<p>Something may have happened at a fraternity. Things are happening at fraternities, dorms, houses at lots of schools, unfortunately. Something may well have happened to Jackie at UVa. We just don’t know.
CF I believe the university and IFC have been pretty clear that they certainly do not condone rape.</p>
<p>I just hope Jackie is cooperating with the police, if this is true. The fact people are saying she is not cooperating with the police does not look good on her part. That would be bad advice if she were told that at this stage. Hope this has changed. She has a lawyer now so talking the police should be a formality, unless she needs to protect herself. </p>
<p>@dstark, I saw your one post with a question back there a few pages. I will get to it. </p>
<p>Toxic sex and toxic relationships go hand in hand and are not that uncommon. We’ve all had friends that were caught in that situation. And i’m sure the olders of us have all found ourselves in some sort of toxic situation. All I hope is that my H and I have raised our kids in an environment where we were fairly candid about the good and the bad in relationships and to raise the kids to have a healthy self-image. In my experience most people that find themselves in toxic situations are there because they are either very naive or have poor self-image and don’t know how to get themselves out. People that are toxic don’t generally even know how toxic they are without being forced or voluntarily going into therapy. I’m not sure how you educate that on a broad scale - it’s definitely not the the purple dinosaur school of “everyone’s wonderful”…it’s really more than that. </p>
<p>Sometimes I think people get caught because it’s aspirational - they think if they get involved with a particular person it will benefit them, or elevate them and that can lead to toxic sex. There was some expression and I can’t remember if it was a movie or what it was and the character said “you complete me.” It used to make me gag because I pretty much felt I was fully formed going into relationships and I really wasn’t looking for someone to “complete me.” </p>
<p>Thr dailymail referenced the ny times snd the ifc story is a little different.</p>
<p>I don’t get the trashing of jackie. Jackie has serious problems no matter what. If Jackie had a psychological break…</p>
<p>^^Agree and I think most people would agree that whatever the situation, Jackie would benefit from some help. Whether it was needed before this incident or because of something that happened at UVa…at this point it doesn’t really matter because it’s the here and now and the future that matter.</p>
<p>At this point I’m really questioning whether anything actually happened to Jackie at all … or if she made the whole thing up starting in 2012 to court the attentions/sympathies of her friend Randall. That’s the gist I get from the Washington Post article. Her friends never met the guy; nobody by the name she gave her friends ever went to UVa. “The guy” texted with Jackies friends, lamenting that she was interested in some first year instead of him; then sends an email to Randall (the friend in whom Jackie was romantically interested) relaying all the nice things Jackie has to say about him. “The guy” she names sends pictures of himself to her friends, but it turns out to be someone she knew of from HS. Sounds to me like “The guy” was Jackie, and the attack was manufactured. Seriously disturbed? Yes. Impossible? No, absolutely not. Our family had a horrible incident many years ago when my sister got involved with a man who <em>faked his own infant daughter’s death</em> to ply the sympathies of my sister and my parents (who got a bad vibe from him from the get-go and were suspicious…). </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Nope, that statement would be a horrendously bad PR move.</p>
<p>This statement would not fly in the face of the current political climate. Simply because the statement does not acknowledge what the advocacy groups believe, and it is them the IFC is really addressing. The groups believe that: 1) rape accusers never lie, and therefore, 2) Jackie is actually a bona fide rape victim.</p>
<p>The IFC would be nuts to put out a noncommittal statement because the advocacy groups position is that there is nothing but truth that comes out of rape accusers’ mouths. And to be noncommittal would be seen, by default, as applying a sense of doubt to Jackie’s claim. Big no-no there. </p>
<p>The response to the above statement would be something like this, “The IFC, like all rape apologists and deniers, by refusing to acknowledge Jackie’s rape is proving again how much work needs to be done to get people to take rape victims seriously. Doubting a rape victim, even for second, just re-victimizes her, especially when done publicly for the world to see. Shame on the IFC.”</p>
<p>Yeah, they would be toast. </p>
<p>Oh give me a break. </p>
<p>Yup to awc…</p>
<p>Awcntdb , don’t bother answering my question. Post 2147 is enough for me.</p>
<p>D1 mentioned to me the other day that there was a girl in her dorm who was allowed to have a dog because she had been raped. The implication being that she had been raped before she came to the university. It raises a rather delicious suggestion…</p>
<p>We all have constitutional rights, but some rights seem to trump others at various times. The 2nd amendment and religious freedom come to mind. But the ADA seems to trump everything! If a rape victim has a counselor certified emotional support service dog, there is probably not one thing a college can do to stop her. Want to swim laps? Fido the giant Rottweiler can sit near the pool edge and guard. Chem lab? Fido will be right under your lab table. Run into Rapey Mc Raperston as you walk across campus? Fido can take care of that too! Mwahahaha.</p>
<p>Greenwitch, I liked your video but are you kidding? Somebody was raped and you care that she walks around with a dog?</p>
<p>CC doesn’t make me feel good about humanity. :)</p>
<p>Sorry if I wasn’t clear. I’m glad she has her dog and I think colleges would take rape victims more seriously if they all insisted on having them too. Colleges seem to want to either sweep the cases under the rug or do idiotic things In order to look busy. Dogs might just simplify it all.</p>
<p>In another thread, not dealing with rape, we looked into emotional support animals. The ADA does not seem to regard emotional support animals in the same way it regards service dogs. I doubt that the college is required to allow an emotional support dog as it would be required to allow a seeing eye dog. if you have contrary information please post it.</p>
<p>I don’t know how I could have read your post any other way. </p>
<p>I just read it again and it is worse the second time. ;)</p>
<p>Very offensive. </p>
<p>I still like the video. </p>
<p>
[quote]
We all have constitutional rights, but some rights seem to trump others at various times. The 2nd amendment and religious freedom come to mind. But the ADA seems to trump everything! If a rape victim has a counselor certified emotional support service dog, there is probably not one thing a college can do to stop her. Want to swim laps? Fido the giant Rottweiler can sit near the pool edge and guard. Chem lab? Fido will be right under your lab table. Run into Rapey Mc Raperston as you walk across campus? Fido can take care of that too! Mwahahaha.</p>
<p>There was an emotional support pig in a plane. </p>
<p>This thread’s certainly run the gamut. </p>
<p>Somewhere within this thread I read a poster stating that 1% of girls that are raped whereas only .1% of boys are accused and this is not a valid argument to throw innocent young men under the bus. If you are innocent but accused and your life dreams are destroyed is that okay? How would you feel as their parent? Stories such as Jackie which are unfolding with the facts or purported facts changing daily is not going to help future rape victims. </p>
<p>On another note how many posters on here ever been asked by a friend or family member to do something that they didn’t feel like doing and initially said no but later were coaxed into saying yes. Did you give into buying a toy for your child, or agree to go out to dinner after saying no but later acquiescing? The same thing happens all the time with sex partners. Now if you said no initially to your husband or wife or boyfriend/girlfriend but later went with it is that rape? Holding innocence to the standard of a verbal yes, yes, yes is not a realistic standard. </p>
<p>College administrators should not be regulating sex on campus. Either 18 years are adults or they are not. We entrust them to protect our nation as they can serve in the military and go to war but they can’t handle their own sexual affairs? I still don’t get why an 18 year old can go to war yet it is illegal for them to have an alcoholic beverage. </p>
<p>If two college age students have been drinking it is wrong that the boy is held to a different standard, a higher standard than the girl. In the heat of the moment I don’t see most students having a philosophical discussion of consent. </p>
<p>The burden of proof in our judicial system does not rest on the defendant but on the accuser/prosecutor. It is not up to the accused to provide proof of their innocence but rather it is up to the accuser to provide proof of guilt. For colleges to follow a lesser threshold will mean these cases will end up in a court of law. Parents are not going to sit idly with their sons expelled from college with the word rapist attached to their name without pursuing damages in court. In the end colleges will be paying millions to their former students wrongly accused. </p>
<p>^^The .1% innocent men are just collateral damage for the 1% alleged victims whether or not rape did actually occur. No one cares about the .1%. That is the impression I get. Otherwise, why ask questions like, “Are you kidding me? Only 36 cases per year” or something to that effect.</p>