time mag article "Sexual Assault Crisis on American campuses"

Parents Forum
361

<p>Actually, in that case it sounds like no changed to “whatever,” because she was tired. He was not just in her room by invitation, he was in her bed and she willingly joined him there. CF with all due respect I really think you are being way to literal on this one. There is also non-verbal communication that goes on between couples unless we want to demand a signed consent form before sex. I absolutely believe her story and don’t consider it rape. Apparently she didn’t either for six weeks.</p>

<p>They were in the midst of a break-up. Who knows what else happened after that night to cause her to report him. Rape is about power and violence. This just wasn’t. This sounds more like mutual “whatever”. That’s not a crime.</p>

362

<p>

</p>

<p>However, citizens who believe in the Constitution have a problem with this for one reason - you ignore the fact that these are universities, not judicial entities designed to review statements to determine accuracy, relevance, or legality. </p>

<p>Courts of law have defined procedures and standards. which everyone understands, and each party (plaintiff and defendant) has representation and fair hearings to present their side of the story.</p>

<p>If Preponderance of Evidence is used, which is just fine with me if people want that, then NO NEED for university NON-JUDICIAL boards taking decisions because Preponderance of Evidence is already used in civll courts.</p>

<p>The best solution then is to sue the male in civil court and stop the charade of tribunals that no one knows how they operate. </p>

<p>Secretive trials with unknown operating rules are expressly un-American. There is no other way to say it. </p>

363

<p>Which is why we need to come to a critical decision about what constitutes an inability to give consent. I disagree with you (Cardinal), if a young woman even fathoms the thought that she’s too tired but oh what the heck, that is not sexual abuse and that is not rape. If she says no, get out of here. Or better yet says no and gets up to remove herself but is pressured - that is abuse, that is rape in my opinion. Women, unless they are incapacitated, also need to show some spine and say no at that moment…not 5 months later…not a year later because they suddenly become enlightened and realize they should have said no but allowed it all to happen. I’ve been in some sticky situations when young but I sure as heck knew how to say no and mean it…sober and tipsy. I’ve never been assaulted fortunately, but I’ve also never been so drunk I didn’t know what I was doing either so perhaps my position is unique. I don’t think so. I think the key to all of this is the word “incapacitated.” </p>

<p>If someone is incapacitated they can’t say no. Not tipsy, not tired, not into a random hookup at that point in time… Men, too, can ask, should ask, after all there’s that conversation about condoms and birth control that needs to happen every time a man or a woman engages in sex, so clearly there’s a conversation, but they cannot and should not bear the burden of guilt later in what is at that moment in time consensual sex. </p>

<p>What is incapacitated: can’t walk straight, can’t talk clearly, throwing up, falling down, no sense of where they are.</p>

<p>I don’t want to see naive young women shoot themselves in the proverbial foot by using this powerful but slightly flawed tool in a way that eventually dilutes the strides that have been made toward women’s right to self determination. I rather enjoyed myself as a young single woman and I would chafe at the thought that I needed “special protection” in the classroom, in the business world, on the streets, on public transportation and wherever I happen to be sleeping. The OP asked what to say to her daughter and I would say this to any young women if the topic came up in conversation: Be smart. Be strong. Be confident. Don’t drink too much. Don’t walk alone after dark. If you think it’s the wrong thing to do, it probably is…learn how to say no firmly and with meaning.</p>

364

<p>In all things sexual, men ought to get that an absence of yes is no. Jeez, they ought to be taught what mutual means. If all they care about is their own yes, they might as well just rent a movie. No really does mean no. And nobody has to shout no for it to be no. </p>

365

<p>I don’t think anyone has disputed that No means No. I think we’d all agree unable to answer means no. But you’re not addressing the whole picture. What about able to do so, but choosing not to answer? Is choosing not to say No(when one is able to) the same as a yes? Is a guy that receives no answer required to be telepathic? Or what about Yes? We’ve learned some here feel Yes means No, too.</p>

366

<p>

</p>

<p>This strikes me as an unrealistic definition for governing all things sexual. This would be fine, if we were robots that only do things one way, but we aren’t.</p>

<p>Not only is there such a thing as non-verbal communication, there is also such a thing as mutual understanding, which requires no conversation. Interestingly, both of these apply to my wife. </p>

<p>As I said before in this thread, I have known my wife since her first day on campus. And thirty years later, I can say I never heard anything like a “yes,” because it never came up in a question form to require such an answer. So, there has always been a definite absence of a “yes,” but it did not mean “no.” And, we have two kids to prove that point.</p>

<p>I do understand what you trying to get at, however, humans are not robots that function on query and answer only; it is much more complicated than that. </p>

367

<p>

</p>

<p>That means NO. Consent means consent. She said No. She doesn’t have to keep saying No every two minutes.</p>

<p>The guy isn’t supposed to be telepathic. He’s supposed to hear that she said No and leave her alone until she changes her mind, if she does.</p>

368

<p>Look you are talking about sex. I am talking about rape. Normal men cannot understand the way rapists operate and frequently think it must be a “mistake” on the part of the rapist. There are many ways to say yes to an intimate relationship, but if you are telling me saying no once is not enough? You are incorrect and the law is changing to reflect the fact that a woman’s mere presence is not consent to rape anymore than a drunk man’s presence is consent to rape. </p>

369

<p>Poetgirl: Are you certain that college campuses are MORE dangerous for young women than not being in college? The report cited in the Time article actually extrapolates the college data to the entire year to come up with their estimate of 20% (but conveniently then do not explain that). </p>

<p>CF: Really, every Monday these issues are happening in your kid’s high school? I can’t imagine the community not taking some action if that is the case. It definitely happens at our HS, but pretty rare. Is it the same girls over and over (which seems to be what I hear about) or different girls? </p>

<p>No means no, but I am not sure that an absence of a yes can mean no if the actions do not convey that message. I think girls must be taught to say No and boys must be taught to listen to that. Yes, even one no means no, but not saying no and then saying but I meant no because i didn’t say yes, is hard to understand. Boys need to understand that they need clear consent, but girls also have to communicate. </p>

<p>Every post on this thread clearly states that rape is rape and that any number of rapes is unacceptable and any man that rapes should be prosecuted if proven guilty. Absolutely! The reason this discussion focuses on the grey area is because it is just that - a grey area. There are those that say that if a woman says it is rape, it is rape and lock him up (or expel him), regardless of any evidence to the contrary (and it is a very unusual case where there is clear evidence of innocence. But some of us believe that there are times when there really is a grey area - a girl that may be drunk (but not incapacitated) who seems to give consent but later decides she did not and reports the guy - who fully believes she gave consent. There are also times when boys take advantage of a girl that clearly is incapable of giving consent or who says no - which is clearly rape. </p>

<p>But for colleges, especially untrained administrators, to decide on some standard that is less than “beyond a reasonable doubt” that a boy should be expelled can be worrisome. Yes, the girls must be protected, but it is equally unacceptable to ruin the life of a boy that did nothing wrong. Again, not to say that there are not young men who are rapists and who should be brought to justice. And there are horrible situations where certain young men are known to have done this more than once and yet are not prosecuted. That is unacceptable as well. A preponderance of the evidence determined by a college administrator can be troubling. Some data suggests that 8% of all crimes, including rape, are false reports. And for attempted rape (which remember the 20% figure includes more attempted than completed rapes), the chance for miss-communication is even higher. </p>

<p>In the report on which the Time article is based, it is reported that 65% of women who did not report the rape or attempted rape, said they did not because they didn’t think it was a big deal. Further, the report states that 48% of women did NOT consider the incident to be rape, even though the researchers categorized it that way. Some of that is that women do not always understand that they have the right to say no, even if they know the guy, but it is not clear (or reported in the study), exactly where the disconnect was. They also state that the “companion” study found a much lower incidence of rape (0.16 % vs the 1.1% in the quoted study) and similar differences with attempted rape. If the researchers and women involved have such a difficult time defining rape, is it surprising that this is a difficult situation for colleges to deal with.</p>

<p>There is still a double standard when it comes to girls, even among girls, when it comes to dress, drinking and sexual activity. Yet there are also some societal standards and yet some of the societal norms are not always bad - it is not always appropriate to dress like you are at the beach in the office even if that is how a particular girl would like to dress. And while the way a girl dresses should not be used against her, the reality is that society is not there yet. </p>

<p>I wish there was a way to discuss this issue and evaluate appropriate responses, without either dismissing the very real concerns of young women and yet not seeing young men as the enemy. The vast majority of men are not rapists and many are allies in the support of women. I</p>

370

<p>

</p>

<p>My kid doesn’t have a high school. He was homeschooled, and he is now well above high school age. I think you are talking to the GFG, not me.</p>

371

<p>Actually, mom2and, the majority of men are not rapists. On college campuses, as elsewhere, it is beginning to be understood that these are crimes of opportunity committed by very few men multiple times. The danger is that these are predators and they convince normal guys, who really don’t attempt sex with passed out or uninterested women, that they had consent. In some ways the fact that normal men consider actual rape inconceivable protects the rapists on campus. </p>

<p>I like that most men find rape inconceivable. I dislike that they protect the rapists because of this. I think this may be changing. I think more and more men are beginning to “get” that it’s very difficult to actually accidentally rape someone. There must be some actions involved. Bystander education is helping a lot!</p>

372

<p>

No, no, no…;-)… women must be explicit…they must say no! To say nothing is implicit conversation. And THAT is very much at the heart of the problem universities face. Women need to say Yes or they need to say NO. Men need to ask Yes or No. If a woman is ambivalent, she needs to get the heck away…or the males should steer clear is my advice. Honestly, anyone will tell you more males than females are direct in their conversations. Be clear. Be explicit. </p>

<p>God bless her, my mother used to tell me when I was a teenager not to make men guess what I want. Living in a household full of males I am nothing if not concise and direct…</p>

373

<p>

</p>

<p>This is quite accurate from my experience. </p>

<p>Wifey had no problem saying “No.” Took many a cold showers for months to prove it - gees, I am still cold from all of those. However, never once heard a “yes” - implicit conversation for sure.</p>

374

<p>Poetgirl: Do you have some basis for your statement that young men are protecting rapists? Yes, in some cases boys (and some girls) know that a particular guy “gets” a girl to go home with him on a regular basis, and often the girls are inebriated. I know there is one study that found that most of the campus rapes were committed by a small number of men. But not sure how much data there really is on this issue. </p>

<p>Bystander education is very helpful, for bullying especially. But I can imagine the scenario in which a drunk, but not incapacitated girl, insists she wants to go with a boy not planning on sex, but just on continuing to party. How do her friends intervene? Or do they let her party on? Not always easy to reason with a drunk person (and, at times, the friends may think the girl shouldn’t go but she is capable of making the decision and wants to go). </p>

375

<p>Bystander education shows all the points at which both males and females can intervene in potential acquaintance rape scenarios. Men are not “protecting” rapists on purpose. Acting as if the “accidental” rape scenario is plausible provides cover for the predators. We see this same unfortunate scenario with pedophiles, or we used to. It’s just it’s so unimaginable to the healthy young guy. </p>

376

<p>@‌ consolation
"I agree with this. The problem I see is with the Title IX procedures. They seem to be more likely to convict and punish innocents. "</p>

<p>You are definitely right about that. The current legal system punishes almost no one related to these cases, so that is clearly safest for innocents. If no one goes to jail then no innocents are in jail. But then why have laws at all? </p>

377

<p>This time of year is rife with ambiguous sexual scenarios because it is prom season. Students now have a tradition of leaving prom for a beach house or someone’s home in town, where they have a co-ed sleepover. Alcohol is generally present at these after-prom parties, and parents sometimes aren’t. Need I say more? Is my town unusual in this regard? I don’t think so.</p>

378

<p>Oh, man. I remember the after-prom parties. I remember all the scandals that surfaced that following Monday morning. </p>

379

<p>you sure misunderstood my post, in your response CF, posted at 5.14.
You may want to read my questions again. At no time did those questions reference the Sawrthmore allegations.
In my questions no guy was asking “every 2 minutes”.</p>

380

<p>

</p>

<p>If there are not enough guilty court verdicts to your liking, then the logical follow-up questions are, “Are there facts in these cases you know that no one else does? And more specifically, is there evidence in the ‘not guilty’ cases, which you know that the prosecutors and juries reaching these decisions do not know?”</p>

<p>Let me posit another interpretation: the courts are finding exactly those guilty who should be found guilty when the statements and stories of both the female and male are put under the SAME level of scrutiny. </p>

<p>I understand the intense passions behind this discussion, but statements like this is exactly why courts and the legal system are needed - to methodically ferret out what may be erroneous conclusions based on politics and emotions, not facts.</p>

<p>Fundamentally, laws are not meant to satisfy the populous, based on what the populous believes has happened or based on what the populous wants; they are meant to determine guilt or innocence, irrespective of what the populous believes or desires. That is good thing. Is our system perfect? Well, no system is. However, it is still much better and more reliable than groupthink.</p>