Rape is a legal term. Or do you mean like calling this incident rape is raping the definition of rape?
You have to specify if you mean legally or not. That seems to be a sticking point for several folks here.
Or did you?
Mr. Lubrano - you have my vote! My heart still breaks when I think about how Joe was treated...dispicable and unbearable. I will never support the cowards that were on the BOT at that time. Get rid of them all.
It is a shame that the BoT did not have the back bone or the guts to stand up for JoePa. It is also a shame that they had to succumb to the pressures of the press instead of doing what is right and supporting him. Joe Paterno was a much better man then any one of those on the BoT, and he proved it, year after year, after year, after....well I could go on for 61 times, (one for every year he was there.) by backing the University & so many times, by backing "His Kids". God Bless Ya Joe; Russ Hess
You have to specify if you mean legally or not. That seems to be a sticking point for several folks here.
What's the difference between legal rape and not legal rape?
What's the difference between legal rape and not legal rape?
Well, I was talking about the difference between legal proceedings and conversational discussion.
Pointing out the logical result of what you say isn't "trolling".
Rape is a legal term. Or do you mean like calling this incident rape is raping the definition of rape?
"1st degree rape," "2nd degree rape," "3rd degree rape," "sexual assault" and various other phrases are all "legal terms" that refer to one person engaging in sex with another person without the consent of the other person. The seriousness of the crime is dependent on the details, and the specific phrasing that encompasses the details of a particular a crime varies from state to state. Furthermore, it's also clear that sexual misbehavior that is NOT criminal can nevertheless be punished by educational institutions.
Do you get it? Forcing sex on a person under threat of bodily injury or death, or by physically overpowering the other person, is not the only meaning of the above terms. And even sex under conditions that aren't considered criminal, but where consent is somewhat ambiguous, can be punished by universities - no crime is necessary. This is what is being discussed - this very broad category that can be collected under the umbrella term "sexual assault."
Stop playing word games.
Stop telling me what "I want." If you wish to make an adult contribution to this thread, then tell us what YOU want. All of your posts so far are just BS.Oh I get it entirely.
You want schools to essentially adjudicate every sexual encounter to make sure that there is no sexual "misbehavior" going on. Talk about not keeping the government out of the bedroom
Rather than flailing about, telling us about how the system is trying to "control men," why don't you tell us YOUR solution to the problem of sexual assaults on campus.And where sexual "misbehavior" will be defined according to increasingly insane rules. The point is obvious. To use the power of institutions to control men. And it is very clearly targeted at men; see the discussion where sex between a drunk man and a woman is only sexual "misbehavior" on the part of the man.
Stop telling me what "I want." If you wish to make an adult contribution to this thread, then tell us what YOU want. All of your posts so far are just BS.
Rather than flailing about, telling us about how the system is trying to "control men," why don't you tell us YOUR solution to the problem of sexual assaults on campus.
St. Louis Post-Dispatch Editorial Page Editor Tony Messenger writes that readers — both liberal and conservative ones — have lobbied the paper to change its lineup of conservative columnists. But apparently a bit of a push was necessary.
That came from a recent controversial piece by Washington Post columnist George Will — the one about the “supposed campus epidemic of rape” and the way in which “victimhood” serves as a “coveted status that confers privileges.”
Those words, writes Messenger, “made the decision easier” to dump Will in favor of Washington Post columnist Michael Gerson, who grew up in the Post-Dispatch’s back yard. “We believe that Mr. Gerson’s commitment to ‘compassionate conservatism’ and his roots in St. Louis will better connect with our readers, regardless of their political bent,” notes Messenger.
Notification of the switch came with something of a retraction regarding Will’s sexual-assault piece: “The column was offensive and inaccurate; we apologize for publishing it.”
In a chat with the Erik Wemple Blog, Messenger said that the apology was the first note of contrition that the paper had passed along to its readers. The two-week lag, says Messenger, gave him space to assess the column: “Sometimes thoughtful analysis takes some time,” says Messenger. “Seeing the reaction and intensity of the hurt in some of social media and the reaction of women I know and talking to people who really were offended by the thought that sexual assault victims would seek some special victimhood — it helped seeing that response and it informed my opinion.”
Negative backlash to the Will column came from readers in the St. Louis area, as well as from national sites and commentators. “Women readers in particular — many of them were offended,” says Messenger. For a period of months, says Messenger, he and his colleagues had reached the conclusion that Will had “lost a little bit of speed on his fastball” and the sexual-assault piece expedited the yanking of the columnist. Messenger laments that his unit “fell asleep at the switch a little bit in terms of not paying enough attention” to the Will column. “We don’t edit our syndicated columns but we do maintain the right to express editorial judgment in terms of deciding whether or not to publish something that we got from a syndicated columnist,” says Messenger. “Part of it is just the reality of the news business these days. Nothing gets as much of a look as it used to. That’s our reality and we have to live with that. That’s why it was important to include ‘We apologize’ in that note because we didn’t want readers to think that we were shirking our responsibility.”
So how many readers have called with those classic, rambling, vague threats to cancel their subscriptions over the cancellation of George Will? Three voicemails, says Messenger, who suggests he got that same rigmarole a while back, when he bumped Charles Krauthammer from the Sunday lineup in favor of Will. “I actually had conservatives tell me I was only doing that because Will wasn’t as clear a conservative as Krauthammer was. What they can do is threaten to cancel and what I can do is explain my reasoning and thank them for their business.”
What do you think should be done with Hillary?Apparently the negative public response to Will's column is making at least one newspaper re-think whether it wants Will in its weekly lineup of columnists:
St. Louis Post-Dispatch dumps Will over column
But I'm not surprised that our right-wing posters see so much to like in an over-the-hill conservative columnist. I just wish the Washington Post would follow the Post-Dispatch's lead and yank Will. I swear, if I read one more Will "It is axiomatic . . ." NON-axiomatic assertion, I think I'll throw up.
Stop telling me what "I want." If you wish to make an adult contribution to this thread, then tell us what YOU want. All of your posts so far are just BS.
Rather than flailing about, telling us about how the system is trying to "control men," why don't you tell us YOUR solution to the problem of sexual assaults on campus.
What do you think should be done with Hillary?
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...on-took-me-through-hell-rape-victim-says.html
Why would I have a solution to an invented problem? Even you started talking about punishing "sexual misbehavior" not sexual assault.
The "solution" would be for feminists to stop imagining sexual "assaults" where none exist.
If a drunk man and drunk woman have sex it isn't rape.
If a man nags a woman for sex it isn't rape.
etc.
What do you think should be done with Hillary?
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...on-took-me-through-hell-rape-victim-says.html
Which feminists have suggested that those two situations are rape?
Dear Senators Blumenthal, Feinstein, Baldwin and Casey:
I have received your letter of June 12, and I am puzzled. You say my statistics “fly in the face of everything we know about this issue.” You do not mention which statistics, but those I used come from the Obama administration, and from simple arithmetic involving publicly available reports on campus sexual assaults.
The administration asserts that only 12 percent of college sexual assaults are reported. Note well: I did not question this statistic. Rather, I used it.
I cited one of the calculations based on it that Mark Perry of the American Enterprise Institute has performed {link}. So, I think your complaint is with the conclusion that arithmetic dictates, based on the administration’s statistic. The inescapable conclusion is that another administration statistic that one in five women is sexually assaulted while in college is insupportable and might call for tempering your rhetoric about “the scourge of sexual assault.”
As for what you call my “ancient beliefs,” which you think derive from an “antiquated” and “counterintuitive” culture, allow me to tell you something really counterintuitive: I think I take sexual assault much more seriously than you do. Which is why I worry about definitions of that category of crime that might, by their breadth, tend to trivialize it. And why I think sexual assault is a felony that should be dealt with by the criminal justice system, and not be adjudicated by improvised campus processes.
....
The topic is indeed rape and insensitivity to it...no?After reading that several times the only similarities I can see between the two issues is the topic of rape. The actual conduct is completely different. Seems like a topic for a different thread, no?
I see no mention of any feminists in that post, nor do I see any mention of anyone claiming that when two adults have sex whilst under the influence of alcohol it is rape.
The difficulty of defining incapacitation and consent was underscored last week when Dean Wasilolek took the stand. Rachel B. Hitch, a Raleigh attorney representing McLeod, asked Wasiolek what would happen if two students got drunk to the point of incapacity, and then had sex.
"They have raped each other and are subject to explusion?" Hitch asked.
"Assuming it is a male and female, it is the responsibility in the case of the male to gain consent before proceeding with sex," said Wasiolek.
The topic is indeed rape and insensitivity to it...no?