OT: Around the NHL: The Countdown to Camp

[Randy Butternubs]

Me in this thread:

 

[Shady Machine]

Me in this thread:

I was waiting for someone to post that.

 

[Jaded-Fan]

I am sorry for the following rant, but this is something I got to get off my chest:

I am sick and tired of the dumb idiots who will say things like "Oh, she followed him home, she had to know that he hadn't invited her over to play cards" or stupid things like that (she is a tease, etc). Especially when these people use "it didn't excuse what he did, but...", that's like saying "I am not racist/homophobe, I have a Black/gay friend." The girl claims she has been assaulted, she is the (alleged) victim here. If you bring a girl home and she says no, well, too bad, but it is no. Sure, you might see her as a tease and be frustrated, but that doesn't mean you have the right to rape her and even less that SHE is responsible for what happened.

Fortunately, I haven't see it a lot here, but on Facebook, GOSH! I would punch those people. Then people will claim that society is equal. BS!

Kane might not be guilty at all, but let's not act as if the GIRL is to blame here, god damn! Oh, and even if a someone says "yes" and THEN, in the heat of the moment, changes her mind and YOU DON'T STOP and FORCE HER to continue, it is rape.

Sorry again for the rant.

I haven't seen anyone say that here.

The only blow back at all has been the position of 'let the facts play out and do not rush to judgment'.

That certainly has been all that I have said all along. There are enough cases of crying wolf to make that the only sane position. Even if there was only one case like that, and there have not been (Rolling Stone Article, Duke Lacross, Tawana Glenda Brawley come immediately to mind, but there are many others), it is the only sane position in a civilized nation.

The current state of far too many opinions is to presume guilt.

And I say that admitting that Kane's past shows him to be a bit of a dirtbag (as did Rothlisberger's for that matter, though marriage seems to have finally made him grow up) so understand why some may rush to judgment. Just because one has bad prior acts, it does not mean that this time he was guilty. It is why the courts so limit use of bad prior acts in court, the probative value is vastly outweighed by the prejudice that 'evidence' brings.

 

[Scandale du Jour]

I haven't seen anyone say that here.

The only blow back at all has been the position of 'let the facts play out and do not rush to judgment'.

That certainly has been all that I have said all along. There are enough cases of crying wolf to make that the only sane position. Even if there was only one case like that, and there have not been (Rolling Stone Article, Duke Lacross, Tawana Glenda Brawley come immediately to mind, but there are many others), it is the only sane position in a civilized nation.

The current state of far too many opinions is to presume guilt.

And I say that admitting that Kane's past shows him to be a bit of a dirtbag (as did Rothlisberger's for that matter, though marriage seems to have finally made him grow up) so understand why some may rush to judgment. Just because one has bad prior acts, it does not mean that this time he was guilty. It is why the courts so limit use of bad prior acts in court, the probative value is vastly outweighed by the prejudice that 'evidence' brings.

Oh, I agree man, it hasn't happened here, but it has on FB a lot. On the main board too. I was barely venting. I am quite relieved to see that we are smarter than that on the Pens board.

Rape culture is a pathetic thing. Saddest thing being that most people don't even realize how damageable it can be.

I also agree that we shouldn't pronounce Kane guilty until guilt is proven. I just can't tolerate when some people (not here, thank God) do it.

 

[HandshakeLine]

There are a significant amount of colleges and universities that do in fact put the responsibility solely on the guy. They are mostly the same colleges that have a guilty until proven innocent rule in place with rape accusations.

I've heard this a lot but nobody ever names the universities or the policies that say so. It's one of those things that, unless someone gives me names of the institutions that do so, I highly HIGHLY doubt is a widespread pattern. Especially having been involved as a graduate student liaison and having sat in on board meetings, and seeing how the universities operate on a pretty intimate level.

Maybe some universities do. But as far as the elite American schools go, I certainly can't think of any that I've had experience with that do that. But I haven't dealt with the state schools just because of my career path.

But I've said my peace on this. I've no desire to chew the gristle on this board with yinz.

 

[Penguinator]

Started a main board thread, do you agree with the NHLPA's proposition?
http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=1939317

 

[Deutschland Dangler]

It may be a sexist policy, but it's in place on college campuses for a reason. There are still a huge number of sexual assaults on college campuses.

That might be too much off topic now but I wonder why that problem is so prevalent there? There are lots of universities/colleges in Germany, too, but I don't recall ever coming across anything that indicated it would be a particular problem at such institutions.

 

[Scandale du Jour]

That might be too much off topic now but I wonder why that problem is so prevalent there? There are lots of universities/colleges in Germany, too, but I don't recall ever coming across anything that indicated it would be a particular problem at such institutions.

I know in Canada (in Quebec for sure) most people DON'T live on campus. Seems to be the opposite in the US. Might explain a little.

 

[Ogrezilla]

I've heard this a lot but nobody ever names the universities or the policies that say so. It's one of those things that, unless someone gives me names of the institutions that do so, I highly HIGHLY doubt is a widespread pattern. Especially having been involved as a graduate student liaison and having sat in on board meetings, and seeing how the universities operate on a pretty intimate level.

Maybe some universities do. But as far as the elite American schools go, I certainly can't think of any that I've had experience with that do that. But I haven't dealt with the state schools just because of my career path.

But I've said my peace on this. I've no desire to chew the gristle on this board with yinz.

The new rules and incentives Obama has put in place the last few years has made this trend blow up. Institutions with some form of this policy include Duke, Amherst, Harvard, Princeton, etc etc etc. The accused doesn't even get to speak in his own defense at a lot of these places.

http://www.eagleforum.org/publications/educate/nov14/students-guilty-until-proven-innocent.html

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/b...tandard-for-sex-assault-cases/article/2551863

It may be a sexist policy, but it's in place on college campuses for a reason. There are still a huge number of sexual assaults on college campuses. We still have a culture of blame the victim and calling a woman derogatory names for sleeping around while the man is generally seen in a positive light. When you have a culture like that on college campuses, you have to have policies in place to protect women, even if they seem sexist.

I don't see any reason that these colleges should set up their own judge and jury for these cases. That's why we have real judges and real juries. Sure, they don't end up in jail this way, but this process is entirely too likely to **** up an innocent person's life over nothing more than an accusation. If you are raped, call the cops. The court system is equipped to deal with these cases properly. Universities are not. A university panel should not have the power to label someone as a rapist. And they sure as **** shouldn't be able to do it without allowing the accused a legitimate trial. But that's exactly what these rules allow.

 

[Zirakzigil]

Started a main board thread, do you agree with the NHLPA's proposition?
http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=1939317

What's this have to do with Kane? Quit derailing this thread!

I like the idea actually. I'm all for Scotty to get a trophy in his name.

 

[Shady Machine]

I don't see any reason that these colleges should set up their own judge and jury for these cases. That's why we have real judges and real juries. Sure, they don't end up in jail this way, but this process is entirely too likely to **** up an innocent person's life over nothing more than an accusation. If you are raped, call the cops. The court system is equipped to deal with these cases properly. Universities are not. A university panel should not have the power to label someone as a rapist. And they sure as **** shouldn't be able to do it without allowing the accused a legitimate trial. But that's exactly what these rules allow.

I guess I'm not sure what colleges are doing. Where I went to school there was a lot of education on what is or isn't consent but they weren't judge and jury. I guess I would just need to know what you are talking about before I comment further.

 

[Shady Machine]

That might be too much off topic now but I wonder why that problem is so prevalent there? There are lots of universities/colleges in Germany, too, but I don't recall ever coming across anything that indicated it would be a particular problem at such institutions.

Well for one, alcohol isn't legal until kids are 21. Sure people drink in high school, but most kids get their real taste of party culture in college. Most 18 year old college kids likely don't know enough about their tolerance and the types of things that can happen when you they are drunk. I think America has a poor relationship with alcohol. I don't know about alcohol advertisements in Germany, but most here are attached to sex and party culture.

There are number of other issues that lead to this, I'm sure, but that's one example.

 

[PensBandwagonerNo272*]

Yeah honestly the late drinking age is likely a huge contributing factor to the terrible reputation college students have in the USA. It's not as bad in Canada I don't think at a 19 YO legal age, and I think even that is a year or two late.

 

[plaidchuck]

There's a lot of factors that figure in to this problem. For starters, the us has a binge drinking culture, even before you get into the idiocy that is the 21 yo drinking age.

And then you have this limbo where students are adults at 18 legally but not financially with loans/health care which basically keeps them as a dependent children for their parents.

Finally for lots of these kids this is the first time they're away from home, which makes some super vulnerable and makes others lose their minds.

 

[Shady Machine]

There's a lot of factors that figure in to this problem. For starters, the us has a binge drinking culture, even before you get into the idiocy that is the 21 yo drinking age.

And then you have this limbo where students are adults at 18 legally but not financially with loans/health care which basically keeps them as a dependent children for their parents.

Finally for lots of these kids this is the first time they're away from home, which makes some super vulnerable and makes others lose their minds.

All good points.

 

[Ogrezilla]

I guess I'm not sure what colleges are doing. Where I went to school there was a lot of education on what is or isn't consent but they weren't judge and jury. I guess I would just need to know what you are talking about before I comment further.

Schools pretty much are required to have a board to handle these situations internally. The system drastically changed in 2012 or so under title IX.

Once the complaint is filed, an investigator, who lacks subpoena power, interviews the accuser and the accused student; beyond that, the college promises only that the investigator will make a "good faith effort" to speak to relevant witnesses, and will "try" to obtain relevant physical or medical evidence. If the investigator's "good faith" effort doesn't track down relevant witnesses, the policy presumes that the accused student won't be able to call those witnesses before the hearing.

"Attorneys cannot participate in the Hearing Board process" at Amherst (although, the college helpfully notes, the accused student can hire an attorney—at his own expense—and have the attorney present on campus the day of the hearing, perhaps for a very expensive form of virtual, moral support). The attorney-less accused student does receive an "advisor" from the campus community, but this advisor "is not an advocate for the student."

Amherst does not permit the accused student to directly cross-examine his accuser; he can only submit questions to the panel chair, who may ask or reject the questions as the chair chooses. Effective cross-examination under such circumstances is all but impossible—even more so since the accuser is allowed to write responses, rather than respond to questions orally. Any guilty finding is "permanently noted on the student's record."

http://www.americanthinker.com/arti...ilty_until_proven_innocent.html#ixzz3iSdy8V1x

 

[billybudd]

Originally Posted by Deutschland Dangler View Post
That might be too much off topic now but I wonder why that problem is so prevalent there? There are lots of universities/colleges in Germany, too, but I don't recall ever coming across anything that indicated it would be a particular problem at such institutions.

Short answer is that the idea that sexual assault rates are higher among college age students who attend college than in the age group generally is a myth* (originating in a small, voluntary response survey asking questions such as "have you ever regretted a sexual encounter" or "have you ever had sexual contact while impaired by alcohol?" which produced an absurd 3 in 5 number that became widely disseminated without examination of methodology).

US DoJ just published their long-term study on this (check out the link, it's an interesting read and not that long); in the College age group (18-24), a nonstudent has a 50% higher probability of being the victim of rape, at 20% higher probability of experiencing a failed attempted rape, a 10% higher probability of experiencing sexual assault and a 10% lower chance of experiencing threats of sexual violence (on that last note, I would assume that's explainable by less access to the internet among nonstudents).

Obvious conclusion is that campuses are safer than the living situations in similar demographic groups who don't attend college, but public perception is exactly the opposite for some reason.


*there is a single group in which being the recipient of sexualized violence is higher among students--males--but that's a fraction of overall incidents and nobody has any idea what to make of the results

 

[Honour Over Glory]

Yeah honestly the late drinking age is likely a huge contributing factor to the terrible reputation college students have in the USA. It's not as bad in Canada I don't think at a 19 YO legal age, and I think even that is a year or two late.

It has nothing to do with drinking age in the US, it's a culture that has been bred for generations.

It has nothing to do with drinking age at all.

 

[Honour Over Glory]

There's a lot of factors that figure in to this problem. For starters, the us has a binge drinking culture, even before you get into the idiocy that is the 21 yo drinking age.

And then you have this limbo where students are adults at 18 legally but not financially with loans/health care which basically keeps them as a dependent children for their parents.

Finally for lots of these kids this is the first time they're away from home, which makes some super vulnerable and makes others lose their minds.

Most countries do just fine, what makes US so special with the 21yr old drinking age and making them vulnerable because they're not bright enough at a young age compared to people of similar age in other countries?

Again, a culture.

People making too many excuses for people that are just flat out stupid and given a free pass because of certain things like their background (family money) or what they do (sports).

You have a lot of dumb people in an education system that isn't all that strong to begin with, already drinking underage, 21yr old doesn't mean ****. How many here waited until legal drinking age, be honest.

I am betting the odd 2-5% at most.

 

[plaidchuck]

Well duh, it is a cultural issue, exacerbated by things like the high drinking age, binge culture, and college life being sold as an "experience" rather than preparation for entering the adult workforce.

 

[Honour Over Glory]

Well duh, it is a cultural issue, exacerbated by things like the high drinking age, binge culture, and college life being sold as an "experience" rather than preparation for entering the adult workforce.

Why do Canadian Universities and Colleges and Universities in other parts of the world not have those issues in high volume like the US?

Because their schools don't allow it and when it does happen, they handle it accordingly. The culture is bred, it's encouraged, then when it gets over board, the kids that are already morons, get blamed.

You breed a bunch of ******** youths, then you let them do that sort of thing, then you come up with random excuses to deter the fact that these kids are idiots being taught by idiots that are bred by idiots.

Life.

Change the drinking age to 19, it changes nothing. I would put money on it.

 

[Deutschland Dangler]

Thanks for the interesting responses, appreciate it.

 

[Ogrezilla]

Most countries do just fine, what makes US so special with the 21yr old drinking age and making them vulnerable because they're not bright enough at a young age compared to people of similar age in other countries?

Again, a culture.

People making too many excuses for people that are just flat out stupid and given a free pass because of certain things like their background (family money) or what they do (sports).

You have a lot of dumb people in an education system that isn't all that strong to begin with, already drinking underage, 21yr old doesn't mean ****. How many here waited until legal drinking age, be honest.

I am betting the odd 2-5% at most.

having to hide that you're drinking leads to drinking even less responsibly imo. Since you can't drink casually, and you probably don't want to be storing alcohol for long to avoid getting caught, under age drinking almost always leads to pure binge drinking. It also leads to younger students drinking with older students that they likely don't know very well. And never in public places; you need to go to these people's houses.

Its not the only problem, but the late drinking age is certainly a contributing factor.

 

[Shady Machine]

having to hide that you're drinking leads to drinking even less responsibly imo. Since you can't drink casually, and you probably don't want to be storing alcohol for long to avoid getting caught, under age drinking almost always leads to pure binge drinking. It also leads to younger students drinking with older students that they likely don't know very well. And never in public places; you need to go to these people's houses.

Its not the only problem, but the late drinking age is certainly a contributing factor.

Agreed. Very well said. I also think the vast majority of alcohol ads being tied to partying and sex doesn't help.

 

[Penguinator]

Agreed. Very well said. I also think the vast majority of alcohol ads being tied to partying and sex doesn't help.

Young persons also tend to be more influenced by a certain type of movies & series that encourage this type of behaviour...