Why do some men commit rape?

ChampagnePop wrote: »

I've experienced rape culture in Ireland, it was in college and it was not funny

ChampagnePop wrote: »

Sorry, I wasn't clear, the jokes were used to make light of rumours that had been going on for years in a college group. It was only when he was caught sexually assaulting an unconscious girl by her boyfriend that the truth about his victims came to light.

Maguined wrote: »

It was just all political pressure. Title IX was enacted in the 70s to stop gender based discrimination however a few years ago lobby groups were promoting the idea that beause women encounter sexual harassment more frequently on college that the college was at fault for not protecting their female students and so failed to uhold their Title IX obligations. This put the pressure on colleges who reacted badly under their pressure by violating an accuseds due process as it is simply easier for them to suspend a student as an example to show they were trying to be protective and reduce harassment numbers. All colleges receive federal funding but the government said they would withold it if a college failed to protected their female students as it would violate Title IX.

NI24 wrote: »

See this is what I was saying about it not being noble. The first draft of title ix may have been noble, but by the time it passed it snowballed into something a little less so. The reason it was started was because a female professor was getting edged out of her job despite her experience, qualifications, etc. and she wanted to protect her job. Then, for some reason, it changed into something about gender discrimination of students, which, prior to the professor complaining didn't seem to be a big enough issue to warrant concern. It was initially about the employment practices in education, specifically federally funded ones. Now it's something else.

Did you notice that two of the cases referred to on fire.org were women being punished by schools for sexual misconduct, in both cases sexual language related issues? Well, actually one woman for sexual harassment and one woman I can't really seem to understand. I have a feeling Grant's lawsuit about being singled out for his "male gender" isn't going to go very far. He really shouldn't have turned his lawsuit into a gender issue.

Title IX applies to all educational programs and all aspects of a school's educational system. Civil rights activists and organizations such as the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) maintain that "when students suffer sexual assault and harassment, they are deprived of equal and free access to an education."[54] Further, according to an April 2011 letter issued by the Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights, "The sexual harassment of students, including sexual violence, interferes with students' right to receive an education free from discrimination and, in the case of sexual violence, is a crime."[55]

The letter, known colloquially as the "Dear Colleague" letter, states that it is the responsibility of institutions of higher education "to take immediate and effective steps to end sexual harassment and sexual violence."[56] The letter illustrates multiple examples of Title IX requirements as they relate to sexual violence, and makes clear that, should an institution fail to fulfill its responsibilities under Title IX, the Department of Education can impose a fine and potentially deny further institutional access to federal funds.

He was suspended for three semesters by the University of Colorado Boulder for “sexual misconduct,” even though police filed no charges against him and his accuser admitted she wanted to scare him when she made the complaint.

“CU Boulder has created an environment in which an accused male student is effectively denied fundamental due process by being prosecuted through the conduct process under the cloud of a presumption of guilt,” says the Nov. 21 lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court in Colorado. “Such a one-sided process deprived John Doe, as a male student, of education opportunities at CU Boulder on the basis of his sex.”

Andrew Miltenberg, a New York City lawyer who has filed eight such lawsuits, including the Colorado case, said the Obama administration has fueled an atmosphere on campus in which due process is taking a back seat to institutional self-preservation.

“I’m not an apologist for sexual misconduct,” Mr. Miltenberg said. “All I really want is for the process to be transparent and fair, and for the White House not to impose unrealistic standards on people, especially when it’s bowing to special-interest pressure.”

Pat Mustard wrote: »

The reason that you attempt to discuss timing of consent is to say that it did not happen before penetration and that therefore, there cannot have been any consent.

This is a false premise because consent cannot be given afterwards.

But the woman said that she consented. And consent cannot be given afterwards, only beforehand.

That's all there is to it.

mzungu wrote: »

I would not be looking for any kind of impartial view in the Irish media, as the starting position is that we have a rape culture. The only question allowed is 'how do we stop it?'. If you disagree, then you get labelled a misogynist.

NI24 wrote: »

It's a false premise that the girl herself gave to the school, not me. As she said, she did not give consent before, only after. "Although I told Grant no, he ended up penetrating me". What part of no don't you understand? That means consent isn't given. So it's not all there is to it, no matter how many times you repeat, no matter how many time you ignore her direct description of events. And guess who's opinion matters here, yours or the schools?

NI24 wrote: »

Despite your adamant insistence that consent cannot be given afterwards, that is exactly what the girl said she did, yet you continually ignore it. If you are ignorant of the law and consent, that's your problem not mine.

NI24 wrote: »

Here's the problem with last part of your post. Once again, you have a student claiming he was denied his rights on the basis of his gender, yet fire.org gave two examples of women being charged and punished under title ix. And Grant is doing the same thing. They're looking for discrimination where there is none.

“One of the most basic tenets of due process is that the accused deserves a hearing in front of an impartial panel. My alma mater’s ‘training,’ however, ensures that this panel is biased against the accused,” said FIRE President Greg Lukianoff. “Add to that both the recent, unwise ‘guidance’ from the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights, and Stanford’s policy that makes virtually any sex after drinking tantamount to rape, and the accused have little hope of fundamental fairness.”

The training materials for Stanford’s “Dean’s Alternative Review Process,” which handles sexual harassment and misconduct cases, also inform student jurors that they should be “very, very cautious in accepting a man’s claim that he has been wrongly accused of abuse or violence,” claiming that “[t]he great majority of allegations of abuse—though not all—are substantially accurate,” and that “an abuser almost never ‘seems like the type.'”

The material provided to student jurors, much of which comes from a book titled Why Does He Do That: Inside the Minds of Angry and Controlling Men, is generally directed not at ensuring a fair trial for both the accuser and the accused, but at ensuring that accused men are presumed guilty.

“Imagine being a male Stanford student at your sexual assault hearing,” said FIRE Senior Vice President Robert Shibley. “The ‘jury’ has been told that denying the charges is a sign of guilt, and so is being persuasive and logical. They’ve been told that accusers almost never lie, that they need to be extra suspicious of men who don’t seem like they’d commit rape, and that being neutral is taking the side of abusers. Additionally, the Department of Education has mandated that a sliver of certainty is all that is required to find you guilty. Would any Stanford administrator volunteer to be tried for sexual assault in a real court under the same conditions that they have imposed on their students?”

The case, Doe v. Amherst College, stems from a sexual encounter between two Amherst students that took place in February 2012, about which the female student filed a sexual misconduct complaint in October 2013. The accuser claimed that while the encounter was initially consensual, she withdrew her consent while performing oral sex on the accused—her roommate’s boyfriend—at which point he held her head down and forced her to finish. The accused student, who had been drinking heavily, told Amherst’s investigator that “he had experienced a blackout” and did not remember the sexual encounter. After a hearing that the accused student alleges was deeply flawed and unfair (for more on that, see Professor KC Johnson’s discussion of the case at Minding the Campus), Amherst expelled the accused student in December 2013. He filed a federal lawsuit against Amherst in May 2015.

In addition to challenging the procedures used to investigate his case and find him responsible for sexual misconduct, the accused student’s lawsuit alleges:

[A]fter the disciplinary process had run its short course, the plaintiff discovered, and submitted to the College, irrefutable documentary evidence—text messages previously concealed by the complainant—which disclosed that the very night the sexual encounter occurred, the complainant had admitted that not only had she consented to the sex, but that she was its moving force. Nevertheless, Amherst has refused to take any action to correct or remediate the wrong committed against plaintiff.

Pat Mustard wrote: »

Your posts on this topic show a consistent failure of reasoning, worthy of young earth creationism.

I have no further interest in attempting to discuss the topic with you.

NI24 wrote: »

I think the responses to this article are a perfect example of why some men commit rape.