“So, are you saying that the fraternity has no culpability and this is only about money? It has been established that this is not a false allegation. It has been established that the young woman was harassed by members of the community for her decision to speak out and prosecute her attacker. I have to agree with Jeremy, if the fraternity really supported this woman and waned to change the culture, then the response would be very different.”
Quaker09 on Oct 18, 2012 at 16:37:18
“Hold on, only two things have been established: 1. The rape occurred and the rapist was found guilty and sentenced. 2. People on the Internet don't understand the distinction between established facts and the anecdotal allegations of a prosecution team.
The prosecution can tell the press whatever they want and will often grossly exaggerate and even fabricate stories to further their goals in the lawsuit. I have a hard time believing that a small prestigious liberal arts school with less than 3000 students would release the name and residency of a rape victim and then sit back and watch an alleged "pro-rape" demonstration outside her window. It just doesn't make any senses.
And yes, the case is only about money by definition. In a civil lawsuit one party is sueing another for damages in the form of money.”
Quaker09 on Oct 18, 2012 at 16:27:24
“Ok, let me set something straight, only two things have been established thus far. 1. There was a sexual assault and the victim has been prosecuted and sentenced. 2. People on the Internet do not understand the difference between the allegations of a prosecution team and established facts.
I find it very had to believe that the Univeristy would release the name and residence of the rate victim and then sit back and watch as their own students formed some kind of alleged "pro-rape" protest outside of her dorm. That just doesn't make sense, use your common sense and be careful about the distinction between facts and allegations based on purely anecdotal evidence from 1 source (Jane Doe's lawyer).
And yes this is only about money by definition - that is what a civil suit is. The criminal trial ended months ago.”
Quaker09 on Oct 18, 2012 at 16:20:06
“First off, the warning emails and property dispute Im referring to was BEFORE the rape allegations even began. Next, the sexual assault has been established and that is it. The rest is anecdotal evidence put forth by a lawyer who specializes in negligence civil suits. I hope you understand he can say whatever he wants to the press to help his case, regardless if validity. The criminal trial ended months ago, this is a CIVIL suit which means yes it is only about money because that is the only thing that can be exchanged in a CIVIL suit.
My main point this whole time is just to remind people to not blindly believe every single thing they hear on the internet. Use your common sense please, people very commonly make untrue, skewed or grossly exaggerated claims to further their own motives (just look at politics) and these anecdotal allegations should not be confused with fact.
Do you seriously expect me to believe that a prestigious liberal arts college with less than 3000 students would release the name and/or residence of a rape victim immediately after she comes out with rape allegations?? And not only that, but then the school just sat back and watched as their own students protested around her dorm? Annnnd then after allowing this alleged "pro-rape" rally forced the fraternity back ON campus. It simply doesn't make sense... But I admit that if that is the whole truth then Wesleyan owes a huge payout.
“Shouldn't you be asking why did someone rape her instead of why did she allow herself to be raped?!”
skyeagle on Oct 18, 2012 at 22:26:23
“Nope, you go to a place called a "rape Factory" and then you cry when you are raped. She went looking and she found out. Did she deserve to be raped? Sometimes you have to use common sense to avoid a traumatic incident.”
“I am not condoning this woman's choice to not disclose her status. However, he has to be accountable for his actions. He made a choice to take a risk. No matter what she said, he still had a responsibility to protect himself from STI's, pregnancy etc. There is a window period between transmission and positive testing. In another scenario, she could have truthfully told him that she was negative and still been highly infectious. Had he contracted the disease in that scenario, who would he have to blame? We don't know for certain, but I'm fairly sure this man did not engage her in a conversation about her status before they had sex. Regardless, we should not be in the business of criminalizing infectious diseases; it's slippery slope. (Why stop at HIV? Pneumonia can kill you too.)”
“Because marriage is a civil ceremony, it is a civil right. Southern Baptists have every right to not recognize this withing their church. They have no right to impose their religious views on our state rights.”
LeftRight on Jun 21, 2012 at 15:01:11
“EXACTLY!!!! NOBODY is going to force a single Southern Baptist Church to conduct a single wedding that they don't want to, INCLUDING such already settled couples as interracial couples!! But the STATE cannot deny a marriage license to any couple without an overriding reason, and there just isn't one when it comes to gay marriage!!!!!”
Jan 27, 2012 at 09:27:02
“Ok, Mike. Do the math for me. Show me how to raise a family of 5 on two minimum wage salaries? Please include time allotted to quality family time, education, savings for college etc. Did people forget the concept of the working poor? Are we going to be forever tied into this stereotypical image of poor people as lazy?”
“uuhh, 'Black' is not a nationality. And the fact remains that we don't make racism disappear by not talking about it and pretending that everything is equal. It is not. So, it is still relevant for cultures and classes of people - be they black, women, LGBT, old, youth, disabled - speak to the issues, concerns and inequities that affect their communities.”
“So are you saying that you're 'ok with" statutory rape? Do you understand why statutory rape is still considered rape? If a person doesn't have the capacity to consent (ie. they are too young to appreciate the consequences, have full understanding of what they are consenting to etc) then if someone who is older and does have the capacity takes advantage of them, then it is rape; whether or not the underage party was a 'willing' participant. And to be clear, he wasn't talking about statutory rape.”
TrixieTrue2 on Aug 21, 2012 at 11:40:17
“Not at all. I was really trying to figure it out for myself, so I threw it out to this forum. Thanks for your insight.”