@Gothish520 said:

@Knixon said:

@Gothish520 said:

But how do you know these cases are miscarriages of justice? Do you know every single detail? How do you know the expelled students are innocent? How do you know there was no investigation in each and every case? And if some teacher got fired for calling a him a her, maybe that was just the straw that broke the camel's back. Maybe he was warned or written up and continued with his behavior. Maybe he was a crappy teacher and this was a good way to get him off payroll. After all, they got Al Capone for tax evasion.

I just don't see what you are getting all worked up about. People have the right to go to work and not be subject to other people's nastiness. Again I ask, what is wrong with being professional in a professional setting?

I know because I follow the stories. Students have gotten bounced from a university within days or sometimes even hours, without a chance to present contrary evidence or even make an argument. At some university "courts" the defendant doesn't even have a right to argue. Simply on the basis that "women must be believed."

The gender pronoun stuff is not just "he" or "she." As I've mentioned before, there's a BUNCH of them now. Including, for example, specific pronouns for someone who was born male, wants to be female, but then claims to be a lesbian. Or however that works. So if you see someone with long hair and female features and wearing a dress etc, in your classroom, and you call that person "her," you could be in big trouble if it's really a male getting ready to be a female lesbian. Which requires you address them as "Xer" or something. If THEY think so. Which is another part of the problem: There are no actual rules. So you can't follow some established path to determine what's the "correct" term to use, and your employer will support you if you did it right. Each person gets to decide for themselves. And it can change if they decide to change it. Good luck navigating THAT minefield.

If someone feels they are wrongfully expelled or wrongfully fired, they can file a complaint or a countersuit or something to have their side heard. I find it very hard to believe that people are being kicked out left and right based on one person's word, with no corroborating evidence, statements, etc. If a person chooses to accept their punishment without fighting for their right to be heard, then perhaps there's a reason for that.

There are incidents of men been kicked out of school without corroborating evidence because of accusations brought against them.

There are also countless incidents of Universities completely ignoring a culture of sexual assault of women on their campuses. Michigan State just had a president and athletic director step down over it and Baylor Univ had one the worst neglect of sexual assault scandals in American history recently.

Colleges have to implement some kind of due process that resembles our judicial system ; but the biggest problem we currently have is Universities trying to sweep these incidents under the rug and not deal with them at all.

@CalabrianQueen said:

@Gothish520 said:

@Knixon said:

@Gothish520 said:

But how do you know these cases are miscarriages of justice? Do you know every single detail? How do you know the expelled students are innocent? How do you know there was no investigation in each and every case? And if some teacher got fired for calling a him a her, maybe that was just the straw that broke the camel's back. Maybe he was warned or written up and continued with his behavior. Maybe he was a crappy teacher and this was a good way to get him off payroll. After all, they got Al Capone for tax evasion.

I just don't see what you are getting all worked up about. People have the right to go to work and not be subject to other people's nastiness. Again I ask, what is wrong with being professional in a professional setting?

I know because I follow the stories. Students have gotten bounced from a university within days or sometimes even hours, without a chance to present contrary evidence or even make an argument. At some university "courts" the defendant doesn't even have a right to argue. Simply on the basis that "women must be believed."

The gender pronoun stuff is not just "he" or "she." As I've mentioned before, there's a BUNCH of them now. Including, for example, specific pronouns for someone who was born male, wants to be female, but then claims to be a lesbian. Or however that works. So if you see someone with long hair and female features and wearing a dress etc, in your classroom, and you call that person "her," you could be in big trouble if it's really a male getting ready to be a female lesbian. Which requires you address them as "Xer" or something. If THEY think so. Which is another part of the problem: There are no actual rules. So you can't follow some established path to determine what's the "correct" term to use, and your employer will support you if you did it right. Each person gets to decide for themselves. And it can change if they decide to change it. Good luck navigating THAT minefield.

If someone feels they are wrongfully expelled or wrongfully fired, they can file a complaint or a countersuit or something to have their side heard. I find it very hard to believe that people are being kicked out left and right based on one person's word, with no corroborating evidence, statements, etc. If a person chooses to accept their punishment without fighting for their right to be heard, then perhaps there's a reason for that.

There are incidents of men been kicked out of school without corroborating evidence because of accusations brought against them.

There are also countless incidents of Universities completely ignoring a culture of sexual assault of women on their campuses. Michigan State just had a president and athletic director step down over it and Baylor Univ had one the worst neglect of sexual assault scandals in American history recently.

Colleges have to implement some kind of due process that resembles our judicial system ; but the biggest problem we currently have is Universities trying to sweep these incidents under the rug and not deal with them at all.

I agree, due process is definitely the right of every citizen. And I'm not saying two wrongs make a right by any stretch, but there has a been a long and sordid history of schools, businesses, religious institutions, military organizations, etcetera dismissing, covering up, and ignoring grievous instances of sexual assault and abuse for decades, if not centuries. Perhaps there has been a bit of an overcorrection, after all the years and years of hand-waving this stuff away and allowing predators and just plain hideous people to keep their jobs or positions of power for so long.

@CalabrianQueen said:

There are incidents of men been kicked out of school without corroborating evidence because of accusations brought against them.

There are also countless incidents of Universities completely ignoring a culture of sexual assault of women on their campuses. Michigan State just had a president and athletic director step down over it and Baylor Univ had one the worst neglect of sexual assault scandals in American history recently.

Colleges have to implement some kind of due process that resembles our judicial system ; but the biggest problem we currently have is Universities trying to sweep these incidents under the rug and not deal with them at all.

"Culture of sexual assault" is one of the biggest exaggerations. An exaggeration which has been debunked multiple times, although the media mostly ignores that. Michigan State, for example, did have a big problem. But it was far from involving any kind of large segment of the student population. You could make a more legitimate claim of a "culture of sexual assault" within one department of the university - and a rather small department at that, at least in terms of number of students - but that doesn't prove anything like the whole university suffered from some kind of cancer. Nor would it justify instituting a system of kangaroo courts even if it did.

@Gothish520 said:

I agree, due process is definitely the right of every citizen. And I'm not saying two wrongs make a right by any stretch, but there has a been a long and sordid history of schools, businesses, religious institutions, military organizations, etcetera dismissing, covering up, and ignoring grievous instances of sexual assault and abuse for decades, if not centuries. Perhaps there has been a bit of an overcorrection, after all the years and years of hand-waving this stuff away and allowing predators and just plain hideous people to keep their jobs or positions of power for so long.

None of which justifies trampling the rights of students NOW who had nothing to do with any history of problems going back perhaps before they were born.

@Knixon said:

@Gothish520 said:

I agree, due process is definitely the right of every citizen. And I'm not saying two wrongs make a right by any stretch, but there has a been a long and sordid history of schools, businesses, religious institutions, military organizations, etcetera dismissing, covering up, and ignoring grievous instances of sexual assault and abuse for decades, if not centuries. Perhaps there has been a bit of an overcorrection, after all the years and years of hand-waving this stuff away and allowing predators and just plain hideous people to keep their jobs or positions of power for so long.

None of which justifies trampling the rights of students NOW who had nothing to do with any history of problems going back perhaps before they were born.

I agree with that. But just as you claim that there is no culture of sexual abuse, I claim that there is no gross miscarriages of justice going on in any kind of significant way.

And there certainly has been an extreme culture of sexual abuse proven in many institutions - religion and Hollywood spring to mind. The military as well. Surely you can acknowledge that. I already mentioned the two jerks who finally got fired at my and my husband's places of work - both kept their jobs much longer than they should have, and were able to harass others because of the foot-dragging and hand-waving of management.

I do see it, but I also see that many people seem intent on exaggerating it, often for political reasons. (How many times do claims like "one in three college women will be sexually assaulted" need to be exposed as a fraud? It's another case of a lie traveling around the world before the truth can get its shoes on. And then the lie locks the truth in a closet and does it again...) And once again, I don't believe that somehow (over)correcting for past injustices, excuses mistreating even ONE innocent person now.

In case you have doubts, I would be in favor of very harsh punishment especially for the most severe cases of assault. Probably moreso than you would. (Although not based on the outcomes of what are laughingly called "due process" in many locations now.) But I would also favor very harsh punishment for cases of false accusations. For example, the Duke Lacrosse case. Something along the lines of "attempted murder" seems appropriate, considering the possible outcome of the case if they had succeeded. (Which may very well have happened if the students hadn't been in a better position than most people are, to mount a defense.) And in the Duke Lacrosse case, those charges might be appropriate for the original prosecutor as well, and perhaps others involved too.

Actually, for the Duke Lacrosse case, the false-accusation charges might best be limited to the prosecutor etc. They were far more responsible than the accuser.

@Knixon said:

I do see it, but I also see that many people seem intent on exaggerating it, often for political reasons. (How many times do claims like "one in three college women will be sexually assaulted" need to be exposed as a fraud? It's another case of a lie traveling around the world before the truth can get its shoes on. And then the lie locks the truth in a closet and does it again...) And once again, I don't believe that somehow (over)correcting for past injustices, excuses mistreating even ONE innocent person now.

In case you have doubts, I would be in favor of very harsh punishment especially for the most severe cases of assault. Probably moreso than you would. (Although not based on the outcomes of what are laughingly called "due process" in many locations now.) But I would also favor very harsh punishment for cases of false accusations. For example, the Duke Lacrosse case. Something along the lines of "attempted murder" seems appropriate, considering the possible outcome of the case if they had succeeded. (Which may very well have happened if the students hadn't been in a better position than most people are, to mount a defense.) And in the Duke Lacrosse case, those charges might be appropriate for the original prosecutor as well, and perhaps others involved too.

I don't know the details of that case, I will have to look it up.

I also agree that the "one in three college women" statistic is almost laughably ridiculous. If that number was anywhere near accurate, women would be avoiding college like the plague.

It's important for people to feel safe, it's important to have voices be heard, it's important to take these situations seriously. Because they have been swept under the rug for far too long. But of course I agree that people should not be judged or punished until all the facts are in. Everyone has the right to due process, and if truly innocent people are being vilified, then that is certainly wrong, and anyone who makes a deliberately false accusation should face consequences.

We all need to work together. This does not have to be a "men vs women" thing. I'm not a raging misandrist, or even a calm one I LOVE men - heck, I married one! Bad behavior on both sides should be acknowledged and dealt with - just as victims on both sides have the right to be heard and taken seriously.

Perhaps the single most important thing here, as well as many others - Cindy Sheehan comes to mind - is that people have the right to be heard, but that doesn't mean what they want must necessarily or automatically happen.

Hmm looks like the site format changed on us again, in mid-post. Some things I like, but I hope they're not finished yet. I'm getting a tiny little space to type in, which I don't like.

I also sometimes wonder about the husbands, boyfriends, brothers, fathers, etc of the "all men are guilty!" faction. How do THEY feel about basically being all guilty by association?

@Knixon said:

Perhaps the single most important thing here, as well as many others - Cindy Sheehan comes to mind - is that people have the right to be heard, but that doesn't mean what they want must necessarily or automatically happen.

On that we can agree.

Thank you for a very interesting and enlightening debate, sir.

@Gothish520 said:

@Knixon said:

Perhaps the single most important thing here, as well as many others - Cindy Sheehan comes to mind - is that people have the right to be heard, but that doesn't mean what they want must necessarily or automatically happen.

On that we can agree.

Thank you for a very interesting and enlightening debate, sir.

I hope Erica doesn't see that, I have a reputation to protect!

@Knixon said:

@Gothish520 said:

@Knixon said:

Perhaps the single most important thing here, as well as many others - Cindy Sheehan comes to mind - is that people have the right to be heard, but that doesn't mean what they want must necessarily or automatically happen.

On that we can agree.

Thank you for a very interesting and enlightening debate, sir.

I hope Erica doesn't see that, I have a reputation to protect!

@Knixon said:

I do see it, but I also see that many people seem intent on exaggerating it, often for political reasons. (How many times do claims like "one in three college women will be sexually assaulted" need to be exposed as a fraud? It's another case of a lie traveling around the world before the truth can get its shoes on. And then the lie locks the truth in a closet and does it again...) And once again, I don't believe that somehow (over)correcting for past injustices, excuses mistreating even ONE innocent person now.

In case you have doubts, I would be in favor of very harsh punishment especially for the most severe cases of assault. Probably moreso than you would. (Although not based on the outcomes of what are laughingly called "due process" in many locations now.) But I would also favor very harsh punishment for cases of false accusations. For example, the Duke Lacrosse case. Something along the lines of "attempted murder" seems appropriate, considering the possible outcome of the case if they had succeeded. (Which may very well have happened if the students hadn't been in a better position than most people are, to mount a defense.) And in the Duke Lacrosse case, those charges might be appropriate for the original prosecutor as well, and perhaps others involved too.

Actually, for the Duke Lacrosse case, the false-accusation charges might best be limited to the prosecutor etc. They were far more responsible than the accuser.

I think false accusers deserve a SEVERE punishment. Perjury charges, a fine for the accused' legal fees and a separate punishment that approximates what the falsely accused would have been subject too, if it's proven beyond a reasonable doubt that they lied.

I think that would deter false accusers. Im fine with anything that brings them to justice and protects the integrity of actual victims.

Also, I agree with Erica that the Due process should resemble our judicial system, not the kangaroo courts in place in many Universities.

@ArcticFox12 said:

I think false accusers deserve a SEVERE punishment. Perjury charges, a fine for the accused legal fees and a separate punishment that approximates what the falsely accused would have been subject too, if it's proven beyond a reasonable doubt that they lied.

I think that would deter false accusers. If fine with anything that brings them to justice and protects the integrity of actual victims.

Also, I agree with Erica that the Due process should resemble our judicial system, not the kangaroo courts in place in many Universities.

Due process has different meanings at different levels of the judicial system. In lower-level cases including most if not all civil actions, "preponderance of the evidence" is all that is required. But that's not nearly enough for anything with as much life-changing potential as sexual assault charges. "Beyond a reasonable doubt" should be the standard there.* Which, as unfortunate as it might seem to many people, means that most if not all "she said/he said" cases would not meet the threshold for "guilt" if there's no additional real evidence. Other than what each of them told their friends, etc.

• (Sadly, many people get their lives seriously damaged or even ruined by some lower-level courts such as Justice Of The Peace where they can sentence people up to 6 months or even a year in jail, in addition to imposing large fines, plus sometimes handing other matters such as divorce and custody etc, yet the "judges" in those courts may not be required to have ANY legal training or experience. And nobody seems to be watching them much either, to make sure they actually do their job properly.)

@Knixon said:

@ArcticFox12 said:

I think false accusers deserve a SEVERE punishment. Perjury charges, a fine for the accused legal fees and a separate punishment that approximates what the falsely accused would have been subject too, if it's proven beyond a reasonable doubt that they lied.

I think that would deter false accusers. If fine with anything that brings them to justice and protects the integrity of actual victims.

Also, I agree with Erica that the Due process should resemble our judicial system, not the kangaroo courts in place in many Universities.

Due process has different meanings at different levels of the judicial system. In lower-level cases including most if not all civil actions, "preponderance of the evidence" is all that is required. But that's not nearly enough for anything with as much life-changing potential as sexual assault charges. "Beyond a reasonable doubt" should be the standard there.* Which, as unfortunate as it might seem to many people, means that most if not all "she said/he said" cases would not meet the threshold for "guilt" if there's no additional real evidence. Other than what each of them told their friends, etc.

• (Sadly, many people get their lives seriously damaged or even ruined by some lower-level courts such as Justice Of The Peace where they can sentence people up to 6 months or even a year in jail, in addition to imposing large fines, plus sometimes handing other matters such as divorce and custody etc, yet the "judges" in those courts may not be required to have ANY legal training or experience. And nobody seems to be watching them much either, to make sure they actually do their job properly.)

I meant the highest levels where a decision by 12 jurors beyond a reasonable doubt is a requirement. The criteria for evidence , preponderance, as in civil cases, simply isn't good enough.

The main issue is, it's extremely difficult to prove sexual assault happened without concrete evidence and many women who are victims don't report immediately.