All UVa frats on suspension

Parents Forum
3701

Everyone is just focusing on the ‘sober brothers’, guarding the stairs, calling the police. The fraternity/sororities at UVa also agreed to more education classes and to following the rules that are already on the books but not followed. I think the Nationals of these houses will be watching.

I have seen a big difference in education, prevention, counseling from when I went to school. In my sorority house, which was about 6 blocks from campus in a residential neighborhood, and pretty dark and scary to walk home alone, we had a few talks about safety, but not until someone broke into the house and tried to attack our president (first bedroom off the stairs) did we take it more seriously and make sure all doors were locked, had plans to walk home together, used some common sense. Alcohol education? No. We could have kegs in the house my first year but then the law changed and we couldn’t. Now there is no alcohol at sorority houses (official anyway)

My daughter lives in a dorm across the street from her sorority house. If there is a sorority event, at the house or otherwise, she cannot leave alone but must be escorted back to her dorm or walk back with another sister (not a date). She could walk from the library, which is about 6 buildings away, or the gym or student union, but not across the street because the sorority is responsible for her if she is at a sorority event. Even if it is at a frat house, two sisters walk her home and then return to the event. She’s had mandatory classes on alcohol from the school and sorority, on physical safety, on date rape, on what to do about it. The school sponsors a lot of free things for the students to do on Friday nights, all sporting events are free to students, some cultural events like plays or concerts have a small fee but most don’t. The school tries to keep everyone involved, and so do the Greek houses. Most of the Greek houses are on University property, so the school has more control.

My nephew goes to the school I went to, and there is no university control over the fraternities and only a little over the sororities, all located off campus. There is still a huge difference from my day with sober brothers/drivers, education about the dangers of alcohol, drugs, sexual assault now. They are trying to improve, to make the school safer.

3702

Yes and no. The definition of binge drinking is four drinks in a short period of time for women, five for men. But that is roughly the same amount that will make a person unable to drive. I gave the DUI definition just so that people could get a feel of how drunk the person is, for binge drinking purposes. Not that drunk, actually.

JHS, I don’t know where you went to school, but it may not have been representative. Schools in the Northeast and Midwest, schools with a significant fraternity presence, rural schools, secular schools, schools that are proportionately whiter than the average, schools with a higher proportion of men than the average all have higher rates of drinking. University of Wisconsin, say, has a higher rate of binge drinking than UC Irvine. Dartmouth has a higher rate of binge drinking than Wellesley.

3703

Momofthreeboys, are you against the suspensions of the three boys at the univ of oregon?

I am asking you because you have argued that schools should not be involved in the decision making process when it comes to rape.

If the above is incorrect, you can set me straight.

3704

By the way, I am picking my wife up and walking her home tonight because men are the rapists. She is not going to be drunk. Her intelligence is high.

3705

No I’ve never ever said that colleges should not be involved with issues of sexual misconduct. I’ve said I do not think colleges should adjudicate felony matters.

I don’t know much about the Oregon case, but i don’t have a problem with colleges suspending students for honor code violations as long as the process is fair and is the student is accorded due process and there is evidence of guilt and there is no other way to separate the two students involved. I’m also in favor of keeping track of accusers and accused to make sure there is no pattern. I am in favor of mandatory reporting in cases of sexual assault. I’m on the fence how I feel about expulsions in the absence of a finding of criminal guilt.

3706

Rape is a felony. So… You don’t believe the school should have suspended the guys?

Ok… Momofthreeboys, you edited your post after I posted mine which is fine.

3707

Forgive me if this has been already posted, but I think it is worth pointing out that most rapes are committed by a very small number of men (http://www.davidlisak.com/wp-content/uploads/pdf/RepeatRapeinUndetectedRapists.pdf):

“Pooling data from four samples in which 1,882 men were assessed for acts of interpersonal violence, we report on 120 men whose self-reported acts met legal definitions of rape or attempted rape, but who were never prosecuted by criminal justice authorities. A majority of these undetected rapists were repeat rapists, and a majority also committed other acts of interpersonal violence. The repeat rapists averaged 5.8 rapes each. The 120 rapists were responsible for 1,225 separate acts of interpersonal violence, including rape, battery, and child physical and sexual abuse.”

The whole thing is worth reading because I think it clearly demonstrates that going after sexual assault on campus is not about going after all men. It’s about educating the whole student body to recognize rape when they see it, stand up for victims, and be responsible for their community.

3708

Regarding the question about Oregon dstark ask me: I would not support suspension unless there were multiple offenses on record - see my comment about keeping track. I could possibly see a suspension if the case was slated for trial and if the charge was an unprovoked forcible sexual assault of a nature that fairly obviously puts others on campus in harm’s way. Sometimes people don’t make bail for these types of situations where they are clearly a threat to others and the law keeps this in mind. People are innocent until proven guilty. Basic right in the United States.

3709

One of the guys involved in the gang rape has been accused of gang rapes twice. Two different schools. Now there is a third school interested in him. I guess he is a good basketball player.

What about my rights as a student? Do I have a right to attend a school without a student accused of a gang rape also attending the school. I would personally rather go to a school with somebody who cheats on a test than somebody who may be a gang raper.

Does a school have a right to pick and choose their students?
Can a school say, “We don’t want students with accusations of gang rapes at our schools? We are going to investigate and if we think there is a chance a student gang raped somebody, we will suspend or expell the student.”

There are multiple rights issues here.

The case isn’t going to trial. Most rape cases don’t go to trial.

I will tell you one thing momofthreeboys, I don’t want this guy living near me. He can live near you. :slight_smile:

3710

Not necessarily. That is what jails are for - to keep people away from the rest of society. A restraining order is used to keep someone away from you. Sometimes they go hand-in-hand, a restraining order alone, or in conjunction to keep someone away who is out of jail on bail (as well as other uses). If I had pressed criminal charges against someone and I knew they were living a block or more away I’d probably want a restraining order…but that’s covered under Title IX. Once the student notifies the college of an accusation the college should do what it can within it’s structure to keep the two parties separated during the investigation by the college and whatever else is going on. Again I haven’t read the detail in the Oregon case so can’t comment on that specific situation. That said, in today’s climate colleges can do whatever they want…but they are rapidly moving toward buttoning up their policies - 72% of total payouts from the largest college insurance company went to accused men. Until our country changes, due process and rights of the accused will always trump. There are still many cases pending that will continue to shape the landscape and determine exactly what “due process” means in terms of these college adjudicating criminal matters and the students involved in these adjudications.

I believe that courts have upheld, at least tentatively, that a student and a university do indeed have a legal contract. So as you say, there are many issues at play. In my opinion the most interesting are the obligation the college has under Title IX, the tenuous obligation the university has contractually with each student, the obligation the university has under civil law.

FIRE has an excellent, excellent website and many pages that address rights:

http://www.thefire.org/fire-guides/fires-guide-to-due-process-and-fair-procedure-on-campus/fires-guide-to-due-process-and-fair-procedure-on-campus-full-text/#Contents6

This is just snippet on suspensions:

3711

deepseafish, we’ve previously discussed the Lisak claims about the large majority of rapes coming from a few serial predators. Many of us are reluctant to declare that the claims are definitely true without some more verification. It’s just one guy, with a small study. He could be wrong.

3712

Just jumping in here to say that my D’s sorority had "sobers’ assigned at every frat party the sorority was invited to. The purpose was two-fold - protect a drunk sister from potential assaults and protect the house from accusations of poor behavior. As I remember her telling it, they were very diligent about the responsibility.

3713

Hmmmmm…this looked like a tough case for the plaintiff…

Except there are two women who sad they were raped by the same guy…the star.

http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/12132479/attorneys-jameis-winston-sexual-assault-accuser-file-civil-suit-florida-state-university

3714

I saw all the other posts in response to mine. Thank you for your responses.

I think it is excellent for students and other parents to see the different points of view given the disparate posts.

Wow, we definitely have a different approach to life, as I take full responsibility for my immediate personal safety and taught my boys the same. Wife is also the same. I consciously and actively do not put myself knowingly in a position where I am totally dependent on someone else to save my hide, if I can help it; I think ahead, far ahead.

And, when there is problem in my life, family, or company, I fix it with all the control buttons I have, and I darn sure do not wait around for others to change their behavior, while I am being damaged in some way. I cut the damage off at the pass or just stop the damage cold in its tracks head-on. I also do not wait around for government and other entities to help me, while I am getting my butt kicked. I stop the butt-kicking hard and fast and hit back hard too if necessary.

Now, if advocates are correct, then college females are definitely getting their butts kicked on campus, i.e., assaulted. In my view, to then teach young females that it is fine to continue the same behaviors that is highly associated with getting their butts kicked, while begging and waiting for government and schools to hopefully change others is completely foreign to me and my family. Waiting around for others, while getting our butts kicked, is not our style.

This waiting for schools and government approach is really only teaching dependency on government and others for your immediate personal safety, which is not the government’s or anyone else’s job. No matter how safe an environment is created and developed, no entity can guarantee, but more importantly, no entity is responsible for your immediate safety, only you are.

This is really only common sense because no entity can react quick enough and the person doing the attacking could care less about laws and rules, so who cares what laws are on the books at that moment. Those laws are not helping and will never help you if the attacker does not respect them. Therefore, at that moment, your personal safety is all on you.

It is clear to me that young college females who drink to the point of not being able to take smart, personal decisions have not internalized or have not been taught the concept of making sure they have a safe zone around their personal space where they (not someone else) are thinking, responsive and sharp enough to take useful actions against a bodily threat.

No one argues against the fact that the perpetrator is the party causing harm, but it boggles my mind why anyone would knowingly make it easier for perpetrators (who have no respect for their rights or for laws) to harm him / her and then think somehow that is an empowered position to make yourself an easier target. No, it is simply martyrdom, and no empowerment takes place from that, only more damage.

3715

I saw all the other posts in response to mine. Thank you for your responses.

I think it is excellent for students and other parents to see the different points of view given the disparate posts.

Wow, we definitely have a different approach to life, as I take full responsibility for my immediate personal safety and taught my boys the same. Wife is the same. I consciously and actively do not put myself knowingly in a position where I am dependent on someone else to save my hide, if I can help it; I think ahead, far ahead.

And, when there is problem in my life, family, or company, I fix it with all the control buttons I have, and I darn sure do not wait around for others to change their behavior, while I am being damaged in some way. I cut the damage off at the pass or just stop the damage cold in its tracks head-on. I also do not wait around for government and other entities to help me, while I am getting my butt kicked. I stop the butt-kicking hard and fast and hit back hard too if necessary.

Now, if advocates are correct, then college females are definitely getting their butts kicked on campus, i.e., assaulted. In my view, to then teach young females that it is fine to continue the same behaviors that is highly associated with getting their butts kicked, while begging and waiting for government and schools to hopefully change others is completely foreign to me and my family. Waiting around for others, while getting our butts kicked, is not our style.

This waiting for schools and government approach is really only teaching dependency on government and others for your immediate personal safety, which is not the government’s or anyone else’s job. No matter how safe an environment is created and developed, no entity can guarantee, but more importantly, no entity is responsible for your immediate safety, only you are.

This is really only common sense because no entity can react quick enough and the person doing the attacking could care less about laws and rules, so who cares what laws are on the books at that moment. Those laws are not helping and will never help you if the attacker does not respect them. Therefore, at that moment, your personal safety is all on you.

It is clear to me that young college females who drink to the point of not being able to take smart, personal decisions have not internalized or have not been taught the concept of making sure they have a safe zone around their personal space where they (not someone else) are thinking, responsive and sharp enough to take useful actions against a bodily threat.

No one argues against the fact that the perpetrator is the party causing harm, but it boggles my mind why anyone would knowingly make it easier for perpetrators (who have no respect for their rights or for laws) to harm him / her and then think somehow that is an empowered position to make yourself an easier target. No, it is simply martyrdom, and no empowerment takes place from that, only more damage.

3716

NOTE: Have not a clue how the double posts occurred in Posts 3713 and 3714, but it did.

What a tragic situation because it would have been a whole lot smarter if she knew not to be drunk and literally out of her senses like that in a public place. Drinking in her dorm surrounded by girlfriends, fine, but in public in a place a unfamiliar to her just stacked the decks against her.

Unfortunately, she paid the ultimate price because that predator (like all predators) did not give a hoot about her rights. And sadly, not exercising smart personal responsibility is betting on the luck of the draw and on the kindness of strangers who one hopes knows how to step in or is even around to step in. Hannah lost the bet. But, why she would even think it was OK to bet her personal safety in that way is troubling.

As a male, I cannot fathom putting myself in such a position. Why a young female would even think this is smart and wise I will never understand given the risks of predators and other intoxicated males who are no longer thinking straight, just like the intoxicated young female is not thinking straight. I just do not get how that is viewed as acceptable behavior.

I do not have a DD, but I was there at the dinner table when Dad and Mom talked about such things with my sister, who is one year older. And the two most emphasized points are so different than what adults today seem to think is OK.

  1. They emphatically told my sister never to put herself in a position where she cannot clearly extricate herself from a bad situation on her own accord - that means being able to think straight.
  2. Also told her to be always in a position to control the situation to the best of her ability by being able to act decisively - that too means thinking straight.

Therefore, I do not understand why young females are getting intoxicated to the point they cannot even accomplish these two basic tasks of immediate personal responsibility and safety.

Just do not get it, and I am fine with not getting it, given the carnage being left behind.

3717

The University of Oregon case is puzzling to me. I think it’s important to read the DA’s statement explaining why he chose not prosecute, not just the Huffington Post’s comments.
http://dailyemerald.com/2014/05/06/lane-county-district-attorney-alex-gardner-releases-statement-about-alleged-rape/

His major reasons for not pursuing the case were questions about the victim’s level of intoxication and questions about whether the acts were consensual or forced.

The Huffington Post wrote: “In a lengthy statement this week, Gardner repeatedly blamed the victim for not taking action to stop the assault. The prosecutor raised the victim’s sexual history as a reason for his decision not to prosecute.”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/05/09/university-of-oregon-rape_n_5297928.html

Although the DA did question why the victim remained in the presence of the perpetrators for several hours in several places, this isn’t the same thing as blaming “the victim for not taking action to stop the assault.”

Also I don’t find anything in the DA’s statement that indicates that he “raised the victim’s sexual history as a reason for his decision not to prosecute.”

Did I miss that or was that in a different statement?

The DA’s statement concludes “While there is no doubt the incidents occurred, the conflicting statements and actions by the victim make this case unprovable as a criminal case”

The Providence College case involving one of the three Oregon players (Austin) is also somewhat murky. When Austin and another player were accused of sexual assault, they were immediately suspended from the team (not the college) while the college investigated. At that point Austin chose to transfer.

The men’s lawyer said “The school did an exhaustive review [but] there was never a finding against either of the students that there was a sexual assault.” The other player, Rodney Bullock, remained at Providence and rejoined the team.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/19/providence-players-sexual-assault_n_4994133.html

In other words it appears that the college investigative committee didn’t find Austin or Bullock responsible (guilty) for the charges.

3718

I do like some of 3713 and 3715, awc. Some of it sounds renegade, but I agree we need a whole lot more wisdom, from the get go. No one scenario describes all the problem, but kids need to think. And when there is a problem, no one should sweep it under the rug.

D1 tested plenty of limits at a work hard/party hard school. Unscathed. Now the new prez is clamping down on drinking, including some beloved raucous events. The new UVa arrangement does seem limp.

3719

Ok. I read the links and the testimony in the Oregon case. I can see why the DA did not want to prosecute the case.

3720

Yes well, if this is the same person she’s going to try a civil suit:

http://www.cnn.com/2015/01/09/justice/university-of-oregon-title-ix-lawsuit/