ADVERTISEMENT

Eerily similiar situation to Kinsman case

It is sad what is happening. Civil rights and due process are thrown out the window with some of these cases. Leaves the door wide open for the accused to sue these schools.
Posted from Rivals Mobile
 
I agree with you completely. Luckily for the guy in the article, he has the resources to take Duke to the mats. I hope when they start winning these lawsuits they set some precedents for the return of due process.
 
So a women doesn't have to be drunk, she just has to say she was. In fact they have other standards, like emotion problems that she claims she had even if he didn't know about them. Duke is just being a bunch of self righteous bastards and lynching the kid. She doesn't want to go to the police but is more than happy to stay in the shadows and destroy the young mans life with political correct administrators..
 
There's a reason why movements like MGTOW are growing. Being a man in 2015 is rather scary.
 
Originally posted by Scalphunter:

I agree with you completely. Luckily for the guy in the article, he has the resources to take Duke to the mats. I hope when they start winning these lawsuits they set some precedents for the return of due process.
They won't win. Courts have upheld these for years. Courts just don't consider school discipline the same as criminal prosecution and due process is analyzed on a sliding scale basis.

Posted from Rivals Mobile
 
Originally posted by AllNoles:

Originally posted by Scalphunter:

I agree with you completely. Luckily for the guy in the article, he has the resources to take Duke to the mats. I hope when they start winning these lawsuits they set some precedents for the return of due process.
They won't win. Courts have upheld these for years. Courts just don't consider school discipline the same as criminal prosecution and due process is analyzed on a sliding scale basis.


Posted from Rivals Mobile
This is the really weird/scary/interesting thing going on here IMO is that "school discipline" is being used (kind of like civil rights cases) to take things farther than the law will allow. Since the school has so much power over the accused it's almost like the school has become an unofficial arm of the justice system. They are taking their authority for doing this based on instructions from the legislature, so it would seem like constitutional protections should have to come into play.

You can tell I never went to law school, right? Someone fix this.
 
Guess defending the potentially innocent is not as sexy as smearing a high profile QB.

Funny how the press isn't jumping all over the 30 lawsuits.
 
The "yes means yes" laws in California and New York were made to protect universities from male defenses. So in those states universities can expel MALE students based on a charge without ANY proof or any defense.


Example: Boy and girl are dating. Boy and girl go to a bar, drink then go home and have sex. 3 weeks later boy and girl get into a fight and split up. Girl then files rape charges claiming that she was drunk 3 weeks ago when they had sex. Boy cannot prove she wasn't drunk, and the "she didn't look, sound or act" drunk isn't a defense, it only counts if she FEELS like she wasn't in the right mind. Boy gets expelled, girl laughs and moves on as if nothing happened, but of course considers herself a campus hero.

Under "yes means yes" this isn't only legal but expected. Now comes title IX, these universities will have a very tough time trying to justify allowing abuse of these men while protecting the women from the same.
 
Safest thing is to make a video tape:


Male - what are we about to do?
Female - we are about to have sex.

Male - are you under the influence of drugs, alcohol or any medications?
Female -Nope

Male - do you enter into the upcoming sexual congress under your own free will despite you being much hotter than my usual girl?
Female - I feel like I'm slumming hooking up with you. Your skin is pasty and pale, but I'm pissed at my jerk boyfriend.

Male - Is there anything you were denying him you'd like to give to me in order to piss him off?
Female - I have some ideas....
 
Originally posted by More Kirk Less Spock:
Safest thing is to make a video tape:


Male - what are we about to do?
Female - we are about to have sex.

Male - are you under the influence of drugs, alcohol or any medications?
Female -Nope

Male - do you enter into the upcoming sexual congress under your own free will despite you being much hotter than my usual girl?
Female - I feel like I'm slumming hooking up with you. Your skin is pasty and pale, but I'm pissed at my jerk boyfriend.

Male - Is there anything you were denying him you'd like to give to me in order to piss him off?
Female - I have some ideas....
Three days later::

Female: I want to report a rape. This guy I sleep with a few days ago.
School: Did he force you?

Female: No
School: Were you drunk or threatened?

Female: No
School: Then why do you say he raped you??

Female: Because I was having emotional issues, he should have known I wasn't emotionally "there"!!
School:...............Good enough for us!!
 
Another high profile case is not quite what it seems...

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/02/03/columbia-student-i-didn-t-rape-her.html

As a father of daughters and sons, this is a troubling issue for me.

I obviously think women need to be protected from sexual predators, and I think for too long in history, men were allowed to get away with sexual assault and harassment way too much. Men should not feel free to force themselves on women, in college or anywhere else, without consequence.

HOWEVER...it is pretty damn scary that as far as these university hearings and media judgments, there is literally zero way to "prove" it is not rape.

The accuser doesn't have to say no, and she can say yes.
The accuser doesn't have to remember what happened at all.
The accuser doesn't have to even prove there was sex.
She doesn't have to be drunk.
She can initiate the encounter, and/or ask for the sex.
There can be a proven and admitted to sexual relationship before and after the incident.
The accuser can carry on a totally friendly relationship with the accused for any amount of time.
There can be witnesses before and after and even DURING the act.

You can find cases with all these circumstances and more that have ruined the reputations of people and or institutions. This is an important issue...and I am ALL FOR erring on the side of protecting the woman.

But there has to be SOME baseline to say, this is proven, and this means it is not rape. People talk about signing contracts or videotaping consent...you're crazy if you think that matters. There's guys that have been ruined, even with a text from the accuser that says basically "come over and f--- me". None of it matters.

I can see where it is going...if you lie to someone, claim that you are not in a relationship, or say you are rich, or lie about your age...is that a sexual assault because of the false pretenses? She didn't agree to sleep with you, she agreed to sleep with someone you are not.

Does affirmative consent apply in marriage? If you roll over an grab your wife's butt in the middle of the night to see if you can get some, can you be accused of sexual assault? Why not? Women can obviously be raped in a marriage, so why don't they have these same affirmative consent protections? Do you have to ask your wife permission to give her a grab, or look at her in the shower?

You can say slippery slope, but 20 years ago, what is happening now would have been dismissed the same way.

Sexual assault, campus and otherwise, is a real problem and women need more support on the issue than they have presumably gotten. But this is NOT the way to do it. It's going to, and already is backfiring on the cause, and these lawsuits are going to eventually make it HARDER, not easier for victims to get justice.
 
The frequency of such events has dramatically increased over the last two decades as college women have decided that feminism means you can go to a bar dressed like a $20 hooker, get bombed out of your mind, hook up with random guys because that proves you're liberated, and then find out that a college boy is going to expect them to come through with what the girl has been teasing him with all night.

Females are entirely in charge of about 95% of these situations. Easiest thing ever is not to get blind knee-walking drunk and remain in charge of yourself and your surroundings.

I once worked with a group of college girls in an alumnae Panhellenic rush evaluation meeting and they looked at one girl's registration form. Some of them knew her and said she was a slut and slept around in high school. I asked if she did it with a lot of guys, and they said yes. I asked how many was a lot and how many was just normal. They all agreed that anything over about 12 was hitting slut territory. In high school. And this was in the late 80's. Those girls are now mothers with teenage daughters or even maybe college age daughters by now. I wonder if they would be upset if THEIR daughter was knocking boots with 12 guys in high school.
Believe me, girls that age aren't horndogs like guys are. To sleep with that many guys in high school means they are doing it either to prove they are liberated feminists or they are succumbing to peer pressure.
And all it means is that they ARE sluts. Sorry but some things will never ever ever change.
 
Originally posted by goldmom:

The frequency of such events has dramatically increased over the last two decades as college women have decided that feminism means you can go to a bar dressed like a $20 hooker, get bombed out of your mind, hook up with random guys because that proves you're liberated, and then find out that a college boy is going to expect them to come through with what the girl has been teasing him with all night.

Females are entirely in charge of about 95% of these situations. Easiest thing ever is not to get blind knee-walking drunk and remain in charge of yourself and your surroundings.

I once worked with a group of college girls in an alumnae Panhellenic rush evaluation meeting and they looked at one girl's registration form. Some of them knew her and said she was a slut and slept around in high school. I asked if she did it with a lot of guys, and they said yes. I asked how many was a lot and how many was just normal. They all agreed that anything over about 12 was hitting slut territory. In high school. And this was in the late 80's. Those girls are now mothers with teenage daughters or even maybe college age daughters by now. I wonder if they would be upset if THEIR daughter was knocking boots with 12 guys in high school.
Believe me, girls that age aren't horndogs like guys are. To sleep with that many guys in high school means they are doing it either to prove they are liberated feminists or they are succumbing to peer pressure.
And all it means is that they ARE sluts. Sorry but some things will never ever ever change.

12 in high school is absolutely sickening IMO. Each to their own...

I have found out a reason why a bunch of women get married so young (22/23) that go to our mega-church --- if you watch the Duggards on TLC it's the same reason. These girls are abstaining until they graduate college and get married --- I think it's great. But again just my opinion. Folks can do whatever they want obviously...
Posted from Rivals Mobile
 
-->

"Both Probosch and Nungesser express bafflement at the practice of letting colleges handle allegations of violent rape."
 
I'm absolutely stunned that Duke continues to "step in it"....did they learn nothing from the Lacrosse Team Scandal?

And more recently, while the Rasheed Sulaimon rumor/story was handled with the necessary caution, this case has them falling all over themselves in a rush to judgment. The "adults" in this situation need to start acting like adults and stop worrying about negative PR....
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT