Brian, let's just lay out some facts here:

1) DIB's #1 concern, the crux of his argument, is that colleges are punishing accused rapists too harshly

2) In service of this goal he has formulated a hazily defined proposal using what at this point can only be described as a buzzword: "mandated reporting"

3) You, a man who is admittedly not well informed on this matter, have for some reason reflexively decided that DIB's proposal has merit and you've begun fabricating a version of reality where it does have merit. (this nonsensical "pressing charges" thing, a generalized belief that you're trying to solve a problem that other people are resisting, etc.)

4) AFAIK nobody else really agrees with you and DIB.

Are there any conclusions you can draw from this? People like to whine about me doing too much soulreading, but Brian, why do you think nobody but you has signed on to DIBsy Grand Scheme to Protect and/or Punish date rapists?

Fly, do you know why you frequently use first person plural when sharing your views, and third person when addressing others' ideas? Why it infuriates you when others do the same? Why you often choose to NOT use first person singular when expressing your own views, or NOT use second person when addressing the individuals you have issues with? Do you even realize how frequently you communicate this way? Of course you don't.

But let me help you out. You're clearly invested in the idea of creating in-groups and out-groups, as it allows you to chastise the out group in order to feel better about yourself. It's a component of social identity theory and is all about boosting your self-image. This also nicely explains your incessant effort to vilify and label those who oppose your world view.

You're welcome!

Because it would be plagiarism if he did it the other way around?

You know who asks these questions? People who don't understand what mandated reporting is. Shocker!

As has been stated dozens of times ITT, the problems had by you and your team all start and finish with utter ignorance about what mandated reporting is. You #dudeliterally love to tell people how it's not your job to educate them on X Y and Z topic. Deliciously ironic that your core issue here is not knowing anything about mandated reporting, while NOT letting this ignorance stop you from going on the war path. It's delightful to watch.

Go read up on the subject, and THEN have passionately-advocated-for positions about whether or not it would be a viable solution to the problem at hand. Or don't, as your flopping around here is pretty amusing TBH. Not sick of it yet.

First person plural when expressing his views:

"We all think mandated reporting isn't the solution here."

As opposed to first person:

"I think mandated reporting isn't the solution here.



Third person when addressing others:

"DiB is afraid to explain himself!"

As opposed to second person:

"You are afraid to explain yourself!"

You don't understand this thing I have expertise in!

NO YOU don't understand this thing I have expertise in!

You're such an idiot, why won't you listen to my appeal to authority!?

NO why won't YOU listen to MY appeal to authority!?

why not try and explain things then? If you feel someone isn't understanding a vital part of your plan, go ahead and explain your expertise. Who better to educate? Worst thread in pu and that's a hard thing to do.

LOL

Except for, you know, over half the people who participated in the poll, who either are unsure or think mandated reporting is a GOOD solution.

Except those people. But continue, don't let facts get in the way of your delusions. I know it's much more fun to believe my proposal is vague and undefined (lol) and that everyone else thinks there is no value in what's being proposed.

rofl when DIB counts "undecided" as agreeing with him, amazing

IDK what else to do. Have your read Trolly admitting his ignorance about mandated reporting being his biggest problem? Did you read the initial (admittedly obnoxious) back-and-forth with Wookie, which culminated with him exposing his ignorance about mandated reporting?

I mean, did you read this Fly bit, which exposes the core issue for him being ignorance about mandated reporting?

What is it that you want, a written overview of what mandated reporting is and how it works? I mean I guess I could type that up, but it's all readily available on the internet. Google works. Try it.

Like FFS this is all very straight forward and easy to understand. What's more interesting to me is how the general disdain for me as a poster has made such a simple concept beyond complicated for you all. Like, your emotions as a whole are so far out of hand that you can't conceptualize something as simple as, "Make relevant staff at universities mandated reporters."

Wat?!? It is common knowledge that they don't. IF a school finds a student responsible for sexual assault, there is a less than one in three chance that they will expel the student.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/241023157/...-DOJ-FY2011-13

Let's ignore mandated reporting for a moment and go back to defining the problem which DIB thinks mandated reporting can help solve.

Does Title IX provide sufficient federal guidance for schools on how to deal with accusations of sexual assault? Are schools generally complying with at least the bare minimum required by Title IX?

No. Per RAINN:

https://rainn.org/images/03-2014/WH-...mendations.pdf

Page 10.

I asked two questions. Are you replying "no" to both or just the latter question?

Just the latter.

Are you saying "yes" or "I don't know" to the first question?

No comment as of now on how sufficient the guidance is.

And like I said, but which apparently went over your head, many if not most states already have certain school employees as "mandated reporters". Any abuse of children, the disabled, or the elderly? ON IT. Report to the relevant government social services agency mandated by law.

Problem. Solved.

Contentless peanut gallery made noise when the whole swarm of flies were methodically swatted.

So we have for the record throat Fly is for the status quo when is comes to populations that are protected by mandated reporting.

What if the university self-mandates mandated reporting for sexual assault and rape as a matter of policy rather than law?

...you DO realize this proposal is for college students, right? Not children, disabled, etc.? The hell is wrong with you?

I'm proposing we make relevant staff mandated reporters, and that we include sexual violence towards students as crimes reporters are mandated to report.

Suuuuuper easy Fly, just stay focused. We're not talking about elderly people nor small children. Are you with me?

What DIB is concerned about matters to me and my desire that schools be required to report sexual assaults to the authorities and that the cops be required to arrest/investigate based on those reports approximately not at all.

What the schools can/ought do in addition to that isn't part of my argument. I happen to fine with schools having codes of conduct that go beyond the law. I happen to be fine with schools punishing/expelling students based on a standard of preponderance of the evidence rather than a standard of beyond a reasonable doubt.

Again, since you are too dense to remember, I don't care what DIB's said or did. What he says, thinks and does has nothing to do with my argument.

Mandated reporting just means that you have to report what you know to the cops. You also, in most cases, can't rely on plugging your ears and shouting "lalalalalala" avoid knowing what you ought know.

When I was a therapist, I had to tell the authorities if I had reason to believe and why I believed that child abuse/neglect had occurred, statutory rape had occurred, elder abuse had occurred. I also had to warn (by going to the authorities) if I had reason to believe that someone was in danger and why I believed so. That is all that mandated reporting is. It isn't complicated.

Wat?!? I've supported widening who falls under mandated reporting laws and what sort of things are required to be reported for quite a long time. That DIB happens to be bringing it up is irrelevant to me.

It is a tough subject (and if your characterization of his views of Title IX is accurate, I don't agree with him on that part). I imagine that everyone already has at least some vague ideas on the value of privileged communication (communication is confidential and the professional isn't allowed to say boo to the authorities without the express consent of the person). Chezlaw and Trolly mentioned this concern explicitly.

P.R. also made excellent points as to how victims aren't served well by the authorities. That needs fixed as well.

In the case of sexual assault, given that rapists are an ongoing threat, I think the duty to protect is more important than any duty to maintain confidentiality. I also think that the victims are better off if the crimes against them are taken seriously

I'm entirely unsure why you think that I am signing on with DIB. Given that I found his non-answers to be highly annoying and gave my own actual proposal where he didn't and have absolutely no interest in protecting rapists, it is really hard to imagine how you got from a to b.

Someone(who?) telling the police "hey I think this girl maybe had sex and I suspect she didn't give consent" is not reporting a crime.

If the girl isn't there to say "I did not consent" there isn't an "unreported crime", there's no crime at all. There's nothing to investigate!

You keep bringing up this point as if the only possible outcome to a reported rape is that the victim just lies if the police come to question her. There's a big difference between "too afraid to talk to the police in any situation" and "not willing to go to the police yourself, but you'd cooperate with them if they came to you".

I have absolutely no idea what DIBs thinks.

Who: All college/university employees who have contact with students.

How: By dialing 911 and speaking to the cops.

When: Any time they have reason to believe a sexual assault has occurred. Typically this will because someone has told them that they were sexually assaulted.

Why: Because rape is a serious crime that is extremely common and severely underreported.

Problems to be solved: Schools can't sweep sexual assaults under the rug. More sexual assaults are investigated by the police. More perpetrators of rape are arrested. It indirectly communicates to victims that the problem is rapists, not victims of rape (reduction of self-blaming by victims). It serves as a warning to potential rapists that raping leads to being arrested for rape. It serves as a warning to potential victims that there are rapists in their midst. The current standard places the responsibility to go to the cops on the victim, which is an unfair burden.

Brain,

I'm not against the concept of mandatory reporting, although I gave the example how the military has created sexual assault resource coordinators who are prohibited from reporting. This ensures a confidential resource to victims to help them through the process of reporting if they go that route, and also helps victims get help beyond just reporting the crime (which as I said before, is probably as sorely needed as anything).

But before folks get behind mandatory reporting on behalf of adults of sound mind and body, I do think think some data should be presented showing how many women are coming forward to school employees about being raped without going to police. On first blush, this seems like a subject that wouldn't come up very often between a professor or curriculum counselor and student, and not at all sure I'd want to mandate reporting on school doctors and psychologists, lest people shy away from medical and mental help to avoid getting law enforcement involved. And I'd like to hear some thoughts on whether you think that number reporting to school officials of some sort would go up or down if mandatory reporting was in place. I personally don't have that information, although I think it is quite relevant before one can endorse such an unusual policy of mandatory reporting for just one specific crime in which an adult was victim. Of course, there are also cases in which the administration finds out through other means, beyond the victim coming forward (perhaps a witness, for example). I still think a non-mandated resource coordinator would be better positioned to work with a victim in such a case, at least initially, but am open to change my mind if the arguments are persuasive.

When I asked these questions before, DIB pointed me to the HuffPo article previously mentioned, but as I responded, I don't see how mandatory reporting directly addressed the issues related to repeat offenders moving between states or schools. Or rather, I think there are more effective means to ensure admissions offices should be made aware of past disciplinary actions. I think a few lawsuits by victims might go a long way towards universities developing such means themselves.