<p>
</p>
<p>And that is one of the stupidest things I have ever heard. Our system is so broken. </p>
<p>I think you could probably get it in if there’s pattern of behavior.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’m willing to be lenient here, because after all, it’s he-said she-said. But he hasn’t given me any basis for his belief that she consented. As I understand you, she says she didn’t do anything at all to indicate consent, and he also says she didn’t do one single thing to indicate that she consented: she didn’t say Yes, Yes, Yes, she didn’t fling himself at him, she didn’t drag him down to the bed by his necktie or start kissing him like there was no tomorrow or anything. So then why does he assert she consented? He is admitting that he had sex with her despite, according to his own admission, not one shred of evidence that she consented. That is rape.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Umm, that <em>is</em> my point, may be? That it’s not rape? But that it still gets counted as rape because the girl may regret it later, and because she is drunk rape victim advocates circle the wagons and tell her that she is a rape victim because she 1) regrets the sex now after a few months, and 2) couldn’t have made a decision to not have the sex because she was drunk? And that gets counted into the numbers and gets reported as the rape epidemic? And based on that laws are changed which are heavily discriminatory towards boys?</p>
<p>I have been to frat parties at uva. Mostly day parties. I was at one on the last football game of the season which is known as fourth year fifths. That one was ugly. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well, I didn’t watch it or comment on it because I saw it quite a while ago in another thread and we discussed it then. It is very good, IMHO, in illustrating positive bystander behavior.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You’ve got the wrong standard of proof here. She (or he, if she is the accuser) has to at least give me a reason to believe that the other person consented. They can say s/he said yes, or they can say that s/he indicated consent by a wide variety of other means. But there has to have been something. It’s not that the accused person has to <em>prove</em> that the accuser consented, but if they don’t even <em>assert</em> that the accuser demonstrated consent, then they are admitting the rape.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I have no idea. All of them should. And any of them who don’t get consent, and who nevertheless proceed, and who subsequently are accused of sexual assault, should be in big trouble.</p>
<p>It may be that women who drunkenly jump on guys are acting in the belief that guys rarely accuse women in such cases. And they are probably right in that belief. That’s not going to be a defense if they’re accused.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Oh no! He is telling you that she gave all these signals in deed, but she never opened her mouth. She is telling you that he misrepresented it all and all she was doing was trying to solve yesterday’s crossword puzzle, though she may have done some knitting as well in the middle of all this. It’s a classic example of he said she said. Only one thing is clear, no one said no and no one said yes and no one pushed the other back (both parties agree on that). Under the old system this wouldn’t be a rape.</p>
<p>Did you know that in some Ohio School the new campus sex policy requires clear discussion of <em>why</em> the two people are having sex as well? If you don’t know the why of it, then you haven’t received enthusiastic consent. Of course, you have to get clear enthusiastic consent on who, where, how, and when, but that’s not enough. You also need to know the why.</p>
<p>I wonder who wrote this set of standards. Remember, these are the standards boys will be judged against. A girl may have written up a note detailing each act, the time and place for each, as well as duration, but she may not have delved into her psyche and figured out the why. Then the boy is out of luck.</p>
<p>You can’t make this s**t up. It’s better than Woody Allen in Deconstructing Harry.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>She can give you all kidns of reason to believe, but he is saying that she is mistaken. People do read physical signs wrong. Why would you think her read that “He Was Just Asking For It” is accurate? You wouldn’t believe a boy who says that about a girl, now would you?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes that leaves 20 out of 100, right? Or 20% of the total incidence is real rape? I took the CDC number of 19% over 6 years, got 3.33% in a year, took 20% of that or ~0.7%, and rounded it upped to get to 1%, which is what I based my UVA number on. By the way, I didn’t calculate, someone else did. I just said 1% incidence.</p>
<p>Today after reading the Slate article it’s clear that I overestimated. The real incidence is ~0.25%. But that’s not that I showed in my 20% example.</p>
<p>Hang on a sec, SoWhat. Yesterday you agreed that there were 80 cases a year at UVA of actual rape. Not drunk sex, but actual rape. You assured us that this meant that rape was rare at UVa. Now you are backtracking?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Both claims are medically 100% inaccurate. </p>
<p>Medics and soldiers in the field have reported this since the dawn of war. An issue that some soldiers have is they do get sexually aroused in battle when in great fear. It is in response to the rise in testosterone in their system because of the power needed to perform their duties. It is testosterone that keeps their muscles toned, but also increases their sex drive, as a natural side effect. </p>
<p>It falsely believed that females and pheromones are necessary for an erection. Erections are primarily driven by emotional responses, that is why men do not get them around all females, just particular ones.</p>
<p>Medically, incapacitation is not some line that one crosses over and then everything stops, so this is wrong as well.</p>
<p>My suggestion is to go to a male urologist, say the above exactly as you believe, and then ask that doctor to go on record supporting your claims publicly. See what the doctor says to you.</p>
<p>OK, back to topic.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>What in the world don’t you agree with? I usually agree with much of what you say so I am confused by this attitude. </p>
<p>Does UVA allow alcohol in dorms? Did we have a lying RA who gave us the rules when we moved my kid in as a 1st year? </p>
<p>Can you show me even 1 example of a UVA sanctioned even on grounds where there was alcohol and underage students were allowed to drink?</p>
<p>And you do realize that UVA routinely busts kids for underage drinking. I know kids that it has happened to. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>No, but I pay so darn many of them, and they are obligated to answer my questions, that I effectively have the resources to play one on TV.</p>
<p>Awcntdb, How do you know if two people are in the same drunken state? </p>
<p>Does a drunk person have carte blanche to do whatever he wants? Hey! The other person was drunk too. We were equally drunk. So I s…her. In effect, You are giving carte blanche to these guys? Aren’t you? </p>
<p>Drunk on drunk sex. There are predators out there. Let’s not fool ourselves. Some are dressed nicely too. </p>
<p>Roofies don’t exist? </p>
<p>Did you read the New Orleans link? Cases are thrown out left and right before they are ever investigated. If you leave a window open you may get hit in the face by one of the files. Maybe not. I dont think several detectives ever started a file. ;)</p>
<p>I have a mentally challenged daughter. Are there a lot of cases where 2 mentally challenged people did what the lawyer said and somebody sued for rape? </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You left that part off before. That changes things completely. He says she consented, by various actions that I, the college tribunal, think would be reasonably interpreted to be consent. She says either that she didn’t do those things, or they didn’t indicate consent. </p>
<p>Then it becomes a matter of her word against his. I am not going to convict him with no evidence. Case dismissed.</p>
<p>I don’t see how verbal consent makes this scenario worse, when one or the other is lying. Either one of them could lie just as easily about verbal consent as about non-verbal consent. He could say she said Yes when she didn’t; she could deny she said Yes when she did. Same as non-verbal consent-- he could say she hauled him down when she didn’t, she could deny hauling him down when she did.</p>
<p>For me, the verbal consent is only useful because it can be requested and not gotten. If you ask your partner whether this is OK, and they say it isn’t, then you just got a message to stop. </p>
<p><a href=“UVA response to the Rolling Stone fiasco: Teresa Sullivan and Tommy Reid promise to stay the course.”>http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2014/12/10/uva_response_to_the_rolling_stone_fiasco_teresa_sullivan_and_tommy_reid.html</a></p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>If only life were so easy. Now you should go and read some of the new standards on Yes means Yes and what they mean. There is an overbearing burden of proof on the accused, and by that I mean boys as, you are right, boys may regret having sex but they don’t typically cry rape. That’s why I kept giving the hint - the boy admits that the girl didn’t verbally say yes, the boy only thought that through her actions the girl meant yes. Thoughts are for the birds. Anyway, even a verbal yes is not really enough, as some schools get really philosophical on this - as to the whys for intercourse (surprise! we wanted to make a baby before mid terms!).</p>
<p>This is reality. Yes, there only has been a few lawsuits so far, but that’s because the tribunals are so new, too. Let them prime up and start producing what they are intended to do for the general public, a steady stream of red meat in the form of boys who were expelled with the sitgma of being a rapist (good luck, boys!) simply because they didn’t fill in all the forms of the university sex handbook to the satisfaction of some bureaucrat who is judge, jury, and executioner, and is not going to allow pesky things such as fact finding, representation, and cross examination.</p>
<p>Welcome to backlash. Civil libertarians are not going to stand by this. They have always been very dependable friends of the feminists, but this is a wrong place to poke. Bring back the old standard of clear and convincing evidence that colleges used in the past (but that hardly got any convictions as there is hardly ever any clear and convincing evidence) and incur the wrath of the rape victim adcocates. Implement in full swing the new standard of Stalinist style purge kangaroo courts, and incur the wrath of the Civil Libertarians. What’s a college to do?</p>
<p>This will be interesting.</p>
<p>PS: I do wish some girls get on the verge of being kicked out too for not getting an Enthusiastic Yes. That will stop this nonsense much faster. No, I don’t want anyone to get kicked out. These kids are just having fun.</p>
<p>Latest on the story from the Washington Post -</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/u-va-students-challenge-rolling-stone-account-of-attack/2014/12/10/ef345e42-7fcb-11e4-81fd-8c4814dfa9d7_story.html?hpid=z1”>http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/u-va-students-challenge-rolling-stone-account-of-attack/2014/12/10/ef345e42-7fcb-11e4-81fd-8c4814dfa9d7_story.html?hpid=z1</a></p>
<p>Clearly none of us have any idea what actually happened to Jackie, but this article seems to indicate that her story might be a total hoax …</p>
<p>@awcntdb concerning post 2090:</p>
<p>You will never convince me that both claims are 100% inaccurate. I will concede that I should have said “most” or some other qualifier with respect to claim 1. In reading some case studies I see that some of what you say is true about fear, but it also says it is usually in pre-pubescent males and that it goes away after puberty. It goes on to say that males in fear can still get erections when manually stimulated which I guess probably happens in my scenario so I stand corrected, from that aspect of things. My apologies.</p>
<p>Where I strong disagree with you is the statement that
</p>
<p>Are you saying that incapacitation only occurs when someone is unconscious? If that is what you are saying then I think you are so wrong. Alcohol is a drug. Anyone under the influence of a drug can be so “out of it” that they are incapacitated. Next time you (or one of your lawyers) is in court try telling the judge that the person who was just coming out of anesthesia and incoherent wasn’t incapacitated and that they consented to give away all their money, or verbally consented when the nurse asked if she could have sex with them. </p>
<p>There is clearly a line somewhere along the continuum where once crosses into incapacitation. That is just medical fact. When a person is dying of alcohol poisoning or other drug overdose, and are almost dead, there is still a point where they respond to pain etc. They might even babble incoherently. They aren’t passed out but there clearly aren’t able to give consent to anything. For that reason I think I must have misunderstood your claim.</p>
<p>Now this is becoming seriously strange…texting with a non-existent person?</p>