating sex are sexual abuse survivors.Not true. "many, many" smacks a leeetle too much of "I pulled this out of my ass."
"From men. Women get a free pass on their bad behavior."Well she didn't. I'd say she's paying dearly, whether she is responsible or not. The boys will too, and this is almost always the case. The repercussion are there, yet they all chose to do it anyway. Even teenagers should have a basic level of wisdom, an understanding of consequences, a knowledge of right and wrong. Why aren't they getting it? Are they being fed something else instead?
ST I get what you mean. Sexuality has always been around, and it's always had a key role in whatever path culture is rolling along at the time. But, there are rises and declines in civilization throughout history and blatant in your face sexual immorality has always accompanied declines.
I'd say she's paying dearly...No, she isn't. I bet that the newspapers aren't printing her name. They are printing the boys' names.So, she can walk away from this, move to another town, and start over with no problem.They boys can't.
Wyo Sis, I didn't say there SHOULD be a sexy rearward, I said there might be one in the right circumstances. And the best way to ruin the mood would be for a guy to expect a reward. Only because it would make that guy very attractive.
One of the reasons they called it the Wild West was because it was a whore's paradise.
Why aren't they getting it? -- bagoh20I'd be interested in your diagnosis.
Inga, I don't mean you personally. I mean the ideas that liberal women buy into even while they, if they are responsible parents, teach their children differently. In the larger culture promoting false ideas of actions and consequences causes a breakdown.
Wyo Sis, I think you're generalizing liberal women. Many of the women who you refer to are young. I'd say these women made up their own minds when they became adults. It wasn't just that or even that they were raised by liberal women. I know many conservative parents with some wild offspring.
Somebody tell me what in the fuck a conservative is?I haven't got a clue.Liberals, I know, are people who have a plan to fix things. I regard them as complete assholes for precisely this reason. If they want to fix something, they should go fix themselves.Conservative seems to be a catchall term for people who don't have a plan to fix things. Which would be all the sensible people.Doesn't seem to have much meaning beyond that.And, I haven't noticed a lick of difference in women's sexual behavior as a result of their alleged political ID (pun intended).
"Why aren't they getting it? -- bagoh20I'd be interested in your diagnosis."Values. The old values were repressive, especially for women. They worked because the level of technology before required a division of labor, which put both men and women in their places, with little desire to try and cross over. Today women can do most of what men can, so it's hard to have respective roles that are complimentary.We are developing into one sex. One not particularly impressive compromise. Many think that's exactly what we want, but then again, we never saw it before. I think all the boys and the girls in this episode were just being that one lame compromise. Throw out the best parts, the parts that make us different, so we can be equal.
Maybe conservatives are people who don't have a plan to fix things that aren't broken.
Re: Nomennovum:Honor, like chivalry, is a two way street.I think to suggest that chivalry is a two way street is to misunderstand chivalry in a very fundamental, very modern way. It's not transactional -- it's not about being gracious only to those who are gracious to you. In Chretien's telling of the Grail Story, Gawain encounters a "haughty" maiden who is rude and verbally abusive, but he behaves towards her with perfect courtesy. That is chivalry in the Western tradition.
Shouting Thomas; you wrote words I've said to myself, especially in this past election.* * *When I was a senior in high school, I learned that a girl I heard that a terrible crush on was a raging alcoholic. The guys wanted nothing to do with her, while I suspect her being a very emotional drunk played a part, I think it was more. Seeing her puking her brains out on the front lawn at a party some months later (one of the few I went to) pretty much took care of my crush.
All that was needed was one rule - The Golden Rule.It sounded like everyone just took advantage in whatever way they could. Nobody denied themselves, nobody thought: this is my chance to be brave, to be stand-up, to be the good guy/girl. Nobody wanted to be good, because that's being a sucker, and they are right. You often do lose by doing the right thing. The most visible of all things like celebrity and politics is rife with bad guys and girls winning it all. Our kids are basically just learning what works.
Re: bagoh20: Nobody wanted to be good, because that's being a sucker, and they are right. You often do lose by doing the right thing.Wellll, it does sound like other people did try to stop the girl from going off with the boys who now stand accused of rape.
It's not transactional -- it's not about being gracious only to those who are gracious to you. -- BalefegorI did not say that. You misunderstood. Men treated the weaker sex with special consideration, curbed their aggressive sexual natures in their dealings with women, and provided for women in marriage. In turn, women were expected to be submissive to men, to remain chaste until marriage, and to curb their hypergamous natures after marriage.This is not a "I'm not gonna hold the door open for that mean bitch" thing at all. Do you understand the distinction I'm trying to make here?Women did not hold up their end of the bargain with regard to chivalry in the whole. So why should men? Why should a man marry a woman who spent most of her youth fucking around? Why should a man commit to a woman who is as agressive as any man? Why should a man pay for a woman's support when she decides she can to better, be happier, no longer married to him?He won't. That's why men are dropping out. Why there is shaming of "men who won't grow up." Why matrimony laws continue to grow to the detriment of men. Feminism created agressive sluts and nasty she-men. So now we have to live through the fallout.It's just begun.
The football player part of it does matter - because they are usually valued and protected. Even at a university known more for its brains than its sports skills, they are the rainmakers and are coddled and passed through - some of them barely able to read.
The football player part of it does matter - because they are usually valued and protectedAs are women. Let's see which side has more mojo in this case. I vote: The girl!
@bagdhad said "our kids are just learning what works."True. I have a hard time telling kids differently, knowing how badly it will turn out for them. I'll leave it to their parents to lie to them. They can see how it works themselves by observation.
ST-I don't doubt the scenario you've suggested could be true. However, I think you and most commenters are underestimating the naivete and romantic silliness that teenage girls are capable of. Very few teenage girls are truly aware of the dangers of male hormones and alcohol in combination. Most teenage girls don't truly get the male mind. Most of us have to be married awhile before we even begin to get the differences in how our husband's minds work versus ours. And that's the GOOD guys. I suspect many or even most women have a scary incident or two that brings it home. Some have something really bad happen to them first, like this girl's experience. Maybe she was in on it, and does stuff like this all the time. Or maybe, she didn't know how much alcohol was too much until it was too late. We all come from different places, but I would tend to bet on the latter.
Someone please explain to me something. Shana, maybe you can. If a woman cannot legally give consent to sex with a man if she is drunk (thus making the act rape), how can a man have the requisite intent to commit this purported illegal act if he is also drunk?Why don't the two drunks cancel each other out? It's just two drunks fucking, neither know what he or she is doing. Indeed, they didn't intend to do anything at all.Oh, the unfairness!
Because he is the active participant. She is just laying there out cold. He wouldn't be able to perform if he were to be in the same state of unconciousness as her.
Re: Nomennovum:I don't think you can draw the distinction in the way you're trying to draw it. Chivalry is a personal ideal, not a form of social organisation. And just as it wasn't some kind of deal between a man and a woman, it certainly wasn't a deal struck between Men and Women.If you don't want to be chivalrous, that's your decision, not a decision that is forced on you by society. Just as individual men and women chose not to be chivalrous or chaste in years past, you can choose or not choose to be chivalrous today.Also, look at the haughty maiden in the Grail story. She1. Tells Gawain not to help her get on her horse because (a) she's not one of those silly girls who fawns over knights, (b) his dirty hands will never touch her body2. Tells him her clothes are none of his business when he moves to pick up her cloak for her.3. Laughs at him when a passerby jacks his horse while his back is turned 4. Makes fun of him for riding around on a broken down old nag after his horse is stolen5. Follows him around for the express purpose of watching him suffer (and hopefully die)6. Tells him to shut up and ride when he tries to lecture her about how a lady ought to be proper and demure7. Asks him mockingly if he feels like a big man after defeating her boyfriend then baits him into crossing the river at the "perilous ford" (in the hopes he would rown)She's actually incongruously modern. But she is so hilariously awful to him, I have difficulty imagining she was not drawn from life, so I imagine there must have been women like that in the 12th century too.Anyhow, Gawain treats her well all the same because he's a paragon of chivalry. In the context of the narrative, his chivalrous behaviour seems more an ideal than a baseline expectation, because clearly other people in the story don't behave chivalrously. In fact, a lot of them advise him to stop travelling with that awful, evil girl but what's he going to do? Chase her away? That wouldn't be chivalrous, even if she's only hanging around to watch him suffer. He's chivalrous, as it were, in a fallen world, not chivalrous in a world where all the ladies are demure and submissive and nice. What's more, medievals also clearly felt a kind frisson from the haughty girl's verbal abuse of Gawain because some completions or adaptations of Chretien (e.g. Wolfram von Eschenbach) have them marry. So they can't have thought her bad behaviour put her beyond the pale. Sure, it's after she apologises for being so mean, but it's also after like 10 background characters have commented that her heart is 100% pure evil, so her character and reputation are pretty well established narratively by that point."Women aren't demure" isn't an excuse for abandoning the chivalric ideal. Now, you may think it's incompatible with modern life. Or that there's no profit in it for a modern, and that's fine. I'm not saying we have to return to the Thirteenth, Greatest of Centuries. But it's not women's fault that men aren't chivalrous. It's up to men. Just as it's not men's fault that women are unchaste -- that's up to women.
Don't misunderstand me I am NOT saying that the girl there's no responsibility. it was foolish in the extreme. forgive my typos I'm on a cellphone. being drunk does not excuse you from committing a crime. being drunk makes you more likely to be a victim of a crime. I drank store owner is not locking his store properly is still a victim of robbery. and if the robber was drunk he is still guilty. getting drunk is generally a bad idea.
bears not there's
Chivalry can stand the exception, Balfegor. But it fails in the face of full-blown insurrection, because that is the way it is. You are welcome to remain a gentle man. That is a noble choice. Most men won't. ... and haven't. That is my point. Sorry I can't be clearer. Blame my iPad.
You went off the rails in your last three sentences, though, Bal.
Nomennovum:Chivalry can stand the exception, Balfegor. But it fails in the face of full-blown insurrection, because that is the way it is. You are welcome to remain a gentle man. That is a noble choice. Most men won't. ... and haven't. That is my point. Sorry I can't be clearer. Blame my iPad.If your point is merely that humans respond to incentives, and that the balance of incentives and rewards have changed today so that chivalry is not rewarded (if it ever was, which is somewhat doubtful) and is even punished, then I don't disagree. Empirically, that's obviously the case. But normatively, the fact that something is hard doesn't absolve one of the obligation to do it, if it's also right -- it's not a mutual bargain.That said, I wouldn't say that I'm particularly chivalrous myself, beyond the traditional courtesies. I certainly don't look to Arthurian romances as a model for my conduct (I look, if I look to anything, to the example of my ancestors, and the example of the Later Kings)But if one thinks chivalry is a good thing, the fact that women aren't demure anymore is no excuse at all for not trying to live up to the ideal.
Chivalry only makes sense if both sexes play their role, Bal.
No one involved with this sorry story has a shred of honor, and I'll NPR to the list. The chance that we are hearing the whole story and not merely a story edited to push a meme is zero to as many digits as one cares to calculate.The football players should not have risked their scholarships messing around with a naked, drunken girl.Their coach should have come down on them like a ton of bricks. Throw them off the team? Depends on when he knew that the talk he was overhearing was more than just talk.The bystanders should have gotten the girl home somehow. Naked and puking so her family grounds her until she's 85, but unraped.And as for the girl? May I quote Paglia?Is it rape if she's too drunk to object?If she's drunk, she's complicitous.
Chivalry only makes sense if both sexes play their role, Bal.Unless by "makes sense" you mean "makes things easy enough that chivalry isn't hard anymore" I just don't see how you can say that.
Ultimately you have to look at yourself in the mirror and assess your actions. If they are actions that you're not proud of you have to do something about it. Or maybe nothing about it, but the consequences happen anyway.It's a shame kids don't learn this fact earlier when the consequences are less devastating.
Jersey Shore in real life.
Big Mike says:If she's drunk, she's complicitous.So being drunk makes a girl complicit in her own gang rape. Got it.
Let's not confuse complicitous with solely at fault. K?Besides all those guys were drunk too.
There's a vast difference between having a serious beer buzz and being passed out. And complicity implies something more than just putting oneself in a risky situation, and most teenage beer parties don't end in this sort of behavior.
She went to a party with drunk football players. There were no chaperones. She drank alcohol and was not forced to do so. She drank enough to get rip-roaring drunk. She didn't leave before something bad happened. She didn't have sense enough not to go in the first place. You're right. She should have these guys thrown in jail and their lives ruined for their non-chivalrous behavior. She should not hang her head in shame,. She has the right to do this all again without being gang- banged. She is woman. Hear her roar ... "Help, police!"
And whatever you do, DO NOT JUDGE HER!
She has the right to do this all again without being gang- banged. She is woman. Hear her roar ... "Help, police!"Actually, she does have the right to do all those things without getting gang-banged. Whether or not these are optimal or wise behaviors doesn't mean she should be subjected to that. And if she or anyone else was raped in such a situation, she should call the police. The fact that you and others seem to have a problem grasping that says more about you than her.
Nomennovum:Exactly. The difference between men and women is not a separate dignity, but that women have a unique responsibility to care for a new human life from conception to birth. The father has a complementary responsibility, and both have a responsibility to foster development of this developing human life from birth to adulthood.Also, both women and men are only (with rare exceptions) eligible to enjoy liberty when they are capable of self-moderating behavior.This case is exceptional. It should be investigated, prosecuted, and if the accused are proven guilty, then they should be held accountable accordingly.The more important issue, however, is that men and women respect each other. That they don't support either redistributive or retributive change, or any other form of involuntary exploitation, which denies an individual's dignity. That they accept responsibility for the outcome of their voluntary behavior.
Also, I played football in high school, drank lots of beer and attended many unchaperoned parties. Somehow, no one got gang-raped at any of those events. Getting pass-out drunk isn't a good move in any circumstance (assuming she wasn't roofied or something similar), but that doesn't entail complicity or make this incident (assuming the accused are guilty) any less of a crime.
How do you know she didn't want to have sex, even gang banged, some feller, based on her actions? You don't. Yet you judge me and not her. Typical.
"Also, I played football in high school, drank lots of beer and attended many unchaperoned parties. Somehow, no one got gang-raped at any of those events. Getting pass-out drunk isn't a good move in any circumstance (assuming she wasn't roofied or something similar), but that doesn't entail complicity or make this incident (assuming the accused are guilty) any less of a crime.." - sfBecause your team was chivalrous? Gay? Whatever. Here's you pat on the back:
Based on the evidence that has become public, including video evidence, she was passed out. That ends the analysis, even if one assumes for the sake of argument that she wanted to have sex with someone when conscious.But yes, I am judging you. You have been judged and found wanting. I suspect that happens all the time to you.
nn,Yes. Feminists and white knights forget that we are all responsible for our actions, regardless of our sex. Acting like a slut has its consequences. This is why it's always bad for a woman to be one.
Maybe so, sf. I am sure you are held in the highest esteem. I know I respect you for you ability to judge based on this NPR news I item. You go, girl.
"...and most teenage beer parties don't end in this sort of behavior."Quite frankly? Yes, they do. *Someone* at that party has sex when they didn't want to, because they were drunk, and not remembering who it even was? That too.And I'm pretty sure that telling girls that they've got a "right" to get falling down drunk with no consequences is not doing anyone a favor. We promote a fantasy because not-judging is worth having more victims? Someone mentioned drunk driving? Well, getting plastered at a party is like giving your safety over to a drunk driver. Yes, sure, the drunk driver is still guilty as hell, but would we tell someone that they've a right to get in a car with a drunk driver without consequences?We just wouldn't do that.
Based on the evidence that has become public, including video evidence, she was passed out. No, you haven't seen such evidence.A trial is ongoing to discover the facts that you're just assuming.Why don't you shut up and wait for the outcome of the trial?
Why don't you shut up and wait for the outcome of the trial?Why don't you do the same on this and many other topics?
Post a Comment