<p>There are many cases where people are convicted of rape. Just because there are advocates who say the conviction rate is not high enough does not mean that the actual conviction rate does not accurately represent cases that, given the seriousness of the charge and potential sentence for the accused, can actually be proved. And it clearly does not mean the advocates have a clue about what is the truth in other cases.</p>
<p>Note that these same advocates who say the conviction rates are not high enough are the exact same people who want a system where Jackie’s story would be believed on its face and get any guy(s) she accuses kicked out of school, even if parts of the allegation are false. That is a system that rewards vindictive or agenda-driven people the most - not good.</p>
<p>No, #799. Malice must only be proven when the subject of the defamation is a public figure. This fraternity and its members were not public figures.</p>
That occured to me as it’s a quite common form of “protection”.
(It is seemingly also very common for a younger rape victim to accuse someone who is not the real abuser, as a way to call for help - they’re not lying, per se, but since they can’t say the full truth, and can’t “not say anything”, they find a way to speak up. Often, it’s not even conscious, it’s a protection mechanism. So the person or the place may have morphed into something else, but it doesn’t mean the person doesn’t exist and the rape/abuse didn’t take place. Specialists need to “dig” to figure out what caused the trauma. This is not a job for an academic court, nor a journalist).
Is the investigation/are the investigations going on? </p>
<p>I will bring back episode 8 season 6 in The Good Wife (which dealt with a rape “tried” in a college’s “court”) - does not involve UVA and was shot well before UVA was in the news so not related to UVA, but related to rape on campus and pretty well-researched when it comes to proceedings, assumptions, etc. And it is fiction :). </p>
I don’t agree with this part. Right? It smacks of “the end justifies the means”—make a big bang noise, d*mn the facts and the innocent just so the author can write a clickbait narrative. </p>
<p>Except that the author implied that the gang rape was an initiation ritual, which implicates <em>ALL</em> Uva Phi Kappa Psi members, so it does matter that the fraternity was named, and it does matter to every member of that chapter.</p>
<p>I agree with Myos in part, but MYOS did not go far enough. It brought more than 1 issue to the fore. There is also the issue of fallout from false claims. IF a claim is shown to be false, or embellished, it hurts the alleged victim and the alleged perpetrator. But even more so, such a claim hurts every other subsequent alleged victim of a sex assault or rape because it makes that victim’s story all the harder to believe.</p>
<p>While I am not yet ready to conclude this story is true or false, I think all will agree there is ever increasing doubt on the truth now. It is my hope the whole truth will come out so the answer is clear.</p>
<p>But this quote puzzles me, from post 798: “there’s no question UVA expelled more people for lying than for raping”.
Isn’t that what we’d expect? Isn’t it a reasonable guess that more people lie than commit rape? Am I missing the point of that comment, or what?</p>
<p>Indeed. People are now blaming Jackie and RS for embellishment, but really they should look into their own behavior and how outraged they were when the article came out, even though none of what was reported was substantiated in a court of law. This is not logical, adult behavior. This is mob behavior driven by groupthink.</p>
<p>@MYOS1634 Aren’t you the person who asserted up-thread that “rapey” was invented specifically to describe fraternities? Did you read the post in which I cited sources for the word that never mentioned fraternities, and asked you to provide citations to the contrary? Are you going to do that?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The author doesn’t say they had lawyers at that stage: she says she tried to go through their house contact sheet and talked to the current president and someone from national. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Seriously? And you thought it was fine for a “reporter” to literally invent a character in an ostensibly factual piece of reporting that leveled serious charges at an easily identifiable group of people? Really?</p>
<p>Yes, that’s what I was trying to say - it does matter that the fraternity was named because of the people affected (it doesn’t matter to the broader issue of university policies toward rape victims, or rape on campus).</p>
<p>And matters to all fraternities at uva as it was suggested that fraternities in general are just gangs or thugs that have these types of rituals</p>
<p>Yes it matters to the broader issue of rape on campus, as aren’t you among the chorus who wants to wipe out fraternities because they are (in your mind) singularly or primarily responsible for the majority of rapes on campus, even though we do not have a single reliable statistic that tells us this is so?</p>
<p>Yes I did. (Answering post #807)
Fact is, I didn’t learn of “rapey” by reading Urban Dictionary. I learned of it through casual use by many (very different) young people, and every single instance I heard it used in was in conjunction with fraternities.
(@consolation: I didn’t reply because it seemed to veer off topic into a sematics debate).</p>
<p>In addition, it would be disingenuous not to admit most parents or mothers warn their daughters about the dangers of fraternity parties; this was discussed at length in several other threads, too, and this was a point of consensus.
I did talk to security officers on a campus and they admitted to a minimum of one rape per weekend, estimated more due to low reports (followed with a shrug in one instance). It’s not possible to suddenly discount the fact no one I know, and no parent on CC (based on several threads) would let their daughter go to a fraternity party without mentioning problems with alcohol and being at risk for rape.
There is a real problem at UVA; there is a real problem on campuses accross the US; there is a real problem with fraternities.
Perhaps UVA can lead the way. Perhaps “good” fraternities can lead the way.
But something <em>still</em> needs to be done.
Whether RS can recover from the expected libel suit or other related topics doesn’t affect the primary issue.</p>
<p>Note that I never called for fraternities to be disbanded or done away with entirely or whatever. Suspended pending investigation, yes. Completely different.</p>
<p>@younghoss wrote: “But this quote puzzles me, from post 798: “there’s no question UVA expelled more people for lying than for raping”.
Isn’t that what we’d expect? Isn’t it a reasonable guess that more people lie than commit rape? Am I missing the point of that comment, or what?”</p>
<p>I can see why you would be confused. What the poster should have said is that NOBODY has ever been expelled for rape (or any sexual assault) at UVA, even those who admitted it to the Sexual Misconduct Board.</p>
<p>I didn’t learn of the word through the Urban Dictionary either, but through casual usage, just like you. </p>
<p>The difference is that I didn’t assert that the word was literally INVENTED for a specific context that suited my prejudices. Nor did I simply assert that you were wrong. I looked it up. What a concept.</p>
<p>Aie, Consolation, I didn’t think the word was in the Urban Dictionary, but I did know it as recent, casually used, and as far as the use that’s been done, well, yes, it’s used specifically to describe some fraternities. (I use Webster’s but didn’t think it’d apply since it’s such a recent word). And, again, I didn’t want to get off topic on semantics.
The word exists. In the world of college and high school students discussing college matters, it’s related to fraternities. It may apply to people or categories but I’ve never, ever heard it used in front of me in another context than related to fraternities. The fact common use in a fairly wide setting involving young people doesn’t mesh with Urban Dictionary doesn’t invalidate common use, even if Urban Dictionary widens it.
Urban dictionary also has a definition for College Confidential that may not be totally thorough and all- encompassing.
I don’t think you are validated in your claim, but I’m cool if you think you are.
And we ARE getting onto a tangent (and personal).</p>
<p>I just do not think that there is a jury in the world that is going to convict a woman for naming her rapists. What ever happened to the first amendment? </p>
<p>I understand that the young men are under age, but this is a very adult crime, and I think the public has a right to know. They didn’t spray paint a wall or steal a toy from the toy store.</p>