Don't normally agree but wrote:
... just this once I agree. Basically a woman who has drunken sex can use the alcohol as an excuse but a man can't.
This also happening big time at exclusive New England prep schools.
Girls have remorse and anxiety the morning after for giving up their virginity without remembering anything so lash out.
It shows us how far women have NOT come. To think that it is either shameful, or power-ceding, to engage in sex with another person, is to engage in pure victimization mentality. In claiming the power to retroactively reconsider and to accuse, women are actually being taught that they themselves are untrustworthy and weak in the face of real-time decision making about sex.
Why is it that we still have parents teaching their girls that somehow it is "special" or even somehow shameful to lose their virginity in the first place? If girls were truly being trained to be equals, they'd approach this like males do, which is that it's kick ass to have sex, that there should be no guilt and stigma.
Regardless, there will be a backlash and title IX procedurals will fall out of favor at universities, in just another example of the pathetic intellectual weakness and dishonesty of our supposed academics. Also, universities will be sued into large settlements. Women and social justice types, who cannot get their way in criminal processes, will lose big time when all is said and done. In the process, these young girls who have been poisoned by these charlatans will pay a price.
It's pretty simple... me and friend created consent contracts that women have to sign before sex. That way if they try to press charges there's proof she consented and read the contract so she wasn't unconscious. This is the same thing porn does. And really casual sex is just untaped porn. We haven't really made these but it's getting to a point where men need to take this precaution.
Or, the real solution is don't have sex with someone you aren't in a serious relationship with. If you are dumb enough to have casual sex, then accept the consequences of your actions.
I’m a guy and I realize how stupid this article is. Also how stupid rojo must be to make this statement. My god I hope none of the letsrun creators have procreated because it is embarrassing how you act on this site. Absolute ignorance at it’s finest.
CapnPerv wrote:
Don't normally agree but wrote:... just this once I agree. Basically a woman who has drunken sex can use the alcohol as an excuse but a man can't.
This also happening big time at exclusive New England prep schools.
Girls have remorse and anxiety the morning after for giving up their virginity without remembering anything so lash out.
Why are so many people unable to remember anything the next morning? I guess these schools are not so exclusive if they are admitting people who can't remember what they did the night before.
Technically wrote:
Correct. He is to blame because the complaint was brought against him. He is well within his right to file a complaint against her.
Again, this is a case that is obviously frustrating because of several factors but this is how the law is written/viewed.
Again, as the OP said THIS IS NOT THE LAW. The cops would have dropped this case. The OP is complaining that the extra-judicial punishment from our post-secondary education system puts undo burden on men.
For those of you who haven't read the whole thing. Here's a nice cliff notes version of what happened but the guy was expelled.
his lawyer wrote:
"It would be difficult to imagine a better documented case of consensual sex than this case, where the female student initiates the sexual contact, asks for a condom in writing, tells a friend she is going to have sex in writing, asks for a condom again when she gets to the room, tells friends she is 'fine' when she is having sex, willingly performs consensual oral sex, is interrupted by a roommate while having sexual intercourse and continues having intercourse, and then texts smiley faces to friends right after having sexual intercourse."
As to my earlier comment about why they both wouldn't be charged with sexual assault, it looks like he tried to make the same argument.
the article says:
A few weeks after filing with the Superior Court, in an apparent effort to show Occidental's inconsistent application of its own sexual-assault policies, John filed a sexual-assault complaint against Jane Doe with Occidental. He claimed she did not obtain his consent prior to performing oral sex on him—as he doesn't even recall this happening, and nobody ever asked Jane whether she received consent from John, he believes it should be subject to the same scrutiny under which he was investigated. (Sexual intercourse, as it's defined in the Occidental policy, includes oral sex, and there is no statute of limitations on when an accuser can file a claim.) However, because he would not meet with the university's investigator without his attorney present—just as he wouldn't meet with the investigator during the earlier investigation without his attorney present—the school declined to hear his complaint, citing his "inconsistent assertions, the timing of [his] complaint, and [his] failure to cooperate in the initial assessment process."
This is why, in addition to a condom, I carry a consent form and breathalyzer test with me at all times.
Gets a little awkward when the parental consent form has to come out.
Anyone know what happened in the case. The article is from 2015. Court case has to have been decided by now right?
College campuses are now socialist gulags where the only acceptable sex is between LGBQRSTs
I'm aware that men and their attorneys are starting to get wise about this SJW campus scam, and are hustling into the Title IX and student conduct offices to file against the females in these cases. Their logic is certainly sound. You were drunk? So was I. The police won't take your case, so there was no crime. Now, you'll have to answer to a university conduct panel why YOU weren't the one who assaulted ME in this case.Glorious tit for tat. It also enhances their civil lawsuits if the universities don't afford them all of the same procedures and considerations that were provided to the women. The important thing is that the male has to make their complaint quickly, or the university, like in Occidental's case, might get away with rejecting the claim. The men in these cases should also go after the women civilly, forcing them to make legal depositions and to make the whole thing very loudly public. SJW wanna play? Scorched earth baby. I hate academics. I hate social justice warriors. The use of Title IX in this manner is so intellectually barren that it hurts my head. This use of Title IX simply enforces the notion that liberals will cheat to get what they think is just. The criminal justice system doesn't make us happy? Let's just screw these kids with Title IX procedures instead! Yay!
rojo wrote:
For those of you who haven't read the whole thing. Here's a nice cliff notes version of what happened but the guy was expelled.
his lawyer wrote:"It would be difficult to imagine a better documented case of consensual sex than this case, where the female student initiates the sexual contact, asks for a condom in writing, tells a friend she is going to have sex in writing, asks for a condom again when she gets to the room, tells friends she is 'fine' when she is having sex, willingly performs consensual oral sex, is interrupted by a roommate while having sexual intercourse and continues having intercourse, and then texts smiley faces to friends right after having sexual intercourse."
As to my earlier comment about why they both wouldn't be charged with sexual assault, it looks like he tried to make the same argument.
the article says:
A few weeks after filing with the Superior Court, in an apparent effort to show Occidental's inconsistent application of its own sexual-assault policies, John filed a sexual-assault complaint against Jane Doe with Occidental. He claimed she did not obtain his consent prior to performing oral sex on him—as he doesn't even recall this happening, and nobody ever asked Jane whether she received consent from John, he believes it should be subject to the same scrutiny under which he was investigated. (Sexual intercourse, as it's defined in the Occidental policy, includes oral sex, and there is no statute of limitations on when an accuser can file a claim.) However, because he would not meet with the university's investigator without his attorney present—just as he wouldn't meet with the investigator during the earlier investigation without his attorney present—the school declined to hear his complaint, citing his "inconsistent assertions, the timing of [his] complaint, and [his] failure to cooperate in the initial assessment process."
ritt wrote:
I would love it if every guy at that college who had sex while drunk started filing rape complaints against the females.
As horrible as it is to do this, I agree.
There are obvious flaws in Occidental's procedures, but what father would tell their son that if a drunk girl you never really met before wants to have sex with you, you should just go for it? Is it so much to ask college age kids to make sure that the first time they have sex with someone is when everyone is sober and had a chance to really consider whether it is the right decision? With dating apps, social media and sexting, it is so much easier for young people to see sex as pure recreation and not a part of a meaningful relationship. Why not teach if not require young men to be the adult in the room and say no to an obviously drunk girl? This girl certainly was not ready emotionally for the sexual encounter and would have been much better of had this guy turned her down. While it should not be grounds for permanent expulsion, we should be doing something to teach young college guys to see a drunk girl as something other than a good chance to get a quick f-ck. Wouldn't you want your daughter to go to a school where guys were required to back off if a girl at a party was obviously drunk? Especially a 17 year old virgin?
The conclusions that people have made about academics based on some systemic issues in the peripherals of college education are shocking. This article brings to light some issues about people in a situation where the College is involved but has absolutely nothing to do with college education. However, people here are saying that they HATE higher education, liberals, yada, yada.
Take a step back. Rape is a crime and should be handled by the justice system, not the college. However, their rules have forced them into it and they are ill equipped to do it. That does not make education evil.
You may believe that education is ruining America. That is a very strange idea, but it is fine for you to believe it. But please use some critical thinking skills to understand that Rape (alleged or otherwise) on campus is not a statement about the education of a school or even the liberal or conservative attitude of the school. It is about 2 people and the law. Way too much other stuff is being projected onto this.
Apparently you are an academic, one who can either (1) not read, or (2) prefer to ignore the salient issues being discussed. Universities, and the academics that run them, are at the core of EVERYTHING being discussed in this thread, nitwit. Please read the article linked by the OP, then read through the comments again, and if you have something interesting to post, have at it. To post comments to the effect that posters aren't being nice enough to academics is so off point that I believe you didn't read the article at all.All of the above tells me that you are probably an academic. If you are an academic and aren't aware of the Title IX kangaroo courts taking place on your campus, get your head out of your anus and do something about it.
ShockedAndAwed wrote:
The conclusions that people have made about academics based on some systemic issues in the peripherals of college education are shocking. This article brings to light some issues about people in a situation where the College is involved but has absolutely nothing to do with college education. However, people here are saying that they HATE higher education, liberals, yada, yada.
Take a step back. Rape is a crime and should be handled by the justice system, not the college. However, their rules have forced them into it and they are ill equipped to do it. That does not make education evil.
You may believe that education is ruining America. That is a very strange idea, but it is fine for you to believe it. But please use some critical thinking skills to understand that Rape (alleged or otherwise) on campus is not a statement about the education of a school or even the liberal or conservative attitude of the school. It is about 2 people and the law. Way too much other stuff is being projected onto this.
rojo wrote:
The Triggering wrote:Okey dokey, you're incapable of reading for 20 minutes at a time.
Paraphrase
2 freshmen - boy and girl get drunk on campus separately.
They meet up in the dorms.
She is sexually aggressive with him in his dorm, and leaves.
They text, she asks if he has a condom, he tells her yes and to come back.
She fellates him.
They have sex.
Neither remember much.
She regrets it but is normal with him afterwards.
Until...
She meets with an activist group that convinces her she was raped.
She files against him.
He gets expelled.
He tries to enroll at another school but an 'anonymous tip' at the new school prevents him from enrolling.
Should I dumb it down any more for you?
My goodness. Terrible.
I have a liberal friend who while a victim of sexual assault herself, thinks cases like this are absurd. It's gone so far in one direction that she said she told me she is going to have a talk with her son when he goes out to college about sex - warning him about false allegations. I guess it's the white version of the talk many black parents have with their kids about aggressive policing.
Her advice - don't have sex with an you you don't know.
The thing I don't get from a legal perspective is why if two drunk people have sex, the man is viewed as the aggressor. In this case, she asked him to come back.
Under the logic of anything that happens while intoxicated is a crime, it seems if both are drunk and men and women are viewed as truly equals they both should be charged with a crime as they are both raping the other as neither can consent.
By only charging the man, aren't you buying into old fashioned stereotypes.
ROJO,
Your comments show that you are a logical thinker who tries to think things through based on reason and fairness. As a result, you don't seem to buy the typical leftist mumbo-jumbo, and I would guess you lean slightly to the right of center. And here you are commenting on a non-running thread. My question is, why do so many non-running political/cultural threads get deleted by letsrun? I swear, if I posted what you just posted, I could expect the thread to be deleted within the hour. I don't know who you have working for you, but my repeated experience is that there are some lefty censers hard at work on your site. I hope it changes. Don't be a wimp. Keep your site free from the "thought police."
Roy, she was the aggressor and very willing party to the sex that occurred, with plenty of proof of the multiple aspects in which she did more than simply consenting. Did you read the article? I suspect you didn't.
Instead of his parents being responsible for training him to be Sir Gallahad, perhaps her parents should have trained her that aggressively dry humping and then blowing a guy before then having intercourse with him are simply fun things that college kids do. No hang ups, no "rape culture", just people doing what people do. If she was assaulted, then so was he.
You think you're promoting some sort of gallantry or decency, but you're simply furthering the paradigm that allows the double standards exposed in this case to exist.
Note the article is from 2015. The case has been heard by the court and they ruled in the boy's favor.
http://www.latimes.com/local/education/la-me-ucsd-male-student-20150715-story.html
Anne Hedonia wrote:
Note the article is from 2015. The case has been heard by the court and they ruled in the boy's favor.
http://www.latimes.com/local/education/la-me-ucsd-male-student-20150715-story.html
I can't read it seems. This is a completely different case. Never mind.
Can you people read? The case below was a UC case, not the Occidental College case referenced by the OP.
Anne Hedonia wrote:
Note the article is from 2015. The case has been heard by the court and they ruled in the boy's favor.
http://www.latimes.com/local/education/la-me-ucsd-male-student-20150715-story.html
Am I living in the twilight zone? The Boston Marathon weather was terrible!
Is there a rule against attaching a helium balloon to yourself while running a road race?
How rare is it to run a sub 5 minute mile AND bench press 225?
Matt Choi was drinking beer halfway through the Boston Marathon
Move over Mark Coogan, Rojo and John Kellogg share their 3 favorite mile workouts
2024 College Track & Field Open Coaching Positions Discussion
Des Linden: "The entire sport" has changed since she first started running Boston.