I really don't feel like I can argue with the people in this thread in good faith anymore. Some of you have been great, and admittedly, this is an issue I'm somewhat emotional about and it shows. But others of you handwave away issues that would be a shit storm were the genders reversed or any other group aside from men were effected. So, I'm done. Best of luck high fiving each other about how awesome Feminism is.
As someone who was falsely accused and nearly lost his job because of it, I feel rather strongly about not inherently giving the "she said" more value than "he said". The idea of making something easier to prove is a frightening prospect. They can't find you guilty... so they change what is needed to find you guilty and then find you guilty.
Fuck that shit.
The alternative is for sexual assault to remain a crime that is easy to get away with, where women are afraid to get help and where anyone who does stand up as a victim is vilified. You'll have to forgive me if you having a close call is less significant to me than the thousands, if not millions, of victims who get no help whatsover, who are brutalized by people who are untouchable and who are treated like shit by everyone they know if they ever try to get out from their situation.
My personal situation was only resolved because she withdrew the allegations.
But that's not my point. Our system for determining guilt is innocent until proven guilty. In a situation where it's practically he-said she-said, do you not see how putting the value on the she-said is a really fucked up solution?
Frankiedarling's situation is pretty much why I hold the opinion I do. Even if only 1% are false accusations, are that 1% not entitled to an equal and fair defense?
Also, and this may just be my misunderstanding things here, but why the fuck are colleges arbitrating sexual violence claims instead of, you know, the goddamn legal system?
Yes, because trying to make sure prosecution for rape is held to the same standards as every other crime we have, without a single exception, means you are pro rape and attacking rape victims.
Just awesome.
And if we were talking about the judicial system, you would have a point.
Here's the thing - colleges can set up their disciplinary systems however they wish. Some chose to set up their systems as miniature courts, as is their right. What is not their right, however, is to violate federal law. And as it turns out, federal laws regarding sexual harassment and assault and the responsibilities of corporations and educational entities state that a preponderance of the evidence is to be the standard. And there is no "but our disciplinary system isn't set up like that" get out of regulations card.
So they have wrongly been using the criminal standard of guilt up until now even though they were supposed to use the civil one? That seems pretty messed up.
As someone who was falsely accused and nearly lost his job because of it, I feel rather strongly about not inherently giving the "she said" more value than "he said". The idea of making something easier to prove is a frightening prospect. They can't find you guilty... so they change what is needed to find you guilty and then find you guilty.
The alternative is for sexual assault to remain a crime that is easy to get away with, where women are afraid to get help and where anyone who does stand up as a victim is vilified. You'll have to forgive me if you having a close call is less significant to me than the thousands, if not millions, of victims who get no help whatsover, who are brutalized by people who are untouchable and who are treated like @#!*% by everyone they know if they ever try to get out from their situation.
Man, could you cite some statistics on this stuff or something? The kind of thing you're talking about is so far away from my experience with how rape victims are dealt with by society it's unbelievable. It's literally the opposite of how I've seen victims of that crime treated in every situation it has come up in my life.
0
Options
Nova_CI have the needThe need for speedRegistered Userregular
My personal situation was only resolved because she withdrew the allegations.
But that's not my point. Our system for determining guilt is innocent until proven guilty. In a situation where it's practically he-said she-said, do you not see how putting the value on the she-said is a really fucked up solution?
The court system, yes. And it still is.
But a college is not a court. And the situation where a rape victim has virtually no power is a system I cannot support in any fashion. Since we're not talking about jail time, or addition to a registry (Which is a whole other can of worms), but expulsion, I'm not so sympathetic. It's not the end of your life.
And we should not be basing general policy on the outliers. If you have a better idea for making a college a safer environment for women, I'm all ears, but so far you seem to be saying the status quo of rape being an easy crime to get away with is acceptable. It is not. And the extraordinarily rare incidents of false accusations do not trump the extraordinarily common incidents of raped women having to choose between attending a college where they see their rapist every day or abandoning their education.
As someone who was falsely accused and nearly lost his job because of it, I feel rather strongly about not inherently giving the "she said" more value than "he said". The idea of making something easier to prove is a frightening prospect. They can't find you guilty... so they change what is needed to find you guilty and then find you guilty.
Fuck that shit.
The alternative is for sexual assault to remain a crime that is easy to get away with, where women are afraid to get help and where anyone who does stand up as a victim is vilified. You'll have to forgive me if you having a close call is less significant to me than the thousands, if not millions, of victims who get no help whatsover, who are brutalized by people who are untouchable and who are treated like shit by everyone they know if they ever try to get out from their situation.
My personal situation was only resolved because she withdrew the allegations.
But that's not my point. Our system for determining guilt is innocent until proven guilty. In a situation where it's practically he-said she-said, do you not see how putting the value on the she-said is a really fucked up solution?
No, our system for determining guilt in a criminal court of law is beyond a reasonable doubt. Civil courts default to preponderance of evidence, and private organizations can set up any system they see fit that meets their legal obligations.
But yes, it is a problem that someone charged but not yet convicted of a crime gets run through the wringer, especially if it's a sexual crime. The thing is, a lot of that is cultural, not legal, in nature.
Man, could you cite some statistics on this stuff or something? The kind of thing you're talking about is so far away from my experience with how rape victims are dealt with by society it's unbelievable. It's literally the opposite of how I've seen victims of that crime treated in every situation it has come up in my life.
Yeah, when I'm not at work. However, I probably won't bother unless I get more than a single anecdote of false accusation being a problem.
Since the entire crux of the argument against colleges changing their standard is the specter of a man being falsely accused.
Man, could you cite some statistics on this stuff or something? The kind of thing you're talking about is so far away from my experience with how rape victims are dealt with by society it's unbelievable. It's literally the opposite of how I've seen victims of that crime treated in every situation it has come up in my life.
Yeah, when I'm not at work. However, I probably won't bother unless I get more than a single anecdote of false accusation being a problem.
Since the entire crux of the argument against colleges changing their standard is the specter of a man being falsely accused.
Oh man I wanted to stay away so badly. So so badly. But this is just such nonsense I can't.
Why stop at rape? If all you have to worry about is a minority of falsely accused people, why not lower the standard of evidence for all crimes? I mean, the falsely accused are a minority. It's so small. It's much better to see that justice is done more often than protect criminals at the expense of victims for a minority of falsely accused.
I had a friend in college who ended up getting tossed out due to accidentally walking into a shower that occupied by a woman. (We had co-ed bathrooms). I blame him for his stupidity and not explaining himself at all to the college authorities, and the girl a bit for overreacting after the fact (as she pushed hard to get him kicked out when it was clear that he was not trying to assault her or anything of that nature).
His case is the only case I heard of in college where a man got the short end of the stick, and still not really the girl's fault, while I knew of 3 other cases where the woman had to use the system to protect herself.
League of Legends: Sorakanmyworld
FFXIV: Tchel Fay
Nintendo ID: Tortalius
Steam: Tortalius
Stream: twitch.tv/tortalius
My personal situation was only resolved because she withdrew the allegations.
But that's not my point. Our system for determining guilt is innocent until proven guilty. In a situation where it's practically he-said she-said, do you not see how putting the value on the she-said is a really fucked up solution?
The court system, yes. And it still is.
But a college is not a court. And the situation where a rape victim has virtually no power is a system I cannot support in any fashion. Since we're not talking about jail time, or addition to a registry (Which is a whole other can of worms), but expulsion, I'm not so sympathetic. It's not the end of your life.
And we should not be basing general policy on the outliers. If you have a better idea for making a college a safer environment for women, I'm all ears, but so far you seem to be saying the status quo of rape being an easy crime to get away with is acceptable. It is not. And the extraordinarily rare incidents of false accusations do not trump the extraordinarily common incidents of raped women having to choose between attending a college where they see their rapist every day or abandoning their education.
What about a system where the falsely accused have no power? I can't support that in any way, shape or form.
rape: unlawful sexual activity and sexual intercourse carried out forcibly or under threat of injury against the will of a female or with a person who is beneath a certain age or incapable of valid consent because of mental illness, mental deficiency, intoxication, unconsciousness, or deception
No. The UCR Program defines forcible rape as “The carnal knowledge of a female forcibly and against her will” (p. 19). In addition, “By definition, sexual attacks on males are excluded from the rape category and must be classified as assaults or other sex offenses depending on the nature of the crime and the extent of injury” (p. 20). An aggravated assault is a Part I offense and would be reported on the Return A form. (A simple assault is a Part II offense but also would be reported on the Return A form.) Sex offenses qualify as Part II offenses and would be reported on the appropriate Age, Sex, and Race of Persons Arrested form (p. 96 and p.142).
It varies state to state. In some states, a woman can rape a man. In others, she cannot.
0
Options
Nova_CI have the needThe need for speedRegistered Userregular
Oh man I wanted to stay away so badly. So so badly. But this is just such nonsense I can't.
Why stop at rape? If all you have to worry about is a minority of falsely accused people, why not lower the standard of evidence for all crimes? I mean, the falsely accused are a minority. It's so small. It's much better to see that justice is done more often than protect criminals at the expense of victims for a minority of falsely accused.
Because other crimes aren't nearly so difficult to prove. You know, if rape had conviction rates like murder or kidnapping, I'd be on your side. But they don't. Not even close..
So we make due.
0
Options
Nova_CI have the needThe need for speedRegistered Userregular
My personal situation was only resolved because she withdrew the allegations.
But that's not my point. Our system for determining guilt is innocent until proven guilty. In a situation where it's practically he-said she-said, do you not see how putting the value on the she-said is a really fucked up solution?
The court system, yes. And it still is.
But a college is not a court. And the situation where a rape victim has virtually no power is a system I cannot support in any fashion. Since we're not talking about jail time, or addition to a registry (Which is a whole other can of worms), but expulsion, I'm not so sympathetic. It's not the end of your life.
And we should not be basing general policy on the outliers. If you have a better idea for making a college a safer environment for women, I'm all ears, but so far you seem to be saying the status quo of rape being an easy crime to get away with is acceptable. It is not. And the extraordinarily rare incidents of false accusations do not trump the extraordinarily common incidents of raped women having to choose between attending a college where they see their rapist every day or abandoning their education.
What about a system where the falsely accused have no power? I can't support that in any way, shape or form.
The falsely accused do have power, though, in the preponderance of evidence standard. If fact, going by this thread, they have the same power they would have if accused of most other things in a civil setting.
And they have the same power they always had in criminal as well.
So basically, the standard of evidence was lowered to civil instead of criminal. Is there a problem with people being found civilly responsible of rape?
My personal situation was only resolved because she withdrew the allegations.
But that's not my point. Our system for determining guilt is innocent until proven guilty. In a situation where it's practically he-said she-said, do you not see how putting the value on the she-said is a really fucked up solution?
The court system, yes. And it still is.
But a college is not a court. And the situation where a rape victim has virtually no power is a system I cannot support in any fashion. Since we're not talking about jail time, or addition to a registry (Which is a whole other can of worms), but expulsion, I'm not so sympathetic. It's not the end of your life.
And we should not be basing general policy on the outliers. If you have a better idea for making a college a safer environment for women, I'm all ears, but so far you seem to be saying the status quo of rape being an easy crime to get away with is acceptable. It is not. And the extraordinarily rare incidents of false accusations do not trump the extraordinarily common incidents of raped women having to choose between attending a college where they see their rapist every day or abandoning their education.
What about a system where the falsely accused have no power? I can't support that in any way, shape or form.
The falsely accused do have power, though, in the preponderance of evidence standard. If fact, going by this thread, they have the same power they would have if accused of most other things in a civil setting.
And they have the same power they always had in criminal as well.
So basically, the standard of evidence was lowered to civil instead of criminal. Is there a problem with people being found civilly responsible of rape?
How? We've established that most of these cases are her word against his. If you're granting her automatic validity, how does the guy have any power?
When you no longer need substantial evidence to ruin someone's life, something is fucking wrong.
Frankiedarling on
0
Options
Nova_CI have the needThe need for speedRegistered Userregular
What? Since when does 'preponderance of evidence' mean the accuser is automatically validated?
In a civil case, is the plaintiff always the victor? No? Well then, why not?
I'd imagine because the defendant has an opportunity to refute the charges, and that refutation is given the same weight it would as in any other civil case.
What? Since when does 'preponderance of evidence' mean the accuser is automatically validated?
In a civil case, is the plaintiff always the victor? No? Well then, why not?
I'd imagine because the defendant has an opportunity to refute the charges, and that refutation is given the same weight it would as in any other civil case.
How would this apply in what seems to be the norm? His word vs her word?
I mean, that's the main problem. That the legal act and illegal act is practically the same. The only major difference, unless it turns violent, is the state of mind of those involved. It is literally he-said she-said. Either you validate one person's word above another's or you go with the "innocent until proven guilty".
The way it normally works in he said she said is you try to figure out who's more credible. Someone is wrong and someone is right and you ask questions and try to figure out which is which. Heck, a TON of CRIMINAL cases are he said she said, just Cop said, Defendant Said, and the judge/jury is figuring out who's the liar and who's not.
League of Legends: Sorakanmyworld
FFXIV: Tchel Fay
Nintendo ID: Tortalius
Steam: Tortalius
Stream: twitch.tv/tortalius
Man, could you cite some statistics on this stuff or something? The kind of thing you're talking about is so far away from my experience with how rape victims are dealt with by society it's unbelievable. It's literally the opposite of how I've seen victims of that crime treated in every situation it has come up in my life.
Yeah, when I'm not at work. However, I probably won't bother unless I get more than a single anecdote of false accusation being a problem.
Since the entire crux of the argument against colleges changing their standard is the specter of a man being falsely accused.
Oh man I wanted to stay away so badly. So so badly. But this is just such nonsense I can't.
Why stop at rape? If all you have to worry about is a minority of falsely accused people, why not lower the standard of evidence for all crimes? I mean, the falsely accused are a minority. It's so small. It's much better to see that justice is done more often than protect criminals at the expense of victims for a minority of falsely accused.
Again, we're not talking about the criminal justice system.
Man, could you cite some statistics on this stuff or something? The kind of thing you're talking about is so far away from my experience with how rape victims are dealt with by society it's unbelievable. It's literally the opposite of how I've seen victims of that crime treated in every situation it has come up in my life.
Yeah, when I'm not at work. However, I probably won't bother unless I get more than a single anecdote of false accusation being a problem.
Since the entire crux of the argument against colleges changing their standard is the specter of a man being falsely accused.
Oh man I wanted to stay away so badly. So so badly. But this is just such nonsense I can't.
Why stop at rape? If all you have to worry about is a minority of falsely accused people, why not lower the standard of evidence for all crimes? I mean, the falsely accused are a minority. It's so small. It's much better to see that justice is done more often than protect criminals at the expense of victims for a minority of falsely accused.
Again, we're not talking about the criminal justice system.
How is that a thing you can hide behind? Seriously? How can you just wash your hands at the obvious inequality of it just by going "Well shucks, it's not the criminal justice system, so all bets are off!" How can that seriously be your response? You don't even try to deny that its an inequality. Just that its one that is worth it to you, or for the greater good, and it can be got away with.
That's so very intellectually lazy.
0
Options
Nova_CI have the needThe need for speedRegistered Userregular
Man, could you cite some statistics on this stuff or something? The kind of thing you're talking about is so far away from my experience with how rape victims are dealt with by society it's unbelievable. It's literally the opposite of how I've seen victims of that crime treated in every situation it has come up in my life.
Yeah, when I'm not at work. However, I probably won't bother unless I get more than a single anecdote of false accusation being a problem.
Since the entire crux of the argument against colleges changing their standard is the specter of a man being falsely accused.
Oh man I wanted to stay away so badly. So so badly. But this is just such nonsense I can't.
Why stop at rape? If all you have to worry about is a minority of falsely accused people, why not lower the standard of evidence for all crimes? I mean, the falsely accused are a minority. It's so small. It's much better to see that justice is done more often than protect criminals at the expense of victims for a minority of falsely accused.
Again, we're not talking about the criminal justice system.
How is that a thing you can hide behind? Seriously? How can you just wash your hands at the obvious inequality of it just by going "Well shucks, it's not the criminal justice system, so all bets are off!" How can that seriously be your response? You don't even try to deny that its an inequality. Just that its one that is worth it to you, or for the greater good, and it can be got away with.
That's so very intellectually lazy.
And your defense of the status quo is any less so? The system as is is tremendously inequal. This whole thread is about how inequal it is. And so far all you've done is whinge about any steps to equalize it results in oppression against men.
Which, if oppression = men no longer having a distinct advantage, well, I guess that's true, but that's not my definition of oppression.
The way it normally works in he said she said is you try to figure out who's more credible. Someone is wrong and someone is right and you ask questions and try to figure out which is which. Heck, a TON of CRIMINAL cases are he said she said, just Cop said, Defendant Said, and the judge/jury is figuring out who's the liar and who's not.
I'll admit, I'm not a lawyer, so I'm not sure how that would play out. Don't you have to establish something definitive?
That's the trouble with rape. If it wasn't violent, the only thing you can really establish is that there was sexual intercourse. After that, it's completely in the minds of the two people. The legal act is indistinguishable from the illegal act from an outside perspective.
I'm going to assume that in that sort of situation, the guy is usually let off due to lack of evidence. Do I have that right?
But the system is not unequal. The laws to convict someone of rape are the exact same as all other laws in most respects. Nobody has specifically made laws to shield rapists. In fact, there are numerous laws that already make it easier to get a conviction without lowering the standard of evidence. And as I've said, rape is not the only crime where it's hard to gather evidence or convict. It's just the only one politicized enough that we feel justified (well you feel justified) in breaking down due process to get better conviction rates.
The ends justify the means after all, right?
0
Options
spacekungfumanPoor and minority-filledRegistered User, __BANNED USERSregular
My personal situation was only resolved because she withdrew the allegations.
But that's not my point. Our system for determining guilt is innocent until proven guilty. In a situation where it's practically he-said she-said, do you not see how putting the value on the she-said is a really fucked up solution?
The court system, yes. And it still is.
But a college is not a court. And the situation where a rape victim has virtually no power is a system I cannot support in any fashion. Since we're not talking about jail time, or addition to a registry (Which is a whole other can of worms), but expulsion, I'm not so sympathetic. It's not the end of your life.
And we should not be basing general policy on the outliers. If you have a better idea for making a college a safer environment for women, I'm all ears, but so far you seem to be saying the status quo of rape being an easy crime to get away with is acceptable. It is not. And the extraordinarily rare incidents of false accusations do not trump the extraordinarily common incidents of raped women having to choose between attending a college where they see their rapist every day or abandoning their education.
Better a thousand innocent men should be punished than one guilty man should walk free?
Man, could you cite some statistics on this stuff or something? The kind of thing you're talking about is so far away from my experience with how rape victims are dealt with by society it's unbelievable. It's literally the opposite of how I've seen victims of that crime treated in every situation it has come up in my life.
Yeah, when I'm not at work. However, I probably won't bother unless I get more than a single anecdote of false accusation being a problem.
Since the entire crux of the argument against colleges changing their standard is the specter of a man being falsely accused.
Oh man I wanted to stay away so badly. So so badly. But this is just such nonsense I can't.
Why stop at rape? If all you have to worry about is a minority of falsely accused people, why not lower the standard of evidence for all crimes? I mean, the falsely accused are a minority. It's so small. It's much better to see that justice is done more often than protect criminals at the expense of victims for a minority of falsely accused.
Again, we're not talking about the criminal justice system.
How is that a thing you can hide behind? Seriously? How can you just wash your hands at the obvious inequality of it just by going "Well shucks, it's not the criminal justice system, so all bets are off!" How can that seriously be your response? You don't even try to deny that its an inequality. Just that its one that is worth it to you, or for the greater good, and it can be got away with.
That's so very intellectually lazy.
No, what is intellectually lazy and dishonest is to constantly conflate two systems to try to win points.
Again, colleges can set up their disciplinary systems however they would like. Some choose to set theirs up as judicial systems in miniature, many don't. The thing is, when it comes to Title IX, such a system doesn't meet the standard the law sets forth. And the schools don't get to thumb their nose at the law.
The way it normally works in he said she said is you try to figure out who's more credible. Someone is wrong and someone is right and you ask questions and try to figure out which is which. Heck, a TON of CRIMINAL cases are he said she said, just Cop said, Defendant Said, and the judge/jury is figuring out who's the liar and who's not.
I'll admit, I'm not a lawyer, so I'm not sure how that would play out. Don't you have to establish something definitive?
That's the trouble with rape. If it wasn't violent, the only thing you can really establish is that there was sexual intercourse. After that, it's completely in the minds of the two people. The legal act is indistinguishable from the illegal act from an outside perspective.
I'm going to assume that in that sort of situation, the guy is usually let off due to lack of evidence. Do I have that right?
Actually, in most of those cases, the prosecutor will simply opt to not press charges in the first place.
What's wrong with rape being handled as a civil claim? Preponderance of evidence is an accusatory construct if I remember correctly, not room for any sort of conviction.
Shouldn't we be more worried about the fact that a false accusation (if proven as false) can have such arbitrary consequences?
And on Space's contention, I'd hazard that many unreported sexual crimes (with both male and female victims) tend to go unreported. Essentially have the opposite of that statement: a thousand guilty men go free to make sure no innocent man is incarcerated. It's a huge grey area.
The way it normally works in he said she said is you try to figure out who's more credible. Someone is wrong and someone is right and you ask questions and try to figure out which is which. Heck, a TON of CRIMINAL cases are he said she said, just Cop said, Defendant Said, and the judge/jury is figuring out who's the liar and who's not.
I'll admit, I'm not a lawyer, so I'm not sure how that would play out. Don't you have to establish something definitive?
That's the trouble with rape. If it wasn't violent, the only thing you can really establish is that there was sexual intercourse. After that, it's completely in the minds of the two people. The legal act is indistinguishable from the illegal act from an outside perspective.
I'm going to assume that in that sort of situation, the guy is usually let off due to lack of evidence. Do I have that right?
Actually, in most of those cases, the prosecutor will simply opt to not press charges in the first place.
Sounds about right, thanks.
0
Options
VanguardBut now the dream is over. And the insect is awake.Registered User, __BANNED USERSregular
Man, could you cite some statistics on this stuff or something? The kind of thing you're talking about is so far away from my experience with how rape victims are dealt with by society it's unbelievable. It's literally the opposite of how I've seen victims of that crime treated in every situation it has come up in my life.
Yeah, when I'm not at work. However, I probably won't bother unless I get more than a single anecdote of false accusation being a problem.
Since the entire crux of the argument against colleges changing their standard is the specter of a man being falsely accused.
Oh man I wanted to stay away so badly. So so badly. But this is just such nonsense I can't.
Why stop at rape? If all you have to worry about is a minority of falsely accused people, why not lower the standard of evidence for all crimes? I mean, the falsely accused are a minority. It's so small. It's much better to see that justice is done more often than protect criminals at the expense of victims for a minority of falsely accused.
Again, we're not talking about the criminal justice system.
To re-ask my question again...
Why?
Why is there a separate, privately-owned entity engaged in arbitration for what should be, for all intents and purposes, considered a criminal charge in the existing legal system?
Man, could you cite some statistics on this stuff or something? The kind of thing you're talking about is so far away from my experience with how rape victims are dealt with by society it's unbelievable. It's literally the opposite of how I've seen victims of that crime treated in every situation it has come up in my life.
Yeah, when I'm not at work. However, I probably won't bother unless I get more than a single anecdote of false accusation being a problem.
Since the entire crux of the argument against colleges changing their standard is the specter of a man being falsely accused.
Oh man I wanted to stay away so badly. So so badly. But this is just such nonsense I can't.
Why stop at rape? If all you have to worry about is a minority of falsely accused people, why not lower the standard of evidence for all crimes? I mean, the falsely accused are a minority. It's so small. It's much better to see that justice is done more often than protect criminals at the expense of victims for a minority of falsely accused.
Again, we're not talking about the criminal justice system.
To re-ask my question again...
Why?
Why is there a separate, privately-owned entity engaged in arbitration for what should be, for all intents and purposes, considered a criminal charge in the existing legal system?
Why are there two systems at all?
Because there are two entities at play here. The college bringing disciplinary charges against someone is completely and totally separate from the judicial system prosecuting them. In fact, part of the DoE letter was to remind colleges that pressuring complainants into not pressing charges pending resolution of the school's process (an altogether too common occurance) is prohibited by Title IX.
Man, could you cite some statistics on this stuff or something? The kind of thing you're talking about is so far away from my experience with how rape victims are dealt with by society it's unbelievable. It's literally the opposite of how I've seen victims of that crime treated in every situation it has come up in my life.
Yeah, when I'm not at work. However, I probably won't bother unless I get more than a single anecdote of false accusation being a problem.
Since the entire crux of the argument against colleges changing their standard is the specter of a man being falsely accused.
Oh man I wanted to stay away so badly. So so badly. But this is just such nonsense I can't.
Why stop at rape? If all you have to worry about is a minority of falsely accused people, why not lower the standard of evidence for all crimes? I mean, the falsely accused are a minority. It's so small. It's much better to see that justice is done more often than protect criminals at the expense of victims for a minority of falsely accused.
Again, we're not talking about the criminal justice system.
To re-ask my question again...
Why?
Why is there a separate, privately-owned entity engaged in arbitration for what should be, for all intents and purposes, considered a criminal charge in the existing legal system?
Why are there two systems at all?
Because college codes of conduct are for the protection and well being of the students and the justice system is for punishment.
When you take a violent crime a colleges number one priority is safety so they take a lower standard of evidence because a serial crime, like rape, you aren't just talking about letting 1000 guilty people go free you are talking about an additional 1000 or more people (and we are really talking people here. I can't stress enough that it just isn't women) being raped so that we can avoid one (theoretical) person being falsely convicted.
I mean imagine you go to college and the ra comes in says that your roommate was accused of rapeing their previous roommate but they could only prove it to a lower standard so they couldn't charge them. Do you feel safe?
Man, could you cite some statistics on this stuff or something? The kind of thing you're talking about is so far away from my experience with how rape victims are dealt with by society it's unbelievable. It's literally the opposite of how I've seen victims of that crime treated in every situation it has come up in my life.
Yeah, when I'm not at work. However, I probably won't bother unless I get more than a single anecdote of false accusation being a problem.
Since the entire crux of the argument against colleges changing their standard is the specter of a man being falsely accused.
Oh man I wanted to stay away so badly. So so badly. But this is just such nonsense I can't.
Why stop at rape? If all you have to worry about is a minority of falsely accused people, why not lower the standard of evidence for all crimes? I mean, the falsely accused are a minority. It's so small. It's much better to see that justice is done more often than protect criminals at the expense of victims for a minority of falsely accused.
Again, we're not talking about the criminal justice system.
To re-ask my question again...
Why?
Why is there a separate, privately-owned entity engaged in arbitration for what should be, for all intents and purposes, considered a criminal charge in the existing legal system?
Why are there two systems at all?
Because college codes of conduct are for the protection and well being of the students and the justice system is for punishment.
When you take a violent crime a colleges number one priority is safety so they take a lower standard of evidence because a serial crime, like rape, you aren't just talking about letting 1000 guilty people go free you are talking about an additional 1000 or more people (and we are really talking people here. I can't stress enough that it just isn't women) being raped so that we can avoid one (theoretical) person being falsely convicted.
I mean imagine you go to college and the ra comes in says that your roommate was accused of rapeing their previous roommate but they could only prove it to a lower standard so they couldn't charge them. Do you feel safe?
Counter question, how would you feel if being accused(not convicted) of a crime caused people of authority to run around telling everyone you were guilty, they just couldn't prove it.
Man, could you cite some statistics on this stuff or something? The kind of thing you're talking about is so far away from my experience with how rape victims are dealt with by society it's unbelievable. It's literally the opposite of how I've seen victims of that crime treated in every situation it has come up in my life.
Yeah, when I'm not at work. However, I probably won't bother unless I get more than a single anecdote of false accusation being a problem.
Since the entire crux of the argument against colleges changing their standard is the specter of a man being falsely accused.
Oh man I wanted to stay away so badly. So so badly. But this is just such nonsense I can't.
Why stop at rape? If all you have to worry about is a minority of falsely accused people, why not lower the standard of evidence for all crimes? I mean, the falsely accused are a minority. It's so small. It's much better to see that justice is done more often than protect criminals at the expense of victims for a minority of falsely accused.
Again, we're not talking about the criminal justice system.
To re-ask my question again...
Why?
Why is there a separate, privately-owned entity engaged in arbitration for what should be, for all intents and purposes, considered a criminal charge in the existing legal system?
Why are there two systems at all?
Because college codes of conduct are for the protection and well being of the students and the justice system is for punishment.
When you take a violent crime a colleges number one priority is safety so they take a lower standard of evidence because a serial crime, like rape, you aren't just talking about letting 1000 guilty people go free you are talking about an additional 1000 or more people (and we are really talking people here. I can't stress enough that it just isn't women) being raped so that we can avoid one (theoretical) person being falsely convicted.
I mean imagine you go to college and the ra comes in says that your roommate was accused of rapeing their previous roommate but they could only prove it to a lower standard so they couldn't charge them. Do you feel safe?
That's nasty man. If you can't prove it, you can't prove it. Either the person is guilty of rape and is prosecuted or they're innocent. How fucking awful would you feel walking around with the label of "rapist" over your head even though you were not found guilty? Is the accusation "rapist" now equal to being found guilty?
Man, could you cite some statistics on this stuff or something? The kind of thing you're talking about is so far away from my experience with how rape victims are dealt with by society it's unbelievable. It's literally the opposite of how I've seen victims of that crime treated in every situation it has come up in my life.
Yeah, when I'm not at work. However, I probably won't bother unless I get more than a single anecdote of false accusation being a problem.
Since the entire crux of the argument against colleges changing their standard is the specter of a man being falsely accused.
Oh man I wanted to stay away so badly. So so badly. But this is just such nonsense I can't.
Why stop at rape? If all you have to worry about is a minority of falsely accused people, why not lower the standard of evidence for all crimes? I mean, the falsely accused are a minority. It's so small. It's much better to see that justice is done more often than protect criminals at the expense of victims for a minority of falsely accused.
Again, we're not talking about the criminal justice system.
To re-ask my question again...
Why?
Why is there a separate, privately-owned entity engaged in arbitration for what should be, for all intents and purposes, considered a criminal charge in the existing legal system?
Why are there two systems at all?
Because college codes of conduct are for the protection and well being of the students and the justice system is for punishment.
I disagree. The intent of the criminal justice system, and laws in general, is the protection and well being of society. I also find the distinction that one is for "punishment" dishonest, as being kicked out of college with no way to recover lost tuition and no chance to enroll elsewhere, in this economy, is a pretty harsh punishment. Not prison or sex offender registry harsh, but still "have fun working minimum wage for the rest of your life" harsh.
When you take a violent crime a colleges number one priority is safety so they take a lower standard of evidence because a serial crime, like rape, you aren't just talking about letting 1000 guilty people go free you are talking about an additional 1000 or more people (and we are really talking people here. I can't stress enough that it just isn't women) being raped so that we can avoid one (theoretical) person being falsely convicted.
I think, realistically, we're just talking about women here, due to the combination of regional laws that do not recognize that males can be raped and societal attitudes that simultaneously keep men from reporting (or even acknowledging!) that they were victims and administrators who largely hold the same "men can't be raped" attitude.
I mean imagine you go to college and the ra comes in says that your roommate was accused of rapeing their previous roommate but they could only prove it to a lower standard so they couldn't charge them. Do you feel safe?
No, but if that was the case, I think I'd have a pretty good case to get re-assigned to a new roommate. Also, that RA wouldn't be an RA long spreading rumors. Also, didn't we decide as a society that tatooing "rapist" on the accused's forehead is cruel and unusual? If there was no proof that a crime was committed, why do you still get to treat the accused as if they were guilty?
Man, could you cite some statistics on this stuff or something? The kind of thing you're talking about is so far away from my experience with how rape victims are dealt with by society it's unbelievable. It's literally the opposite of how I've seen victims of that crime treated in every situation it has come up in my life.
Yeah, when I'm not at work. However, I probably won't bother unless I get more than a single anecdote of false accusation being a problem.
Since the entire crux of the argument against colleges changing their standard is the specter of a man being falsely accused.
Oh man I wanted to stay away so badly. So so badly. But this is just such nonsense I can't.
Why stop at rape? If all you have to worry about is a minority of falsely accused people, why not lower the standard of evidence for all crimes? I mean, the falsely accused are a minority. It's so small. It's much better to see that justice is done more often than protect criminals at the expense of victims for a minority of falsely accused.
Again, we're not talking about the criminal justice system.
To re-ask my question again...
Why?
Why is there a separate, privately-owned entity engaged in arbitration for what should be, for all intents and purposes, considered a criminal charge in the existing legal system?
Why are there two systems at all?
Because college codes of conduct are for the protection and well being of the students and the justice system is for punishment.
When you take a violent crime a colleges number one priority is safety so they take a lower standard of evidence because a serial crime, like rape, you aren't just talking about letting 1000 guilty people go free you are talking about an additional 1000 or more people (and we are really talking people here. I can't stress enough that it just isn't women) being raped so that we can avoid one (theoretical) person being falsely convicted.
I mean imagine you go to college and the ra comes in says that your roommate was accused of rapeing their previous roommate but they could only prove it to a lower standard so they couldn't charge them. Do you feel safe?
Counter question, how would you feel if being accused(not convicted) of a crime caused people of authority to run around telling everyone you were guilty, they just couldn't prove it.
Cant prove it to a specific standard of evidence. The point being that a college has A responsibility to err on the side of caution in safety.
But yes, if someone could prove I raped someone to a preponderance of the evidence I would expect them to kick me out even if I didn't.
0
Options
JuliusCaptain of Serenityon my shipRegistered Userregular
Being expelled from one college does not prevent you from going to other colleges, nor does it irrevocably ruin your life.
Melodramatically overstating the consequences of a disciplinary hearing does nothing to advance your case that using a lower standard of evidence is inherently immoral.
Actually if you read the articles Houn posted, people who were expelled were also banned for 3 years from all the other state colleges. With a shit ton of debt, and no degree to show for it.
So yeah. There is that.
So what should the appropriate punishment be for someone who's guilty of sexual assault on a college campus?
Because actual courts would send people to prison for a lot longer than 3 years, and probably put you on a sex offender registry for your entire life, so saying that being kicked out of state colleges for three years equates to having one's entire life ruined doesn't really hold up.
Except that actual courts wouldn't convict. For criminal court these people are not considered guilty.
Man, could you cite some statistics on this stuff or something? The kind of thing you're talking about is so far away from my experience with how rape victims are dealt with by society it's unbelievable. It's literally the opposite of how I've seen victims of that crime treated in every situation it has come up in my life.
Yeah, when I'm not at work. However, I probably won't bother unless I get more than a single anecdote of false accusation being a problem.
Since the entire crux of the argument against colleges changing their standard is the specter of a man being falsely accused.
Oh man I wanted to stay away so badly. So so badly. But this is just such nonsense I can't.
Why stop at rape? If all you have to worry about is a minority of falsely accused people, why not lower the standard of evidence for all crimes? I mean, the falsely accused are a minority. It's so small. It's much better to see that justice is done more often than protect criminals at the expense of victims for a minority of falsely accused.
Again, we're not talking about the criminal justice system.
To re-ask my question again...
Why?
Why is there a separate, privately-owned entity engaged in arbitration for what should be, for all intents and purposes, considered a criminal charge in the existing legal system?
Why are there two systems at all?
Because college codes of conduct are for the protection and well being of the students and the justice system is for punishment.
When you take a violent crime a colleges number one priority is safety so they take a lower standard of evidence because a serial crime, like rape, you aren't just talking about letting 1000 guilty people go free you are talking about an additional 1000 or more people (and we are really talking people here. I can't stress enough that it just isn't women) being raped so that we can avoid one (theoretical) person being falsely convicted.
I mean imagine you go to college and the ra comes in says that your roommate was accused of rapeing their previous roommate but they could only prove it to a lower standard so they couldn't charge them. Do you feel safe?
Counter question, how would you feel if being accused(not convicted) of a crime caused people of authority to run around telling everyone you were guilty, they just couldn't prove it.
Cant prove it to a specific standard of evidence. The point being that a college has A responsibility to err on the side of caution in safety.
But yes, if someone could prove I raped someone to a preponderance of the evidence I would expect them to kick me out even if I didn't.
I guess we're gonna have to disagree. I think a college has a responsibly to respect the rights of the accused.
0
Options
Deebaseron my way to work in a suit and a tieAhhhh...come on fucking guyRegistered Userregular
Man, could you cite some statistics on this stuff or something? The kind of thing you're talking about is so far away from my experience with how rape victims are dealt with by society it's unbelievable. It's literally the opposite of how I've seen victims of that crime treated in every situation it has come up in my life.
Yeah, when I'm not at work. However, I probably won't bother unless I get more than a single anecdote of false accusation being a problem.
Since the entire crux of the argument against colleges changing their standard is the specter of a man being falsely accused.
Oh man I wanted to stay away so badly. So so badly. But this is just such nonsense I can't.
Why stop at rape? If all you have to worry about is a minority of falsely accused people, why not lower the standard of evidence for all crimes? I mean, the falsely accused are a minority. It's so small. It's much better to see that justice is done more often than protect criminals at the expense of victims for a minority of falsely accused.
Again, we're not talking about the criminal justice system.
To re-ask my question again...
Why?
Why is there a separate, privately-owned entity engaged in arbitration for what should be, for all intents and purposes, considered a criminal charge in the existing legal system?
Why are there two systems at all?
Because college codes of conduct are for the protection and well being of the students and the justice system is for punishment.
When you take a violent crime a colleges number one priority is safety so they take a lower standard of evidence because a serial crime, like rape, you aren't just talking about letting 1000 guilty people go free you are talking about an additional 1000 or more people (and we are really talking people here. I can't stress enough that it just isn't women) being raped so that we can avoid one (theoretical) person being falsely convicted.
I mean imagine you go to college and the ra comes in says that your roommate was accused of rapeing their previous roommate but they could only prove it to a lower standard so they couldn't charge them. Do you feel safe?
Counter question, how would you feel if being accused(not convicted) of a crime caused people of authority to run around telling everyone you were guilty, they just couldn't prove it.
Cant prove it to a specific standard of evidence. The point being that a college has A responsibility to err on the side of caution in safety.
But yes, if someone could prove I raped someone to a preponderance of the evidence I would expect them to kick me out even if I didn't.
Well given that these cases have little more evidence than he-said she-said and false accusations are only estimated to be between 2% - 8%, would you be fine with an accusation = guilt standard?
Posts
Well this is new, I actually agree with a mra.
I don't think you can argue in good faith either.
My personal situation was only resolved because she withdrew the allegations.
But that's not my point. Our system for determining guilt is innocent until proven guilty. In a situation where it's practically he-said she-said, do you not see how putting the value on the she-said is a really fucked up solution?
Also, and this may just be my misunderstanding things here, but why the fuck are colleges arbitrating sexual violence claims instead of, you know, the goddamn legal system?
So they have wrongly been using the criminal standard of guilt up until now even though they were supposed to use the civil one? That seems pretty messed up.
Man, could you cite some statistics on this stuff or something? The kind of thing you're talking about is so far away from my experience with how rape victims are dealt with by society it's unbelievable. It's literally the opposite of how I've seen victims of that crime treated in every situation it has come up in my life.
The court system, yes. And it still is.
But a college is not a court. And the situation where a rape victim has virtually no power is a system I cannot support in any fashion. Since we're not talking about jail time, or addition to a registry (Which is a whole other can of worms), but expulsion, I'm not so sympathetic. It's not the end of your life.
And we should not be basing general policy on the outliers. If you have a better idea for making a college a safer environment for women, I'm all ears, but so far you seem to be saying the status quo of rape being an easy crime to get away with is acceptable. It is not. And the extraordinarily rare incidents of false accusations do not trump the extraordinarily common incidents of raped women having to choose between attending a college where they see their rapist every day or abandoning their education.
No, our system for determining guilt in a criminal court of law is beyond a reasonable doubt. Civil courts default to preponderance of evidence, and private organizations can set up any system they see fit that meets their legal obligations.
But yes, it is a problem that someone charged but not yet convicted of a crime gets run through the wringer, especially if it's a sexual crime. The thing is, a lot of that is cultural, not legal, in nature.
Yeah, when I'm not at work. However, I probably won't bother unless I get more than a single anecdote of false accusation being a problem.
Since the entire crux of the argument against colleges changing their standard is the specter of a man being falsely accused.
Oh man I wanted to stay away so badly. So so badly. But this is just such nonsense I can't.
Why stop at rape? If all you have to worry about is a minority of falsely accused people, why not lower the standard of evidence for all crimes? I mean, the falsely accused are a minority. It's so small. It's much better to see that justice is done more often than protect criminals at the expense of victims for a minority of falsely accused.
His case is the only case I heard of in college where a man got the short end of the stick, and still not really the girl's fault, while I knew of 3 other cases where the woman had to use the system to protect herself.
FFXIV: Tchel Fay
Nintendo ID: Tortalius
Steam: Tortalius
Stream: twitch.tv/tortalius
What about a system where the falsely accused have no power? I can't support that in any way, shape or form.
http://research.lawyers.com/glossary/rape.html http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/frequently-asked-questions/ucr_faqs
It varies state to state. In some states, a woman can rape a man. In others, she cannot.
Because other crimes aren't nearly so difficult to prove. You know, if rape had conviction rates like murder or kidnapping, I'd be on your side. But they don't. Not even close..
So we make due.
The falsely accused do have power, though, in the preponderance of evidence standard. If fact, going by this thread, they have the same power they would have if accused of most other things in a civil setting.
And they have the same power they always had in criminal as well.
So basically, the standard of evidence was lowered to civil instead of criminal. Is there a problem with people being found civilly responsible of rape?
How? We've established that most of these cases are her word against his. If you're granting her automatic validity, how does the guy have any power?
When you no longer need substantial evidence to ruin someone's life, something is fucking wrong.
In a civil case, is the plaintiff always the victor? No? Well then, why not?
I'd imagine because the defendant has an opportunity to refute the charges, and that refutation is given the same weight it would as in any other civil case.
How would this apply in what seems to be the norm? His word vs her word?
I mean, that's the main problem. That the legal act and illegal act is practically the same. The only major difference, unless it turns violent, is the state of mind of those involved. It is literally he-said she-said. Either you validate one person's word above another's or you go with the "innocent until proven guilty".
I'm hoping it's the latter.
FFXIV: Tchel Fay
Nintendo ID: Tortalius
Steam: Tortalius
Stream: twitch.tv/tortalius
Again, we're not talking about the criminal justice system.
How is that a thing you can hide behind? Seriously? How can you just wash your hands at the obvious inequality of it just by going "Well shucks, it's not the criminal justice system, so all bets are off!" How can that seriously be your response? You don't even try to deny that its an inequality. Just that its one that is worth it to you, or for the greater good, and it can be got away with.
That's so very intellectually lazy.
And your defense of the status quo is any less so? The system as is is tremendously inequal. This whole thread is about how inequal it is. And so far all you've done is whinge about any steps to equalize it results in oppression against men.
Which, if oppression = men no longer having a distinct advantage, well, I guess that's true, but that's not my definition of oppression.
I'll admit, I'm not a lawyer, so I'm not sure how that would play out. Don't you have to establish something definitive?
That's the trouble with rape. If it wasn't violent, the only thing you can really establish is that there was sexual intercourse. After that, it's completely in the minds of the two people. The legal act is indistinguishable from the illegal act from an outside perspective.
I'm going to assume that in that sort of situation, the guy is usually let off due to lack of evidence. Do I have that right?
The ends justify the means after all, right?
Better a thousand innocent men should be punished than one guilty man should walk free?
No, what is intellectually lazy and dishonest is to constantly conflate two systems to try to win points.
Again, colleges can set up their disciplinary systems however they would like. Some choose to set theirs up as judicial systems in miniature, many don't. The thing is, when it comes to Title IX, such a system doesn't meet the standard the law sets forth. And the schools don't get to thumb their nose at the law.
Actually, in most of those cases, the prosecutor will simply opt to not press charges in the first place.
Shouldn't we be more worried about the fact that a false accusation (if proven as false) can have such arbitrary consequences?
And on Space's contention, I'd hazard that many unreported sexual crimes (with both male and female victims) tend to go unreported. Essentially have the opposite of that statement: a thousand guilty men go free to make sure no innocent man is incarcerated. It's a huge grey area.
http://www.gamesindustry.biz/
I write about video games and stuff. It is fun. Sometimes.
Sounds about right, thanks.
I think this falls under the umbrella of outliers.
To re-ask my question again...
Why?
Why is there a separate, privately-owned entity engaged in arbitration for what should be, for all intents and purposes, considered a criminal charge in the existing legal system?
Why are there two systems at all?
Because there are two entities at play here. The college bringing disciplinary charges against someone is completely and totally separate from the judicial system prosecuting them. In fact, part of the DoE letter was to remind colleges that pressuring complainants into not pressing charges pending resolution of the school's process (an altogether too common occurance) is prohibited by Title IX.
Because college codes of conduct are for the protection and well being of the students and the justice system is for punishment.
When you take a violent crime a colleges number one priority is safety so they take a lower standard of evidence because a serial crime, like rape, you aren't just talking about letting 1000 guilty people go free you are talking about an additional 1000 or more people (and we are really talking people here. I can't stress enough that it just isn't women) being raped so that we can avoid one (theoretical) person being falsely convicted.
I mean imagine you go to college and the ra comes in says that your roommate was accused of rapeing their previous roommate but they could only prove it to a lower standard so they couldn't charge them. Do you feel safe?
Counter question, how would you feel if being accused(not convicted) of a crime caused people of authority to run around telling everyone you were guilty, they just couldn't prove it.
That's nasty man. If you can't prove it, you can't prove it. Either the person is guilty of rape and is prosecuted or they're innocent. How fucking awful would you feel walking around with the label of "rapist" over your head even though you were not found guilty? Is the accusation "rapist" now equal to being found guilty?
I disagree. The intent of the criminal justice system, and laws in general, is the protection and well being of society. I also find the distinction that one is for "punishment" dishonest, as being kicked out of college with no way to recover lost tuition and no chance to enroll elsewhere, in this economy, is a pretty harsh punishment. Not prison or sex offender registry harsh, but still "have fun working minimum wage for the rest of your life" harsh.
I think, realistically, we're just talking about women here, due to the combination of regional laws that do not recognize that males can be raped and societal attitudes that simultaneously keep men from reporting (or even acknowledging!) that they were victims and administrators who largely hold the same "men can't be raped" attitude.
No, but if that was the case, I think I'd have a pretty good case to get re-assigned to a new roommate. Also, that RA wouldn't be an RA long spreading rumors. Also, didn't we decide as a society that tatooing "rapist" on the accused's forehead is cruel and unusual? If there was no proof that a crime was committed, why do you still get to treat the accused as if they were guilty?
Cant prove it to a specific standard of evidence. The point being that a college has A responsibility to err on the side of caution in safety.
But yes, if someone could prove I raped someone to a preponderance of the evidence I would expect them to kick me out even if I didn't.
Except that actual courts wouldn't convict. For criminal court these people are not considered guilty.
I guess we're gonna have to disagree. I think a college has a responsibly to respect the rights of the accused.
Well given that these cases have little more evidence than he-said she-said and false accusations are only estimated to be between 2% - 8%, would you be fine with an accusation = guilt standard?