Rolling Stone apologizes

[OutHouse]

Professional journalism is a lost art.

 

[dmcowen674]

Rolling Stone apologizes

So by failing to properly vet the accused raper(s), rolling stone might have made a booboo. Award winning journalism at it's finest.

That's what a music magazine gets for trying to be a fake news source.

They should leave that to Fox.

 

[Ancalagon44]

Thought I would share this

 

[WhipperSnapper]

Phi Kappa Psi should sue Rolling Stone, Erdely, and "Jackie" for defamation. Sadly, they probably won't.

 

[Jodell88]

Thought I would share this

I think this article should be read as well
http://www.slate.com/articles/doubl..._but_the_efforts.html?wpsrc=sh_all_tab_tw_bot

This gem is a bit eye opening

Assertions of injustice by young men are infuriating to some. Caroline Heldman, an associate professor of politics at Occidental College and co-founder of End Rape on Campus, said of the men who are turning to the courts, “These lawsuits are an incredible display of entitlement, the same entitlement that drove them to rape.” Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Missouri, a co-sponsor of the CASA bill, said to the Washington Postof these suits, “I don’t think we are anywhere near a tipping point where the people accused of this are somehow being treated unfairly.”

I'm not sure if these women are thinking straight. :hmm:

 

[Triumph]

I think this article should be read as well
http://www.slate.com/articles/doubl..._but_the_efforts.html?wpsrc=sh_all_tab_tw_bot

This gem is a bit eye opening
I'm not sure if these women are thinking straight. :hmm:

Yeah I read that article last night. Disgusting. Guy is accused of rape because girl's mom finds out she was sexually active and her mom didn't like that. Guy gets basically put on trial without his knowledge by the school, without proper due process or effective representation, school arbiter flat out lies in her summary of findings, guy forced out of school and now no one will take him as a transfer.

These people need to remember a principle tenant of the justice system: William Blackstone's Ratio says,

"All presumptive evidence of felony should be admitted cautiously; for the law holds it better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent party suffer."

Who is William Blackstone? Who cares! How about John Adams?

It is more important that innocence should be protected, than it is, that guilt be punished; for guilt and crimes are so frequent in this world, that all of them cannot be punished

A lot of people don't know their history so they probably never even heard of our second president John Adams. But most people have heard of Ben Franklin:

That it is better 100 guilty Persons should escape than that one innocent Person should suffer, is a maxim that has been long and generally approved.

Maybe we should listen to these people who knew what they were talking about over 250 years ago?

 

[FerrelGeek]

Don't be silly. You're quoting dead white guys and everyone knows that the opinions of dead whit guys have no value in our evolved, enlightened society. They have nothing whatsoever to teach us. They're disgusting relics of a (hopefully soon) bygone era of oppressive patriarchy.

That's sarcasm,btw. But I'd be willing to bet you'd hear a retort like that in many of our 'enlightened' universities today. Susan B Anthony is retching in her grave over what her 'sisters' have become. This whole mess is yet another example of how warped and deranged certain sectors of liberalism have become.

Yeah I read that article last night. Disgusting. Guy is accused of rape because girl's mom finds out she was sexually active and her mom didn't like that. Guy gets basically put on trial without his knowledge by the school, without proper due process or effective representation, school arbiter flat out lies in her summary of findings, guy forced out of school and now no one will take him as a transfer.

These people need to remember a principle tenant of the justice system: William Blackstone's Ratio says,

Who is William Blackstone? Who cares! How about John Adams?

A lot of people don't know their history so they probably never even heard of our second president John Adams. But most people have heard of Ben Franklin:



Maybe we should listen to these people who knew what they were talking about over 250 years ago?

 

[Pens1566]

Phi Kappa Psi should sue Rolling Stone, Erdely, and "Jackie" for defamation. Sadly, they probably won't.

They won't because they'd also have to sue the other women that are reporting similar experiences with the chapter. She's not the only one, just the one the article focused on. They're in trouble and they know it.

Having first hand experience, both as an undergrad member and now an alumni advisor of a different fraternity of a similar national presence to that of Phi Psi, their rebuttal is dubious at best. They are leaning on semantics with the "no official party" and "no pledges at that time of the year" points. Chapters do not report all social events as official. Once it becomes an official event there are legal/insurance/risk management situations that come into effect that the active members would rather ignore. A friday night early in the semester at a prestigious house on campus, you'd be naive to think that there wasn't something going on there. Second, regardless of the campus rules on pledging periods there are always new members being recruited. Always. They may not be official according to the school, but they are there and they are being made to do things of a questionable nature.

I'm not condoning the alleged behavior or the practices I've described above. Just pointing out that taking the fraternity statement as gospel is doing the same thing everyone is accusing RS of doing originally with the source. Seeing as how this appears to be Phi Psi's oldest, if not founding, chapter (a very important point in that world) with very powerful alums, they will be very motivated to defend and protect it's image. If they do not take any legal action against either RS or their sources that will be telling.

 

[werepossum]

They won't because they'd also have to sue the other women that are reporting similar experiences with the chapter. She's not the only one, just the one the article focused on. They're in trouble and they know it.

Having first hand experience, both as an undergrad member and now an alumni advisor of a different fraternity of a similar national presence to that of Phi Psi, their rebuttal is dubious at best. They are leaning on semantics with the "no official party" and "no pledges at that time of the year" points. Chapters do not report all social events as official. Once it becomes an official event there are legal/insurance/risk management situations that come into effect that the active members would rather ignore. A friday night early in the semester at a prestigious house on campus, you'd be naive to think that there wasn't something going on there. Second, regardless of the campus rules on pledging periods there are always new members being recruited. Always. They may not be official according to the school, but they are there and they are being made to do things of a questionable nature.

I'm not condoning the alleged behavior or the practices I've described above. Just pointing out that taking the fraternity statement as gospel is doing the same thing everyone is accusing RS of doing originally with the source. Seeing as how this appears to be Phi Psi's oldest, if not founding, chapter (a very important point in that world) with very powerful alums, they will be very motivated to defend and protect it's image. If they do not take any legal action against either RS or their sources that will be telling.

lol Translation: If they didn't do this, they undoubtedly did things just as bad. I believe the same argument was used for Eric Garner.

It's the Ratherization of logic and jurisprudence, "It's fake but accurate until you prove otherwise."

 

[Pens1566]

lol Translation: If they didn't do this, they undoubtedly did things just as bad. I believe the same argument was used for Eric Garner.

It's the Ratherization of logic and jurisprudence, "It's fake but accurate until you prove otherwise."

If that's what you took away from my post ...

 

[master_shake_]

i thought false rape accusations were the cornerstone of the patriarchy.

or maybe some women have issues.

 

[cubby1223]

I think this article should be read as well
http://www.slate.com/articles/doubl..._but_the_efforts.html?wpsrc=sh_all_tab_tw_bot

This gem is a bit eye opening
I'm not sure if these women are thinking straight. :hmm:

It's kind of the way the justice system has always worked. The side with the more powerful activist group behind it gets to create the truth. We're not accomplishing equality and fairness, we're just shifting which group is shit on.

 

[fskimospy]

You don't think defamation/libel lawsuits are in order?

Sure, they should feel free to sue them. They might even win, although defamation is a tough case to make in the US.

 

[Moonbeam]

Yeah, UVA false claims is no different from Lena Dunham false claims is no different than Duke false claims. If it is not that then its Gamergate.

Any dude who had sex with a drunk girl can now face claims of rape for dozens of years afterwards. It doesn't matter if he was drunk too, it doesn't matter if he was drunk and she wasn't. All that matters is that they had sex which is rape because "consent" wasn't given.

Before they called it slut shaming. Now it's just man shaming.

It is a 100% automatic assumption that the male is wrong now. If you can't recognize that then there is no help for you.

What happened? Did you get burned by one or more woman? I think the evidence shows pretty clearly that our society hasn't taken sexual assault against women seriously. Did you not anticipate there would be some feminist reaction to that, and some of it extreme. In the process of righting a ship, sometimes it leans the other way. Wouldn't it be in the best interest of victims that we try to be objective about all rape claims and not come down with a starting bias for one side or the other? Isn't that the only way to prevent the swing back and forth. I am a liberal and I sure as hell don't assume that every rape claim is factual or false. Let's be open to the evidence and let's remember too, that the claims of victims are often full of trauma induced inconsistencies and confused memories. One can have all kinds of errors and inconsistencies in ones testimony and still have been raped.

 

[StinkyPinky]

What happened? Did you get burned by one or more woman? I think the evidence shows pretty clearly that our society hasn't taken sexual assault against women seriously. Did you not anticipate there would be some feminist reaction to that, and some of it extreme. In the process of righting a ship, sometimes it leans the other way. Wouldn't it be in the best interest of victims that we try to be objective about all rape claims and not come down with a starting bias for one side or the other? Isn't that the only way to prevent the swing back and forth. I am a liberal and I sure as hell don't assume that every rape claim is factual or false. Let's be open to the evidence and let's remember too, that the claims of victims are often full of trauma induced inconsistencies and confused memories. One can have all kinds of errors and inconsistencies in ones testimony and still have been raped.

The problem is that rape claims have been made so hysterical that it's difficult for the guy to throw off the stigma even if he's found not guilty. There will always be people that assume his guilt regardless, and that's a hell of a burden for an innocent person to have. We're all so anxious to appear right and proper with the apparent victim that we sometimes forget the accused has rights and should also be allowed to tell their side of the story. Instead however it seems many media outlets these days just go right into lynch mob mentality.

 

[Atreus21]

I think this article should be read as well
http://www.slate.com/articles/doubl..._but_the_efforts.html?wpsrc=sh_all_tab_tw_bot

This gem is a bit eye opening
I'm not sure if these women are thinking straight. :hmm:

:thumbsup:

 

[surfsatwerk]

I think this article should be read as well
http://www.slate.com/articles/doubl..._but_the_efforts.html?wpsrc=sh_all_tab_tw_bot

That's a pretty shocking article.

 

[SMOGZINN]

The problem is that rape claims have been made so hysterical that it's difficult for the guy to throw off the stigma even if he's found not guilty. There will always be people that assume his guilt regardless, and that's a hell of a burden for an innocent person to have.

There are also a lot of people that will assume that she somehow caused her own rape, that she was dressed too provocatively, or she was 'leading him on', or perhaps she is just known to be a bit too slutty. That is also one hell of a burden to lay on a innocent person.

We're all so anxious to appear right and proper with the apparent victim that we sometimes forget the accused has rights and should also be allowed to tell their side of the story.

So, yes we have to make sure that the accused gets a chance to tell their side of the story, but we need to be careful that his story is not 'she deserved it'.

 

[Moonbeam]

The problem is that rape claims have been made so hysterical that it's difficult for the guy to throw off the stigma even if he's found not guilty. There will always be people that assume his guilt regardless, and that's a hell of a burden for an innocent person to have. We're all so anxious to appear right and proper with the apparent victim that we sometimes forget the accused has rights and should also be allowed to tell their side of the story. Instead however it seems many media outlets these days just go right into lynch mob mentality.

That is a new problem that has happened as a reaction to thousands of years of the abusive treatment of women that continues all over the world even today. Your point is valid, but it needs some context to be appreciated properly, I think. Let's remember where the great weight of the history of injustice lies and deal with the what injustice is created by rebounding from that in perspective. A few thousand years of men going to prison for rapes they didn't commit, white men going to prison for rape they didn't commit, that is, and we will need a masculinist revolution.

 

[werepossum]

What happened? Did you get burned by one or more woman? I think the evidence shows pretty clearly that our society hasn't taken sexual assault against women seriously. Did you not anticipate there would be some feminist reaction to that, and some of it extreme. In the process of righting a ship, sometimes it leans the other way. Wouldn't it be in the best interest of victims that we try to be objective about all rape claims and not come down with a starting bias for one side or the other? Isn't that the only way to prevent the swing back and forth. I am a liberal and I sure as hell don't assume that every rape claim is factual or false. Let's be open to the evidence and let's remember too, that the claims of victims are often full of trauma induced inconsistencies and confused memories. One can have all kinds of errors and inconsistencies in ones testimony and still have been raped.

I'd say our society has taken sexual assault against women extremely seriously. There are only two charges that will be taken seriously when reported years, even decades, after the supposed occurrence, rape and molestation. In only one of those can the victim be an adult and still be taken seriously. We're not the United Islamic States; men have been prosecuted, jailed, sometimes freakin' lynched or shot dead on the basis of an accusation. We have date rape, where a man pretty much can be charged with rape if he doesn't call within three days based solely on the woman's testimony. (Technically if she decides it was rape after the fact - at any time until the statute of limitations expires.) Show me the case where a man can successfully bring a charge years later against a woman alleging a violent felony which he didn't bother reporting at the time (when there would have existed physical evidence) and have legions of people insisting that the woman be prosecuted. It simply doesn't exist.

Certainly one can have all kinds of errors and inconsistencies in ones testimony and still have been raped. One can also go to prison for as long as a murderer based solely on testimony with all kinds of errors and inconsistencies alleging a rape that never happened. This is NOT a one-way street here.

 

[LegendKiller]

What happened? Did you get burned by one or more woman? I think the evidence shows pretty clearly that our society hasn't taken sexual assault against women seriously. Did you not anticipate there would be some feminist reaction to that, and some of it extreme. In the process of righting a ship, sometimes it leans the other way. Wouldn't it be in the best interest of victims that we try to be objective about all rape claims and not come down with a starting bias for one side or the other? Isn't that the only way to prevent the swing back and forth. I am a liberal and I sure as hell don't assume that every rape claim is factual or false. Let's be open to the evidence and let's remember too, that the claims of victims are often full of trauma induced inconsistencies and confused memories. One can have all kinds of errors and inconsistencies in ones testimony and still have been raped.

Yes, tell me a "crime" where the "victim" takes utterly no responsibility and it is automatically assumed, 100% of the time, that the man is at fault, regardless of how the woman acted. This "crime" can be charged decades later with NO evidence other than he/she said. It's disgusting that people just say that women are a protected class, even from their own actions, and that they can magically call down the law whenever they feel like it.

I am 100% for prosecuting rape. I am 100% against this arbitrary war on men where women are a protected class.

From the agenda being pushed - Woman are considered dumb, helpless and incapable of rationalizing bad situations and are thought to have NO situational awareness.

You look at Lena Dunham. This guy was raked over the coals in his personal life and assumed to be guilty, all because some liberal troll harpy decided that he was a Republican and had to be punished. Now we see her publisher backing away, but nobody is actually apologizing to the guy and Dunham isn't coming forward to clear him. Why? Because it would discredit her.

Then there's Cosby. There isn't a fucking thing the guy could say to justify himself or defend himself. Not a fucking thing. The pattern? It's the 60s, 70s, and 80s, wealthy people had drugs. And now, all of the sudden, the guy is one of the biggest serial rapists on the planet. Ohh, no, don't dare say that some of these women were attracted to his personality, or power, or popularity, or wanted to just fuck a celeb. Nope, he was an evil drugging rapist. Maybe he was, but how could he defend himself decades later?

If he goes on the attack, he's a slut shaming monster. If he defends himself, he's preventing other women from coming forward. He blames her, he's blaming the victim. He calls them extortionists, he's shaming again.

 

[Jodell88]

Woman are considered dumb, helpless and incapable of rationalizing bad situations and are thought to have NO situational awareness.

Dafuq am I reading here?

 

[LegendKiller]

Dafuq am I reading here?

How else do you explain it?

A woman can do no wrong and will automatically, at least initially, be believed if she claimed she was raped and there is no personal responsibility or doubt of credibility.

We have to protect them from themselves because they are incapable of doing it. At least that's the common mantra spewed by feminists. Which is ironic considering the message they are trying to forward.

What lessons should a father teach his sons? That no matter what, they will be 100% at fault if they are drinking and have sex with a woman who is drinking and will be fucked for life because of it.

 

[Blanky]

Yeah I read that article last night. Disgusting. Guy is accused of rape because girl's mom finds out she was sexually active and her mom didn't like that. Guy gets basically put on trial without his knowledge by the school, without proper due process or effective representation, school arbiter flat out lies in her summary of findings, guy forced out of school and now no one will take him as a transfer.

These people need to remember a principle tenant of the justice system: William Blackstone's Ratio says,



Who is William Blackstone? Who cares! How about John Adams?



A lot of people don't know their history so they probably never even heard of our second president John Adams. But most people have heard of Ben Franklin:



Maybe we should listen to these people who knew what they were talking about over 250 years ago?

:thumbsup:

 

[Blanky]

How else do you explain it?

A woman can do no wrong and will automatically, at least initially, be believed if she claimed she was raped and there is no personal responsibility or doubt of credibility.

We have to protect them from themselves because they are incapable of doing it. At least that's the common mantra spewed by feminists. Which is ironic considering the message they are trying to forward.

What lessons should a father teach his sons? That no matter what, they will be 100% at fault if they are drinking and have sex with a woman who is drinking and will be fucked for life because of it.

first lesson obviously is don't rape somebody. Second lesson is don't sleep with or be around a crazy woman who may decide to accuse you of rape because as you say/allude to, there are damn few accusations in society that can be 100% not grounded in any truth at all yet screw a guy's life up so severely.

Now I do believe Cosby is probably a serial rapist because damn so many people have accused him of it, but let us tone it down to say one accusation and assume it has no merit st all. That can still be destructive. He in particular seemed to be given a huge free pass by the media, probably over correcting to avoid accusations of racism, but most other people wouldn't be.