Runner commits sexual assault in a race. Race is photo'd/video'd. He gets caught.

By the way, Swift sued and won, mostly based on this photograph

OP got it wrong, it was Sexual Battery, not Sexual Assault.

SEXUAL ASSAULT

The State of Georgia does not have a single “Sexual Assault” definition but rather defines the following sexual crimes: ...

Sexual battery O.C.G.A. § 16-6-22.1

(a) For the purposes of this Code section, the term ‘intimate parts’ means the primary genital area, anus, groin, inner thighs, or buttocks of a male or female and the breasts of a female.

(b) A person commits the offense of sexual battery when he or she intentionally makes physical contact with the intimate parts of the body of another person without the consent of that person.”

* wrote:

I think this offense is on the same level as the murders in Pensacola.

If this is true, you are an unreasonable person with no sense of proportion. If everyone on this board were calling for a terrorist investigation of this runner like you seem to be, I think we'd have a real problem. But no one--absolutely no one--is saying that. More likely, though, is that your comment is just a failure of wit.

If what you're saying is that men should be able to slap women without their consent and without consequences, that too is a problem. Just a different one. I happen to think that women should not be slapped--anywhere--out of the context of a consensual dynamic in a fully-consensual relationship. You think it is okay to slap women whenever, because guys sometimes feel like it.

Here's the thing. He humiliated her publicly for no reason other than to gratify himself sexually; to show that, even sweaty, wearing ridiculous clothes, and in the middle of an unremarkable race effort, he still has a power advantage over a professional woman; and to establish his masculine bona fides to runners around him. No one needs him to be castrated or imprisoned for this. It seems to me that, though the criminal justice system could and should be brought to bear here, a live, public, and sincere apology (to balance the live, public nature of the humiliation) would be a decent penance for this. It's not too much to ask someone who has humiliated someone else to publicly own up to it and apologize.

The guy is a complete A-hole but that's not sexual assault. Give me a break.

Sexual assault is a serious allegation. The OP is being a complete A-hole himself by using that term. Ultimately it undermines real victims of sexual assault.

I want to amend what I wrote below: I think the runner should both apologize and be prosecuted. No more letting guys get away with sexual assault/intimidation with a half-hearted, "If anyone was offended..." non-apology. But, as I wrote before, I think that community service would be the most appropriate "punishment" for this guy, rather than some sort of fine or jail time. Have him see how his casual misogyny fits into a pattern of male sexual dominance by having him do 40 hours of service at a women's shelter. I say "punishment" because offering someone the opportunity to become a better, more fully-realized person is a kind of grace or mercy rather than a penalty.

This thing happens to every female with a decent ass. Usually it's at a concert or a nightclub where the guy wont get caught. It's certainly not right though. Girls do it to guys a lot too. They like to play around and do bad things too. This guy took a real risk doing it at this particular time and place. A huge mistake on his part. Perhaps he just banged another woman before the race and was still in a real frisky mood. Again, i dont condone this behavior but im trying to put it in perspective. The SJWs obviously are average people AT BEST and want to feel special by attacking a random person for an error less significant than the SJWs worst life mistake.

TKTKTK wrote:

Trolling

Thanks for repeatedly assuming this moron's intent and trivializing actual sexual assault.

TKTKTK wrote:

Here's the thing. He humiliated her publicly for no reason other than to gratify himself sexually;

No. The ones who are humiliating her publicly are the ones that brought this up on a public forum in the first place.

And actually, she posted this on twitter to bring attention to more people viewing this.

She is not humiliated by this. She is looking for attention.

This is not Christine Blasey Ford, who suffered a real and traumatic sexual assault and had to be convinced to tell her story as a way to defend all women.

The guy made a jerk move, for sure.

Calling it a sexual assault is is simply wrong.

It hurts the women's cause when you lump things of different degrees together and winds up belittling the more serious attacks.

So you're saying that it is okay to slap women's asses, but only at clubs, or only when you're horny, or only if it's the worst thing you'll do in your life. Got it. Being a woman with a body is like people who walk around with wallets just bulging with cash. They get money stolen, but usually just in crowded placed where the thief won't get caught. Stealing on TV is a "huge mistake." Am I getting this right? But you don't "condone" this guy's ass-slapping. You're saying it's a "huge mistake"? But is that because he got caught? And if it's an act that one would rather not be caught doing, then maybe it is an inappropriate act, even a sort of violation of personal space and dignity. And if it is inappropriate, then maybe there should be some sort of, I don't know, justice apparatus that can be leveraged to see that that inappropriate behavior is somehow punished. The idea that you don't condone this behavior but you also can't bear to see it punished is beyond belief. One of those things is a lie.

Bands a make hoes dance wrote:

This thing happens to every female with a decent ass. Usually it's at a concert or a nightclub where the guy wont get caught. It's certainly not right though. Girls do it to guys a lot too. They like to play around and do bad things too. This guy took a real risk doing it at this particular time and place. A huge mistake on his part. Perhaps he just banged another woman before the race and was still in a real frisky mood. Again, i dont condone this behavior but im trying to put it in perspective. The SJWs obviously are average people AT BEST and want to feel special by attacking a random person for an error less significant than the SJWs worst life mistake.

Lighten up folks wrote:

It was a playful tap on the rear. Big f’in deal.

Get over it reporter lady.

Get over it all of you with your panties in a bundle.

You are a sh*tty piece of water trash.

Even by LR standards, the majority of the posts in this thread are depressing. I am constantly arguing with people against the concept of this misogynist, oppressive patriarchy that we all are apparently living in, but some of you are really giving them fodder.

In the end, it doesn't matter if you'd mind being slapped (we're really comparing running a naked mile to this???), or where she was standing or what she had posted on IG in the past. All that matters is the action as it happened. This is the type of garbage our wives, sisters, girlfriends, moms, etc. deal with all the time (even daily, depending where you live/work). I don't care that this dude has been called out online. Perhaps he should have thought about that before smacking a reporter in the rear in front of a camera. His goal was to humiliate this reporter publicly. Now it's his turn, it seems.

I'm a big fan of Haight and I really enjoyed the book that you linked.

However, there is a snowball's chance in the ninth circle of hell (or maybe the second circle, regarding the content of the post) that Haight or Lukianoff would use this example as applicable to their theories. For one, it is not an imagined danger or an "unsafe" intellectual space. It's a legitimate action that happened...an action that is verifiably unlawful.

I'm all for discussion, but when a forum, such as this forum, openly allows...and even encourages...members to down-grade the severity of a crime against a female in this day and age and then an owner of the forum tries to argue that they are doing the right thing?

My classmates and colleagues at Princeton. Yale, and Columbia used to make fun of Cornell's academics, but I never really understood why they did so. It's now starting to become clear.

Derek Forgot Where He Came From wrote:

Macdaddy wrote:

It’s pretty pathetic that your initial reaction to a woman being inappropriately touched is to find dirt and judge her.

You must also be one of those Derek Murphy jerk offs that loved his article where he doxxed the hobby jogger that legitimately ran a marathon. The hobby jogger's crime that Murphy was judge, jury, and executioner for? He picked up two finisher medals at the finish line instead of just one!

Derek Murphy is not a god. He has been wrong quite often and think he doesn't stink. He also has no sense of proportionality nor hypocrisy, and rushes to a conclusion before adequate research, like in this case.

I don't know who Derek is, nor do I care what his opinion is.

I care that there are dozens of people victim-blaming someone who was touched inappropriately without consent. Nothing else matters here. There is no additional evidence needed here. Woman was assaulted while doing her job. That's it. If you can't see that, or would rather post instagram pictures of her, that speaks volumes about your character.

I'd love for these anonymous posts to go to your mothers, sisters, and daughters. I'm sure they would agree with me. You're all pathetic.

Why don't you tell me why this "moron" veered over to a TV news reporter in the middle of a race and smacked her on the ass? I'd love to hear all the "Maybe he..." statements from you; I'm sure they'll be super-compelling. In the end, he did what he did: establish a professional woman as nothing more than an ass to be smacked for his own sh!ts and giggles. You can identify whatever feeble proximate cause you'd like (as others have), but there is no other ultimate rationale for his behavior than one or all of the three I provided. I'm sorry I appear to be minimizing other forms of sexual assault. I keep trying to say that there is a spectrum of sexualized violence, but it's hard to make this point with all the MRA static on this thread. Smacking a stranger on the ass, especially while she is carrying out public-facing responsibilities, is on that spectrum. It is using the threat of sexual/intimate entitlement rather than brute strength to try to make the point that she is less than she thinks she is, to remind her that no matter what else she has accomplished, she is still just a body for claiming, a canvass for acting out male fantasies. I totally agree that there are "worse" kinds of sexual assault--and for those, I would recommend harsher punishments. But if we say that sexual assault only starts with sustained groping, or unwelcome kissing, or actual penetration, then we're diminishing the very real threat to security and dignity present in something like this case.

Okboom wrote:

TKTKTK wrote:

Trolling

Thanks for repeatedly assuming this moron's intent and trivializing actual sexual assault.

Lawyer 101 wrote:

Sexual battery O.C.G.A. § 16-6-22.1

(a) For the purposes of this Code section, the term ‘intimate parts’ means the primary genital area, anus, groin, inner thighs, or buttocks of a male or female and the breasts of a female.

(b) A person commits the offense of sexual battery when he or she intentionally makes physical contact with the intimate parts of the body of another person without the consent of that person.”

[/quote]

Does "makes physical contact with the intimate parts" include those covered by clothes?

aoxomoxoa wrote:

My classmates and colleagues at Princeton. Yale, and Columbia used to make fun of Cornell's academics, but I never really understood why they did so. It's now starting to become clear.

Well this post went off into left field in a hurry. What connection does Cornell have to any of this other than that the brother of the person you're responding to used to work there? Or did you just want to tell us where you went to school?

Thanks for clarification. This guy is a total jerk who violated and harassed someone. He deserves to be held accountable. I am going to guess this wasn't his first time. Shame on anyone saying he shouldn't have done it but who cares, let it go.

Lawyer 101 wrote:

OP got it wrong, it was Sexual Battery, not Sexual Assault.

SEXUAL ASSAULT

The State of Georgia does not have a single “Sexual Assault” definition but rather defines the following sexual crimes: ...

Sexual battery O.C.G.A. § 16-6-22.1

(a) For the purposes of this Code section, the term ‘intimate parts’ means the primary genital area, anus, groin, inner thighs, or buttocks of a male or female and the breasts of a female.

(b) A person commits the offense of sexual battery when he or she intentionally makes physical contact with the intimate parts of the body of another person without the consent of that person.”

If only this guy could have attended the race...

§ 16-6-22.1. Sexual battery

(c) Except as otherwise provided in this Code section, a person convicted of the offense of sexual battery shall be punished as for a misdemeanor of a high and aggravated nature.

§ 17-10-4 - Punishment for misdemeanors of a high and aggravated nature

(a) A person who is convicted of a misdemeanor of a high and aggravated nature shall be punished by a fine not to exceed $5,000.00 or by confinement in the county or other jail, county correctional institution, or such other places as counties may provide for maintenance of county inmates, for a term not to exceed 12 months, or both;