Maybe you recall the Civil Rights Act?
Why don’t you just answer the question directly?
The look-alike guy has the right not to be harassed. in the situation we’re discussing, it’s not clear that the woman is presently accusing the guy of anything. As described, it’s the college, not the woman, that is making ridiculous demands on him. (Yes, they may be making those demands on her behalf, but we’ve not heard that she herself is harassing him.)
Sometimes, if it is too difficult to admit that one has been consistently advancing a ridiculous argument, it is a good idea to quietly leave the thread.
@JustOneDad If I feel annoyed by your presence on CC forum discussions, should I ask the admins to ban you from any discussion that I partake in? Maybe even force you to go offline whenever I’m registered as online? Would that be fair?
And this is meant as an analogy: me being the girl on campus, you the guy restricted from going places she goes to. And yes, I just compared a real life situation to a hypothetical one on the internet.
By all means, feel free to be as evasive with answering my question as you have been with everybody else’s. It would just serve to prove that you really have no argument. I don’t know why, but you remind me of a certain fictional character by the name of Peter van Houten —> when asked a direct question, goes rhetorical trying to impress people with his “genius”. In other words: sad and pointless.
Please do not participate in this discussion if all you have are cryptic comments and turned-around questions. If you have something useful that adds to the conversation, share it. People have come here to discuss a certain topic, not play a Moriarty version of a crossword puzzle. I believe some posters here share my opinion on this
New world record - shortest time to filter!
You’d have to provide the full and exact text of the complaint in order for a decision to be made. Because you can’t investigate “black men” as a whole, it’s likely this would result in additional counseling for the complainant. I hope you can understand why making a complaint about a single person is different from complaining about a protected group.
You can ask all you want, but since no sexual harassment has been alleged and since CC is not an educational institution and likely does not receive Title IX funds, I would be very surprised if their obligations to either you or me are anything even similar to the participants in this case.
Hope you aren’t planning for law school.
Sounds like InfinityMan might be applying to charm school, not law school, and may have a better chance of admittance than some others here. Just an observation…
So why do the girl’s rights trump the innocent lookalike’s?
So, a number of you have said that the poor male student hasn’t done anything wrong which seems to be a key component of your outrage over the accommodations in this case. I’m not going to look back, but I think at least one person alluded to the guy simply having some compassion for a fellow student, and voluntarily cooperating to restrict his activities in a way that gives the rape victim some relief. I’d have to point out that would also represent an accommodation on her part in that she would know the man is still present on campus, but it’s just much less likely that she would see him and trigger the fear.
However, I would have to say that the majority of the responses indicate people feel adamant about asserting every right they have (and more) in an effort to protect themselves.
So, now that we’re doing hypotheticals, ranging from the ridiculous to the simply uneducated, here are a couple;
- What if the university asked you to restrict your activities in an effort to help another student undergoing counseling for rape trauma? It would involve primarily your job at the copy center, but they will get you another similar job at the Law Library. It’s unlikely to affect your other classes, but in order to make this work, you need to run them by the ombudsman after the schedule is set for the next quarter. If there is a conflict, they may be able to make some adjustments. Can you do that?
2)You begin an investigation of the male student. Two of the student’s friends, when shown a picture of the female, state that the male knew her, or at least had talked about her in the past. They are sure the two never dated or had any similar relationship.
Ultimately, the student in question tells investigators that he never knew her or anything else about the situation, but now that he knows it’s a problem, he’s “fine with it” and will stay away from her workplace.
Is this still innocent? Under the law? Is he lying about his previous knowledge of her? If so, why would he do that?
He wasn’t “asked” to stay away from certain parts of campus. He was banned from certain parts of campus. There’s no point in asking if you can see the difference, but the rest of us easily can.
Since this conversation seems to be heading seriously off the rails I’ll offer up this essay, which I found quite interesting. It’s very long but might provide fodder for a productive debate around the original topic. What do you think? Do you agree or disagree with the author?
https://riversong.■■■■■■■■■■■■■/new-puritanism-new-paternalism/
Quoted from Emily Yoffe as posted above;
"Unfortunately, under the worthy mandate of protecting victims of sexual assault, procedures are being put in place at colleges that presume the guilt of the accused. "
Interestingly enough, the accommodations reached in this case appear to strike a balance between the two.
This guy is not accused of anything.
I think you’re the only poster here who holds that opinion.
So back to the discussion (this is not a debate). Don’t think I am permitted to link the Harvard law blog, but obviously the root of the problem is that her argument is baseless and without merit because she refers to the school as a "liberal arts university, which we know is a misnomer. End of discussion. (please reset your sarcasm alerts now)
Are you aware of the different types of discussion and learning including the didactic, the Socratic and maybe the dialectical? I’d prefer to choose the questions I did and didn’t answer. If that’s okay with you.
Are you aware that there are ways to use the socratic method is ways that facilitate learning and are not condescending? Apparently not. But no matter. This is a discussion, not a lecture. At least to most.
It would be more conducive to discussion if your comments had some bearing on the question itself and not so much on whose it is.
For example, no one has said a word about due process. Why would this student agree to an accommodation without due process?
The problem with your hypotheticals is that they in no way reflect what was actually alleged in this case which is that the man was banned from free movement on campus and was subject to disciplinary action if he came into contact with the woman even though he was completely cleared of any involvement in her attack, and solely because he looked like the attacker.
But I will attempt to respond:
- If the school asked me to change on-campus jobs to help someone undergoing counseling for rape trauma, and it meant the same hours and pay, I would do so as long as it was not in any way implied that this was required or that it implicated me as responsible for her trauma. If they asked me to move into another section of a class and it was at a convenient time with a good professor, I would again do so with the caveat above. I would be less likely to give up a class slot if the time or the professor were less desirable. And I would not agree to any other restrictions on my general movements on campus. That is I might switch to the library job, but if I needed to go to the copy center I would not be willing to only go only when she wasn't working. But in this case, the school did not ask; it told and said he would be subject to disciplinary action if he did not comply.
- Not sure what you are asking in the second hypothetical? If he lied about knowing her on campus, that still may have no bearing on committing sexual assault that was reported to have taken place very far away. If he lied about assaulting her, then of course he is not innocent. But, again, the allegation here is that he looked like the rapist but was not,
Fully expecting you to attack my language here or say I am assuming something, but giving it one last try to figure out where you are coming from on this issue.