Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
We're the boys prosecuted for underage drinking? Was anyone at the party?
All should have been.
Why not?The boys should be punished but when the mother of the victim stood up and lectured them it kinda got to me. This girl had a history of alchohol abuse and the mother should not be lecturing anyone about anything.
I don't know if you are a male or female. But if the former, and if you had access to a drunken woman, would you do to her what those "boys" did? That should be a very easy question to answer. And if your answer is no, please explain why.My question, was the gril prosecuted for under aged drinking? If not, why not, her behavior was the enabling factor in the whole incident. She has to bear some responsibility.
For teen-age boys to have opportunistic sex with an unconscious girl is one thing. Taking and publicizing degrading photos of the girl demonstrates a contemptible character flaw that needs to be punitively corrected.
I will admit that aside from what I've read in this thread and saw briefly on television news I know nothing about the circumstances in this case. But whatever the details, there are certain essential behavioral principles which evidently have been violated and which call for severe punishment. The rules of civilized conduct demand that.There's way too much vagueness in the story to draw reasonable conclusions, I simply asked if the girl is going to be held responsible for her known actions.
You are wrong on every level. They have her passed.put on film. They did piss on her. They have audio.of them saying she is passed out. You know what, as a father of a daughter, I say fuck you.You are off, on many different levels. The boys' actions were indefensible. Someone being unconscious is not a license to rape her, or piss on her, nor laugh about her being dead.
A lifetime sentence as a sex offender is too lenient. It is not enough of a deterrent to keep other boys from just having fun at someone else's expense.
There is no evidence she was unconscious at the time the boy touched her with his finger.
Nobody got pissed on.
Laughing at someone should NEVER be against the law.
In any case, you didn't address the point. Are we now going to say that if a woman doesn't give specific consent to sex, her partner is guilty of rape?
I just don't buy it.
There is no slippery slope. It against the law to have sex with an unconscious person.period. it doesn't matter the person got into an unconscious state.
You are off, on many different levels. The boys' actions were indefensible. Someone being unconscious is not a license to rape her, or piss on her, nor laugh about her being dead.
A lifetime sentence as a sex offender is too lenient. It is not enough of a deterrent to keep other boys from just having fun at someone else's expense.
There is no evidence she was unconscious at the time the boy touched her with his finger.
Nobody got pissed on.
Laughing at someone should NEVER be against the law.
In any case, you didn't address the point. Are we now going to say that if a woman doesn't give specific consent to sex, her partner is guilty of rape?
I just don't buy it.
In any case, you didn't address the point. Are we now going to say that if a woman doesn't give specific consent to sex, her partner is guilty of rape?
You are wrong on every level. They have her passed.put on film. They did piss on her. They have audio.of them saying she is passed out. You know what, as a father of a daughter, I say fuck you.There is no evidence she was unconscious at the time the boy touched her with his finger.
Nobody got pissed on.
Laughing at someone should NEVER be against the law.
In any case, you didn't address the point. Are we now going to say that if a woman doesn't give specific consent to sex, her partner is guilty of rape?
I just don't buy it.
As you're apparently a father incapable of raising a daughter to not drink herself into a state of unconsciousness, I say right back at ya pal.
You've probably all heard about the Ohio juveniles convicted of raping a young woman too intoxicated to give consent. If not, the story is here:
Two teens found guilty in Steubenville rape case - CNN.com
While I think it was MONUMENTALLY stupid of those boys to take pictures of the drunk girl and post them on the internet, I must admit, at the risk of sounding cold, I'm not sure I support the rape conviction.
I don't want to "blame" the victim but on the other hand, nobody forced her to drink herself into oblivion. That was her choice, one that any one knows can lead to unintended and negative consequences. But that's not really my point.
My point is that while these boys, who were also drunk, messed with this girl (no penile penetration), I'm not sure I'd call it rape. While the girl never "consented" to relations, nor did she protest or ever utter a "no" or "stop".
My concern is about the NEXT time two drunks kids have at it. Have we come to a point where the girl can now claim rape because she never gave explicit consent? That's going to result in a lot of innocent boys branded for life as a pervert and that's wrong.
I say if you get so drunk you are unable to voice opposition to another horny teenager fingering your girly parts, you should probably focus on drinking less and not the actions of the drunk boy, all of whom deal with raging testosterone. Of course it's rape if the girl says 'no' but now it's rape if the girl doesn't say 'yes'? What next, signed consent before any sexual relations?!
I don't know, if it was my boy that did that, I'd punish him for sure, but I don't see imposing what is effectively a lifetime sentence of 'sex offender' that will ensure he never gets a good job or any opportunity for advancement. It just doesn't seem right to me. If it was my daughter, I wouldn't allow her to blame the boys. I'd reprimand her for being so damn irresponsible in the first place.
What say you? Am I off base here? I admit to not have a well formed opinion on this one. It just doesn't feel right to me.
You've probably all heard about the Ohio juveniles convicted of raping a young woman too intoxicated to give consent. If not, the story is here:
Two teens found guilty in Steubenville rape case - CNN.com
While I think it was MONUMENTALLY stupid of those boys to take pictures of the drunk girl and post them on the internet, I must admit, at the risk of sounding cold, I'm not sure I support the rape conviction.
I don't want to "blame" the victim but on the other hand, nobody forced her to drink herself into oblivion. That was her choice, one that any one knows can lead to unintended and negative consequences. But that's not really my point.
My point is that while these boys, who were also drunk, messed with this girl (no penile penetration), I'm not sure I'd call it rape. While the girl never "consented" to relations, nor did she protest or ever utter a "no" or "stop".
My concern is about the NEXT time two drunks kids have at it. Have we come to a point where the girl can now claim rape because she never gave explicit consent? That's going to result in a lot of innocent boys branded for life as a pervert and that's wrong.
I say if you get so drunk you are unable to voice opposition to another horny teenager fingering your girly parts, you should probably focus on drinking less and not the actions of the drunk boy, all of whom deal with raging testosterone. Of course it's rape if the girl says 'no' but now it's rape if the girl doesn't say 'yes'? What next, signed consent before any sexual relations?!
I don't know, if it was my boy that did that, I'd punish him for sure, but I don't see imposing what is effectively a lifetime sentence of 'sex offender' that will ensure he never gets a good job or any opportunity for advancement. It just doesn't seem right to me. If it was my daughter, I wouldn't allow her to blame the boys. I'd reprimand her for being so damn irresponsible in the first place.
What say you? Am I off base here? I admit to not have a well formed opinion on this one. It just doesn't feel right to me.
We're the boys prosecuted for underage drinking? Was anyone at the party?
All should have been.
No one was. The police focused on the rape and not the drinking.
All I can think right now is, say I'm jaywalking and a man mugs me in the middle of the road, and I press charges on the mugger, then you ask "did the cops give you a ticket for jaywalking?"
*blink blink*
I don't understand why in all other cases, driving, getting into a fight, spending money, being drunk does not excuse or remove you from your responsibilities, yet women can use this excuse to claim that they were raped.
I am not talking about being passed out drunk, that is obvious, but when a woman is drunk the law gives her the option to claim that she was too drunk to make the decision to have sex, but the man, who may be just as drunk, is held liable not only for having sex, but is guilty of having raped her.
When a woman--a young woman, especially--is in such a state, she is subject to predators. It is the responsibility of people in her company to protect her.
Period.
What the hell kind of message are you sending by whining about whether the rape victim was given a ticket for being drunk during her assault?All should have been.
No one was. The police focused on the rape and not the drinking.
All I can think right now is, say I'm jaywalking and a man mugs me in the middle of the road, and I press charges on the mugger, then you ask "did the cops give you a ticket for jaywalking?"
*blink blink*
So you think the largest single contributing factor should be ignored, what kind of a message does that send to other teens? Drink all you want, just don't screw around while you do it, or atleast don't document it with your cell phone.
You can write the Steubenville police an angry letter and demand they give the rape victim her $250 ticket.
Men have no rights in america and they better get used to it.
