One of the key words in this post will be censored. I've never known why and I contend that it ought not to be because it is sending a fundamentally wrong message.
I've been following this case for some months now, but given the recent media coverage, I'm not sure whether I should be surprised or not surprised that the topic has yet to be raised here.
Well, I think it's important, so I'm raising it now.
Relevant facts of the case:
A girl went to a party somewhere in Steubenville, a party at which several members of the local football team were present.
The girl subsequently became intoxicated to the point that she was for all intents and purposes unconscious.
Over the next several hours, several members of aforementioned football team performed and recorded unsolicited sexual acts on the girl. They then continued recording while they drove the unconscious girl to several other parties where the same happened. During this, it is verbally acknowledged on recording that the girl is unconscious, that the sexual acts being performed are without any form of consent, and that they willfully disregard this while continuing to perform the acts.
This footage is still publicly available as it was published on several social networking sites. I will refrain from linking to it here.
The girl is eventually dumped outside her own house. She is not aware of the events of the night until it is brought to her attention as a result of the distribution of recorded footage on networking sites.
Subsequent attempts to clarify what happened and to seek legal advice are met with resistance and threats in order to suppress the family of the girl. This appears to be because Steubenville's football players were involved.
It takes a sustained and somewhat-illegal campaign led by Anonymous to bring to public attention the specific details of the case, including the details of people they believe were positively identified in the footage, that the acts recorded constitute ****, and that prosecution ought to follow.
Eventually, two of the perpetrators are tried and convicted of ****.
Subsequently, just about every major broadcasting network in the US laments the destruction of two promising football careers and the tragedy of young men being convicted of ****.
---
It's at this point that much of the world took notice and went "Wait, what?" While it is true that the girl did attend the party, and did become intoxicated, this incident is being portrayed such that the girl is the one at fault. And that the ones who ***** her (repeatedly and willfully, on video) are the victims. And every one of these media reports appear to conveniently forget what sexual assault actually is, and what standards we, as purportedly civilised people, are supposed to be holding ourselves to.
What I want to know is, can any of you tell me what the hell is going on in America? What's the real deal? What does the public actually think of this case, or are they only aware of the media party line and therefore agree that the boys are the victims? And what the **** is wrong with a country with institutions that rally behind patriotic hubris to the extent that it disregards the rights which it supposedly granted equally to its citizens? What kind of shameful pride is that?
Tell me it isn't so. This isn't a problem unique to the US, of course, seeing as Australia has had a similar problem with its own footy **** culture several years ago, and worse happens on a regular basis in India, not to mention other places... but thanks to the happenings in a small town in the US, and the subsequent distortion of justice and the media machine which is plain as day to anybody who doesn't live there, the spotlight, America, is now on you.
I agree that from a Western perspective women have far less freedom within muslim countries, however please try to refrain from imposing Western ideals on everyone.
i'm not talking about muslim countries. but about saudi.
also am i not against the non western ideals. i am against the medieval ideals.
I just want to remind everyone that the media, nor government, represents the American people as a whole. Anyway, let's quickly touch up on whether women should wear more clothing or not.
Women should be mindful of what they wear, where they go, and what they do. However, this is true for men as well. If you fail to lock your doors, you're more prone to being a victim of theft. If you walk around alone in fancy clothing and in gang territory, you increase your odds of being mugged. If you're a woman and you're walking the streets at night by yourself, maybe it will help to wear less revealing clothing as a way of keeping perverted eyes off you. Despite all the precautions we can take, those that we should take, we can never hold the victim accountable. If you keep your door unlocked and someone steals from you, you should not be held liable. If you're mugged in gang territory, you should no be held liable. If a woman is raped, possibly because she made herself a target for wearing revealing clothing, she should not be held liable.
I haven't been keeping up with the Steubenville case, but let's take a look at the information Strop provided.
What could the girl have done to avoid being raped? She could have been more responsible with how much she drank. She could have also kept a close eye to make sure nobody slipped her anything. More importantly, she should have had a sober friend there to watch her back. In no way should the girl be held liable for what has happened to her. The rapists should be punished regardless of what precautions the girl took or did not take.
When it comes to drinking, women should always make sure they have a trusted friend with them if they plan on getting drunk and they should always be very careful with watching their drinks and how much they drink. This is actually advice everyone should take, but it's advice I more strongly recommend for women, especially younger women.
We must not hold people liable for failing to take precautions from the coercion of others.
Well said noname, But I want to emphasize that most of the sexual assaults against women that occur are acquaintance-based, not because she was walking through a dark alley at night. People seem to forget/not know that fact. And to me, it seems to take the steam out of the 'clothes' argument.
You are also correct about alcohol being a big risk factor, for both the victim and perpetrator. I wanted to contribute this:
Conservative estimates of sexual assault prevalence suggest that 25 percent of American women have experienced sexual assault, including rape. Approximately one-half of those cases involve alcohol consumption by the perpetrator, victim, or both. Alcohol contributes to sexual assault through multiple pathways, often exacerbating existing risk factors. Beliefs about alcoholâs effects on sexual and aggressive behavior, stereotypes about drinking women, and alcoholâs effects on cognitive and motor skills contribute to alcohol-involved sexual assault.
they are not. woman have no freedom where you live. they can't report it by own will. and if they do. they most likely have to face more horror in the future, despite already been raped.
I agree that from a Western perspective women have far less freedom within muslim countries, however please try to refrain from imposing Western ideals on everyone.
Western Perspective and western ideals has nothing to do with it. It doesn't matter from what perspective you look at it, from an Objective perspective, women in many mideastern countries have less freedom. Western culture may be the standard by which we are comparing, but that does not invalidate the comparison. People are people no matter where you go, and They still have less freedom. And.... just because they come from different cultural ideals doesn't mean they don't want and deserve equal treatment to men. Evidence to support these claims:
I especially like the part about how women aren't allowed to drive in saudi arabia. Is that just examples of those women trying to impose western values on others? I don't think so.
they are not. woman have no freedom where you live. they can't report it by own will.
from where exactly are you pulling this out? I have seen with my own eyes women filing complaints against domestic abuse etc alone. There is no reason they will be barred from filing a complaint about rape. Yes their is a legal loop hole which requires two witnesses for rape which UAE countered by classifying rape under burgulary rather than adultery.
And.... just because they come from different cultural ideals doesn't mean they don't want and deserve equal treatment to men. Evidence to support these claims:
Saudi Arabia
Just few pathetic dissenters, will be dealt swiftly NoNamec69 said what I was trying to say all along.
So I woke up this morning to find this all over my newsfeed: Sexual Assault Case
Content warning: Story is rather detailed, involves rape and violence.
For those who don't want to read the article, basically four young men (ages 19-21) in my hometown have been charged with abducting a homeless teenage girl off the streets, bringing her back to an apartment, forcing her to drink alcohol, and sexually assaulting her for two days before she escaped.
Its probably the most depressing thing I have read recently, and the fact that it was so close to home, and that the aggressors are people my age... Its just too much.
I thought I would bring it up here, just to note the difference in the comments on this story from the Steubenville one. There was a lot of "blaming the victim" going around the Steubenville case, whereas with this one most of the comments are call for violent action against the young men accused. The main similarity, of course, is that the current plight of the victim seems to get more or less overlooked by commenters on both cases.
I thought I would bring it up here, just to note the difference in the comments on this story from the Steubenville one. There was a lot of "blaming the victim" going around the Steubenville case, whereas with this one most of the comments are call for violent action against the young men accused. The main similarity, of course, is that the current plight of the victim seems to get more or less overlooked by commenters on both cases.
there are two reasons (from what I have seen) that led to blaming the victim in Steubenville that makes this case different from the previous one reviewed.
the first is the most obvious one: the girl went to the party on her own choice, so she had to deal with the consequences of her actions. this is unfair for her because nobody goes to a party expecting for something grim to happen. there was no act of irresponsibility on the part of the victim, so there is no way she can get any of the blame shifted to her. bear in mind, there shouldn't be any reason as to why it is significant, but that doesn't mean the subconscious mind won't listen to reason (it's a fairly similar situation to one described in a book known as "Tess of the D'Urbervilles".
the second reason this one is different is the fact that the ones who committed the acts aren't local celebrities. the previous case involved football players, which is currently considered highest on the social food chain (it shouldn't matter because this setup is closer to that of a highschool than that of reality, but again, people aren't always rational). this is significant because people will rally behind people of influence, regardless of how ethically, and morally, correct it is (hitler is a prime example of this). since these new rapists aren't respected in the community, then they don't have a base group of people outside of their family that will defend their "honor". this means that people are much more likely to turn against them, which they did.
though this is why the two cases are different, there is no reason for these two circumstances to be so oppressive to the facts of the matter. rape is rape, no matter who the culprit is, or what he/she is known for.
Pathetic as in "The blind, old dog was a pathetic sight"
You're missing the point. He wasn't saying you were spewing hate for calling someone pathetic. He was saying that you were for saying, 'will be dealt swiftly.'
however please try to refrain from imposing Western ideals on everyone.
I have an issue with this. The only ones imposing anything are those forcing women to wear conservative clothing in the name of rape prevention and modesty.
How are, 'Western ideals' of letting people do what they want, imposing anything on anyone? No one is stopping a woman from dressing conservatively if she wishes, but she's free to choose otherwise too. The only oppressors here are you.
You're missing the point. He wasn't saying you were spewing hate for calling someone pathetic. He was saying that you were for saying, 'will be dealt swiftly.'
Yes, thank you. You are proving my point that regardless of cultural ideals, these women have objectively less freedom. While doing your best impression, you acknowledged the reality that women who try to drive an automobile will be punished for their crimes(?)... because they have less freedom. My question is why are you on the empire's side?
Yes, thank you. You are proving my point that regardless of cultural ideals, these women have objectively less freedom. While doing your best impression, you acknowledged the reality that women who try to drive an automobile will be punished for their crimes(?)... because they have less freedom. My question is why are you on the empire's side?
May be because I lost my wife to pregnancy and mentor chopped off my limbs. Other than them being lousy drivers I have no objection to it.
impression, you acknowledged the reality that women who try to drive an automobile will be punished for their crimes(?)... because they have less freedom. My question is why are you on the empire's side?