UVA and the alleged frat rape - Rolling Stone backpedals

Re: Rolling Stone on rape at UVA

We'll see. Like someone else posted, I'd sure like to hear Jackie tell the story herself. I have basically no opinion on whether she went through some kind of trauma or not. Her story as told by Rolling Stone is so unbelievable, not just in the details but the core allegations, that I am 99.9 percent sure that it could not have happened. Did something else happen? I don't know. If it did, she's embellished it 100 times over. Why?

 

Re: Rolling Stone on rape at UVA

If you want your brains to not explode, don't check out the Chronicle of Higher Education's forum/thread on this.

http://chronicle.com/forums/index.php/topic,173941.15.html

 

Re: Rolling Stone on rape at UVA

Too many negatives for me to parse. I'm going in!

 

Re: Rolling Stone on rape at UVA

There appears to be a culture of rape supporters in which you absolutely do not question the truth of rape allegation. It seems like dogma. They've probably internalized it to a large degree, but Iwould guess that even if they knew something didn't add up here, they are bound by the cause to express belief no matter what.

 

Re: Rolling Stone on rape at UVA

I think if this story turns out to be completely false, the main effect (if any) will be to slow these judiciary panels that are "investigating" and handing out campus punishments based on no standards whatsoever.

Which would be a good thing. They need to just beef up the local police force and run everything through the professionals. Leave the university to handle the parking tickets that are the extent of their expertise.

 

Re: Rolling Stone on rape at UVA

Another idea I'm tired of, but have heard or read repeated a lot this week, is something along the lines of, "If you committed so-and-so crime, no one would question it." Yes, they would. People argue that something's not an assault or that a shooting was justified in self-defense or that the facts don't support an insider trading conviction. And so on.

 

Re: Rolling Stone on rape at UVA

It's pretty clear that in the fight to be the most anti-rape you can possibly be, some are willing to take indefensible positions:

Here's Ezra Klein, in a column that bore the headline, "Yes Means Yes" is a terrible law, and I completely support it

For that reason, the law is only worth the paper it's written on if some of the critics' fears come true. Critics worry that colleges will fill with cases in which campus boards convict young men (and, occasionally, young women) of sexual assault for genuinely ambiguous situations. Sadly, that's necessary for the law's success. It's those cases — particularly the ones that feel genuinely unclear and maybe even unfair, the ones that become lore in frats and cautionary tales that fathers e-mail to their sons — that will convince men that they better Be Pretty Damn Sure.

http://www.vox.com/2014/10/13/6966847/yes-means-yes-is-a-terrible-bill-and-i-completely-support-it

 

Re: Rolling Stone on rape at UVA

New York Magazine columnist explains that the benefits of believing Jackie, including reform at UVA, simply outweigh the one drawback of believing her if she is found to be lying - "unnecessary wariness about Phi Kappa Psi."

http://nymag.com/thecut/2014/12/doubting-uvas-gang-rape-victim-is-a-trap.html

 

Re: Rolling Stone on rape at UVA

Just wait until the school disbands the football team [cross-thread].

 

Re: Rolling Stone on rape at UVA

Nah, can't put Mike London out of a job.

 

Re: Rolling Stone on rape at UVA

The narrative is true, even if it's not true here, so these nit pickers are doing a real disservice!

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/120465/uva-gang-rape-story-what-make-rolling-stones-mistakes

 

Re: Rolling Stone on rape at UVA

Big Circus: How is the local TV news covering this story (if you're still around. I'm not even sure)

Everyone else: How is the national TV news covering this?