I would agree with that Hanna - many of these encounters start with a party or drinking or meeting up someplace where there are other people who can add context. Typically two people don’t end up in bed together without some sort of prelude. Plus some of these events occurred in dorm rooms with roommates present, and yes, there are text messages, and instagram and all kinds of electronic communications. Operating on the assumption that women can’t make decisions when they drink and men can is ludicrous and just plain against everything I stand for and believe in so I hope that nonsense gets fixed. In general in my opinion the investigation and the hearing would take into consideration all the circumstances and actions surrounding the incident. Even the idea that a well intentioned person attempted to reframe the situation after the fact becomes part of the entire story. Picking and choosing what to utilize is just plain wrong so I hope that nonsense gets fixed. I also can’t stomach “3rd party” complaints on behalf of someone else - that has got to go – at least give students the agency to make their own decisions about the quality of their own sex lives and I hope that gets fixed in ensuing months. And finally if I university is going to allow the terms “rape” and “sexual assault” to be uttered or published then the university better get the police and their attorneys involved because rape and sexual assault are well established criminal laws in every state…and I hope they fix that too.
Yeah but that other evidence is going to be very ambiguous on the consent issue at the moment of truth. In fact, much of that evidence would tend to be wrongly exculpatory – she didn’t seem that drunk, she was flirting, she left with him voluntarily, she invited him to her room etc. etc. etc. As the advocates always tell us, the victims rarely act like the mythical “good victims” are supposed to act.
I like how mech put it in #197 above. You just have to realize/accept that conviction is going to be impossible much of the time. No matter what you do. I’d argue that it is impossible most of the time. Like maybe 75% of the time or more.
So maybe it isn’t smart to focus the effort primarily on something that is overwhelmingly bound to fail? Focus on stuff that has more promise.
"IMHO, Jameis Winston is a crummy example of “these cases are so hard to prove!” We have no idea what evidence might have turned up had the investigation begun promptly and professionally. That accuser went to police/medical care the same morning, and then there was an unreasonable delay. A lot of crimes become harder to prove if the police don’t act promptly after a report.:
The atmosphere at FSU is pretty toxic imo wrt the football players there. Now FSU football fans claim that the Tallahassee DA office is very aggressive (sometimes overstepping their bounds) when it comes to prosecuting the players. However the previous coach had this rule - if you’re charged with a misdemeanor, you can remain on the team, if it’s a felony, you’re off. The fact you need this rule or guideline should be indicative of the culture there. And Baylor, wow, I don’t want to even get started on that.
“All of the examples you gave in post 155 are civil matters. IMO rape is a criminal matter and a criminal matter requires proof beyond reasonable doubt. So asking for a higher standard of proof is not some sort of privilege.”
But even if you have proof beyond a reasonable doubt, you may still not get convicted, the jury system is not perfect, as we know from two high profile cases, OJ and Bill Cosby. In one case, a juror said she knew OJ was guilty but returned NG to get back at the Rodney King verdict. In the second case, Cosby admitted in a sworn deposition that he put drugs into women’s drinks to have sex with them. Also returned NG.
@CaliDad2020 - I do not suggest that schools require a criminal conviction. I realize my post (which was written very quickly) suggests that but I did post a clarification.
What I think is that there needs to be some evidence beyond a finger pointed at an accuser to throw someone out of school. I also think that if a college thinks a person may be guilty of a crime the matter should ALSO be referred to the police so that there can ALSO be a criminal investigation. Clearly, if the college thinks a person is a rapist it shouldn’t be enough to get them off campus. The college should also want them out of society.
The big problem I have is with those who think that an accusation of sexual misconduct should be enough to remove a person from school. There should be more than that. I don’t think that most accusers are falsely accusing anyone but the fact that they COULD be falsely accusing someone should be accounted for in the process.
@QuantMech - How could you possibly get that from my posts? No I do not think that "every man gets one rape. I never said, nor implied any such thing.
@northwesty - what do you mean by “has more promise?”
@theloniusmonk - I know a few players from my kids high school who were very turned off by the toxic football culuter at FSU. I have to concur that the Winston case is probably not a representative case of a regular Title IX case.
Nor are the one sided accounts that usually lead articles opposing Title IX adjudications. Those particular cases are chosen deliberately for those articles and the schools cannot by law respond. But despite a one sided account with no information whatsoever on what the school actually acted upon, many believe the story hook, line and sinker.
I prefer to evaluate these sorts of things after hearing both sides.
“Operating on the assumption that women can’t make decisions when they drink and men can is ludicrous and just plain against everything I stand for and believe in so I hope that nonsense gets fixed.”
Number one, it is not a woman/man thing It is a victim/assaulter thing. Put another crime to it. Pick one. Physical battery, theft, heck,even murder. Does drinking excuse you from these things?Just because you are impaired doesn’t mean someone can violate you, nor does it mean you can violate someone else.
And in addition that quote shows that the poster has little understanding of Title IX and campus proceedings. Men are entitled to file a complaint for sexual misconduct as well – and they have and women have been expelled. There is no presumption under Title IX that men are always the assaulters and women the complainants.
And then we have same sex relationships as well that involve sexual misconduct.
"- what do you mean by “has more promise?” "
Like maybe using resources to give frosh women an anti-rape training program like they’ve tried out in Canada? Probably a much better ROI than hiring more and more title ix staff chasing convictions that just aren’t going to happen regardless.
And please don’t say “do both.” Since no one has unlimited resources.
I’d love to see some data showing whether the Dear Colleague expenditures have had any meaningful impact. I’d guess not.
One better would be giving frosh “men” an anti-rape training program. It is NOT the victims’ fault. (Of course everyone would benefit from a program teaching them how to be aware of their surroundings and what situations would present a danger to them.)
@Momof3DDs-I think an anti rape training program, as suggested above would benefit both men and women. As a woman I tried to teach my sons not only to treat women with respect, but also to look out for their female friends in social situations. It would be great to have more education programs. I agree with @northwesty that it would be a productive use of funds.
Sure there are man on man or woman or woman or unsure on unsure cases of alleged sexual misconduct or assault but face it the vast majority are women and men who have differing renditions of a sexual encounter. People don’t have sex in a vacuum and Hanna is right there is almost always an evidence trail before and after. In my mind presumably with the absence of sheer force or violence people both end up in a bedroom under their own steam so what happens after that is the touchstone…even if the roommate is there. Drew Sterret got expelled from UOfM even those his roommate was in the room with them…so in today’s macabre world even a witness who says there was no force, no assault and seemingly a noisy willingness to which he texted them because they were keeping him awake doesn’t stop a uni heckbent on increasing their guilty column. It is wrong but it will be fixed.
All of which has zero to do with your statement that the system is operating on some"assumption that women can’t make decisions when they drink but men can." Title IX protections are available to both men and women and both sexes have taken advantage of those protections. Both women and men have been suspended or expelled for sexual misconduct.
The fact that more women may be filing complaints does not create an assumption that the protections are skewed toward women. Perhaps more women are on the receiving end of sexual harassment or men are less willing to step up and report.
Some of the comments here are so cringe worthy. Almost as if we are back in the 1950’s assigning blame…
Thank you @HarvestMoon1 and @MomOf3DDs for attempting to broaden the conversation and enlighten…sigh…
Yes. Exaclty. The question is not “who can make a decision” it is “should anyone be allowed to assume they can have sex with a person/grope a person/photograph or video a person who is not sober/awake/old or mentally capable enough to consent?”
The same logic can apply to lots of things. I go to dinner with someone. I’m a little short and want dessert. “Don’t worry, I’ll give you 5 bucks so you can have dessert.” The person giving me $5 for dessert drinks too much, or takes an allergy pills that knocks them out, or whatever. I drive them home. I put them to bed. I go in their wallet. Oh, more money. I can take this, they gave me $5 earlier, I’ll just take this 100 now…
No one would buy that. Even if I’m drunk too. Even if I believe the other person would let me take the $100.
The difference, of course, is that you can return the $100. You can’t “return” sexual assault (or any kind of physical assault or violence.)
Re #205, I agree that you did not say it explicitly, ProudPatriot, but I do think it is the logical implication of your earlier post, that just one person pointing a finger at the accused is not enough, coupled with the fact that a lot of these circumstances happen in private–and so, ipso facto, there will be only one person pointing a finger at the accused.
Take the Brock Turner case as an example. In my opinion, if he had taken his victim back to his dorm room before the assault occurred, he would probably be swimming for Stanford this year. It’s also an example that when there is a party, people may not recall the interactions between the person and his victim, leading up to the incident. One could scan the reports of the Stanford case to check whether this is true. Someone might have stopped them ahead of time (better for both), if they had tracked interactions.
The Brock Turner case is a poor example of my deeper concern, because it does involve both parties having a lot to drink. A lot of people are dismissive because they assume that the overwhelming majority of campus cases fit this model. But there are quite a few that don’t.
I am actually much more pessimistic about the likelihood of proving that an assault occurred, even when there are multiple accusers, if all of the actions took place in private.
I would have been inclined to say that a woman’s developing PTSD after an assault provided pretty strong evidence that the actions were non-consensual–much stronger than any of the forms of evidence suggested in #199. But on a different thread, Hanna suggested that a woman with PTSD might have had consensual intercourse that accidentally triggered a flashback to an earlier assault, and might then have mistakenly associated the earlier assault with the subsequent case of consensual intercourse–with an accusation made in the later case. This would be enough to raise a reasonable doubt in my mind (considered objectively), but at the same time, on an emotional basis, I deplore this suggestion.
(Edited in an attempt at clarity)
I think @MomOf3DDs, @CaliDad2020, and @HarvestMoon1 all missed the point of @momofthreeboys, which is that there’s no consensus on what rape is. I’m sure there’s case law on what the law is, but that doesn’t answer the moral or ethical questions of what the law should be. The issue is at what point is someone too drunk/high to consent, and how the definition of consent is applied unevenly. Some may think sex should be like MADD’s stance on driving(it shouldn’t happen if you’ve had anything to drink at all). Then there are others, including a lot of women, who may enjoy sex while under the influence of drugs or alcohol. Then, it’s applied unevenly. In theory, a man might claim he was raped when he received a …, from a female, while too drunk or high to consent. In practice, I don’t believe either law enforcement or a Title IX fact finder or disciplinary board would view such a case as anything more than a joke.