Dumb Fuck College Boys: "You Could Tell By The Way She Danced."

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Murphy sees the situation's brutality when she goes back to court to attempt conviction of those who cheered and encouraged the gang rape as accessories to the crime. The intoxicated fraternity boys in question not only do not seem to realize that a rape has occurred, but saw the incident as a “live sex show” rather than as a crime. As one of the first mainstream Hollywood films to address the issue of rape, “The Accused” offers a fascinating and eye-opening look at not only the incident as a serious offense, but at the victim-perpetrator-spectator dynamic. It demonstrates that those who have not directly participated in a crime are not necessarily free of blame.
http://www.colby-sawyer.edu/news/accusedfilm.html

Bold Font Emphasis added.

And this was revealed only in 1988.

Much more recently:Last week, DNA samples were taken from 46 members of thelacrosse team. Investigators are trying to identify at least three men suspected of raping and beating the woman, who was hired to dance at a party.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/ESPNSports/story?id=1770656&page=1&CMP=OTC-RSSFeeds0312

[NZSkep]

this seems like old news, even the link that you sayi s more recent is from March. Pretty sure the lacrosse case was diiscussed quite alot when it was topical.
IIRc not much has come about as a result of lack of DNA evidence, lack of credibility of the witness, coupled with a couple of fuck ups by the cops.

What is the point you are trying to make?

[pariah]

What is the point you are trying to make?

I can't help but notice the title of the OP is similar to a post made three hours earlier criticizing the words of an Islamic cleric.

It may be one of the "zomg westerners do bad stuff too!!" fallacies that pops up anytime anyone dare say something negative about Islam.

[Nialler]

I can't help but notice the title of the OP is similar to a post made three hours earlier criticizing the words of an Islamic cleric.

It may be one of the "zomg westerners do bad stuff too!!" fallacies that pops up anytime anyone dare say something negative about Islam.

I'd say that's exactly what the OP is.

To say that it's a fallacy isn't necessarily true, though.

I posit this situation:

A thread is opened with the following title: "Islam scum indulging in Polygamy".

It is a valid debating point to indicate that polygamy isn't restricted to Islam, and that there are other sects which also indulge in it. The point may be made from two perspectives: that it is a commonly accepted beahviour in many cultures; or, that it is a regrettable abuse of women which seems to, unfortunately, be part of the spectrum of human behaviour. Polygamy is used here simply as an example; I have no strong views on it and I'm just illustrating.

In many of the threads that you refer to, the obnoxious behaviour is often neither a condition of being in Islam, nor is it a behaviour which is restricted to Islam. In some cases, the behaviour is more common in other religions and cultures than it is in the Muslim world. In this case, the highlighting of Islam is both irrelevant and reveals that the real intent is to seek out and expose wrong-doing by Muslims. The intent is clear: to portray Islam in the worst light possible. To do this by selectively applying human failings to them and to them alone, is obnoxious to reason, and is a clearly-loaded attack on them. Its bias is evident. To counter the bias by demonstrating that it happens in other cultures is not a fallacy; it is a counter-balance to illustrate the complete picture.

[Derec]

Bold Font Emphasis added.

And this was revealed only in 1988.


Too bad they don't make any Hollywood movies about all these women that falsely accuse men of rape. And remember, the real life case does not have the "flashback" of what occurred either - we do not know exactly what happened in the real life case this is based on. Lastly, evidence matters, and the credibility of the witness matters, because the prosecution has to prove the guilt beyond reasonable doubt. Assault with a deadly weapon (Jodie Foster's character intentionally ramming a suspect's car) matters she should have been charged with it. To conclude, "The Accused" is a biased film inspired by second wave radical feminism's rape hysteria.


Much more recently:
http://abcnews.go.com/US/ESPNSports/story?id=1770656&page=1&CMP=OTC-RSSFeeds0312

Are you familiar with the more recent developments in this case (your link is from March)? Lack of DNA evidence, showing that the accused did not even have sex with "Precious" (only DNA found on Precious was from her boyfriend) , the other stripper changing her story because DA reduced her bail in an unrelated crime and then later doubling back on herself, improper ID, alibi, and host of other problems. But they must have raped her because they were well-off white men while she was a black woman, and damn the evidence.
The Duke case is more comparable to Tawana Brawley non-rape than to anything else. Only difference being that Al Sharpton already got burned and let Jesse Jackson stick his neck out on this one.

[Blui]

To say that it's a fallacy isn't necessarily true, though.

I posit this situation:

A thread is opened with the following title: "Islam scum indulging in Polygamy".

It is a valid debating point to indicate that polygamy isn't restricted to Islam, and that there are other sects which also indulge in it. The point may be made from two perspectives: that it is a commonly accepted beahviour in many cultures; or, that it is a regrettable abuse of women which seems to, unfortunately, be part of the spectrum of human behaviour. Polygamy is used here simply as an example; I have no strong views on it and I'm just illustrating.

In many of the threads that you refer to, the obnoxious behaviour is often neither a condition of being in Islam, nor is it a behaviour which is restricted to Islam. In some cases, the behaviour is more common in other religions and cultures than it is in the Muslim world. In this case, the highlighting of Islam is both irrelevant and reveals that the real intent is to seek out and expose wrong-doing by Muslims. The intent is clear: to portray Islam in the worst light possible. To do this by selectively applying human failings to them and to them alone, is obnoxious to reason, and is a clearly-loaded attack on them. Its bias is evident. To counter the bias by demonstrating that it happens in other cultures is not a fallacy; it is a counter-balance to illustrate the complete picture.

Actually the highlighting of Islam is relevant, because, in your example, the Islamic religion in the Quran itself condones and mandates polygamy.

Would i be wrong in making a thread 'Islam scum killing an apostate'.

Perhaps the wording is too strong, but it is a legitimate concern and criticism, that Islam condones the killing of Muslims trying to convert.

The highlighting that it occurs in other cultures by Muslims, is this excuse:
"This might happen in my religion, but it happens outside it, so my religion isnt that bad, stop criticising it".

Remarking it occurs outside ones religion is in fact irrelevant towards the claim that the religion does indeed have this negative belief.
It is only relevant if the claim is either:
1.Islam alone has it
2.Islam is worse then every other culture because they have it.

This thread fails.

[Nialler]

Actually the highlighting of Islam is relevant, because, in your example, the Islamic religion in the Quran itself condones and mandates polygamy.

Would i be wrong in making a thread 'Islam scum killing an apostate'.

Perhaps the wording is too strong, but it is a legitimate concern and criticism, that Islam condones the killing of Muslims trying to convert.

The highlighting that it occurs in other cultures by Muslims, is this excuse:
"This might happen in my religion, but it happens outside it, so my religion isnt that bad, stop criticising it".

Remarking it occurs outside ones religion is in fact irrelevant towards the claim that the religion does indeed have this negative belief.
It is only relevant if the claim is either:
1.Islam alone has it
2.Islam is worse then every other culture because they have it.

This thread fails.

And the example that you give fails also, since the xtian relgions have used their own book to justify murdering non-believers. i.e., if someone is to claim that Islamis somehow defective because its book contains this directive, then it is entirely appropriate to say: "While we're condemning them rightly for this outrage, lets broaden the scope of our enquiry and include the xtian faiths as well. i.e, It's not simply "Islam scum", but "Islam and Abrahamic scum".

We don't treat a problem merely by looking at its expression is one distinct group. Think of a doctor who diagnoses your problem after you've spent a night freezing on a mountain top: would you be happy if he told the surgeon: "This man has gangrene in the toes of his left foot, they must be amputated". How would you feel if you can see clearly that the toes on your right foot are similarly effected and you have seen that he never even looked at your right foot?

Only by looking at the whole picture and seeing the common strands of behaviour can we even begin to tackle the problem.

[Malachi151]

Too bad they don't make any Hollywood movies about all these women that falsely accuse men of rape. And remember, the real life case does not have the "flashback" of what occurred either - we do not know exactly what happened in the real life case this is based on. Lastly, evidence matters, and the credibility of the witness matters, because the prosecution has to prove the guilt beyond reasonable doubt. Assault with a deadly weapon (Jodie Foster's character intentionally ramming a suspect's car) matters she should have been charged with it. To conclude, "The Accused" is a biased film inspired by second wave radical feminism's rape hysteria.



Are you familiar with the more recent developments in this case (your link is from March)? Lack of DNA evidence, showing that the accused did not even have sex with "Precious" (only DNA found on Precious was from her boyfriend) , the other stripper changing her story because DA reduced her bail in an unrelated crime and then later doubling back on herself, improper ID, alibi, and host of other problems. But they must have raped her because they were well-off white men while she was a black woman, and damn the evidence.
The Duke case is more comparable to Tawana Brawley non-rape than to anything else. Only difference being that Al Sharpton already got burned and let Jesse Jackson stick his neck out on this one.

I have to agree. The problem with rape, is that whether or not its a crime depends 100% of the perspective of the participants.

Its not like robbing a bank, where everyone can objectively tell that a crime is being committed.

"Rape" is just sex where one of the participants does not want to participate, but sometimes this unwillingness to participate can be either made up after the fact once a person feels guilty about it, or it can be unknown to spectators especially if they are drunk.

So, all this talk about how these spectators are such monsters is quite absurd. If these people knew at the time that this girl was not a willing participant, then yes, of course that was reprehensible behavior on their part, but people do engage in willing group sex, women do like to get gang banged, etc. There is nothing about these events that makes them easily objectively discernible as inappropriate.

The only way you can tell if "rape" is really being committed is to be inside the mind of the people engaged in the sex. In some cases its more obvious than others, but I was in college, I was in fraternities, and I have done plenty of partying in my day, and I'm well aware of the bullshit that many women play, I'm well aware of the drunken nonsense that goes on, I'm well aware of how confusing these things can be in real life.

Obviously if this girl was really yelling "NO, NO, NO, STOP, STOP, RAPE", then yeah, that's one thing, but this is often not what happens.

I've been around many of these types of situations, all of them brought on by the women, and its fortunate that in none of these cases did the women decide to make rape claims, etc. But it can easily happen. They are cheating on their boyfriend or something and then they decide that the boyfriend might find out so they claim rape, or they feel guilty later, so they claim rape, its a gang bang and then one guy says something offensive so the girl doesn't like it and claims rape, etc. A lot of stuff can go on, and when you have a drunken party where both the girl and the guy s are drunk, its typically just a confusing mess.

Rape is a horrible crime, but we have to be realistic and acknowledge that women are just as sexual as men. They like sex too, sometimes they love to simply have a nasty raunchy dirty fuck, they want to get gang banged, etc., that's reality. I'm just sick of the bad kind of feminist attitude that views all women as inherent victims and and men as inherent predators.

[Starshark]

I'd say that's exactly what the OP is.

To say that it's a fallacy isn't necessarily true, though.

I posit this situation:

A thread is opened with the following title: "Islam scum indulging in Polygamy".

It is a valid debating point to indicate that polygamy isn't restricted to Islam, and that there are other sects which also indulge in it. The point may be made from two perspectives: that it is a commonly accepted beahviour in many cultures; or, that it is a regrettable abuse of women which seems to, unfortunately, be part of the spectrum of human behaviour. Polygamy is used here simply as an example; I have no strong views on it and I'm just illustrating.

In many of the threads that you refer to, the obnoxious behaviour is often neither a condition of being in Islam, nor is it a behaviour which is restricted to Islam. In some cases, the behaviour is more common in other religions and cultures than it is in the Muslim world. In this case, the highlighting of Islam is both irrelevant and reveals that the real intent is to seek out and expose wrong-doing by Muslims. The intent is clear: to portray Islam in the worst light possible. To do this by selectively applying human failings to them and to them alone, is obnoxious to reason, and is a clearly-loaded attack on them. Its bias is evident. To counter the bias by demonstrating that it happens in other cultures is not a fallacy; it is a counter-balance to illustrate the complete picture.

While I'm not sure if you're criticising the thread I started, audiatur et altera pars and all that, I'd like to make it explicitly clear I'm not criticisng all Islam, or painting all Muslims with a broad-brush. Something I hope the OP, if not the title, makes clear.

[untermensche]

While I'm not sure if you're criticising the thread I started, audiatur et altera pars and all that, I'd like to make it explicitly clear I'm not criticisng all Islam, or painting all Muslims with a broad-brush. Something I hope the OP, if not the title, makes clear.
So what exactly was the point?

To show that some Muslims are as ignorant as any other group of people?

[Starshark]

So what exactly was the point?

To show that some Muslims are as ignorant as any other group of people?
Why don't you ask that in the other thread instead of derailing this one?

[Graeme]

Why don't you ask that in the other thread instead of derailing this one?

Given the OP I wouldn't consider it a derailment at all....

[Jason Harvestdancer]

This "article" about a movie seems strangely reminiscent of an actual case involving an acutal lacross team at an actual college ... where all of the evidence indicates that the players are innocent.

[countjulian]

So what exactly was the point?

To show that some Muslims are as ignorant as any other group of people?


Show me a non-Islamic cleric or moral leader saying such a thing and you might have half a point.


And the example that you give fails also, since the xtian relgions have used their own book to justify murdering non-believers. i.e., if someone is to claim that Islamis somehow defective because its book contains this directive, then it is entirely appropriate to say: "While we're condemning them rightly for this outrage, lets broaden the scope of our enquiry and include the xtian faiths as well. i.e, It's not simply "Islam scum", but "Islam and Abrahamic scum".

But there simply are no large, global groups or congregations of Christians actively seeking to overthrow world-wide governments, most often by atrocious violence, and install regimes which kill people for converting away from Christianity. You cannot give me an example from the past 100 years of someone being killed for converting away from Christianity, nor any known Christian leader advocating such a thing. The Islamic religion has all of these things in spade. Thusly, a complaint along such lines would be suited to the historical, not the political, forum, whilst such a complaint about Islam is just the exact opposite.

[countjulian]

The intent is clear: to portray Islam in the worst light possible. To do this by selectively applying human failings to them and to them alone, is obnoxious to reason, and is a clearly-loaded attack on them. Its bias is evident. To counter the bias by demonstrating that it happens in other cultures is not a fallacy; it is a counter-balance to illustrate the complete picture.

Oh yes, because we all know what fair and equal treatment Christianity recieves on these forums :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Jeeze, with a name like "Internet Infidels" who'd think that we'de be very harsh towards religion, espeicialy very zealously held religion?

[Malachi151]

This is like every stereotype. Does it apply to every Muslim? No.

Does it apply to Muslims more often than it does to others? Yes.

Secondly, why is this discussion even in this thread and not in the similar thread about Muslims?

[countjulian]

This is like every stereotype. Does it apply to every Muslim? No.

See, that's where it's hard to draw the line. Make a complaint against Islam (and there are many to be made) and the local neo-nazi cove thinks your endorsing them for Furher. It's a difficult problem, I don't know how to solve it.

[Nice Squirrel]

Off to MF&P

[Nialler]

Oh yes, because we all know what fair and equal treatment Christianity recieves on these forums :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Jeeze, with a name like "Internet Infidels" who'd think that we'de be very harsh towards religion, espeicialy very zealously held religion?

I'm being equally harsh to them all.

[Nialler]

Show me a non-Islamic cleric or moral leader saying such a thing and you might have half a point.



But there simply are no large, global groups or congregations of Christians actively seeking to overthrow world-wide governments, most often by atrocious violence, and install regimes which kill people for converting away from Christianity. You cannot give me an example from the past 100 years of someone being killed for converting away from Christianity, nor any known Christian leader advocating such a thing. The Islamic religion has all of these things in spade. Thusly, a complaint along such lines would be suited to the historical, not the political, forum, whilst such a complaint about Islam is just the exact opposite.
Of course I can provide examples. There is a rather well-known example of one leader who was christian and who ordered the massive slaughter of a group of people because of their religion. And it was in the last 100 years.

Funny, I think that he had ambitions about extending his power.

What was his name again?

[Morgana]

Rape is a horrible crime, but we have to be realistic and acknowledge that women are just as sexual as men. They like sex too, sometimes they love to simply have a nasty raunchy dirty fuck, they want to get gang banged, etc., that's reality. I'm just sick of the bad kind of feminist attitude that views all women as inherent victims and and men as inherent predators.When I have nasty raunchy dirty sex, it is consensual, thank-you-very-much.

I think my desire to be gang-banged by a group of drunken boys is probably on a par with most people - men and women. That is to say, it is very low. Anyone can be a victim.

Men are not inherent predators, but there is definitely a significant correlation between gender and sexual aggression.

[Johan]

Does this thread even have a topic? Are we talking about whether rape is okeedokee, whether Islam condones rape, whether "hey everyone's doin' it", whether tu quoques are relevant, whether a specific poster is full of it, what?

[Blui]

And the example that you give fails also, since the xtian relgions have used their own book to justify murdering non-believers. i.e., if someone is to claim that Islamis somehow defective because its book contains this directive, then it is entirely appropriate to say: "While we're condemning them rightly for this outrage, lets broaden the scope of our enquiry and include the xtian faiths as well. i.e, It's not simply "Islam scum", but "Islam and Abrahamic scum".

No, Muslims use this excuse to try and lower the negativity of what their doing by saying someone else does it.

It is exactly the type of childish rubbish teachers have to put up with when they discipline someone for talking, and the child responds 'But Billy was talking too'.

That grown men resort to such tactics is shameful.

But i suppose with your argument, that child was aiming for 'a complete view' of who talked in the classroom.
And...why exactly?

We don't treat a problem merely by looking at its expression is one distinct group. Think of a doctor who diagnoses your problem after you've spent a night freezing on a mountain top: would you be happy if he told the surgeon: "This man has gangrene in the toes of his left foot, they must be amputated". How would you feel if you can see clearly that the toes on your right foot are similarly effected and you have seen that he never even looked at your right foot?

This is a very foolish analogy, to make it actually correct, you would be doing this:

Doctor: Your foot has gangrene, thats pretty bad.
Patient: Do i have to cut it off? i heard other people live with gangrene.
Doctor: Sigh....

Its obvious the OP is downplaying the negativity of Islam by saying 'other socities have rape'.

:wave:

[Stu]

B-B-But Clinton....

[djrafikie]

had a consentual blowjob. whats yer point?

[Stu]

had a consentual blowjob. whats yer point?

I'm just commenting on the depressingly predictable patterns of deflection which are very similar to those you get from freepers on the Bush administration, but this isn't even a criticism of Islam, it's a criticism of one Muslim who has made absolutely disgraceful comments.

I'm really struggling to see the need to start new finger-pointing threads every time Muslims are mentioned, particularly on a secular board.

[dmarker]

Too bad they don't make any Hollywood movies about all these women that falsely accuse men of rape. And remember, the real life case does not have the "flashback" of what occurred either - we do not know exactly what happened in the real life case this is based on. Lastly, evidence matters, and the credibility of the witness matters, because the prosecution has to prove the guilt beyond reasonable doubt. Assault with a deadly weapon (Jodie Foster's character intentionally ramming a suspect's car) matters she should have been charged with it. To conclude, "The Accused" is a biased film inspired by second wave radical feminism's rape hysteria.



You mean like Wild Things (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0120890/)? I guess that movie doesn't exist.

By the way, one of the symptoms of male hysteria is amnesia on popular culture dealing with these subjects.

If you want to read books dealing with the subject of false rape accusations, here's a couple:

A Taste of Death by Susan Conant
False Prophet by Faye Kellerman

Here's another about a false accusation of sexual harrassment:

Serpent's Tooth by Faye Kellerman

And who can forget that scene in ER where Kirsten Dunst, playing a street kid, very publically and falsely accuses George Clooney, playing a doctor, of molesting her?

[Sico]

You mean like Wild Things (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0120890/)? I guess that movie doesn't exist.


Have you seen that movie?

Not arguing your point, but I don't reckon that movie is a good example of it.

[Johan]

Anyone? Can anyone tell me what this thread is about?

[Christina Mirabilis]

Oh good - I thought it was just me. I've read it twice and still can't figure out what it has to do with muslims. Or Clinton. Or blowjobs.

[djrafikie]

you know, I always fail to notice "finger pointing" threads in the negtive towards/positive towards islam vein which has just been mentioned.

I think thats probably because I tend to think that PEOPLE do bad things, and will justifiy it on many bases (she wanted it, the bible/quoran/etc says it's okay.. the devil made me do it) and other people then discuss it in reflecting their own views... but at the end of the day, a bad person CHOSE to do somthing bad.. lied, raped, killed, whatever.. and they did it because they WANTED to.

So I never see the point in validating someone's excuse further.

Either that or I'm just thick and I don't spot the obvious.

[dmarker]

Have you seen that movie?

Not arguing your point, but I don't reckon that movie is a good example of it.


Perhaps not, but that was only movie example that I could think of right off the bat.

Plus, I gave several other examples of false rape accusations in popular media.