Exaggerated or Not?

[clo]

4 minutes ago, ReneeFLL said:

 

I had posted about that previously but I was wrong about the amount of time he served. It's disgusting that he only got 6 months and I don't care if it's his first time. What the heck does that have to do with it? The father saying "it was only 20 minutes of action". What the hell? He wasn't playing sports, he was raping someone. Great example he's setting for his son. Neither one wants him to take responsibility for his actions. I'd like to see them both meet up with Big Bubba and see what they think of their "only 20 minutes of action"!!!

 

Also, what a STUPID judge. Wonder if he has a daughter and she was raped? Would he only give the perp 6 months? Hell no!!

Living out here, this has gotten a huge amount of press.  So this thread has resonated with me (and others of course).  There is nothing that mitigates the crime.  I wish profanity were allowed here because I would use it.

 

BTW, hours ago I reported this thread with the comment that nothing more can be said that's worthwhile and asking that it be locked.

[ReneeFLL]

1 minute ago, clo said:

Living out here, this has gotten a huge amount of press.  So this thread has resonated with me (and others of course).  There is nothing that mitigates the crime.  I wish profanity were allowed here because I would use it.

 

BTW, hours ago I reported this thread with the comment that nothing more can be said that's worthwhile and asking that it be locked.

Good grief! Why would you report it? Just because you don't have anymore say doesn't mean others don't. I think it's going to die down anyway.

[clo]

2 minutes ago, ReneeFLL said:

Good grief! Why would you report it? Just because you don't have anymore say doesn't mean others don't. I think it's going to die down anyway.

Because IMO everything that could be said has been said.  Right?

[ReneeFLL]

4 minutes ago, clo said:

Because IMO everything that could be said has been said.  Right?

Yes for me and you, but who are we to say that for others? Hit the mute button if you don't want to read it anymore. 

 

As I said it will be dying down soon if not sooner. I for one am done commenting on this.

Edited September 10, 2019 by ReneeFLL

[clo]

14 minutes ago, ReneeFLL said:

Yes for me and you, but who are we to say that for others? Hit the mute button if you don't want to read it anymore. 

 

As I said it will be dying down soon if not sooner. I for one am done commenting on this.

What more can be added?  And I don't believe this site is for therapy but what do I know?

[ilikeanswers]

This happens with every article to do with rape. The overwhelming focus is always what the victim did wrong and the perpetrators are mentioned as doing wrong but the victim was or behaved in a way that didn't make them a perfect victim. There always seems to be an excuse for rape and then people are surprised when a rapist gets a lenient sentence after society has spent the whole time criticising the victim. Any young man reading this thread would get the impression that the victim's behaviour is far more important the perpetrators.

 

The fact that the media and by extension the public stigmatises the victim more than the perpetrators is a huge part of the problem as to why rape and sexual assault are not seen as serious crimes amongst young men. A survey done in American universities found 65% of males whose friends admitted to assault didn't feel the need to condemn their friends behaviour and an overwhelming 88% who witnessed their friends assaulting women or where told that there friends were planning on assaulting a woman didn't think it was worth risking their friendship to report these crimes. 

 

How many parents sit down with their sons and discuss what they would do if their friends suggested getting a girl drunk at a party. Would they have the self esteem to say no and stop them from their actions or would their fear of social ostracism make them go along with or ignore their friends actions completely, even defend them if the victim does come forward?

 

We spend so much time focused on why the victim was vulnerable we never talk about why perpetrators become criminals in the first place we never think about the messages boys are receiving that make them not think twice about sexually assaulting someone. If we want a chance at a safer society we need refocus on the perpetrators and stigmatise them more so the crimes themselves will be viewed with the seriousness and gravity that they deserve.

[Aquahound]

14 hours ago, calliopecruiser said:

 

And they're wrong......Being drunk made it easier for them to assault her, but she didn't contribute to her own assault.  A person who doesn't fight back isn't contributing to her/his own assault.  A person who dresses in a certain way isn't contributing to her/his own assault.   A person who doesn't leave an abusive spouse isn't contributing to her/his own assault.  A child who doesn't tell anyone about concerns isn't contributing to her/his sexual assault.   Criminals may take advantage of situations, but that doesn't mean the victim was a contributor to the crime. 

 

So as you may know, this subject falls in to my area of expertise.  I'm brand new to this thread and haven't read all 7 pages but I will say I agree with this post.  Even if that girl went and had otherwise consensual sex with those boys, it would still be a sexual assault because her intoxication made her unable to consent.  That's the law.  

 

Is there a lesson to be learned for parents?  Sure.  It helps provide a narrative when counseling our children.  But I will not participate in blaming the victim.  She fell prey to predatory behavior.  

[DarrenM]

18 hours ago, calliopecruiser said:

 

And they're wrong......Being drunk made it easier for them to assault her, but she didn't contribute to her own assault.  A person who doesn't fight back isn't contributing to her/his own assault.  A person who dresses in a certain way isn't contributing to her/his own assault.   A person who doesn't leave an abusive spouse isn't contributing to her/his own assault.  A child who doesn't tell anyone about concerns isn't contributing to her/his sexual assault.   Criminals may take advantage of situations, but that doesn't mean the victim was a contributor to the crime. 

Absolutely spot on. Very well put indeed.

 

Nothing further to add your honour.

[cruisemom42]

13 hours ago, SRF said:

 

Hmm, and the Easter Bunny and Santa still visit your house every year?

 

Children do not eat every meal at home.  And they are with others at times other than meal times.

 

Possible? Yes.  Probable?  NO

 

A very large anonymous self-reported survey among teens found that about one-third of 8th graders had tried alcohol. Eighth graders are 13-14 years old. So I'm okay with my statement.

 

My son, who just graduated college a couple of years ago is replete with stories of kids he encountered at school who had never had a drink before their college days with sometimes hilarious and sometimes quite terrifying (at least as a parent) results.

[navybankerteacher]

15 minutes ago, cruisemom42 said:

 

A very large anonymous self-reported survey among teens found that about one-third of 8th graders had tried alcohol. Eighth graders are 13-14 years old. So I'm okay with my statement.

 

My son, who just graduated college a couple of years ago is replete with stories of kids he encountered at school who had never had a drink before their college days with sometimes hilarious and sometimes quite terrifying (at least as a parent) results.

The rigid approach in the US contributes to some of those terrifying results.  Thinking that the stated ideal: no alcohol at all until age 21, followed by the assumption that, overnight, a newly-hatched adult can handle it - is simply absurd.

 

Responsible parents should consider accepting reality: if they do not intend to raise teetotalers, they should carefully introduce responsible use.  My earliest memories include (highly diluted) wine at special meals: Thanksgiving and Christmas, followed with an occasional beer (with parents) from age 16.  There was no magic of “forbidden fruit” — and it was clear that I did not drink (AT ALL) when off home turf. Of course this made sense - when I started college 18 was drinking age in NY - and beer was sold in the cafeteria.

[DarrenM]

So national lampoons Animal house wasn't a fair reflection of college life then?

[clo]

13 hours ago, fyree39 said:

(Sorry, clo. I guess I had to get the last word in!)

And darn good words!  It seems like you would have found a middle ground, decreasing risk but allowing some independence.

[navybankerteacher]

54 minutes ago, DarrenM said:

So national lampoons Animal house wasn't a fair reflection of college life then?

From a number of your posts it seems that you might think it was a fair reflection — but actually no: it was not (at least when it comes to the better US colleges and universities).

[DarrenM]

Well that's a shame for those students.

 

I wonder what it was based on then?

[DarrenM]

And care to elaborate on what you mean by my previous posts?

 

Are you talking about the ones that I criticised you for your stance that a 15 year old girl got what she deserved?

 

Or maybe one that I was clearly joking in...... that appears to be lost on some of you?

[navybankerteacher]

10 minutes ago, DarrenM said:

And care to elaborate on what you mean by my previous posts?

 

Are you talking about the ones that I criticised you for your stance that a 15 year old girl got what she deserved?

 

Or maybe one that I was clearly joking in...... that appears to be lost on some of you?

 It is pretty clear from your contention  in your previous post that I believed that  the girl “got what she deserved” simply because I had pointed out that her putting herself in harm’s way had something to do with the harm happening.  

 

Of of course she did not deserve anything of the sort - and her behavior did not in any way lessen the barbarity or her attackers , or make the harm to her any less painful. 

 

  Just consider this:  do you think it at all possible that if other 15 year old girls were aware of the story they might not be as likely to spend their afternoon the same way?

 

 If a drunken cruiser wanders down the Ramblas  in Barcelona, flashing a bankroll at various points then half-inserting it in his pocket before turning into a dark alley to lean against the wall and a pickpocket lifts his cash would you deny my contention that if he had not been drunk but had  taken a taxi back to his shop he might not have lost his money?

 

This is is not suggesting that he deserved being robbed - it is simply pointing out the obvious.  

 

Most people do do not need a university education to be able to recognize the obvious - sadly, however, it seems that some do.

[Toofarfromthesea]

20 hours ago, DarrenM said:

sorry people, but there are some loathsome individuals on this site.

 

How any of you can sleep at night after claiming a 15 year old female is in any way responsible for being sexually assaulted is sickening.

 

Next you will be telling us the perpertator should just get a warning, afterall, the victim was partly responsible.

 

Thank god I dont have a daughter, whilst there are folk with opinions like this around.

 

And I am being patronised by comments like I am not dealing with reality. Uttely bizarre.

 

That 15 year old lass should have been able to walk around naked without being sexually assaulted.

 

Sexual assault of a minor is one of the most heinous crimes out there. The death penalty is too good for the perps.

 

You have just mischaracterized everything that was said.  Which is about par for your course.

[Toofarfromthesea]

19 hours ago, clo said:

Compare this to this thread:

https://www.cnn.com/2016/06/06/us/sexual-assault-brock-turner-stanford/index.html

 

Speaking of irrelevant . . . .

[Toofarfromthesea]

17 hours ago, clo said:

Living out here, this has gotten a huge amount of press.  So this thread has resonated with me (and others of course).  There is nothing that mitigates the crime.  I wish profanity were allowed here because I would use it.

 

BTW, hours ago I reported this thread with the comment that nothing more can be said that's worthwhile and asking that it be locked.

 

And you would be hard-pressed to find ANYONE in this thread who said her actions should mitigate the consequences for the criminal.  

[Toofarfromthesea]

17 hours ago, clo said:

Living out here, this has gotten a huge amount of press.  So this thread has resonated with me (and others of course).  There is nothing that mitigates the crime.  I wish profanity were allowed here because I would use it.

 

BTW, hours ago I reported this thread with the comment that nothing more can be said that's worthwhile and asking that it be locked.

 

You should immediately dial 911 and report the guy holding the gun to your head forcing you to click on and read this thread.

[Toofarfromthesea]

16 hours ago, Aquahound said:

 

So as you may know, this subject falls in to my area of expertise.  I'm brand new to this thread and haven't read all 7 pages but I will say I agree with this post.  Even if that girl went and had otherwise consensual sex with those boys, it would still be a sexual assault because her intoxication made her unable to consent.  That's the law.  

 

Is there a lesson to be learned for parents?  Sure.  It helps provide a narrative when counseling our children.  But I will not participate in blaming the victim.  She fell prey to predatory behavior.  

 

Heaven forbid people should counsel that it is unnecessary to take simple precautions to significantly reduce their vulnerability to predatory behavior.

There are always predators out their.  People can choose to minimize their risk or they can choose to maximize their risk.  It is obvious which occurred in this case.  And that in no way reduces the culpability of the predators.

[Toofarfromthesea]

37 minutes ago, navybankerteacher said:

 It is pretty clear from your contention  in your previous post that I believed that  the girl “got what she deserved” simply because I had pointed out that her putting herself in harm’s way had something to do with the harm happening.  

 

Of of course she did not deserve anything of the sort - and her behavior did not in any way lessen the barbarity or her attackers , or make the harm to her any less painful. 

 

  Just consider this:  do you think it at all possible that if other 15 year old girls were aware of the story they might not be as likely to spend their afternoon the same way?

 

 If a drunken cruiser wanders down the Ramblas  in Barcelona, flashing a bankroll at various points then half-inserting it in his pocket before turning into a dark alley to lean against the wall and a pickpocket lifts his cash would you deny my contention that if he had not been drunk but had  taken a taxi back to his shop he might not have lost his money?

 

This is is not suggesting that he deserved being robbed - it is simply pointing out the obvious.  

 

Most people do do not need a university education to be able to recognize the obvious - sadly, however, it seems that some do.

 

I think it takes a university education to get so far away from common sense as to think that racheting up risk factors doesn't affect your risk.  People without that university education just know that naturally.  Because they understand the difference between the world as they want it to be and the world as it actually is.

[DarrenM]

2 hours ago, Toofarfromthesea said:

 

You have just mischaracterized everything that was said.  Which is about par for your course.

No. No I havent.

 

The evidence is all there to be seen and reviewed.

 

My conscience is absolutely clear on this thread, and no amount of back tracking, or worse, still trying to somehow justify she was the maker of her own downfall, will change that.

 

But hey, you crack on.

 

 

 

 

[DarrenM]

3 hours ago, navybankerteacher said:

 Just consider this:  do you think it at all possible that if other 15 year old girls were aware of the story they might not be as likely to spend their afternoon the same way?

 

What the hell has that got to do with the sexual assault by this paedo?

[DarrenM]

2 hours ago, Toofarfromthesea said:

 

I think it takes a university education to get so far away from common sense as to think that racheting up risk factors doesn't affect your risk.  People without that university education just know that naturally.  Because they understand the difference between the world as they want it to be and the world as it actually is.

or it could be that we all know there are dodgepots out there, and people shouldnt put themselves at risk, but so what?

 

This girl got drunk, on a cruise ship.

 

The only criminal is the attacker, And death is too good for him.

 

She made a huge mistake getting drunk. Still doesnt mean she was in any way responsible for the attack. Not one bit.

 

I didnt go to University. I just know right from wrong.