In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up!
NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action.
On June 17 2015 04:11 JonnyBNoHo wrote: I have never lived in a world where rape wasn't taken seriously and been considered one of the more heinous crimes. Like all crimes, justice is not always served, but that does not excuse a manufactured witch-hunt.
If you and others like you continue to seek injustice and inequality on this matter, you'll continue to get disagreement from me.
In what world do you live? The world in which you live didn't even recognize marital rape as a legal concept barely twenty or thirty years ago. The concept that your wife could be raped didn't even exist, it was simply accepted and condoned.
Johnny, like many conservatives that say things along those lines (e.g. "Racism/sexism doesn't exist! I never see it!"), lives in a small, privileged little bubble and thinks that he can extrapolate that experience to all experiences in our society, regardless of reality.
Pretty gross. Obama bought into the extreme feminist propaganda that the media pushed a few years back, and justice is still getting short-changed. Liberal values aren't supposed to include witch-hunts.
So many things wrong with this.
1) The reporting is pretty awful. They focused a lot on the accuser's sexual activity, which had no bearing on the actual case itself. Typical slut-shaming reporting. They also focused quite a bit on the possibility of rape accusers lying, even though it's been repeatedly proven that rape isn't falsely reported any more than any other crime.
2) This is a perfect example of colleges over-reacting to social sentiment. For years and years women haven't been able to reliably get justice for being sexually assaulted, but our generation is starting to push against that norm. It's obvious that Amherst doesn't want to deal with the PR hit they'd take if they did anything except side with the accuser here, which is the big problem. Men has almost no chance for justice on many college campuses. I was, as an RA in college, explicitly told by my employer that if I have sex with a woman who had been drinking at all that night, that I would be held responsible for sexual assault, even if I was drunk and did not initiate the act.
3) Even though this is a story that should really be reported on, the problem I have with Fox is that they never report the other side of the debate. For instance, I have known two different people who have been sexually assaulted during college; one was my fiance's friend, and the other was a transgender student that I knew. In both instances, neither the police nor the college did anything, despite plenty of evidence to bring charges in those cases. In the second case, the college refused to even investigate the matter. This is also a fairly common occurrence across campuses.
4) I think this whole thing is indicative of the fact that colleges/universities are terrible places to try to achieve justice. There really is no winning here; if you suspend/expel the guy, you've effectively ruled him guilty before a real trial and more or less ruined (or seriously hampered) a large chunk of his life. If you do nothing, then the accused can essentially get away with sexually assaulting someone without any adverse effects while the victim deals with everything that goes along with it, particularly since it's still not exactly easy to win a sexual assault case in court. You really just end up with no justice and a lot of chaos in the culture; quite a few colleges/universities over-react to these accusations just like this and treat these men like they're guilty without proving it, but others will do absolutely nothing and leave sexual assault victims to basically fend for themselves.
I don't think there was any slut shaming, nor have women been unable to get justice until now. Those are radical feminist go-to's that I don't think apply here.
The alleged victim wasn't slut shamed. Her words that they cited are relevant as they clearly contradict her testimony. She claimed that she was traumatized and needed company, when in fact she called for company to pursue sex.
I wouldn't characterize the current climate as an over-reaction. There was never a need for a reaction at all. Sexual crimes were taken seriously long before the '1 in 5' myth made headlines. Our generation's outrage is against a phantom norm.
No it's not, but you can continue to lie to yourself all you want. That kind of attitude is precisely what perpetuates injustice in society today, so feel free to continue being part of the problem.
Yes it is. That's what the objective facts will tell you. Rape, including campus rape, has been on the decline (not an 'epidemic') and I have never lived in a world where rape wasn't taken seriously and been considered one of the more heinous crimes. Like all crimes, justice is not always served, but that does not excuse a manufactured witch-hunt.
If you and others like you continue to seek injustice and inequality on this matter, you'll continue to get disagreement from me.
Edit:
I mean seriously, if you can't realize that for countless decades it was far too difficult for women to get justice for sexual assault, then you just don't live in reality.
Yeah that whole 'innocent until proven guilty' was really... 'problematic.' All hail the new standard of 'listen and believe'.
Yea, go ahead and stick your head in the sand while spouting bullshit strawmans. Seems to be your MO Johnny.
This is why people don't take you seriously.
People who don't take me seriously are often people who don't like having their opinions challenged with facts.
Incidents like Duke Lacross and UVA didn't take the media by storm because the public is dismissive of rape allegations. Quite the opposite actually. Society was quick to believe.
It's not that small of a bubble if republicans can be national competitive. Not to mention the point is to make people feel good about the world they live in and make them regognize it's actually a lot better then it used to be. It's just good politics to be like Johnny.
Pretty gross. Obama bought into the extreme feminist propaganda that the media pushed a few years back, and justice is still getting short-changed. Liberal values aren't supposed to include witch-hunts.
So many things wrong with this.
1) The reporting is pretty awful. They focused a lot on the accuser's sexual activity, which had no bearing on the actual case itself. Typical slut-shaming reporting. They also focused quite a bit on the possibility of rape accusers lying, even though it's been repeatedly proven that rape isn't falsely reported any more than any other crime.
2) This is a perfect example of colleges over-reacting to social sentiment. For years and years women haven't been able to reliably get justice for being sexually assaulted, but our generation is starting to push against that norm. It's obvious that Amherst doesn't want to deal with the PR hit they'd take if they did anything except side with the accuser here, which is the big problem. Men has almost no chance for justice on many college campuses. I was, as an RA in college, explicitly told by my employer that if I have sex with a woman who had been drinking at all that night, that I would be held responsible for sexual assault, even if I was drunk and did not initiate the act.
3) Even though this is a story that should really be reported on, the problem I have with Fox is that they never report the other side of the debate. For instance, I have known two different people who have been sexually assaulted during college; one was my fiance's friend, and the other was a transgender student that I knew. In both instances, neither the police nor the college did anything, despite plenty of evidence to bring charges in those cases. In the second case, the college refused to even investigate the matter. This is also a fairly common occurrence across campuses.
4) I think this whole thing is indicative of the fact that colleges/universities are terrible places to try to achieve justice. There really is no winning here; if you suspend/expel the guy, you've effectively ruled him guilty before a real trial and more or less ruined (or seriously hampered) a large chunk of his life. If you do nothing, then the accused can essentially get away with sexually assaulting someone without any adverse effects while the victim deals with everything that goes along with it, particularly since it's still not exactly easy to win a sexual assault case in court. You really just end up with no justice and a lot of chaos in the culture; quite a few colleges/universities over-react to these accusations just like this and treat these men like they're guilty without proving it, but others will do absolutely nothing and leave sexual assault victims to basically fend for themselves.
I don't think there was any slut shaming, nor have women been unable to get justice until now. Those are radical feminist go-to's that I don't think apply here.
The alleged victim wasn't slut shamed. Her words that they cited are relevant as they clearly contradict her testimony. She claimed that she was traumatized and needed company, when in fact she called for company to pursue sex.
I wouldn't characterize the current climate as an over-reaction. There was never a need for a reaction at all. Sexual crimes were taken seriously long before the '1 in 5' myth made headlines. Our generation's outrage is against a phantom norm.
No it's not, but you can continue to lie to yourself all you want. That kind of attitude is precisely what perpetuates injustice in society today, so feel free to continue being part of the problem.
Yes it is. That's what the objective facts will tell you. Rape, including campus rape, has been on the decline (not an 'epidemic') and I have never lived in a world where rape wasn't taken seriously and been considered one of the more heinous crimes. Like all crimes, justice is not always served, but that does not excuse a manufactured witch-hunt.
If you and others like you continue to seek injustice and inequality on this matter, you'll continue to get disagreement from me.
Edit:
I mean seriously, if you can't realize that for countless decades it was far too difficult for women to get justice for sexual assault, then you just don't live in reality.
Yeah that whole 'innocent until proven guilty' was really... 'problematic.' All hail the new standard of 'listen and believe'.
Yea, go ahead and stick your head in the sand while spouting bullshit strawmans. Seems to be your MO Johnny.
This is why people don't take you seriously.
People who don't take me seriously are often people who don't like having their opinions challenged with facts.
Incidents like Duke Lacross and UVA didn't take the media by storm because the public is dismissive of rape allegations. Quite the opposite actually. Society was quick to believe.
No shit Johnny.
If you would actually read my posts, you would see that I clearly and explicitly mentioned the fact that this stuff has gone too far on college campuses.
but no. Instead of realizing that I actually might agree with you on something but have a slightly different view, you just continue to pedal your obnoxious narrative while blatantly strawmanning my whole viewpoint.
THAT is why I don't take you seriously. I've been on these boards for years having these conversations with you, Introvert, XDaunt, Danglars, and others, so it's not like I refuse to listen to different view points. I just get tired of dealing with people that don't actually converse with me and make up some B.S. caricature of what they think I think so that they can feel smarter by deconstructing it.
It's not that small of a bubble if republicans can be national competitive. Not to mention the point is to make people feel good about the world they live in and make them regognize it's actually a lot better then it used to be. It's just good politics to be like Johnny.
no it's not, and I think that's pretty obvious with our current political landscape.
Doing a wholesale write-off of the issue isn't "good politics" or anything like that. It's being just as extreme as the people that over-react and get these innocent kids expelled, except in the opposite direction ideologically.
It's just a publicity stunt to promote his next beauty pageant. Really streamlines the search for his runningmate too.
Over-Under on how many times he's going to use his "You're Fired!" catchphrase to make fun of Obama leaving the White House... 50 times in the next two years.
A Trump presidential campaign also complicates planning by NBC, the network that carries Mr. Trump’s “Celebrity Apprentice” show. NBC has determined that having Mr. Trump appear in a weekly entertainment program could require the network to provide a similar outlet to other candidates, an NBC official said.
The NBC official said Mr. Trump couldn’t participate in the production of “Celebrity Apprentice” as long as he was an active political candidate. With filming expected to begin this fall, Mr. Trump would have a number of months to mount his candidacy before having to choose whether to continue.
Should he drop out of the race, he could then be involved in production of the program, the NBC official said.
“We will re-evaluate Trump’s role as host of ‘Celebrity Apprentice’ should it become necessary, as we are committed to this franchise,” the NBC official said Tuesday.
The NBC official said planning for “Celebrity Apprentice” is continuing with the assumption Mr. Trump will participate. The show is being planned as a midseason replacement due to air in the winter or spring of 2016.
So basically, Trump running for president directly conflicts with his NBC contract on Celebrity Apprentice, but NBC isn't worried because they figure he'll drop out soon (lol).
Mr. Trump offered a blistering critique of the Obama administration and of politicians in general. He promised to “build a great, great wall” on the Mexican border, which he said the Mexican government would finance, and present a tougher negotiating position with China. He offered a broad pledge to “make America great again.” He said he would repeal the Affordable Care Act, “get tough” on Islamic State militants and forbid Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons.
He offered no details on how he would accomplish any of those proposals.
Trump is might be planning to challenge that law in court. It is of dubious constitutionality.
On June 17 2015 04:11 JonnyBNoHo wrote: I have never lived in a world where rape wasn't taken seriously and been considered one of the more heinous crimes. Like all crimes, justice is not always served, but that does not excuse a manufactured witch-hunt.
If you and others like you continue to seek injustice and inequality on this matter, you'll continue to get disagreement from me.
In what world do you live? The world in which you live didn't even recognize marital rape as a legal concept barely twenty or thirty years ago. The concept that your wife could be raped didn't even exist, it was simply accepted and condoned.
Johnny, like many conservatives that say things along those lines (e.g. "Racism/sexism doesn't exist! I never see it!"), lives in a small, privileged little bubble and thinks that he can extrapolate that experience to all experiences in our society, regardless of reality.
No, no, no. It's facts like
"Women are over-represented in HR fields were hiring and pay setting decisions are made so the sexism argument would have to rely on women being sexist towards women."
and
"Liberals run the police force oppressing blacks"
they are just too challenging so we have to dismiss him. That's the reason, it must be!
I can't wait to see who it is Trump displaces from the Republican debate strictly because the RNC gave control over who was in it to FNC.
Jonny, on this issue there has been serious problems for some time, that are now being addressed. A lot of the problem, imho, is that people tried to have the college address these matters, when a college or university has neither the accountability, nor training, to handle matters of sexual assault and other misconduct. This happened both in the past (where ignoring problems mostly happened) and the present (where there's some ignoring, and some overreacting the other way). All these issues should be transferred to the criminal and civil justice system to be handled there.
On June 17 2015 04:57 zlefin wrote: Jonny, on this issue there has been serious problems for some time, that are now being addressed. A lot of the problem, imho, is that people tried to have the college address these matters, when a college or university has neither the accountability, nor training, to handle matters of sexual assault and other misconduct. This happened both in the past (where ignoring problems mostly happened) and the present (where there's some ignoring, and some overreacting the other way). All these issues should be transferred to the criminal and civil justice system to be handled there.
nitpick for GH: it's peddles not pedals.
It was a play on the repetitive, predictable, and cyclical nature of his pattern, but you know what they say about explaining jokes.
Pretty gross. Obama bought into the extreme feminist propaganda that the media pushed a few years back, and justice is still getting short-changed. Liberal values aren't supposed to include witch-hunts.
So many things wrong with this.
1) The reporting is pretty awful. They focused a lot on the accuser's sexual activity, which had no bearing on the actual case itself. Typical slut-shaming reporting. They also focused quite a bit on the possibility of rape accusers lying, even though it's been repeatedly proven that rape isn't falsely reported any more than any other crime.
2) This is a perfect example of colleges over-reacting to social sentiment. For years and years women haven't been able to reliably get justice for being sexually assaulted, but our generation is starting to push against that norm. It's obvious that Amherst doesn't want to deal with the PR hit they'd take if they did anything except side with the accuser here, which is the big problem. Men has almost no chance for justice on many college campuses. I was, as an RA in college, explicitly told by my employer that if I have sex with a woman who had been drinking at all that night, that I would be held responsible for sexual assault, even if I was drunk and did not initiate the act.
3) Even though this is a story that should really be reported on, the problem I have with Fox is that they never report the other side of the debate. For instance, I have known two different people who have been sexually assaulted during college; one was my fiance's friend, and the other was a transgender student that I knew. In both instances, neither the police nor the college did anything, despite plenty of evidence to bring charges in those cases. In the second case, the college refused to even investigate the matter. This is also a fairly common occurrence across campuses.
4) I think this whole thing is indicative of the fact that colleges/universities are terrible places to try to achieve justice. There really is no winning here; if you suspend/expel the guy, you've effectively ruled him guilty before a real trial and more or less ruined (or seriously hampered) a large chunk of his life. If you do nothing, then the accused can essentially get away with sexually assaulting someone without any adverse effects while the victim deals with everything that goes along with it, particularly since it's still not exactly easy to win a sexual assault case in court. You really just end up with no justice and a lot of chaos in the culture; quite a few colleges/universities over-react to these accusations just like this and treat these men like they're guilty without proving it, but others will do absolutely nothing and leave sexual assault victims to basically fend for themselves.
I don't think there was any slut shaming, nor have women been unable to get justice until now. Those are radical feminist go-to's that I don't think apply here.
The alleged victim wasn't slut shamed. Her words that they cited are relevant as they clearly contradict her testimony. She claimed that she was traumatized and needed company, when in fact she called for company to pursue sex.
I wouldn't characterize the current climate as an over-reaction. There was never a need for a reaction at all. Sexual crimes were taken seriously long before the '1 in 5' myth made headlines. Our generation's outrage is against a phantom norm.
No it's not, but you can continue to lie to yourself all you want. That kind of attitude is precisely what perpetuates injustice in society today, so feel free to continue being part of the problem.
Yes it is. That's what the objective facts will tell you. Rape, including campus rape, has been on the decline (not an 'epidemic') and I have never lived in a world where rape wasn't taken seriously and been considered one of the more heinous crimes. Like all crimes, justice is not always served, but that does not excuse a manufactured witch-hunt.
If you and others like you continue to seek injustice and inequality on this matter, you'll continue to get disagreement from me.
Edit:
I mean seriously, if you can't realize that for countless decades it was far too difficult for women to get justice for sexual assault, then you just don't live in reality.
Yeah that whole 'innocent until proven guilty' was really... 'problematic.' All hail the new standard of 'listen and believe'.
Yea, go ahead and stick your head in the sand while spouting bullshit strawmans. Seems to be your MO Johnny.
This is why people don't take you seriously.
People who don't take me seriously are often people who don't like having their opinions challenged with facts.
Incidents like Duke Lacross and UVA didn't take the media by storm because the public is dismissive of rape allegations. Quite the opposite actually. Society was quick to believe.
No shit Johnny.
If you would actually read my posts, you would see that I clearly and explicitly mentioned the fact that this stuff has gone too far on college campuses.
but no. Instead of realizing that I actually might agree with you on something but have a slightly different view, you just continue to pedal your obnoxious narrative while blatantly strawmanning my whole viewpoint.
You're projecting. You're the one sticking to an obnoxious narrative and straw manning. I did see that you think that colleges have gone too far. I didn't disagree with you on that and hence I didn't address it.
THAT is why I don't take you seriously. I've been on these boards for years having these conversations with you, Introvert, XDaunt, Danglars, and others, so it's not like I refuse to listen to different view points. I just get tired of dealing with people that don't actually converse with me and make up some B.S. caricature of what they think I think so that they can feel smarter by deconstructing it.
I AM conversing with you. I challenged you on two of your 5 points (slut-shaming and that this is an over-reaction). Your response started out as
No it's not, but you can continue to lie to yourself all you want.
YOU turned the conversation into name-calling and making up BS caricatures.
It's not that small of a bubble if republicans can be national competitive. Not to mention the point is to make people feel good about the world they live in and make them regognize it's actually a lot better then it used to be. It's just good politics to be like Johnny.
no it's not, and I think that's pretty obvious with our current political landscape.
Doing a wholesale write-off of the issue isn't "good politics" or anything like that. It's being just as extreme as the people that over-react and get these innocent kids expelled, except in the opposite direction ideologically.
Wholesale write-off? I said not all rapes receive justice. Many other crimes don't receive justice as well but we must maintain standards to protect the accused!!
On June 17 2015 04:11 JonnyBNoHo wrote: I have never lived in a world where rape wasn't taken seriously and been considered one of the more heinous crimes. Like all crimes, justice is not always served, but that does not excuse a manufactured witch-hunt.
If you and others like you continue to seek injustice and inequality on this matter, you'll continue to get disagreement from me.
In what world do you live? The world in which you live didn't even recognize marital rape as a legal concept barely twenty or thirty years ago. The concept that your wife could be raped didn't even exist, it was simply accepted and condoned.
Johnny, like many conservatives that say things along those lines (e.g. "Racism/sexism doesn't exist! I never see it!"), lives in a small, privileged little bubble and thinks that he can extrapolate that experience to all experiences in our society, regardless of reality.
"Women are over-represented in HR fields were hiring and pay setting decisions are made so the sexism argument would have to rely on women being sexist towards women."
they are just too challenging so we have to dismiss him. That's the reason, it must be!
I won both those arguments. I offered a lot of cited facts to discredit the gender wage gape, while you offered none. It's also a fact that most major cities are majority liberal with liberal politicians in positions of power. All you offered there to the contrary was NYC's mayor not having total, absolute control over the PD.
I'm also not a conservative nor do I claim that racism and sexism don't exist.
What I do claim is that citing racism and sexism as an argument, in and of itself, is insufficient.
It's not about writing it off its sensitizing people to it. It shouldn't be treated as anything other then a terrible thing. But the problem with racism and sexual assault is that people keep talking about it and making a big fuss about it when it's gotten better on its own in the past with the culture we have now and will get better regardless of what you do. Meanwhile much worse things go on everyday beacuse people are consentrating and bringing attention away from more pressing and more changeable ways. Culture doesn't change quickly and it'd time people stop thinking otherwise. How much attention is given to the gender pay gap when it would be better to just train everyone equally. How many unprepared minority students go to college instead of trying to find them jobs. How much attention does gun control get when mental illness and socioeconomic conditions are more to blame.
Reagen said to the chosen people it's morning in America again. It was still shitty at the time compared to now. Spreading hate and blame doesn't help anyone and only people filled with hate and wanting to blame people like it.
You're projecting. You're the one sticking to an obnoxious narrative and straw manning. I did see that you think that colleges have gone too far. I didn't disagree with you on that and hence I didn't address it.
I'm not projecting at all, and this is yet another example of your BS. You completely side-step or ignore the things you either explicitly or implicitly say and then try to sound intelligent by going "Gotcha! I never said that!"
This thing started out because you did a whole-sale write-off of the issue of justice for sexual assault (which was what I was responding to with my "stick your head in the sand" post, not to the side argument about questionable reporting). Not only did you say it was a "phantom norm" that people are reacting to (directly implying that it isn't a problem at all, akin to saying "racism doesn't exist"), but you also consistently trivialize it by comparing it to any other crime not getting justice when sexual assault is by far the most under-reported crime in our society precisely because their is a lack of faith in the system.
It's not about writing it off its sensitizing people to it. It shouldn't be treated as anything other then a terrible thing. But the problem with racism and sexual assault is that people keep talking about it and making a big fuss about it when it's gotten better on its own in the past with the culture we have now and will get better regardless of what you do. Meanwhile much worse things go on everyday beacuse people are consentrating and bringing attention away from more pressing and more changeable ways. Culture doesn't change quickly and it'd time people stop thinking otherwise. How much attention is given to the gender pay gap when it would be better to just train everyone equally. How many unprepared minority students go to college instead of trying to find them jobs. How much attention does gun control get when mental illness and socioeconomic conditions are more to blame.
Reagen said to the chosen people it's morning in America again. It was still shitty at the time compared to now. Spreading hate and blame doesn't help anyone and only people filled with hate and wanting to blame people like it.
The absurdly negative outlook that people have in society is an entirely different argument that can be blamed in large part on our current news media.
However, it's absolutely ridiculous and insulting to say that there are "much worse things" going on than (e.g.) the systematic racism in our country, particularly towards black people. This stuff doesn't just magically change and go away, and your line about "it will get better no matter what we do" is precisely the privileged attitude I'm talking about. That stuff changes because people work for it. It doesn't change on its own.
I won both those arguments. I offered a lot of cited facts to discredit the gender wage gape, while you offered none. It's also a fact that most major cities are majority liberal with liberal politicians in positions of power. All you offered there to the contrary was NYC's mayor not having total, absolute control over the PD.
The fact that you think that a city being run by liberals means that all of the PD's are liberal shows your limited understanding of the world.
Most cops are relatively blue-collar/conservative types compared to the major metro population. They usually aren't off-the-wall conservatives, but you aren't very likely to find some bleeding-heart liberal working as a cop.
People who don't take me seriously are often people who don't like having their opinions challenged with facts.
Incidents like Duke Lacross and UVA didn't take the media by storm because the public is dismissive of rape allegations. Quite the opposite actually. Society was quick to believe.
Yes it is. That's what the objective facts will tell you. Rape, including campus rape, has been on the decline (not an 'epidemic') and I have never lived in a world where rape wasn't taken seriously and been considered one of the more heinous crimes. Like all crimes, justice is not always served, but that does not excuse a manufactured witch-hunt.
If you and others like you continue to seek injustice and inequality on this matter, you'll continue to get disagreement from me.
Yeah that whole 'innocent until proven guilty' was really... 'problematic.' All hail the new standard of 'listen and believe'.
Oh, and here are several direct quotes of you grossly mis-characterizing my view point either explicitly or implicitly.
Time to face those facts that you love to ramble on about Johnny.
I wouldn't characterize the current climate as an over-reaction. There was never a need for a reaction at all. Sexual crimes were taken seriously long before the '1 in 5' myth made headlines. Our generation's outrage is against a phantom norm.
And this is the direct quote of you completely writing off the movement for increased accountability for sexual violence.
You're projecting. You're the one sticking to an obnoxious narrative and straw manning. I did see that you think that colleges have gone too far. I didn't disagree with you on that and hence I didn't address it.
I'm not projecting at all, and this is yet another example of your BS. You completely side-step or ignore the things you either explicitly or implicitly say and then try to sound intelligent by going "Gotcha! I never said that!"
This thing started out because you explicitly did a whole-sale write-off of the issue of justice for sexual assault (which was what I was responding to with my "stick your head in the sand" post, not to the side argument about questionable reporting). Not only did you say it was a "phantom norm" that people are reacting to (directly implying that it isn't a problem at all, akin to saying "racism doesn't exist"), but you also consistently trivialize it by comparing it to any other crime not getting justice when sexual assault is by far the most under-reported crime in our society precisely because their is a lack of faith in the system.
I said that not all rapes get justice, which is not writing off the issue.
The whole 'rape culture' and 'rape epidemic' narratives are entirely manufactured. There is no statistical proof of a rape epidemic and you'd have difficulty finding a more female friendly culture than what we have today. If there is a lack of faith in the system it is because people like you try to discredit it. So why don't you get your head out of the sand and stop hurting sexual assault victims all over again.
Edit:
The fact that you think that a city being run by liberals means that all of the PD's are liberal shows your limited understanding of the world.
Most cops are relatively blue-collar/conservative types compared to the major metro population. They usually aren't off-the-wall conservatives, but you aren't very likely to find some bleeding-heart liberal working as a cop.
I don't have any stats on police and political affiliation, but I did not claim I did. My position was pretty clear that most people in large cities are liberal, and elect liberal politicians. I'm also stating that politicians ultimately have a lot of power over PD's, which I don't consider to be refuted if they don't have absolute, total control over each individual officer.
Moreover, if the assertion is that all officers everywhere lean conservative than conservative politicians are in the same boat is liberal politicians in that they're dealing with similar PD's.
Oh, and here are several direct quotes of you grossly mis-characterizing my view point either explicitly or implicitly.
Time to face those facts that you love to ramble on about Johnny.
You'd have to explain what you think is a mis-characterization.
You're projecting. You're the one sticking to an obnoxious narrative and straw manning. I did see that you think that colleges have gone too far. I didn't disagree with you on that and hence I didn't address it.
I'm not projecting at all, and this is yet another example of your BS. You completely side-step or ignore the things you either explicitly or implicitly say and then try to sound intelligent by going "Gotcha! I never said that!"
This thing started out because you explicitly did a whole-sale write-off of the issue of justice for sexual assault (which was what I was responding to with my "stick your head in the sand" post, not to the side argument about questionable reporting). Not only did you say it was a "phantom norm" that people are reacting to (directly implying that it isn't a problem at all, akin to saying "racism doesn't exist"), but you also consistently trivialize it by comparing it to any other crime not getting justice when sexual assault is by far the most under-reported crime in our society precisely because their is a lack of faith in the system.
I said that not all rapes get justice, which is not writing off the issue.
The whole 'rape culture' and 'rape epidemic' narratives are entirely manufactured. There is no statistical proof of a rape epidemic and you'd have difficulty finding a more female friendly culture than what we have today. If there is a lack of faith in the system it is because people like you try to discredit it. So why don't you get your head out of the sand and stop hurting sexual assault victims all over again.
Well, since I just edited my post to demonstrate an explicit quote showing you writing off the issue, you might want to check yourself.
Also, just because our culture is more female friendly than others doesn't mean that we've achieved true equality.
And I never said "rape epidemic" anywhere here, but you've mentioned in multiple times and tried to attribute it to me. Another blatant attempt by you to falsely portray my view points so you can argue against them.
You gonna ever answer for that, or just shift the goal posts and ignore it so you don't have to own up to your intellectual dishonesty?
You'd have to explain what you think is a mis-characterization.
People who don't take me seriously are often people who don't like having their opinions challenged with facts.
Incidents like Duke Lacross and UVA didn't take the media by storm because the public is dismissive of rape allegations. Quite the opposite actually. Society was quick to believe.
I've mentioned several times that I completely agree that we have a problem on college campuses with how rape allegations are handled. This statement does nothing in our dialog other than try to attribute the idea that I think that all campuses are dismissive of rape allegations, something that I never said. The only thing I ever mentioned were two anecdotal incidents to demonstrate that there is still a problem for some women and that their problem isn't completely de-legitimized just because some colleges have gone overboard with reacting.
Yes it is. That's what the objective facts will tell you. Rape, including campus rape, has been on the decline (not an 'epidemic') and I have never lived in a world where rape wasn't taken seriously and been considered one of the more heinous crimes. Like all crimes, justice is not always served, but that does not excuse a manufactured witch-hunt.
If you and others like you continue to seek injustice and inequality on this matter, you'll continue to get disagreement from me.
I never said rape incidences were increasing and I never even used the term "rape epidemic".
Yeah that whole 'innocent until proven guilty' was really... 'problematic.' All hail the new standard of 'listen and believe'.
I never mentioned anything about "innocent until proven guilty" being problematic and "listen and believe" ("guilty until proven innocent") being a good thing. This is an incredibly obvious attempt to trivialize my comments by creating a hugely exaggerated caricature of my statement.
I was alluding to the fact that rape has been the most accepted and under-reported crime for most of human history and that, for instance, marital rape wasn't universally criminalized in this country until 1993. There is a distinct and very prevalent/documented culture of skepticism or lack of action in the general population when it concerns sexual assault accusations.
I am not just talking about college campuses.
I'm talking about sexual assault as it pertains to our whole society. We have countless examples of this; schools or communities letting young athletes off the hook for this (Florida State investigation? That town in Ohio(?)?), comments about how "women shouldn't dress like sluts or walk alone in dark allies" (victim blaming that is irrelevant to where the majority of rapes actually take place), or that police are frequently overly-skeptical of rape claims and label them as "false allegations" in documents in direct violation of their protocol.
This entire argument started because I mentioned that the whole problem with college campuses handling accusations is an over-reaction to the problem of sexual assault in our society as a whole, and then you completely wrote that whole issue off, implying that there was never a need for a societal push to increase our awareness, understanding, and prosecution of rape (I have explicitly quoted you on this at least twice, so don't deny it).
You're projecting. You're the one sticking to an obnoxious narrative and straw manning. I did see that you think that colleges have gone too far. I didn't disagree with you on that and hence I didn't address it.
I'm not projecting at all, and this is yet another example of your BS. You completely side-step or ignore the things you either explicitly or implicitly say and then try to sound intelligent by going "Gotcha! I never said that!"
This thing started out because you explicitly did a whole-sale write-off of the issue of justice for sexual assault (which was what I was responding to with my "stick your head in the sand" post, not to the side argument about questionable reporting). Not only did you say it was a "phantom norm" that people are reacting to (directly implying that it isn't a problem at all, akin to saying "racism doesn't exist"), but you also consistently trivialize it by comparing it to any other crime not getting justice when sexual assault is by far the most under-reported crime in our society precisely because their is a lack of faith in the system.
I said that not all rapes get justice, which is not writing off the issue.
The whole 'rape culture' and 'rape epidemic' narratives are entirely manufactured. There is no statistical proof of a rape epidemic and you'd have difficulty finding a more female friendly culture than what we have today. If there is a lack of faith in the system it is because people like you try to discredit it. So why don't you get your head out of the sand and stop hurting sexual assault victims all over again.
Well, since I just edited my post to demonstrate an explicit quote showing you writing off the issue, you might want to check yourself.
Also, just because our culture is more female friendly than others doesn't mean that we've achieved true equality.
And I never said "rape epidemic" anywhere here, but you've mentioned in multiple times and tried to attribute it to me. Another blatant attempt by you to falsely portray my view points so you can argue against them.
You gonna ever answer for that, or just shift the goal posts and ignore it so you don't have to own up to your intellectual dishonesty?
I tried to attribute the 'rape epidemic' narrative to you because when I cited it, you seemed to defend it. I said that the norm people were outraged over was phantom, and you quickly called me a liar. I cited the 'rape epidemic' narrative and you told me my head was in the sand.
I'm not sure what 'true equality' is supposed to be. If you mean equality of opportunity I'm on board and think we can do more for both men and women, but I disagree with the feminist notion that we need some sort of parity of outcomes. And I point to female friendly because there is now plenty of systemic bias against men. It is not as if we live in a society where only men have advantages.
You're projecting. You're the one sticking to an obnoxious narrative and straw manning. I did see that you think that colleges have gone too far. I didn't disagree with you on that and hence I didn't address it.
I'm not projecting at all, and this is yet another example of your BS. You completely side-step or ignore the things you either explicitly or implicitly say and then try to sound intelligent by going "Gotcha! I never said that!"
This thing started out because you explicitly did a whole-sale write-off of the issue of justice for sexual assault (which was what I was responding to with my "stick your head in the sand" post, not to the side argument about questionable reporting). Not only did you say it was a "phantom norm" that people are reacting to (directly implying that it isn't a problem at all, akin to saying "racism doesn't exist"), but you also consistently trivialize it by comparing it to any other crime not getting justice when sexual assault is by far the most under-reported crime in our society precisely because their is a lack of faith in the system.
I said that not all rapes get justice, which is not writing off the issue.
The whole 'rape culture' and 'rape epidemic' narratives are entirely manufactured. There is no statistical proof of a rape epidemic and you'd have difficulty finding a more female friendly culture than what we have today. If there is a lack of faith in the system it is because people like you try to discredit it. So why don't you get your head out of the sand and stop hurting sexual assault victims all over again.
Well, since I just edited my post to demonstrate an explicit quote showing you writing off the issue, you might want to check yourself.
Also, just because our culture is more female friendly than others doesn't mean that we've achieved true equality.
And I never said "rape epidemic" anywhere here, but you've mentioned in multiple times and tried to attribute it to me. Another blatant attempt by you to falsely portray my view points so you can argue against them.
You gonna ever answer for that, or just shift the goal posts and ignore it so you don't have to own up to your intellectual dishonesty?
I tried to attribute the 'rape epidemic' narrative to you because when I cited it, you seemed to defend it. I said that the norm people were outraged over was phantom, and you quickly called me a liar. I cited the 'rape epidemic' narrative and you told me my head was in the sand.
I'm not sure what 'true equality' is supposed to be. If you mean equality of opportunity I'm on board and think we can do more for both men and women, but I disagree with the feminist notion that we need some sort of parity of outcomes. And I point to female friendly because there is now plenty of systemic bias against men. It is not as if we live in a society where only men have advantages.
I can agree with most of this, to an extent. I agree that we should strive for equality of opportunity and that there are distinct disadvantages that men have in society.
My problem with your comments is that you quickly jumped to a conclusion about what I believed and then argued against that stock character. I never defended the "epidemic" idea. I was attacking your comments that insinuated that there was never a real problem with sexual assault in our society, which is why I mentioned your "head being in the sand".
Most everyone agrees with equality of opportunity. The difference is where you think that some people are arguing for equality of outcome, when they think differently. I haven't talked to very many feminists (or liberals in general) that want equality of outcome. The difference seems to be that you (and most conservatives) have different ideas about how to achieve equality of opportunity when compared to how your average liberal thinks we can achieve that.
I also think that you're exaggerating how often men have a disadvantage compared to women. Yes, there are certainly issues where men are at a disadvantage, and it really grinds my gears when feminists just dismiss them (e.g. men having to sign up for the draft but not women, women having a massive advantage in child custody battles just by virtue of being the mother, men being far more likely to be sentenced to prison time, men being pigeon-holed into "masculine" roles, etc.), but it's not like society has suddenly swung to the point where women have just as many areas in life where they get an advantage over men. The world has been male-dominated in pretty much every society for pretty much all of human history. It's not like we magically turned that around in the last 30 years. There's still work to do.
People who don't take me seriously are often people who don't like having their opinions challenged with facts.
Incidents like Duke Lacross and UVA didn't take the media by storm because the public is dismissive of rape allegations. Quite the opposite actually. Society was quick to believe.
I've mentioned several times that I completely agree that we have a problem on college campuses with how rape allegations are handled. This statement does nothing in our dialog other than try to attribute the idea that I think that all campuses are dismissive of rape allegations, something that I never said. The only thing I ever mentioned were two anecdotal incidents to demonstrate that there is still a problem for some women and that their problem isn't completely de-legitimized just because some colleges have gone overboard with reacting.
Yes it is. That's what the objective facts will tell you. Rape, including campus rape, has been on the decline (not an 'epidemic') and I have never lived in a world where rape wasn't taken seriously and been considered one of the more heinous crimes. Like all crimes, justice is not always served, but that does not excuse a manufactured witch-hunt.
If you and others like you continue to seek injustice and inequality on this matter, you'll continue to get disagreement from me.
I never said rape incidences were increasing and I never even used the term "rape epidemic".
Yeah that whole 'innocent until proven guilty' was really... 'problematic.' All hail the new standard of 'listen and believe'.
I never mentioned anything about "innocent until proven guilty" being problematic and "listen and believe" ("guilty until proven innocent") being a good thing. This is an incredibly obvious attempt to trivialize my comments by creating a hugely exaggerated caricature of my statement.
I was alluding to the fact that rape has been the most accepted and under-reported crime for most of human history and that, for instance, marital rape wasn't universally criminalized in this country until 1993. There is a distinct and very prevalent/documented culture of skepticism or lack of action in the general population when it concerns sexual assault accusations.
I am not just talking about college campuses.
I'm talking about sexual assault as it pertains to our whole society. We have countless examples of this; schools or communities letting young athletes off the hook for this (Florida State investigation? That town in Ohio(?)?), comments about how "women shouldn't dress like sluts or walk alone in dark allies" (victim blaming that is irrelevant to where the majority of rapes actually take place), or that police are frequently overly-skeptical of rape claims and label them as "false allegations" in documents in direct violation of their protocol.
This entire argument started because I mentioned that the whole problem with college campuses handling accusations is an over-reaction to the problem of sexual assault in our society as a whole, and then you completely wrote that whole issue off, implying that there was never a need for a societal push to increase our awareness, understanding, and prosecution of rape (I have explicitly quoted you on this at least twice, so don't deny it).
What happened in 1993 is a red herring. We're talking about the last decade or so. If a woman had a hard time getting justice while married in 1993, that's a shame, but it doesn't mean that women have a hard time getting justice while unmarried and on campus.
I'll also point out that many consider a woman having non-consentual sex with a man to not be rape (no penetration of the man) and that the man in the video could have been the one who was actually sexually assaulted.
As for society being dismissive of rape allegations I'd have to see figures on that. But bear in mind that false rape accusations do exist, and that society should be skeptical when it comes to any accusation.
Real victim blaming shouldn't happen, but what is classified as victim blaming has gone too far. 'Don't walk alone in dark alley' sounds like good advice for both men and women!
What I've written off is the need for a new social crusade. Rape and sexual assault have been on the decline. Moreover, the new social crusade has relied heavily on false statistics and has pushed for the new campus rules that you agree have gone too far. I really don't think it was necessary and I think the facts bear out my opinion.
EPT
