Betsy Devos speaks on campus rape.

[fleshconsumed]

So in one case SHE is taking the action and actively putting others lives at risk and in the other she is the person that is being raped. Those are equivalent in your mind?

The excuse that she was drunk was given to show that her being raped was her own fault for being drunk you tosser. A female being drunk should NOT mean it's OK to rape her.

I believe the argument was person has drunk sex -> regrets later -> says it was rape and not just drunken sex. In which case the two situations would be similar. If one made a choice to drive while drunk, there is no excuse in the book to get you off, similarly if one made choice to get down and dirty while tipsy, that was also a conscious choice (even if drunken choice) and therefore there should be no walking back on it.

 

[ch33zw1z]

If police were present to the drunk consensual sex, then the comparison works.

Othewise, you're right back to he said she said...and leaving the door open to assault drunk girls and claim it's consensual.

 

[fleshconsumed]

If police were present to the drunk consensual sex, then the comparison works.

Othewise, you're right back to he said she said...and leaving the door open to assault drunk girls and claim it's consensual.

Yes, that is a possibility.

I believe people are just fighting the notion that every drunk sex encounter is non-consensual, which is obviously not true.

 

[ch33zw1z]

Yes, that is a possibility.

I believe people are just fighting the notion that every drunk sex encounter is non-consensual, which is obviously not true.

Of course it's not. But if we don't err on the side of caution, it's leaves people exposed in ways that are life changing in a few ways that we know about.

 

[fleshconsumed]

Of course it's not. But if we don't err on the side of caution, it's leaves people exposed in ways that are life changing in a few ways that we know about.

Well what would be "to err on the side of caution" in cases like these? If you say provide the victim with counseling, investigate the case, and go to trial if necessary, then I'd agree with you. However, as with any criminal case I'm strongly against presumption of guilt, which is almost always the case in rape cases. A false rape conviction is life ruining. Accusation alone is enough to cast you out of your social circle and brand you for life.

 

[ch33zw1z]

Well what would be "to err on the side of caution" in cases like these? If you say provide the victim with counseling, investigate the case, and go to trial if necessary, then I'd agree with you. However, as with any criminal case I'm strongly against presumption of guilt, which is almost always the case in rape cases. A false rape conviction is life ruining. Accusation alone is enough to cast you out of your social circle and brand you for life.

I would be with ya, if dudes were more responsible with their wangs.

Comes down to he said she said, side with she said.

Of course, we're talking very black and white here. Other variables would be included in a trial obviously.

 

[woolfe9998]

I would be with ya, if dudes were more responsible with their wangs.

Comes down to he said she said, side with she said.

Of course, we're talking very black and white here. Other variables would be included in a trial obviously.

Are you saying that if a man is sexually promiscuous, he deserves to be presumed guilty if accused of rape?

 

[WackyDan]

Now back to the topic at hand, Devos entertaining MRA's in this manner doesn't bode well for anyone. Men are far from the persecuted gender in the world.
l

Except when it comes to glaring abuse of Title IX on campuses.

Here is one such example.
http://www.mindingthecampus.org/2015/06/did-mattress-girl-tell-the-truth-not-very-likely/

CNN posted an article today saying the university settled the lawsuit with the male student.

You might want to look up for yourself examples at say Duke among others...

Title IX abuses and the handling of accusations is purely what this is about.

 

[WackyDan]

If you read the articles, it's more like the men's organization has no problem publicly attacking rape accusers, whether it's true or not.

Or this little gem...regarding ray rice



From the article, aka she had it coming.

That attitude doesn't stop at hitting women either.

Men are not the victims. If you don't want to be accused of rape, don't nail drunk chicks. Oh those poor poor persecuted men

If you don't want to be raped or question whether you were raped, then don't get drunk.

See what I did there? Both what you said and I said are sound advice to both men and women. One isn't more or less valuable than the other.

 

[ch33zw1z]

Are you saying that if a man is sexually promiscuous, he deserves to be presumed guilty if accused of rape?

If a girl is promiscuous, and raped, do we say oh well, too bad?

 

[fleshconsumed]

I would be with ya, if dudes were more responsible with their wangs.

Comes down to he said she said, side with she said.

Of course, we're talking very black and white here. Other variables would be included in a trial obviously.

Yes, unfortunately in a lot of case it will be he said vs. she said with no way to objectively determine the truth.

It seems to me that you're implying men should be automatically presumed guilty. If so I strongly disagree. There should be investigation and there should be a trial if there is enough evidence for one. The due process must be followed. We cannot automatically presume guilt just because the accused has a penis.

If a girl is promiscuous, and raped, do we say oh well, too bad?

No we don't say too bad she deserved it because she had a lot of sex in the past. And equally we shouldn't presume a man is guilty because he had a lot of sex in the past, or because other men he did not even know committed assault in the past.

 

[ch33zw1z]

I'm not arguing presumption of guilt, that's not how it works, you guys know that.

Rest assured, if I'm ever on a jury for something like this, I wouldn't do that either.

Each case will be different.

On an emotional level, I'm more likely to side with the girl, when's it's strictly he said she sai, in a vaccuum.

 

[ch33zw1z]

Yes, unfortunately in a lot of case it will be he said vs. she said with no way to objectively determine the truth.

It seems to me that you're implying men should be automatically presumed guilty. If so I strongly disagree. There should be investigation and there should be a trial if there is enough evidence for one. The due process must be followed. We cannot automatically presume guilt just because the accused has a penis.


No we don't say too bad she deserved it because she had a lot of sex in the past. And equally we shouldn't presume a man is guilty because he had a lot of sex in the past, or because other men he did not even know committed assault in the past.

The original topic is about Devos engaging groups that will blame the victim, and claim men are persecuted. Which is ridiculous.

I was raised in an environment that would blame the woman without a second thought. And they're not liberals.

 

[woolfe9998]

If a girl is promiscuous, and raped, do we say oh well, too bad?

No, we don't. But what has that got to do with presuming the man guilty because he's promiscuous? Your reasoning is almost exactly parallel to those who blame the victim for being promiscuous.

 

[fleshconsumed]

The original topic is about Devos engaging groups that will blame the victim, and claim men are persecuted. Which is ridiculous.

I think it's fair to say that men by and large are presumed guilty in a rape case. I do not want to diminish the pain and struggle of women who have been assaulted and raped, but there is some truth that men are persecuted in a typical rape case.

I was raised in an environment that would blame the woman without a second thought. And they're not liberals.

So you're against automatically blaming a woman. That's fair, I agree with that. However, at the same time on an emotional level you would trust a woman in a he said vs she said case? It really sounds to me like you're automatically blaming the guy. You're against automatically blaming woman, but blaming a guy is ok?

 

[J.Wilkins]

I believe the argument was person has drunk sex -> regrets later -> says it was rape and not just drunken sex. In which case the two situations would be similar. If one made a choice to drive while drunk, there is no excuse in the book to get you off, similarly if one made choice to get down and dirty while tipsy, that was also a conscious choice (even if drunken choice) and therefore there should be no walking back on it.

Ah, my mistake. I thought he was referring to the article, not a discussion in the thread.

Of course being drunk and willing is no excuse, being so drunk you are unaware of what is going on and completely unable to consent is another thing entirely though.

 

[jackstar7]

And if that drunk chick drives home after her drunken sexual encounter and gets pulled over can she tell the officer don't arrest me for being over the DWI limit, it's not her fault because she was drunk and couldn't make a coherent decision not to drive just like she wouldn't have had sex with that guy (she is now accusing of rape) while sober?


And for those pedantic type I am not talking about passed out drunk during sex, but an active participant.

Stop being so desperate for sex.

 

[ch33zw1z]

I think it's fair to say that men by and large are presumed guilty in a rape case. I do not want to diminish the pain and struggle of women who have been assaulted and raped, but there is some truth that men are persecuted in a typical rape case.


So you're against automatically blaming a woman. That's fair, I agree with that. However, at the same time on an emotional level you would trust a woman in a he said vs she said case? It really sounds to me like you're automatically blaming the guy. You're against automatically blaming woman, but blaming a guy is ok?

It's more likely for me.

I'm glad we live in a day and age where DNA testing can help us out, that's for sure.

My bleeding heart tends to bleed a bit when it comes to sex crimes.

 

[Exterous]

I'm not arguing presumption of guilt, that's not how it works, you guys know that.

Rest assured, if I'm ever on a jury for something like this, I wouldn't do that either.

Each case will be different.

On an emotional level, I'm more likely to side with the girl, when's it's strictly he said she sai, in a vaccuum.

While I know you are not necessarily talking about school cases by saying "If I'm on the jury" but for Title IX there are no juries, the accused is not entitled to hear all the evidence against them, the accused is not entitled to be present for any discussions of of the punishment or appeal, the accused can be immediately barred from classes, dorms, and campus activities before the accused is even talked to let alone an official hearing is held to review the legitimacy of the claim. They may not be allowed a lawyer. The process also isn't required to adhere to testimony of the supposed victim:

A former football player is suing the university and the the U.S. Department of Education. Grant Neal said in his lawsuit that the university suspended him despite the woman involved explicitly telling the director of athletic training “I’m fine and I wasn’t raped.” Neal was suspended for as long as the woman remained at the university.

The biggest issue (IMO) is that Universities are not required to involve professionals or even people with experience in relevant fields. The people doing or running the investigation and rendering a verdict can be the Athletic director of the program the accused plays for, Music professors, or even other students. I'm betting a lot of Universities would be all in favor of clearer\better guidelines given the large number of lawsuits they are facing for both not doing enough and doing too much. (Although I don't expect many to come out an say that given the potential PR issues)

This isn't to say there wasn't(isn't) an issue to address. There is a problem with Universities sweeping these under the rug to protect their reputation especially when it came to athletics. But Title IX isn't a solution as it both allows for Universities to easily sweep things under a rug and unfairly treat the accused

 

[ch33zw1z]

Understood. Thanks for the reply.