Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Alf, the point is that there is never any excuse for a sexual assault, and while it is certainly unwise to drink to excess and put yourself in a vulnerable position, the proper reaction to hearing about a sexual assault, if you don't want to look like an donkey-cave, is not to point out things the victim did wrong. At least not without some serious disclaimers.

Given that the brain isn't fully developed till around age 23(IIRC) it could be said maybe we should raise the drinking limit.

NO, that would Tac another two more years.

I assume you're under 21 Hotsauce

There's a fair amount of data indicating that cultures which start teens drinking in limited quanties, in controlled family settings, don't have as many problems with teen and college-age binge drinking and alcohol abuse as we do.

Yeah, so maybe the answer would be something similar to how driving works with permits before getting a full license.

People between the age of, say, 14 and 21 could drink limited quantities while being supervised by their legal guardian. So they still couldn't purchase it and unsupervised use would still land you in trouble. And of course you couldn't drive with any detectable BAC at all.

 Grey Templar wrote:
I assume you're under 21 Hotsauce

Yes, And my 21st in coming this year.

 Mannahnin wrote:
Alf, the point is that there is never any excuse for a sexual assault, and while it is certainly unwise to drink to excess and put yourself in a vulnerable position, the proper reaction to hearing about a sexual assault, if you don't want to look like an donkey-cave, is not to point out things the victim did wrong. At least not without some serious disclaimers.

This is exactly how I thought my post would be interpreted. When the poor girl was asked, 'hey want to go to an end of the summer party, get your drink on." Or how ever it was presented to her, she should have said, "Nah, I think I'll pass, not too into drinking." BAM! NONE of the horrible acts that happened to her would have happened.

I'm well aware that we are pretty pretty repressed when it comes to drinking, but at the same time that law exists for some reason... but hey, I guess I'm coming off as blaming the victim...

 Alfndrate wrote:

What happened is a shame, a young girl has to live with this for the rest of her life, two young men completely ruined their lives because they committed a horrible act of stupidity...

Stupidity is getting into a car drunk, thinking you can drive yourself home, stupidity would have been climbing onto a ledge drunk and falling. Dragging an unconscious young woman around and using her body without her consent is abusive, bullying, sadistic and brutal. You do not say 'oh, that was stupid, raping that girl multiple times, then posting it about and laughing about it and then filming yourselves laughing about it, that was malevolent and marked them as arrogant little monsters who believed their 'status' in the local community empowered them to commit the act of rape upon another human being.

 Alfndrate wrote:

MGS, while I'm not arguing your point that a woman has just as much right to go out and get drunk as a guy and wake up with just a headache, these were kids, and these kids shouldn't have been drinking to begin with :-\. But I'm sure I'll be called a callous donkey-cave for saying that.

No, you're not callous for saying it, it's just pointless to say it, the fact they were drinking is a pointless issue, it neither condemns the girl for being raped nor does it alleviate or condone the assailants for raping her. I have been drunk many many times, I've managed to do it without raping anyone and I would not have deserved rape for the action of drinking. Also, kids can and will go out and drink, the vast majority of them here and in the UK, none of them should be raped for that and no rape should have been 'explained away' with 'well, she'd been drinking.

It does. In part because people don't say that teenage guys need to avoid going to parties and engaging in otherwise normal social behavior.

While our general culture and the prevalence of binge drinking could use some work, that shouldn't be a reason that teen girls need to hide at home in fear of rape if they happen to act like a normal teenager and be a little bit irresponsible and dumb. Responsibility needs to be on the guys to know that if they rape someone, they are evil scumbags, and will be treated as such.

 Alfndrate wrote:

 Mannahnin wrote:
Alf, the point is that there is never any excuse for a sexual assault, and while it is certainly unwise to drink to excess and put yourself in a vulnerable position, the proper reaction to hearing about a sexual assault, if you don't want to look like an donkey-cave, is not to point out things the victim did wrong. At least not without some serious disclaimers.

This is exactly how I thought my post would be interpreted. When the poor girl was asked, 'hey want to go to an end of the summer party, get your drink on." Or how ever it was presented to her, she should have said, "Nah, I think I'll pass, not too into drinking." BAM! NONE of the horrible acts that happened to her would have happened.

I'm well aware that we are pretty pretty repressed when it comes to drinking, but at the same time that law exists for some reason... but hey, I guess I'm coming off as blaming the victim...

OK, see now I'm going to be blunt, because this is not acceptable.

According to that logic, she should have just not left the house, she should have worn longer clothes so as not to draw men's eyes.

BAM! indeed...

Young women have every damned right to go out without the fear of rape, to live and experiment with alcohol without the fear of rape, do you understand that you have transferred the onus of responsibility to the girl when it is the man's duty to not rape the woman...?

You have suggested she is at fault for going drinking. I do not walk into the pub and down some pints with the thought I might be taken round the back and raped and neither should any woman, it is not their duty to live in fear of being raped, it is a man's duty not to rape a woman.

Deleted I'm tired of being misinterpreted.

Did the girl put herself at risk. Yes. Just as anyone puts themselves at risk for all sorts of bad things to happen when they drink (or take narcotics) to excess. Does this mean that this partly excuses the conduct of the individuals found guilty, absolutely not. They had a choice. They could have chosen not to get involved in a party where people would be doing stupid things. They could have chosen to not interact with the person (when conscious or unconscious). They could have chosen , like anyone else at the party, to not drink or otherwise engage in behavior that would put their freedom, in fact their life, in jeopardy.

Bottom line is everyone involved made some very bad choices, the consequences of which they all will have to live with the rest of their lives, if it be only their conscience that continues to convict them in the years and decades to come.

That said, within this thread is basically a debate about punishment. Do the individuals deserve a 2nd chance or should they be taken out and shot because they are beyond redemption and have no chance make a positive contribution to their families and loved ones, and society at large? Do they deserve to be made permanently destitute? What about their families? Do they deserve to have all that they own taken away from them? If they have siblings, should those siblings be exposed to the consequences of their brother's actions? When do we cross the line from seeking justice to seeking revenge?

 Grey Templar wrote:

People between the age of, say, 14 and 21 could drink limited quantities while being supervised by their legal guardian.

That's not far from how it used to be in Wisconsin.

 Lord of Deeds wrote:

That said, within this thread is basically a debate about punishment. Do the individuals deserve a 2nd chance or should they be taken out and shot because they are beyond redemption and have no chance make a positive contribution to their families and loved ones, and society at large? Do they deserve to be made permanently destitute? What about their families? Do they deserve to have all that they own taken away from them? If they have siblings, should those siblings be exposed to the consequences of their brother's actions? When do we cross the line from seeking justice to seeking revenge?

Well said.

 MeanGreenStompa wrote:

 Alfndrate wrote:

What happened is a shame, a young girl has to live with this for the rest of her life, two young men completely ruined their lives because they committed a horrible act of stupidity...

Stupidity is getting into a car drunk, thinking you can drive yourself home, stupidity would have been climbing onto a ledge drunk and falling. Dragging an unconscious young woman around and using her body without her consent is abusive, bullying, sadistic and brutal. You do not say 'oh, that was stupid, raping that girl multiple times, then posting it about and laughing about it and then filming yourselves laughing about it, that was malevolent and marked them as arrogant little monsters who believed their 'status' in the local community empowered them to commit the act of rape upon another human being.

 Alfndrate wrote:

MGS, while I'm not arguing your point that a woman has just as much right to go out and get drunk as a guy and wake up with just a headache, these were kids, and these kids shouldn't have been drinking to begin with :-\. But I'm sure I'll be called a callous donkey-cave for saying that.

No, you're not callous for saying it, it's just pointless to say it, the fact they were drinking is a pointless issue, it neither condemns the girl for being raped nor does it alleviate or condone the assailants for raping her. I have been drunk many many times, I've managed to do it without raping anyone and I would not have deserved rape for the action of drinking. Also, kids can and will go out and drink, the vast majority of them here and in the UK, none of them should be raped for that and no rape should have been 'explained away' with 'well, she'd been drinking.

MGS has the way of it.

My Wife's sole commentary (evidently she's been following this) is that they are hyper guilty.

 MeanGreenStompa wrote:

OK, see now I'm going to be blunt, because this is not acceptable.

According to that logic, she should have just not left the house, she should have worn longer clothes so as not to draw men's eyes.

BAM! indeed...

Young women have every damned right to go out without the fear of rape, to live and experiment with alcohol without the fear of rape, do you understand that you have transferred the onus of responsibility to the girl when it is the man's duty to not rape the woman...?

You have suggested she is at fault for going drinking. I do not walk into the pub and down some pints with the thought I might be taken round the back and raped and neither should any woman, it is not their duty to live in fear of being raped, it is a man's duty not to rape a woman.

Well, I'd still argue there's a difference between how a person dresses and what parties they go to, and drinking to the point of unconsciousness. Not to the law, or the moral cuplability of the rapists.

But lets be honest, men or women, how much more trouble do we get into after drinking way too much?

Passing out in public is pretty ill advised, regardless of gender.

 Frazzled wrote:
My Wife's sole commentary (evidently she's been following this) is that they are hyper guilty.

And I never said they weren't, these boys deserve the time they're about to serve and probably more (not sure on the average sentence for rape).

 Alfndrate wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
My Wife's sole commentary (evidently she's been following this) is that they are hyper guilty.

And I never said they weren't, these boys deserve the time they're about to serve and probably more (not sure on the average sentence for rape).

Yeah, but it's hard to shake the feeling they're paying for a lot more sins then their own.

 Polonius wrote:

 Alfndrate wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
My Wife's sole commentary (evidently she's been following this) is that they are hyper guilty.

And I never said they weren't, these boys deserve the time they're about to serve and probably more (not sure on the average sentence for rape).

Yeah, but it's hard to shake the feeling they're paying for a lot more sins then their own.

Bull fething gak

They raped a woman. Then they tweeted about it.
They should be skinned alive on tv as a warning to others.

The harm done to this girl was done by a huge chunk of the community. They were the actors, and deserve what they got, but let's not pretend that her victimization began and ended with their actions.

 Polonius wrote:
The harm done to this girl was done by a huge chunk of the community. They were the actors, and deserve what they got, but let's not pretend that her victimization began and ended with their actions.

Yeah. Go read some of the witness testimony. Some people walked in on the rape and didn't do anything. Didn't even seem to find anything odd about it.

 Polonius wrote:
The harm done to this girl was done by a huge chunk of the community. They were the actors, and deserve what they got, but let's not pretend that her victimization began and ended with their actions.

That sounds good but its not, because the community didn't commit the rape.
But I'm euqal opportunity. Beat hell out of them too.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 LordofHats wrote:

 Polonius wrote:
The harm done to this girl was done by a huge chunk of the community. They were the actors, and deserve what they got, but let's not pretend that her victimization began and ended with their actions.

Yeah. Go read some of the witness testimony. Some people walked in on the rape and didn't do anything. Didn't even seem to find anything odd about it.

You're right. They should be punished too. Beat them with rocks on public tv as a warning to others.

chaos0xomega wrote:
Im just going to say it ... "Some girls rape easy." The fact that she was intoxicated and therefore incapable of legally offering consent just furthers that point.

Let's say you go to a party, get drunk. There happens to be a gay guy, at the party, who then subsequently rapes you. Would you feel ok with the excuse "Well, you -were- drunk? I mean, jeez, c'mon, if you diddn't drink so much, that wouldn't have happened."
I don't beleive the girl was even -conscious-, surely that's an indication enough to say "Nope"
I think a year is just far too little for a case like this, and age is no excuse, because it's not like they diddn't understand their actions, it wasn't an accident.

1) What these guys did was reprehensible, no matter what.
2) If they had woken up sober the next day full of shame for their actions and tried to make amends, they'd need a punishment, and support to try and put their own lives back together.
3) If they had woken up sober and panicked and tried to hide what they did, they'd need punishment, education to make them realise the full enormity of their crime, and support to try and put their own lives back together.
4) As they actually woke up and bragged about it, what they need is punishment as a deterrent to others. Their own morals are clearly too loose to be able to refrain from such behaviour from the goodness of their own hearts in future, so what they need is such a serious punishment that they'll be afraid to ever do it again, and that will act as a deterrent to other similarly minded young men.

Now, away from that specific case and back towards more general issues...

A) I knew a girl who was abused as a child and then gang-raped as a teenager. It feths up people's lives. I don't know the details of the various incidents, but I saw up close and personal how upsetting it is. The girl twice begged me to rape her. Literally begged, and she used the word rape. Prior to this she had always frozen up at varying points through us becoming intimate. We never actually had sex, but it was scary to be in that position. Whatever people think about the lost potential of those guy's lives, her potential for intimacy will have at least been harmed, possibly destroyed. I hope it would not be that bad for the girl in this case but it may be.

B) I knew a guy who falsely accused of rape by a girl I had cut out of my life because I had decided long before that she was dangerous and would do that or something similar eventually. It messed things up for him pretty badly, though not as badly as it could have done. The girl claimed to be a lesbian but had slept with at least four other guys from our course. I had also witnessed the same girl attempt to repeatedly molest a straight girl, so drunk she could not stand, who had rejected her advances numerous times in the past and tried to take her home with her. Another very drunk guy and I actually protected the drunk girl and got her mother to come collect her. We were all early to mid-twenties at the time. It is not just kids this happens to, it is not just men who do it, and it can be very very drunk men who do the right thing. The straight girl had been coming on to me whilst sober, and I backed off once she was too drunk. The lesbian did the opposite.

There are two sides to the coin. Women do seduce men, then make false accusations. Sometimes the women were drunk at the time. Being drunk is no excuse for raping, but it is also no excuse for giving consent. Now, a sober, decent man will know that the woman would regret it, and not sleep with her, but a drunk, desperate or unpleasant man might take the opportunity. If a woman is drunk and says "no" or is drunk and incapable of giving an answer, or incapable or even knowing what is happening, it is rape. But if a woman gets a bit tipsy and seduces someone she wouldn't normally, it is no more rape than if a guy gets drunk and shags the fat ugly girl. It is a mistake, but it is her mistake, not the guy's.

Basically, this is an emotive issue which stirs up strong feelings on both sides of the argument. Each case is different. Getting drunk does not mean you have given up your right to safety and decent treatment from others. Drinking does excuse doing something stupid, embarrassing or silly, such as sleeping with someone you wouldn't normally, but it does not excuse doing something vile, depraved or sadistic, such as forcing yourself on someone or accusing someone else of doing that later. Sadly, there are arseholes in the world who will do bad stuff, sober or drunk. There is no excuse.

I'll just leave this here

False accusations of rape are extremely rare. There was a report last week.

http://metro.co.uk/2013/03/13/false-rape-and-domestic-violence-allegations-extremely-rare-3539568/

That is UK, obviously, the situation in the USA may be different.

That study only covers prosecutions. I would suspect a great many false accusations of just about any crime can be found to be false rather quickly and never proceed to court. Even the majority of actual cases of rape and domestic violence never proceed to court. Actually figuring out how common(or uncommon) false accusations are has been a huge cluster feth for everyone.

How can anyone feel sorrry for these guys. They are 16-17. By that age you should bloody know whether or not it is rape. Thy chose to take advantage of a young girl and post on it. They deserve atleast 5 years in state prison.
Heck for extra, send them the Cali for punishment.

 LordofHats wrote:
That study only covers prosecutions. I would suspect a great many false accusations of just about any crime can be found to be false rather quickly and never proceed to court. Even the majority of actual cases of rape and domestic violence never proceed to court. Actually figuring out how common(or uncommon) false accusations are has been a huge cluster feth for everyone.

Should people care about a false accusation that is so weak it has no effect?

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 LordofHats wrote:
That study only covers prosecutions. I would suspect a great many false accusations of just about any crime can be found to be false rather quickly and never proceed to court. Even the majority of actual cases of rape and domestic violence never proceed to court. Actually figuring out how common(or uncommon) false accusations are has been a huge cluster feth for everyone.

Should people care about a false accusation that is so weak it has no effect?

yes actually, but thats a big side topic methinks.