I voted that she was lying. So no, the additional posts and information doesn't change that. I also don't presume what N.S. agenda is, but I assume he just wants to make sure something he cares about is being understood. Maybe his ego is wrapped a bit into it as well, but you know what, everyone's guilty of that on here pretty much. I'm trying to give people the benefit of the doubt on here and assume they have right intentions. Honestly it's a much more refreshing way of living. You should try it.
Yeah well, I didn't ask about those who already voted like that, but... The university has dismissed all accusations. It clearly seems like Sulkowicz and/or people associated with her made this part of the campaign against the guy. I guess if you are crazy enough to carry a mattress around campus for a year and enjoy playing the victim, you will not stop at finding others to support your case.
I don't really know the series of events but you're probably correct. She has been very active in pushing the case (Jezebel). When I was first reading articles I came across mostly conservative backlash against the case from the typical outlets. I don't think this case should be used to make a broad political point. I agree she's in the wrong for going mega-public with a fabricated story. I don't see how "her people" (I guess her friends at school) would gain anything from reporting it, particularly to their literary fraternity (nerds). Since those cases haven't been reported and he's been cleared I'll just accept they were groundless.
Frankly I hope they get slapped with a defamation suit. Their should be consequences to what they have done here.
The only points I was trying to make was 1. This individual should feel bad about lying about rape. 2. Systems where there is a presumption of guilt are flawed and wrong.
Does anyone else think she's kinda hot? Seems like a girl I would have slept with in high school (say what you will). She should probably go the American way and make a porno on the mattress.
I'm not going to spend much further time on this, but you forgot--- 3. Questioning the methodology of rape studies unprompted, which started this debate in the first place. Also, 2. is incredibly hypocritical: I keep on bringing this up but if you refuse to be a part of "courts of public opinion" yet you vote for the girl being a "psycho" you are participating in a court of public opinion and you are presuming guilt before innocence. I have never seen anybody claim that any of this would hold up in a court of law on its own.
It's easy to agree on the fact that rape is a problem, but the original reason why this s**tfest kicked off was, despite retrofitting, the fact that people refused to accept that 1/3 to 1/5 were realistic metrics for the number of women who will undergo sexual assault. I brought up a stat, the methodology of one study was questioned several times unprompted, I then cited a national study, ATW seemed to embrace the fact that 1/40th was more realistic due to a DOJ study, I cited evidence as to why that DOJ study underreported sexual assault. Only then was it branded "off-topic" to talk about systematic underreporting of sexual assault despite my whole point being aggregate stats trump bulls**t anecdotes. If we are in agreement on the extent of the problem and that judging people based on anecdote is bulls**t, then I'm fine with the fact this thread is filled with people who claim they despise presuming "guilt before innocence" despite entertaining themselves with, well presuming guilt before innocence.
Is this what you are referring to? I thought you had been referring to the court of public opinion. I think you're fundamentally misunderstanding how Title IX works and you're speaking for others who might not. Disciplinary penalties are not assigned arbitrarily, unless you presume school disciplinarians are violating due process rights en masse. In fact, one of the things you would have seen in this anecdote was that school policy in the sense of disciplinary hearings and penalties showed there was no presumption of guilt for innocence for the accused. If you believe school disciplinary policies under Title IX presume guilt before innocence, we disagree on that.
I do think 1/40 is probably way too low based on the number of studies I've seen that put it north of 1/5.
That's fairly racist thing of you to say, but you be you. This is further evidence that you are not capable of following along in a fairly straightforward conversation so there's really no sense in me trying to keep spelling things out for you in crayon with the hopes that you will eventually get it. Hey look, even more evidence showing how poorly you follow along in conversation! It's officially a trend. Anyway, if you knew what you were talking about, you'd know that part of the reason the victim in this case is suing the university was because of the presumption of his guilt.....but I don't expect you to follow along....just do your best.
The debate started when you tried to argue that 1/3 to 1/5 women were raped. Nobody believed that. Then you changed your argument to 1/3 to 1/5 women were sexually assaulted. That's more believable. Sexually assaulting is not equal to rape.
Bobby, the school's policy (an implementation of Title IX) doesn't presume guilt. It's a preponderance of evidence system - same as civil suits.
I was talking about how he was immediately on restricted access to university buildings other than his dorm as a result of the accusations. They began treating him as a sexual predator....presuming his guilt, up until the time he proved himself innocent.
