If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Opposing Views)   CNN host Candy Crowley and reporter Poppy Harlow are almost in tears over the "ruined lives" of the two Steubenville, Ohio teen football players who were found guilty of gang-raping a 16-year-old girl   (opposingviews.com) divider line 659
    More: Sick, Steubenville, Candy Crowley, Poppy Harlow, CNN, CNN host, Ohio, guilty verdicts, rapists  
•       •       •

20145 clicks; posted to Main » on 18 Mar 2013 at 6:09 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



659 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-03-18 12:33:02 PM  

TheotherMIguy: As a Steubenville native, I want to apologize for my hometown.

Really, really apologize.

Though, honestly, I can see the cultural split that's causing this particular mentality in the area. Steubenville's a steel town, used to even be divided by ethnic lines. The places of worship in the lower city are most telling. The Irish Catholic Church (St. Peter's), the now closed Polish Catholic Church (St Stanislaus'), the Greek orthodox church that I can never remember the name of, the Jewish synagogue. And then there's the Franciscan University of Steubenville, a hub of the charismatic Catholic Church. All of these religious organizations lead to the older generations being fire and brimstone, the middle generation being divided three ways: between hyper religious zealots connected in some way to the University and thus either home schooled or attending the catholic high school (CCHS) with the more moderate families, the moderate families sending their children to either SHS or CCHS, and the rest of the city which contains working families, religious rejectionists, meth heads, drug dealers, and folks who could give a shiat about their kids.

In that mix comes SHS football. The town's only distraction from the downward spiral the region is in at the moment. They're going to protect it, idiotically, since other sports *cough*Swimming*cough* have a better overall record in the past decade or so.

Hmm, I think I over-ranted, I'm shutting up now.


Not an over-rant. I found that interesting actually.
 
2013-03-18 12:35:40 PM  

notatrollorami: rynthetyn: What pisses me off to no end is that the American media goes and acts like the US is so superior to India when covering the Delhi gang rape case, but then they turn around and do the exact same victim blaming and feeling sorry for the rapists that they love to point fingers about when it happens elsewhere.

Ok am I missing something here? I'll grant you I have given scant attention to this case, but wasn't this a situation wherein two guys fingering a passed out girl? When I read the article I was stunned that it referred to this incident as a brutal gang rape. Now you're comparing this to the Indian incidents. Do I not know something about this case or are there really people who don't grasp the huge divide between fingering a passed out girl and actual violent public bloody gang rape of a screaming woman who later dies from the injuries?

///Glad they got convicted


What part of "rape is rape" don't you understand?  "Sexual assault" is just a euphemism for rape.  Every sex offender is a rapist.  Any question put to a victim is cruel and unusual punishment, especially, "How did you become a victim?" Forensic exams are a barrier to uncovering rape because they discourage reporting.

In order to protect  victims and stamp out rape, it is necessary to adopt absurd positions (like this one). I have it on the authority of the most lugubrious Fark  feminists.
 
2013-03-18 12:37:10 PM  

Popcorn Johnny: Waxing_Chewbacca: Where you in the courtroom? Did you hear all the evidence? No and no. The judge did and agrees with 90% of us who heard what has been reported. Your crusade to exonerate these two is disturbing. A bit up thread you stated that while she may have been drunk at one point she sobered up and wanted it. farking troglodyte.

I didn't state any such thing, stop blatantly lying and distorting what I said. I said that we have no way of knowing when those pictures were taken in relation to when the sexual contact happened. I guess you're going to continue ignoring testimony that the girl willingly went with the guys and lashed out at one of her friends that tried to stop her from leaving.

Did you hear all the evidence? Do you believe that judges always act on the facts and never on public pressure or their own beliefs?

I've said over and over that I have no way of knowing exactly what happened and would like to see more evidence. You seem fine with labeling them as rapists without having all the facts. You're the one that's farked up in the head, not me.


See my next post were I quoted you. "What time was picture taken". "Don't know if she consented". "Willingly went"... Please. She was a mess!

You're working way to hard to find innocence. "Hey... Maybe it was aliens" is next.
 
2013-03-18 12:37:16 PM  

Magnanimous_J: Considering that half of rapes go unreported, it is the much bigger problem. There are no easy answers, as it so often comes down to he said/ she said. In this case, it seems much more cut and dry. Other cases are much trickier.


Well said.  Most cases depend on he said/she said about consent.  Most don't have video evidence showing inability to consent at roughly the same time as the alleged rape.  And it is tough to agree that a system that requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt convict a person solely on the word of one person, the victim.  So, while the system has a worthy goal of requiring the highest of proof, in cases of rape, it gets hard to justify a conviction based on the limited proof.  It doesn't mean that rape didn't occur.  Or that rape isn't bad.  Just that, a system designed to convict only the most clear cut guilty defendants, is not ideal for cases that depend on one witness' testimony. (Rape isn't the only type of case like this, but it is the most emotional lightning rod type of case).
 
2013-03-18 12:37:25 PM  

chocolate covered poop: I have a pretty good idea for punishment of rapists. They have those chastity belt things with a key, basically handcuffs for the offenders genetailia where if he were to become aroused without removing it it would be very painful, plus he woudl not be able to have intercourse with it on. Convicted of rape, in addition to standard prison time you get one of those, your parole officer gets the key


sounds constitutional to me.  Neither cruel nor unusual.  Especially since sexual arousal is strictly voluntary.

What do you do if you have to pee with one of those one?  Go track down your parole officer so he can unlock it?
 
2013-03-18 12:37:33 PM  

Biological Ali: serial_crusher: Suppose somebody breaks into your house and steals all your stuff, so you mosey on down to the police station to file a report. Cop starts asking tough questions like "did you leave the door unlocked?", "do you have a dog?", "oh, you forgot to set your alarm system that day?"

What the fark? I've reported missing/stolen property in the past and haven't been asked any of those questions. What earthly reason would there even be for asking something like "Do you have a dog?"


Target practice.
 
2013-03-18 12:37:38 PM  

cman: I think this is a foot in mouth moment.

If you read it it seems like she is disappointed that they threw their young lives away. She is not saying that the rapists are good people or that they don't deserve what they are about to expect, nor does she say anything bad about the victim or show the victim in any negative light.

TLDR; she could have said it better


Nice try apologizing for the anchors, but the video doesn't back you up, nor does the fact that THEY NEVER MENTIONED THE SUFFERING OF THE VICTIMS.

Imagine a news anchor talking about how the Sandy Hook killer's life was ruined by being shot, but never mentioning any dead children nor teachers. It couldn't happen. No one would be that stupidly insensitive.

But with rape, assholes can be.
 
2013-03-18 12:37:56 PM  

Popcorn Johnny: Waxing_Chewbacca: Where you in the courtroom? Did you hear all the evidence? No and no. The judge did and agrees with 90% of us who heard what has been reported. Your crusade to exonerate these two is disturbing. A bit up thread you stated that while she may have been drunk at one point she sobered up and wanted it. farking troglodyte.

I didn't state any such thing, stop blatantly lying and distorting what I said. I said that we have no way of knowing when those pictures were taken in relation to when the sexual contact happened. I guess you're going to continue ignoring testimony that the girl willingly went with the guys and lashed out at one of her friends that tried to stop her from leaving.

Did you hear all the evidence? Do you believe that judges always act on the facts and never on public pressure or their own beliefs?

I've said over and over that I have no way of knowing exactly what happened and would like to see more evidence. You seem fine with labeling them as rapists without having all the facts. You're the one that's farked up in the head, not me.


Wait - leaving a party with guys equates consent for sexual activity? You're going to have to do better than that. Especially given that party goers openly talked about the girl's rape. Are you suggesting that you have more firsthand knowledge than the party's attendees?

It's also important to note that they went to multiple parties. She had to be escorted out of the first one because she couldn't talk or string together a sentence (according to eye witnesses).
 
2013-03-18 12:39:41 PM  

ginandbacon: liam76: ginandbacon: How on earth does anyone object to the term rape culture? What else would you call the mores of a group that condone and minimize the horror of sexual assault?

I think people are objecting to it being broadly applied to the US.

What's wrong with it being applied in general to this country?


It contradicts most people's experience and alienates them from your cause.
 
2013-03-18 12:39:48 PM  

Bontesla: Popcorn Johnny: Waxing_Chewbacca: Where you in the courtroom? Did you hear all the evidence? No and no. The judge did and agrees with 90% of us who heard what has been reported. Your crusade to exonerate these two is disturbing. A bit up thread you stated that while she may have been drunk at one point she sobered up and wanted it. farking troglodyte.

I didn't state any such thing, stop blatantly lying and distorting what I said. I said that we have no way of knowing when those pictures were taken in relation to when the sexual contact happened. I guess you're going to continue ignoring testimony that the girl willingly went with the guys and lashed out at one of her friends that tried to stop her from leaving.

Did you hear all the evidence? Do you believe that judges always act on the facts and never on public pressure or their own beliefs?

I've said over and over that I have no way of knowing exactly what happened and would like to see more evidence. You seem fine with labeling them as rapists without having all the facts. You're the one that's farked up in the head, not me.

Wait - leaving a party with guys equates consent for sexual activity? You're going to have to do better than that. Especially given that party goers openly talked about the girl's rape. Are you suggesting that you have more firsthand knowledge than the party's attendees?

It's also important to note that they went to multiple parties. She had to be escorted out of the first one because she couldn't talk or string together a sentence (according to eye witnesses).


He finds these facts irrelevant. If she was awake she's consenting apparently.
 
2013-03-18 12:41:20 PM  

vudukungfu: Well, Mine weren't, but I knew how much trouble I'd be in if something like that was happening and I didn't put a stop to it. Not that I would have needed to stop and think about it. You see that happening, you stop it.
You use the minimal amount of force, but feel free to use up to and including deadly force to stop a rape.


Probably the very best argument to live in a "Shall Issue" state.
 
2013-03-18 12:42:47 PM  

Waxing_Chewbacca: Bontesla: Popcorn Johnny: Waxing_Chewbacca: Where you in the courtroom? Did you hear all the evidence? No and no. The judge did and agrees with 90% of us who heard what has been reported. Your crusade to exonerate these two is disturbing. A bit up thread you stated that while she may have been drunk at one point she sobered up and wanted it. farking troglodyte.

I didn't state any such thing, stop blatantly lying and distorting what I said. I said that we have no way of knowing when those pictures were taken in relation to when the sexual contact happened. I guess you're going to continue ignoring testimony that the girl willingly went with the guys and lashed out at one of her friends that tried to stop her from leaving.

Did you hear all the evidence? Do you believe that judges always act on the facts and never on public pressure or their own beliefs?

I've said over and over that I have no way of knowing exactly what happened and would like to see more evidence. You seem fine with labeling them as rapists without having all the facts. You're the one that's farked up in the head, not me.

Wait - leaving a party with guys equates consent for sexual activity? You're going to have to do better than that. Especially given that party goers openly talked about the girl's rape. Are you suggesting that you have more firsthand knowledge than the party's attendees?

It's also important to note that they went to multiple parties. She had to be escorted out of the first one because she couldn't talk or string together a sentence (according to eye witnesses).

He finds these facts irrelevant. If she was awake she's consenting apparently.


It's disgusting.
 
2013-03-18 12:43:53 PM  

Tricky Chicken: doglover: Tricky Chicken: Are you comparing rape to various socialist policies? Or were you going for the wealth redistribution idea?

I for one would like to opt out of "rape redistribution" preemptively, just in case.

I don't think it would be an opt out situation.  Wimins have the hoohaa, mens wants the hoohaas.  It is clearly a monopoly.


And women want the cock.  It's odd that they are considered greedy and miserly, but cocksmen are considered generous and philanthropic.
 
2013-03-18 12:46:26 PM  

Bontesla: Waxing_Chewbacca: Bontesla: Popcorn Johnny: Waxing_Chewbacca: Where you in the courtroom? Did you hear all the evidence? No and no. The judge did and agrees with 90% of us who heard what has been reported. Your crusade to exonerate these two is disturbing. A bit up thread you stated that while she may have been drunk at one point she sobered up and wanted it. farking troglodyte.

I didn't state any such thing, stop blatantly lying and distorting what I said. I said that we have no way of knowing when those pictures were taken in relation to when the sexual contact happened. I guess you're going to continue ignoring testimony that the girl willingly went with the guys and lashed out at one of her friends that tried to stop her from leaving.

Did you hear all the evidence? Do you believe that judges always act on the facts and never on public pressure or their own beliefs?

I've said over and over that I have no way of knowing exactly what happened and would like to see more evidence. You seem fine with labeling them as rapists without having all the facts. You're the one that's farked up in the head, not me.

Wait - leaving a party with guys equates consent for sexual activity? You're going to have to do better than that. Especially given that party goers openly talked about the girl's rape. Are you suggesting that you have more firsthand knowledge than the party's attendees?

It's also important to note that they went to multiple parties. She had to be escorted out of the first one because she couldn't talk or string together a sentence (according to eye witnesses).

He finds these facts irrelevant. If she was awake she's consenting apparently.

It's disgusting.


His attitude is exactly why so many woman don't come forward. I imagine if it were someone he cared about then some girl he doesn't know, presumably, he'd be less forceful in his opinions.
 
2013-03-18 12:46:31 PM  

doglover: If you can prove you're raped you're not gonna find a more helpful collection of harmers to do your dirty work for you than the police. Rapists are the favorite target of EVERY branch of law enforcement. They hates 'em more than normal people.


Envy?
 
2013-03-18 12:46:50 PM  

WhippingBoy: RedT: WhippingBoy: Unless you've been one at some point in your life, please don't purport to "know" what it's like to be a man.

I had no idea you were afraid of being raped when you are out on an early morning run in a low crime area.

My apologies.

Don't be an idiot. I was responding to this part of your comment:  I sincerely doubt any man who I saw running on that same loop had ANY concern about his safety beyond tripping over a root and busting his own ass.


You don't seem to get it at all.  I had no concern over being jumped and mugged by a roving gang of hoodlums on this otherwise safe trail (as I stated in my original post). I am not paranoid.  This isn't the 'hood at dark.  This isn't a shady unsafe place.  This isn't any place that any reasonable person would be concerned about getting mugged or randomly jumped (and because, runners aren't usually carrying anything valuable), I guess a mentally disturbed person off their meds might be out there, but that isn't my concern.

But like, well pretty much any dark sparsely populated place anywhere a gal goes, she DOES have to be concerned about being raped and to the male population (even you) concern over being a victim of rape is never a blip on your radar (and I'm not saying a man has never been raped, but very few men are ever concerned that they will be raped).  of all the things you are allegedly afraid of when you run in a park at night, all of the women in that very same park ALSO have to be aware of the potential for rape and this is not because it is uncommon.

Women are taught to ALWAYS be aware of that potential, because the potential is always there.  And yes, I am going to make the logical presumption that YOU as a man have no farking clue.
 
2013-03-18 12:52:23 PM  

Waxing_Chewbacca: TheotherMIguy: As a Steubenville native, I want to apologize for my hometown.

Really, really apologize.

Though, honestly, I can see the cultural split that's causing this particular mentality in the area. Steubenville's a steel town, used to even be divided by ethnic lines. The places of worship in the lower city are most telling. The Irish Catholic Church (St. Peter's), the now closed Polish Catholic Church (St Stanislaus'), the Greek orthodox church that I can never remember the name of, the Jewish synagogue. And then there's the Franciscan University of Steubenville, a hub of the charismatic Catholic Church. All of these religious organizations lead to the older generations being fire and brimstone, the middle generation being divided three ways: between hyper religious zealots connected in some way to the University and thus either home schooled or attending the catholic high school (CCHS) with the more moderate families, the moderate families sending their children to either SHS or CCHS, and the rest of the city which contains working families, religious rejectionists, meth heads, drug dealers, and folks who could give a shiat about their kids.

In that mix comes SHS football. The town's only distraction from the downward spiral the region is in at the moment. They're going to protect it, idiotically, since other sports *cough*Swimming*cough* have a better overall record in the past decade or so.

Hmm, I think I over-ranted, I'm shutting up now.

Not an over-rant. I found that interesting actually.


Same here.
 
2013-03-18 12:53:01 PM  

Waxing_Chewbacca: You're working way to hard to find innocence. "Hey... Maybe it was aliens" is next.


I'm not trying to find innocence at all, merely pointing out that you don't convict people without evidence. If there are photos of the two guys with their fingers up her snatch and her obviously passed out, then they're guilty. Maybe the judge should be making public what evidence exists rather than having a lot of people questioning the validity of his ruling.
 
2013-03-18 12:53:38 PM  
Step One: REPORT IT.
Step Two: REPORT IT.
Step Three: REPORT IT.

Step Zero:  Establish a credible justice system where people who report sexual assaults are treated with due respect and dignity, instead of often being subjected to further psychological trauma.


In any criminal proceeding, the defense is allowed to thoroughly question witnesses, both to search for inconsistencies and to establish credibility or lack of it. This is a basic part of our justice system.
Why do people feel those accusing rape are not subject to this?
 
2013-03-18 12:54:27 PM  
I feel especially sad that there was someone to take a picture of the jocks carrying the passed out girl. This means that witnesses who were capable of preventing this did not.

The jocks willing to rape her were already a lost cause. The people watching this go down earlier in the night should have done something. This easily could have had a different outcome and I can honestly say I would have been willing to take a beating in order to prevent this, at any time in my life, if it even came to that.

More likely they would have moved on to a less vulnerable target if confronted. These stupid boys deserve this.
 
2013-03-18 12:54:52 PM  

RedT: WhippingBoy: RedT: WhippingBoy: Unless you've been one at some point in your life, please don't purport to "know" what it's like to be a man.

I had no idea you were afraid of being raped when you are out on an early morning run in a low crime area.

My apologies.

Don't be an idiot. I was responding to this part of your comment:  I sincerely doubt any man who I saw running on that same loop had ANY concern about his safety beyond tripping over a root and busting his own ass.

You don't seem to get it at all.  I had no concern over being jumped and mugged by a roving gang of hoodlums on this otherwise safe trail (as I stated in my original post). I am not paranoid.  This isn't the 'hood at dark.  This isn't a shady unsafe place.  This isn't any place that any reasonable person would be concerned about getting mugged or randomly jumped (and because, runners aren't usually carrying anything valuable), I guess a mentally disturbed person off their meds might be out there, but that isn't my concern.

But like, well pretty much any dark sparsely populated place anywhere a gal goes, she DOES have to be concerned about being raped and to the male population (even you) concern over being a victim of rape is never a blip on your radar (and I'm not saying a man has never been raped, but very few men are ever concerned that they will be raped).  of all the things you are allegedly afraid of when you run in a park at night, all of the women in that very same park ALSO have to be aware of the potential for rape and this is not because it is uncommon.

Women are taught to ALWAYS be aware of that potential, because the potential is always there.  And yes, I am going to make the logical presumption that YOU as a man have no farking clue.


My apologies. When you said I sincerely doubt any man who I saw running on that same loop had ANY concern about his safety beyond tripping over a root and busting his own ass, I took it to mean that you sincerely doubted that any man who you saw running on that same loop had ANY concern about his safety beyond tripping over a root and busting his own ass. I didn't realize that "ANY concern" meant rape.
 
2013-03-18 12:56:48 PM  

cman: Genevieve Marie:

The idea that men need to be taught not to rape makes people furious, but I mean... watch the video embedded in this link. The young men talking clearly haven't been taught not to rape. They haven't been taught to respect sexual boundaries. And the scary part is they aren't out of the ordinary! These guys remind me of numerous boys I knew in high school and college.

---

How does one teach others not to rape?

I hate to say this, but rape is part of humanity. It is an aspect of the animal kingdom as well. Even though we are an enlightened species we still have those who either dont care about others or those who have no self control. How do you teach against that ...


There are apparently some studies that indicate that rapists think that all men, given an opportunity, would rape. If true, this implies something wrong deep in their core, some lack of empathy not unlike with a sociopath. They can't even wrap their heads around the idea that normal people don't rape.

A few other things to consider.

One of the "sad" things here is that this is not a "classic" case of rape so it seems "sad" that these boys are being punished so "harshly". But studies show that classic rape (where one uses violence on a stranger) are exceedingly rare. Most violent rapes are against people the rapists knows, and most attacks against strangers usually involve drugs or alcohol to make the victim compliant.

So the kind of rape they did is very common as rapes go. However it is the classic one that usually gets prosecuted. Yes, the kind that almost never happens (at least here in the U.S.). Add to that the statistic that about 97% of rapes go unreported.

Consider also that according to at least one study, most rapists start in their late teens. And most of those that do rape are serial rapists.

So, in that context, these two "boys" exactly fit the norms. They are at just the right age and if not caught for what they did would very likely keep going on doing what they were doing. And with such light sentences, they might still.

On the "bright" side, since most rapists are serial rapists this means that it's not a bunch of people where "they be rapin' everybody up in here", but a very small percentage of individuals responsible for most of the trouble.

The silver lining on that is, contrary to what rapists think, most men are decent human beings and would not do anything like that given the chance. Instead, it's a very small percentage that are very, very dangerous.

/yeah, that doesn't sound like much consolation. It isn't. It's bad, this is all bad and very depressing.
//about retched in my mind when the one guy only apologized for sending the pictures.
///well, there went my morning. I had to do a GIS for cute kittens and puppies for 3 minutes before I could even get back to finish my post. It wasn't enough.
 
2013-03-18 01:00:14 PM  

BarkingUnicorn: Tricky Chicken: doglover: Tricky Chicken: Are you comparing rape to various socialist policies? Or were you going for the wealth redistribution idea?

I for one would like to opt out of "rape redistribution" preemptively, just in case.

I don't think it would be an opt out situation.  Wimins have the hoohaa, mens wants the hoohaas.  It is clearly a monopoly.

And women want the cock.  It's odd that they are considered greedy and miserly, but cocksmen are considered generous and philanthropic.


Actually, I was angling about the "Wealth Redistribution" aspect with my original statement. It all boils down to the Haves and the Have- nots, as it so often does. As was stated by more people than just myself, women have the booty; and are fairly stingy with it, just like the rich people are with their money. Some men are born better off, just like some people are born rich. For them, access to booty (money) is never a problem. As for the "Women want the cock" aspect, this just doesn't work out to be true. For example, in a divorce, the wife has traditionally gotten a share of the husband's money, even if she never worked a day in her life, and had a maid do all the housework. Yet, have you ever heard of one single case where the ex-wife was required to maintain a sex life for her ex-husband comparable to the financial standard of living he is required to provide for her? If she didn't work, and had a maid to do all the housework, that was pretty much the context of her "contribution" to the marriage.
 
2013-03-18 01:03:01 PM  

borg: feckingmorons: I have absolutely no sympathy for rapists.

They're lives weren't ruined when they were adjudicated delinquent (in juvenile court that is tantamount to a guilty verdict), their lives were ruined when they decided to be rapists.

They'll be in detention for a year or at most until they are 21.

Big fecking deal.

Do they have to register as sex offenders for the rest of their lives?  Thats what will ruin their lives and any chance of decent employment.


i0.kym-cdn.com
 
2013-03-18 01:06:15 PM  

Genevieve Marie: cman: How does one teach others not to rape?

Well, for starters, we teach them to view other people as fully human. We don't teach young men that women are stupid, annoying, nags that only exist to be farked.

We also teach all young people a real idea of sexual consent. That sex is a healthy, positive thing as long as appropriate health precautions are taken and as long as both parties enthusiastically consent. We teach teenagers that sex isn't something that makes a boy a man and makes a woman a whore- we teach them that sex is something positive when both parties want it and it's gone into willingly and responsibly.



When it's done in infidelity, even.
 
2013-03-18 01:09:13 PM  

StrangeQ: Popcorn Johnny: One of these two did distribute a nude picture of the girl, so the child porn charge is warranted.

Of all the charges, I would say this is actually the only one not deserved.  If you are 16 and take a picture of another 16 year old and pass it around you may be dumb and irresponsible, but you are not distributing child porn; you are distributing pictures of someone in your fellow age group.  There is a world of difference between that and some 50 year old seeding his stash of photos on TOR.


I'm afraid you don't understand why child porn is treated so severely.  It's not a matter of intent or circumstances.  It's a matter of strict liability; the damage is done no matter what your intentions are or who you are.  Those "innocent" images will end up fueling a predator's fantasies and inspiring him to action.  The question, "Got any more like that?" will be asked and new victims will satisfy it.  The victim will suffer permanent and irreparable damage to her privacy and reputation, and every time someone is tried for possessing her image she will be re-traumatized by having to testify and endure cross-examination.

Whether the victim is your ex-girlfriend or a baby you rented on Craigslist doesn't change the harm you've done.  Your age and immaturity may mitigate your punishment, but can't avert your conviction.
 
2013-03-18 01:09:14 PM  

CeroX: It should be common sense that a girl going to a binge party is entering the ghetto of sexual conduct, and drinking to black out is dangerous and presents an easier opportunity for a rapist to commit rape...



I'm seeing a parallel to the gun-nut arguments here. If we just enacted stricter drinking laws this wouldn't have happened. We should make a law that anyone already violating the law by drinking underage, should not be able to drink until black-out drunk.

If only high-capacity beer can magazines were outlawed this wouldn't have occurred. We could artificially limit 12-packs by making it a crime to put more than 10 beers in it.

Fark.com. Changing liberal's positions on gun-contol, one rape thread at a time.
 
2013-03-18 01:10:18 PM  
None of this behavior surprises me. When I was in High School the football team quarterback got his girlfriend pregnant, so he shot her multiple times then turned the gun on himself.

The next day the school held a big ceremony for mourning the quarterback. The entire school was filled with kids and teachers grieving over him with signs and pictures of him all over campus about how sad it was that this had happened to him. Not a single mention of the poor girl he murdered.

That was about the time that my last shred of faith in humanity was cut.
 
2013-03-18 01:13:03 PM  

Esroc: None of this behavior surprises me. When I was in High School the football team quarterback got his girlfriend pregnant, so he shot her multiple times then turned the gun on himself.

The next day the school held a big ceremony for mourning the quarterback. The entire school was filled with kids and teachers grieving over him with signs and pictures of him all over campus about how sad it was that this had happened to him. Not a single mention of the poor girl he murdered.

That was about the time that my last shred of faith in humanity was cut.


Exactly. It's not a "rape culture"
It's Football culture.
 
2013-03-18 01:14:07 PM  

BarkingUnicorn: I'm afraid you don't understand why child porn is treated so severely.


It's a little ridiculous that it's legal to have sex with a 16 year old but it you're caught with a picture of her boobs on your phone, you can go to jail for possessing child porn. Not talking about this case, just in general. The laws should at least be written to take into account the circumstances as to which the person is in possession of the photos. If a stranger has nude pics of a 16 year old, charge them, but don't charge a teenager for having nudes of their 16 year old girlfriend.
 
2013-03-18 01:18:04 PM  

rynthetyn: People weren't exactly fond of her making clear that drunk women can't consent under any circumstance.


Personally I think a really soft use of, "consent," like that is unproductive.  Basically it paints any sexual contact between two people who are both likely too impaired to be 100% on top of their judgement as a potential crime if either one of them decides later that they don't like what happened.

We constantly act like there's something inherently different about a sex act just because its sexual.  If everyone involved was drinking, and had a good-faith reason to think the person they engaged sexually was on-board (like their full and seemingly enthusiastic participation) and everybody was safe, why do we need to frame it like someone did something REALLY wrong just because of what they actually got up to?  Its essentially just two people making a poor decision about their recreational activities.  Really no different from a bunch of drunks deciding to play tackle football at their Superbowl party.

I mean... was Steve REALLY able to consent to being run over by Ronnie and getting his arm broken on that bootleg pass?  I mean yeah he took off his shirt to play for the skins, and he did CATCH that pass right before he got hit, but he was drunk so we should probably arrest Ronnie... Steve wasn't capable of deciding he wanted to play."

If someone was unconscious, disoriented, drugged, threatened or otherwise forced to do something they clearly did not want to (or even that they seemed like they did before they nodded off from drink) I am 100% on-board with saying, "That's non-consenting, you're a rapist."
 
2013-03-18 01:21:50 PM  

Zombalupagus: The silver lining on that is, contrary to what rapists think, most men are decent human beings and would not do anything like that given the chance. Instead, it's a very small percentage that are very, very dangerous.


I think this may be why people are resistant to statements like "we need to teach men not to rape". The implication is that "men" don't already know this and would rape at the first chance if they thought they could get away with it.
 
2013-03-18 01:21:52 PM  

Zombalupagus: Add to that the statistic that about 97% of rapes go unreported.


That figure is challenging for me to believe.
 
2013-03-18 01:22:00 PM  

wickedragon: You're thinking short term. If the U.S. managed to get a recidivism rate equal to the Norwegian prison system the number of prisoners would drop by at least 25% (Recidivism being 20% in Norway and 60% in the U.S) as the first cycle of inmates leaves prison.
This would also mean that crime drops by 25%.
"The Aggregate Burden of Crime" published in 1999 in Journal of Law and Economic pegged the annual cost of crime at 1.7 Trillion dollars, meaning that a 25% drop would save 425 billion dollars annually, before adjusting from 15 years of inflation.
That means that you save every penny by building and running the 10000 Haldens, AND fewer people get their loved ones taken away, get raped or has their car stolen.

I think that would be nice.


Harden opened in 2010; it has contributed nothing to Norway's recidivism rate.

Reducing competition is a good thing for the surviving criminals.

I  can save money by buying a house, but that is not a good thing if I can't afford a down payment or maintenance.  It's a trap.
 
2013-03-18 01:24:43 PM  

Super_pope: rynthetyn: People weren't exactly fond of her making clear that drunk women can't consent under any circumstance.

Personally I think a really soft use of, "consent," like that is unproductive. Basically it paints any sexual contact between two people who are both likely too impaired to be 100% on top of their judgement as a potential crime if either one of them decides later that they don't like what happened.


His teacher was saying it only goes one way.  If the woman is drunk the guy is a rapist, doesn't matter if he is drunk as well.

Those arguments are worthless and distract from real cases of rape.

Super_pope: I mean... was Steve REALLY able to consent to being run over by Ronnie and getting his arm broken on that bootleg pass? I mean yeah he took off his shirt to play for the skins, and he did CATCH that pass right before he got hit, but he was drunk so we should probably arrest Ronnie... Steve wasn't capable of deciding he wanted to play."


Bingo.
 
2013-03-18 01:25:00 PM  

WhippingBoy: RedT: WhippingBoy: RedT: WhippingBoy: Unless you've been one at some point in your life, please don't purport to "know" what it's like to be a man.

I had no idea you were afraid of being raped when you are out on an early morning run in a low crime area.

My apologies.

Don't be an idiot. I was responding to this part of your comment:  I sincerely doubt any man who I saw running on that same loop had ANY concern about his safety beyond tripping over a root and busting his own ass.

You don't seem to get it at all.  I had no concern over being jumped and mugged by a roving gang of hoodlums on this otherwise safe trail (as I stated in my original post). I am not paranoid.  This isn't the 'hood at dark.  This isn't a shady unsafe place.  This isn't any place that any reasonable person would be concerned about getting mugged or randomly jumped (and because, runners aren't usually carrying anything valuable), I guess a mentally disturbed person off their meds might be out there, but that isn't my concern.

But like, well pretty much any dark sparsely populated place anywhere a gal goes, she DOES have to be concerned about being raped and to the male population (even you) concern over being a victim of rape is never a blip on your radar (and I'm not saying a man has never been raped, but very few men are ever concerned that they will be raped).  of all the things you are allegedly afraid of when you run in a park at night, all of the women in that very same park ALSO have to be aware of the potential for rape and this is not because it is uncommon.

Women are taught to ALWAYS be aware of that potential, because the potential is always there.  And yes, I am going to make the logical presumption that YOU as a man have no farking clue.

My apologies. When you said I sincerely doubt any man who I saw running on that same loop had ANY concern about his safety beyond tripping over a root and busting his own ass, I took it to mean that you sincerely doubted that any man who you ...


I have to say that, as a woman, I took her meaning of  "Any concern about his safety" to be equivalent to the statement "Any concern of being raped", as she was talking about rape previously.

That I saw this, and you didn't, only points out how true her statement is...

Also, homophobia can be expressed as the fear that any man could or would treat you the same as you would treat a woman.
 
2013-03-18 01:26:36 PM  

Super_pope: rynthetyn: People weren't exactly fond of her making clear that drunk women can't consent under any circumstance.

Personally I think a really soft use of, "consent," like that is unproductive.  Basically it paints any sexual contact between two people who are both likely too impaired to be 100% on top of their judgement as a potential crime if either one of them decides later that they don't like what happened.

We constantly act like there's something inherently different about a sex act just because its sexual.  If everyone involved was drinking, and had a good-faith reason to think the person they engaged sexually was on-board (like their full and seemingly enthusiastic participation) and everybody was safe, why do we need to frame it like someone did something REALLY wrong just because of what they actually got up to?  Its essentially just two people making a poor decision about their recreational activities.  Really no different from a bunch of drunks deciding to play tackle football at their Superbowl party.

I mean... was Steve REALLY able to consent to being run over by Ronnie and getting his arm broken on that bootleg pass?  I mean yeah he took off his shirt to play for the skins, and he did CATCH that pass right before he got hit, but he was drunk so we should probably arrest Ronnie... Steve wasn't capable of deciding he wanted to play."

If someone was unconscious, disoriented, drugged, threatened or otherwise forced to do something they clearly did not want to (or even that they seemed like they did before they nodded off from drink) I am 100% on-board with saying, "That's non-consenting, you're a rapist."


Yep, according to the "drinking + sex = rape" fark rule then i raped my wife last night while i was handcuffed and blindfolded to the bed... some how i was able to force her to jump on top of me, ride me in reverse cowgirl and then forced her to sit on my face so i could mouth rape her into orgasm... because we both had a significant amount of alcohol for st. patty's day therefore rape
 
2013-03-18 01:26:39 PM  

RedT: browntimmy: Let's say there's a scenario where a girl accepted an invitation from a guy she just met at a party to come hang out with him and 3 of his friends that she also doesn't know at an abandoned warehouse at 1am, and she's raped. You're not allowed to say things like, "This girl lacks so much common sense she's a danger to herself." Because somehow saying that is equivalent to saying, "The rapists did nothing wrong, it was all her fault."

Because women/girls must be on the lookout at ALL TIMES for potential rape situations.
Men have no idea how it is to feel this way all the time.

This morning I ran around LadyBird lake at 5:30.  I decided to forgo my iPod so that I could hear any footsteps behind me.  I am always very aware of my surrounding and my ability to sprint (and just how fast and how far I can sprint) if necessary.

I also did not run 10 miles because the other 3 miles of the loop are deserted at that hour.  I was NOT afraid of being robbed (of my car key and Garmin, the only things I had on me). I was not afraid of being jumped and beat up by a roving gang of hooligans.
And you bet you ass if I was attacked raped folks would be saying, "What was she doing running in the dark."  "What was she wearing?" "Why was she alone."

I sincerely doubt any man who I saw running on that same loop had ANY concern about his safety beyond tripping over a root and busting his own ass.

This is simply the situation in this country.

Yet, many people don't want to admit that we have a rape culture and want to get offended by the phrase.  But our culture teaches us (both men and women) that gals must be on the lookout at ALL TIMES for potential rape situations.

That's not "culture"?  Bullshiat.


Your daydreams are not our culture.  They're not even every woman's daydreams.

I prescribe Zen meditation.
 
2013-03-18 01:29:43 PM  

CeroX: Super_pope: rynthetyn: People weren't exactly fond of her making clear that drunk women can't consent under any circumstance.

Personally I think a really soft use of, "consent," like that is unproductive.  Basically it paints any sexual contact between two people who are both likely too impaired to be 100% on top of their judgement as a potential crime if either one of them decides later that they don't like what happened.

We constantly act like there's something inherently different about a sex act just because its sexual.  If everyone involved was drinking, and had a good-faith reason to think the person they engaged sexually was on-board (like their full and seemingly enthusiastic participation) and everybody was safe, why do we need to frame it like someone did something REALLY wrong just because of what they actually got up to?  Its essentially just two people making a poor decision about their recreational activities.  Really no different from a bunch of drunks deciding to play tackle football at their Superbowl party.

I mean... was Steve REALLY able to consent to being run over by Ronnie and getting his arm broken on that bootleg pass?  I mean yeah he took off his shirt to play for the skins, and he did CATCH that pass right before he got hit, but he was drunk so we should probably arrest Ronnie... Steve wasn't capable of deciding he wanted to play."

If someone was unconscious, disoriented, drugged, threatened or otherwise forced to do something they clearly did not want to (or even that they seemed like they did before they nodded off from drink) I am 100% on-board with saying, "That's non-consenting, you're a rapist."



Yep, according to the "drinking + sex = rape" fark rule then i raped my wife last night while i was handcuffed and blindfolded to the bed... some how i was able to force her to jump on top of me, ride me in reverse cowgirl and then forced her to sit on my face so i could mouth rape her into orgasm... because we both had a significant amou ...



emotibot.net
 
2013-03-18 01:30:33 PM  

WhippingBoy: Zombalupagus: The silver lining on that is, contrary to what rapists think, most men are decent human beings and would not do anything like that given the chance. Instead, it's a very small percentage that are very, very dangerous.

I think this may be why people are resistant to statements like "we need to teach men not to rape". The implication is that "men" don't already know this and would rape at the first chance if they thought they could get away with it.


It doesn't seem like a bad idea to teach your high school son things like: if a girl has been drinking she can't consent to sex, if even after consenting to sex she wants to stop you need to do so immediately, any pictures she gives you shouldn't be shown to anyone else. While these things might be obvious to most adults, teens can be freaking morons sometimes.
 
2013-03-18 01:30:36 PM  

Esroc: None of this behavior surprises me. When I was in High School the football team quarterback got his girlfriend pregnant, so he shot her multiple times then turned the gun on himself.

The next day the school held a big ceremony for mourning the quarterback. The entire school was filled with kids and teachers grieving over him with signs and pictures of him all over campus about how sad it was that this had happened to him. Not a single mention of the poor girl he murdered.

That was about the time that my last shred of faith in humanity was cut.



This is abhorrent.
 
2013-03-18 01:32:57 PM  

Carth: WhippingBoy: Zombalupagus: The silver lining on that is, contrary to what rapists think, most men are decent human beings and would not do anything like that given the chance. Instead, it's a very small percentage that are very, very dangerous.

I think this may be why people are resistant to statements like "we need to teach men not to rape". The implication is that "men" don't already know this and would rape at the first chance if they thought they could get away with it.

It doesn't seem like a bad idea to teach your high school son things like: if a girl has been drinking she can't consent to sex, if even after consenting to sex she wants to stop you need to do so immediately, any pictures she gives you shouldn't be shown to anyone else should be immediately deleted from your phone after you see it. While these things might be obvious to most adults, teens can be freaking morons sometimes.


FTFY
 
2013-03-18 01:33:22 PM  

CeroX: What the fark did i just read here?

Are you retarded or something?



It's no worse than you comparing the risk of binge-drinking, date-rape to the ghetto. "Ghetto" is a politically-correct way of saying "scary black people."

Two privileged, kids in suburban, Steubenville, OH are pretty far removed from the inner-city. Is it because you saw a black person? The point of this case is that no area is immune to it.

Any other invalid comparisons are, as you say....retarded.
 
2013-03-18 01:34:10 PM  

tlars699: I have to say that, as a woman, I took her meaning of  "Any concern about his safety" to be equivalent to the statement "Any concern of being raped", as she was talking about rape previously.

That I saw this, and you didn't, only points out how true her statement is...

Also, homophobia can be expressed as the fear that any man could or would treat you the same as you would treat a woman.


I give up. You're just going to interpret anything that doesn't support your narrow world view however you see fit.
How is it that you're even able to leave the house? The world is full of potential rapists that could strike at any given moment.
 
2013-03-18 01:34:30 PM  

Snowflake Tubbybottom: ginandbacon: Snowflake Tubbybottom: If it did we would not seek to prosecute the people who do rape and make sure we know who they are and what they did long after their sentence is carried out.

Most of the time we don't.

And sadly that is where we can blame the most victims; for not reporting.  Along with teaching boys not to rape and respect women we also need to teach our girls that if it ever happens to them it isn't their fault and not to feel stigmatized because of it. The not reporting of rape only tends to lead to more rape.


Add blame on the recipients of reports for not treating them in an unbiased manner, and on people who tamper with witnesses by telling accusers it is their fault and stigmatizing them.  The latter should be rounded up immediately and imprisoned at least until the case is resolved.
 
2013-03-18 01:34:31 PM  

HAMMERTOE: Probably the very best argument to live in a "Shall Issue" state.


We don't require a permit to carry concealed here.
You go to the store, pick out a nice concealed holster, or fanny pack. And wear in public.

We don't have a lot of crime, either.
 
2013-03-18 01:34:47 PM  
None of this behavior surprises me. When I was in High School the football team quarterback got his girlfriend pregnant, so he shot her multiple times then turned the gun on himself.

The next day the school held a big ceremony for mourning the quarterback. The entire school was filled with kids and teachers grieving over him with signs and pictures of him all over campus about how sad it was that this had happened to him. Not a single mention of the poor girl he murdered.

That was about the time that my last shred of faith in humanity was cut.


Bullshiat. I went to that school, and that didn't happen. Stop making up nonsense to try to prove your idiotic point.
 
2013-03-18 01:35:01 PM  

BarkingUnicorn: RedT: 
This is simply the situation in this country.

Yet, many people don't want to admit that we have a rape culture and want to get offended by the phrase.  But our culture teaches us (both men and women) that gals must be on the lookout at ALL TIMES for potential rape situations.

That's not "culture"?  Bullshiat.

Your daydreams are not our culture.  They're not even every woman's daydreams.

I prescribe Zen meditation.


6/10
 
2013-03-18 01:35:37 PM  

HAMMERTOE: BarkingUnicorn: Tricky Chicken: doglover: Tricky Chicken: Are you comparing rape to various socialist policies? Or were you going for the wealth redistribution idea?

I for one would like to opt out of "rape redistribution" preemptively, just in case.

I don't think it would be an opt out situation.  Wimins have the hoohaa, mens wants the hoohaas.  It is clearly a monopoly.

And women want the cock.  It's odd that they are considered greedy and miserly, but cocksmen are considered generous and philanthropic.

Actually, I was angling about the "Wealth Redistribution" aspect with my original statement. It all boils down to the Haves and the Have- nots, as it so often does. As was stated by more people than just myself, women have the booty; and are fairly stingy with it, just like the rich people are with their money. Some men are born better off, just like some people are born rich. For them, access to booty (money) is never a problem. As for the "Women want the cock" aspect, this just doesn't work out to be true. For example, in a divorce, the wife has traditionally gotten a share of the husband's money, even if she never worked a day in her life, and had a maid do all the housework. Yet, have you ever heard of one single case where the ex-wife was required to maintain a sex life for her ex-husband comparable to the financial standard of living he is required to provide for her? If she didn't work, and had a maid to do all the housework, that was pretty much the context of her "contribution" to the marriage.


You are describing intercourse as a tradeable commodity. Overt prostitution is illegal in most jurisdictions.  In your divorce scenario, the ex-wife would be forced to subject herself to unwanted intercourse in exchange for financial gain.  I would assume that if she were to refues intercourse then she would forfeit the alimony?  This is a dangerous concept since some women would be discouraged from leaving bad relationships.  A married woman can refuse sex and still live in the nice house. But in your scenario, a divorced woman would be on her own and be forced to provide sex.

No, I must reject your implication that marital sex can be treated as a commodity.

Now open prostitution, is a different subject altogether.
 
2013-03-18 01:36:02 PM  

tlars699: Carth: WhippingBoy: Zombalupagus: The silver lining on that is, contrary to what rapists think, most men are decent human beings and would not do anything like that given the chance. Instead, it's a very small percentage that are very, very dangerous.

I think this may be why people are resistant to statements like "we need to teach men not to rape". The implication is that "men" don't already know this and would rape at the first chance if they thought they could get away with it.

It doesn't seem like a bad idea to teach your high school son things like: if a girl has been drinking she can't consent to sex, if even after consenting to sex she wants to stop you need to do so immediately, any pictures she gives you shouldn't be shown to anyone else should be immediately deleted from your phone after you see it. While these things might be obvious to most adults, teens can be freaking morons sometimes.

FTFY


That's true. With the popularity of snapchat I think that goes without saying but a very good point.
 
Displayed 50 of 659 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report