lol at reporting any post that isn't spam or a death threat. Lighten up, people, jesus.

F***ing pussies, amirite?

maybe getting drunk and going home with a man you met two hours prior isn't a great idea.

Or going home with a woman because she could falsely accuse you of rape. Better use the buddy system.

It's almost like their judgement is impaired.

Reported.

going by the prevailing logic itt yes each party can accuse the other of rape. but while i don't know where i'd find any statistics on it, in practice i doubt any college male has ever accused a college female of rape for having sex with him while he was drunk or incapacitated.

Of course he can. Doing it after she has already said he raped her isn't going to fool anybody though.

this will never play out any differently though, because no college male who has sex with a college female will ever claim rape, even if they were incapacitated. so they're only ever going to claim rape (or really, claim incapacitation) after being accused, as a defense to the accusation.

#hotrapetakes

You just summed up the scenario we've been kicking around for an eternity ITT. Both sides agree that the guy has the right to say the same thing, both recognize that dudes rarely take advantage of this right, but there are some differences in opinion (I think) about the reasons why this is the case.

Where there has been some significant disagreement is how to know when a rape occurred when the situation is a "gray area" case (as you put it) and both parties have been drinking. Team Fly/Drugs/Goofy argue that #feeling raped the morning after is almost enough on its own...and frankly don't abide by "gray area" cases; claiming essentially, "It's simple: Just don't rape drunk chicks!" On the other hand, Team Dude/Ikes/FoldN think that's nowhere near satisfactory.

LOL that is an amazing rewrite of this thread.

You hear back from RAINN yet? Come on, you're like a respected social worker, you absolutely do know what you're talking about, and there's no way you came off like a crank MRA in your letter, right? I'm sure she's just waiting to attach a job offer to be their new president(as their current President supports unethical kangaroo courts!!!!!) to her response.

LOL "we", like this is some collaborative process and you're helping.

I've said it before but guys should have the buddy system to insure women don't falsely accuse them of rape

Grats to you on remembering that I'm a respected social worker! And yes, my background does give me some knowledge that I might not otherwise have on this topic. Experience + education = useful.

But hey, Fly, what is it you do again? I apologize for not remembering, as I've only asked you like 56 times ITT and I'm sure you haven't evaded me each and every time. I'm genuinely curious given your reliance on your own authority for the vast majority of your posts, and your propensity to make frothy assertions / proclamations. I mean, you must be some kind of expert I assume......right?

Did RAINN ever get back to you?

Nope.

I'm sure they are busy defending the onslaught of men from false rape accusations or something.

Yeah except then you didn't know the difference between civil and criminal court and you also thought internal college discipline precluded criminal investigations. Or something. Your knowledge level was so immensely low we #literally had to do a significant amount of work to turn your incoherence nonsense trolling into actual arguments. That's how little you knew about what you're talking about.

None of us needing to be an expert in **** to know you had no idea what you're talking about, by the way(having gone to really any level of school, maybe caught an episode or two of Law and Order, that level of basic civics), that's why #literally a dozen people in this thread pointed and laughed at the social worker who was posting pro-rape-immunity random word association gibberish.

This isn't a credentials contest where your imaginary bull**** degree makes your horrific "no college discipline for sexual misconduct" policy remotely OK.

I gotta ask, though,

When you were crowing about that article "defecating" all over our arguments and like, quoting random lines out of context, you knew you were full of it, right? Like as you were doing the editing, you had to realize that.

So here's my guess: you never emailed RAINN at all. Which, again, thank god. Please do not bother the normals. But there's no way you're so deluded you thought you'd get them to back up an idea you developed in a panic after the thread provided negative feedback to your first round of boilerplate MRA nonsense.

Probably their policy not to reply to the inane ramblings of MRA. Well, you'll always have this thread! (Well, maybe not always...)

Just to stir things up before bed so I have some entertainment tomorrow.

~~~

http://time.com/99959/campus-sexual-...atthew-kaiser/

Full disclosure: This dude is a defense attorney. Below is an excerpt.

But many schools take a different line – that a student under the influence of alcohol in any way can’t consent to sex. Setting aside the sophomoric double rape problem (are two drunk people having sex raping each other?), drunk sex just isn’t what we think about when we think about sexual assault. It’s not what Joe Biden is talking about.

Yet, based on my own anecdotal experience, it’s what I see in these cases.

In most cases I see, both students have been drinking and then have sex. The next morning, the female student wakes up and doesn’t really remember the details of the night before. She knows she had sex. Often, she’s not sexually experienced. She knows what she did was out of character. And she goes to a counselor, trained on the school’s definition of assault, which leads to a complaint against the male student.

It’s easy to empathize with someone in that situation. Sometimes what we do when we’re young and drunk and inexperienced isn’t consistent with how we think of ourselves. Some of that is the hard work of finding out who you are that happens in college.

But it doesn’t mean that a rape happened.

~~~

http://counseling.illinoisstate.edu/...finition.shtml

Illinois State University's counselling services website. Explanation of how having sex with someone who is intoxicated is rape. Brings me back to the segment ITT when defining "intoxicated" or "incapacitated" was in question, and how determining this can be quite tricky up until a BAL of, say, 0.15, and how not having a breathalyzer makes determining this with any level of certainty difficult to say the least.

~~~

http://time.com/100144/kirsten-gilli...exual-assault/

Author is a senator from New York. Highlighted excerpts below.

Part of the problem is a pure lack of understanding of the true nature of campus sexual assault. These are not dates gone bad, or a good guy who had too much to drink. This is a crime largely perpetrated by repeat offenders, who instead of facing a prosecutor and a jail cell, remain on campus after a short-term suspension, if punished at all.

Another issue is that colleges and universities across the country would prefer not to acknowledge they have a problem for obvious public relations reasons. The current lax oversight has the perverse effect of incentivizing colleges to encourage non-reporting, under-reporting and non-compliance with the already weak standards under current federal law.

As it stands today, the federal agencies in charge of enforcing campus sex assault laws are left to a fraction of the funding and staff needed to be effective. And without the right oversight, nearly two-thirds of schools are failing to even report crime statistics as they are required to by current law.

~~~

http://time.com/100091/campus-sexual...-hoff-sommers/

Disclaimer: I don't agree with some of what this woman says, but it's intriguing none the less. I believe she was quoted earlier ITT. Highlighted excerpts below.

On January 27, 2010, University of North Dakota officials charged undergraduate Caleb Warner with sexually assaulting a fellow student. He insisted the encounter was consensual, but was found guilty by a campus tribunal and thereupon expelled and banned from campus.

A few months later, Warner received surprising news. The local police had determined not only that Warner was innocent, but that the alleged victim had deliberately falsified her charges. She was charged with lying to police for filing a false report, and fled the state.

Cases like Warner’s are proliferating. Here is a partial list of young men who have recently filed lawsuits against their schools for what appear to be gross mistreatment in campus sexual assault tribunals: Drew Sterrett—University of Michigan, “John Doe”—Swarthmore, Anthony Villar—Philadelphia University, Peter Yu—Vassar, Andre Henry—Delaware State, Dez Wells—Xavier, and Zackary Hunt—Denison. Presumed guilty is the new legal principle where sex is concerned.

Sexual assault on campus is a genuine problem—but the new rape culture crusade is turning ugly. The list of falsely accused young men subject to kangaroo court justice is growing apace. Students at Boston University demanded that a Robin Thicke concert be cancelled: His hit song Blurred Lines is supposedly a rape anthem. (It includes the words, “I know you want it.”) Professors at Oberlin, University of California, Santa Barbara, and Rutgers have been urged to place “trigger warnings” on class syllabi that include books like the Great Gatsby—too much misogynist violence. This movement is turning our campuses into hostile environments for free expression and due process. And so far, university officials, political leaders, and the White House are siding with the mob.

LOL both of those articles were already posted and discussed at length in this thread. I think the Hoff Summers one has now been posted by three different MRAs, I assume you guys like that one more because it's by a female author.

You continue to have literally no idea what you're talking about. (For example, I straight up do not believe you know what a breathalyzer is, what it measures, how it's administered, etc.)

Eagerly excited for the day when you flash those grad student research skills and run to this thread to post the article in the OP as conclusive proof of... something or other. (you're egregiously misrepresenting the Gillibrand article, natch, in exactly the same manner you tried and failed with RAINN. How many times did you need to touch the stove before you cut that **** out as a child?)

P.S. Seriously learn how to ****ing quote things, these wordbombs of mixed prose and blockquotes are terrible

So...still evading the question? #dudeliterally shocked. Dude. Literally. Shocked.

This social worker wants drastically increased rape reporting to law enforcement. This rando internet dude named Fly wants to disparage disabled people and vilify anyone who opposes his views on life.

So STILL evading the question? Gotcha.

Sure why not Fly, go ahead.

Full of...pride?

I mean, it was kind of sweet seeing how much more in line RAINN's policy was with my views than #dudeliterally's. Your attempts to discredit my position by illustrating how RAINN wants to massively de-emphasize kangaroo courts but not ENTIRELY remove them from rape proceedings is a joke. The fact remains their over-arching approach to how campus rape should be managed is far, far more similar to what I and others have been arguing for ITT, and frankly their approach to how IRBs should be involved is similarly far more similar to my stance than yours as well.

I think even you, deep down beneath all those defense mechs you've got securely in place, must recognize this as the truth.

Sick read # 1,293,490 by Fly. I should wear sunglasses when posting to avoid your stare.

What on God's green earth do you know about normalcy? I've got no reason to believe you engage anyone 'normal' in any 'normal' way, and instead I've got#dudeliterally every reason to believe you're straight mentally unhealthy. You routinely evade any question pertaining to who you are or what you do, or why it is you feel you have any authority on anything.

I mean seriously Fly, what do we know about you? We know you're a dude who regularly has to be put in time out to reflect on your behavior; to consider how whatever you had said was equal parts inappropriate and aggressive.

But Fly, for sure bro, we all will just follow your lead on what is and isn't "normal," and similarly believe without question your "pro tips" and strongly worded assertions. Because, you know, you're Fly. You're that guy with the authority. Totally.

Again, I need to wear shades ITF. Fly straight soul read me with the delusion and panicky emails business. How do you do it, Fly? You're just so smart and intuitive.

lol look at all those "we"s. Who else are you speaking for?

PS - Why are you even engaging me? Like seriously.

Before you got banned you said you wanted me to stop posting, and I responded by saying how much you loved to hate me and that you definitely DIDN'T want me to stop. Is this like an effort to get the last word or something? At this point IDK what it is you want from this back-and-forth, and I'm like 80% sure you aren't self-aware enough to know either.

Uh, because it's amusing how much effort you are putting into really awful posts. Google, huge block quotes of "intriguing" articles you found for the class to discuss, maybe an email(the contents of which you refused to post)...

and all the while you literally had no idea what you were talking about and, despite numerous people telling you exactly that, you tried to just struggle through with more and more bull****. Like you thought you were winning, like you were clever.

There is no back and forth in this thread, dude, this isn't a discussion between two legitimate and valid points of view. Me and the other posters, we're pretty much just exploring just how terrible your insane "no punishment by any third party without a conviction in criminal court" would actually be in if applied in real life. It's funny to us how little you know about civics.