<p>what jonri said, but especially this</p>
<p>“I would tell any D of mine that if a young man said that the Klein/Lack case was “extremely gray,” she should stay a gazillion miles away from him. (Actually, I don’t think I’d have to tell any D of mine that because she’d reach the same conclusion.)”</p>
<p>The Klein/Lack case may be a bit grayer than the article you cited indicates:
[97-063</a> (Lack Case Settlement)](<a href=“http://www.brown.edu/Administration/News_Bureau/1997-98/97-063.html]97-063”>97-063 (Lack Case Settlement))
[Who</a> is a Sexual Assault Victim? Ambiguity and Political Correctness Change Lives](<a href=“http://thebrownspectator.com/sexual-assault-victim-ambiguity-political-correctness-change-lives/]Who”>http://thebrownspectator.com/sexual-assault-victim-ambiguity-political-correctness-change-lives/)
The latter article leaves out the vomit detail.
But even even the story in the article you cited is quite gray, in my opinion. The morning after, the young woman exchanged phone numbers with the man, and didn’t bring charges for five weeks. She said she remembered nothing, and his version of the story described behavior that a reasonable person could interpret as consent.<br>
As for what to tell our children, I suppose we should tell them that they could become the victim of somebody else’s idea of what is a gray area and what isn’t, and to take precautions accordingly.</p>
<p>Again, Hunt, you get to raise your kids your way. But that’s sure the heck NOT what I’d tell any child of mine. And, NO I don’t think a “reasonable” person could interpret such behavior as consent. After all, the ONLY “testimony” that she DID consent is Lack’s. </p>
<p>I don’t think any “reasonable” young man takes an intoxicated young woman he finds passed out in a toilet stall back to his room. PERIOD. FULL STOP.</p>
<p>Now, yes, there may be a case in which they stumble back to his room and they are both equally intoxicated. But Lack didn’t make that claim. He was NOT intoxicated–and nobody who saw him that night testified that he was.</p>
<p>He did NOT claim they were both drunk; he claimed she sobered enough to consent to sex after he took her back to his room.</p>
<p>Gray area!!!</p>
<p>In the settlement, she agrees that she may not have seemed impaired when she met Lack. If that’s true, how is the case not gray?
But I think perhaps the takeaway is that no reasonable young man should take a young woman back to his room if she has been drinking at all–or if she might have been drinking–no matter how talkative she may be. Is that the standard we should expect?
And there was no testimony at all that she didn’t consent. Her testimony was (reportedly) simply that she didn’t remember what happened.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I think all parent advice their daughters to be vigilant and cautious but you need to understand that statistics shows the majority of the sex crime happen with people the victim trust.</p>
<p>Why the onus is on the men because of the science involve in it? The men is the leading force during such crime so there is more protection needed for the girls.</p>
<p>If being a man I can understand this and being a women you don’t then there is a bias involve in your thinking and that’s a major hurdle in this.
Problem comes from all mama’s little angle boys.</p>
<p>“I don’t think any “reasonable” young man takes an intoxicated young woman back to his room.”</p>
<p>Gosh, I guess it depends on how you define “reasonable.” </p>
<p>If this were a realistic statement
assuming that both partners have been drinking
<p>I’m not necessarily in disagreement where in the one smashed, one not scenario.</p>
<p>“But I think perhaps the takeaway is that no reasonable young man should take a young woman back to his room if she has been drinking at all–or if she might have been drinking–no matter how talkative she may be. Is that the standard we should expect?”</p>
<p>A . I do not see how thats the takeaway - I drink beer or wine once or twice a week or so, and I have never in my life vomited from drinking. I dont see how a case where someone drank enough to vomit implicates “drinking at all”?</p>
<p>B. Suppose, for the sake of argument, that WAS the takeaway. “Do not have sex with someone you just met who has had more than one ounce of an alcoholic beverage” </p>
<p>What, exactly, would we as a society have lost? The “college hook up culture”?</p>
<p>*'“I don’t think any “reasonable” young man takes an intoxicated young woman back to his room.”</p>
<p>Gosh, I guess it depends on how you define “reasonable.” </p>
<p>If this were a realistic statement
assuming that both partners have been drinking
<p>back in my day, young men actually had “girlfriends”. Intimacy was possible without alcohol. </p>
<p>Have things actually changed so much?</p>
<p>Back in my day, some people drank and had random (or almost random) sex, and some people didn’t. I’m not sure things have really changed all that much. I think those who didn’t, and don’t, are smarter, but I’m still interested in figuring out how a college should fairly respond to these kinds of incidents.</p>
<p>I’m sure this kind of thing happens all the time (hence the EMT’s report) and that is what spurred the Title IX letter. School’s have awareness raising meetings about alcohol, safe sex, etc. but they don’t crack down on students (particularly fraternities) serving alcohol. </p>
<p>That’s a separate issue but what gets me is that a significant percentage of the population has historically thought it was OK for a guy to take advantage of a girl who’s had too much to drink. Lying in a pool of vomit? Do you really think she wants sex? Would she answer ‘yes’ to anything you say? Too often the thinking is “she shouldn’t have been something so stupid” and put her self in the lion’s den. Her own damn fault and she’ll cry about it to her friends or if she’s more unlucky, she’ll become depressed and eventually withdraw from the university or worse.</p>
<p>It’s like asking someone to sign a contract while they’re still under anesthesia - there’s no way for the person to really understand what is happening. She may have exchanged phone numbers with the boy the next morning because she didn’t remember what had happened and she wanted, probably desperately, to believe that nothing bad had happened.</p>
<p>Now the passing out in the toilet and vomit thing, then there I’d say the young man has a clear sign that he should probably mostly safely call someone, a RA, a policeman, an ER. Otherwise not reasonable.</p>
<p>Dear POIH:
These sorts of comments don’t help at all
“Problem comes for all moma’s little angle boys.” It’s really pretty offensive when you do that. If you don’t “get” that, I’d say you don’t know the old adage about when you point a finger remember there’s always one pointing right back atcha.</p>
<p>The fact is that almost 2/3 of rapes of adult woman are by acquaintances, someone they know fairly well. Knowing someone is different than trusting someone and this is why young women need to be well educated and know how to protect themselves and be given a “real” education in the realities of life so they don’t misplace their trust in every guy who comes along. Being self-sufficient and self-assured won’t always protect someone from being raped but it sure helps.</p>
<p>I don’t have any bias, I think that ball’s in your corner.</p>
<p>"back in my day, young men actually had “girlfriends”. Intimacy was possible without alcohol.</p>
<p>Have things actually changed so much?"</p>
<p>I wish I could just say I was only jesting but I think there’s an element of truth in some circles to my statement. I’ve found myself kind of shocked once in awhile when I discover that a kid I think a lot of engages in this behavior. I don’t know how prevalent it is but haven’t you been following the on-line issues and “hook-up” trends. Hopefully these kids being very well educated some of this is just media hype and not so common but let’s not be naive. However as well taught as a kid can be mother nature can really be strong especially when helped along by a good dose of alcohol. </p>
<p>And really, don’t we live in a society that sends a message of condoning alcohol use with “dating” and beyond. Sure some us don’t participate but are you really saying you don’t see a society that sends that message to young people.</p>
<p>we had alcohol in the day (it was still legal for 18YO’s to drink my first couple of years on campus) </p>
<p>But 90%?! - thats not suggesting a hook up culture exists. Thats suggesting there is practically no intimacy outside the hook up culture. </p>
<p>Is this an issue with arts majors and percentages? :)</p>
<p>Sorry POIH, but don’t all parents start with an assumption that their kids are “angels”… parents of girls AND parents of guys? From there, no, I don’t automatically say my kids are perfect, but since drinking, smoking, and sex aren’t a major pasttime of theirs, maybe they could be the victim too.
</p>
<p>Hunt, </p>
<p>I already said it wasn’t rape beyond a reasonable doubt. </p>
<p>If you think Lack’s conduct was gray because a young woman who had blacked out at the time thinks he “may” not have realized that she hadn’t sobered up enough to consent to sex after he had seen her unconscious and taken her to his room where she “came to” makes this a “gray” case, we just have to agree to disagree. </p>
<p>Again, I would not want any young woman I cared anything about to become romantically involved with any young man you raised. We simply have different moral codes.</p>
<p>If my S behaved as Lack did, I would NOT find his conduct reasonable.Obviously, your mileage does vary.</p>
<p>Please do understand that if my D did was Sarah Klein did, I wouldn’t exactly be proud of her either.</p>
<p>Well, we certainly have different views of civil discourse, jonri.</p>
<p>"But 90%?! - thats not suggesting a hook up culture exists. Thats suggesting there is practically no intimacy outside the hook up culture.</p>
<p>Is this an issue with arts majors and percentages?"</p>
<p>Good one Brooklyn Dad, the answer is no.
It’s an issue with arts majors and sarcasm.
I wasn’t Seeeeerrrrrrioooooussss about 90%, jeez.</p>
<p>“In the settlement, she agrees that she may not have seemed impaired when she met Lack. If that’s true, how is the case not gray?”</p>
<p>the passing out and the vomit thingie. Which would seem to trump her statement of being uncertain about the stuff that she couldnt remember.</p>
<p>“It’s an issue with arts majors and sarcasm.
I wasn’t Seeeeerrrrrrioooooussss about 90%, jeez.”</p>
<p>okay.</p>
<p>It’s my experience that cases that are hotly disputed generally turn out to be grayer than one might think without delving into the facts in some detail. And the characterization of the facts tends to morph. For example, Brooklynborndad, you refer to the girl as being “passed out.” That’s not in the article that was cited. Was she passed out? If so, that makes a difference. But who, exactly, says that she was passed out? Jonri says she was passed out unconscious in a toilet stall. That wasn’t in the article she linked, or in the other one I found. What’s the source? Is the fact that somebody threw up enough to conclude that they are too drunk to consent to sex, even if they are otherwise behaving in a way that doesn’t suggest they are impaired?</p>
<p>As I noted above, I wonder if some people just don’t think there are that many gray areas–that in virtually all cases, the boy should have known better.</p>