Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Nobody said anything about white privilege. What are you going on about? The specific wording of privilege pertains to wealth and to the alleged victim status. Wording that was used in two different contexts by George Will.
U jelly?
The specific wording is about whites checking their privilege, I can point you to multiple threads on this board that back me up. I haven't been through them, but I would not be surprised to find out that you are participating in them, and arguing against the very thing you are now trying to claim isn't a problem.
The problem you have with George Will is that he is right. I know that offends you, and upsets your victim status, but that is your fucking problem, not mine.
George Will: Colleges become the victims of progressivism - The Washington PostColleges and universities are being educated by Washington and are finding the experience excruciating. They are learning that when they say campus victimizations are ubiquitous (micro-aggressions, often not discernible to the untutored eye, are everywhere), and that when they make victimhood a coveted status that confers privileges, victims proliferate. And academias progressivism has rendered it intellectually defenseless now that progressivisms achievement, the regulatory state, has decided it is academias turn to be broken to governments saddle.
Consider the supposed campus epidemic of rape, a.k.a. sexual assault. Herewith, a Philadelphia magazine report about Swarthmore College, where in 2013 a student was in her room with a guy with whom shed been hooking up for three months:
Theyd now decided mutually, she thought just to be friends. When he ended up falling asleep on her bed, she changed into pajamas and climbed in next to him. Soon, he was putting his arm around her and taking off her clothes. I basically said, No, I dont want to have sex with you. And then he said, OK, thats fine and stopped. . . . And then he started again a few minutes later, taking off my panties, taking off his boxers. I just kind of laid there and didnt do anything I had already said no. I was just tired and wanted to go to bed. I let him finish. I pulled my panties back on and went to sleep.
Six weeks later, the woman reported that she had been raped. Now the Obama administration is riding to the rescue of sexual assault victims. It vows to excavate equities from the ambiguities of the hookup culture, this cocktail of hormones, alcohol and the faux sophistication of todays prolonged adolescence of especially privileged young adults.
You wanna try that shit again?
This is about college kangaroo courts when it comes to sexual issues, and their bias against males. How does domestic violence come into play?
colleges have the right to make disciplinary decisions about their students. they are not jailing anyone.
So you do believe in guilty until proven innocent, nice to know.
The specific wording is about whites checking their privilege, I can point you to multiple threads on this board that back me up. I haven't been through them, but I would not be surprised to find out that you are participating in them, and arguing against the very thing you are now trying to claim isn't a problem.
The problem you have with George Will is that he is right. I know that offends you, and upsets your victim status, but that is your fucking problem, not mine.
George Will: Colleges become the victims of progressivism - The Washington PostColleges and universities are being educated by Washington and are finding the experience excruciating. They are learning that when they say campus victimizations are ubiquitous (micro-aggressions, often not discernible to the untutored eye, are everywhere), and that when they make victimhood a coveted status that confers privileges, victims proliferate. And academias progressivism has rendered it intellectually defenseless now that progressivisms achievement, the regulatory state, has decided it is academias turn to be broken to governments saddle.
Consider the supposed campus epidemic of rape, a.k.a. sexual assault. Herewith, a Philadelphia magazine report about Swarthmore College, where in 2013 a student was in her room with a guy with whom shed been hooking up for three months:
Theyd now decided mutually, she thought just to be friends. When he ended up falling asleep on her bed, she changed into pajamas and climbed in next to him. Soon, he was putting his arm around her and taking off her clothes. I basically said, No, I dont want to have sex with you. And then he said, OK, thats fine and stopped. . . . And then he started again a few minutes later, taking off my panties, taking off his boxers. I just kind of laid there and didnt do anything I had already said no. I was just tired and wanted to go to bed. I let him finish. I pulled my panties back on and went to sleep.
Six weeks later, the woman reported that she had been raped. Now the Obama administration is riding to the rescue of sexual assault victims. It vows to excavate equities from the ambiguities of the hookup culture, this cocktail of hormones, alcohol and the faux sophistication of todays prolonged adolescence of especially privileged young adults.
You wanna try that shit again?
The problem you have with George Will is that he is right. I know that offends you, and upsets your victim status, but that is your fucking problem, not mine.
Want to try and explain why he is wrong so I can shove your incredible ignorance down your throat, or do you just want to point to the facts he is slamming you idiots with and cry because you can't deal with the truth?
Come on people. Republicans invaded Iraq because they knew what was best for people they knew nothing about. The Iraqi's are just ungrateful, that's all.
They practice voter suppression because they feel they have the right. After all, this is their country.
In fact, they hate just about every minority because they have the right. Minorities deserve to get peanuts thrown at them because right wingers think they need to "feed the animals".
So is it any wonder, if a right wingers rapes a woman who says no, she's being stupid. She's being ungrateful. They have the right. And any woman who complains is just acting. They know for a fact she "liked it".
This seems to be what I'm getting from the right wing.
Then, as a Conservative, bring the honesty. Building a wall of protection around rapists and blaming the victim is patently dishonest.Perhaps the Right would prefer a burka as a deterrent to rape. Or maybe the Right believes that there is 'legitimate' rape and then there are the rape cases when a woman's body is supposed to 'shut the whole thing down' to prevent pregnancy.
And perhaps one or more posters will try to deny that the Conservatives are waging a war on women.
Perhaps we would prefer an honest discussion of the issues, instead of people beating up straw men.
the right liked the days when, for a man to be charged with domestic violence, he had to cause his victim to have three stitiches or more.
ah... for the good old days when women were raped and men pointed at the clothes they were wearing and said they were "asking for it".
This is about college kangaroo courts when it comes to sexual issues, and their bias against males. How does domestic violence come into play?
colleges have the right to make disciplinary decisions about their students. they are not jailing anyone.
Then take it to the police, not to a kangaroo court where all it takes is a preponderance of the evidence to totally ruin the life of a young man who gets no opportunity to present a defense.
Unless, of course, you don't actually believe in innocent until proven guilty.
Sorry but what?
First off..if a woman is raped? She should go directly to the police so they can collect evidence.
And why would you post some as ridiculous as I don't believe in "innocent until proven guilty".
That patently absurd.
The thread is about how college campuses are ignoring due process, yet you haven't said one word against that practice. Can you explain how it is absurd to assume that, if you do not condemn kangaroo courts that hold people to the guilty until proven innocent standard, you might be seen as supporting them?
Two college students getting drunk and having sex is not rape, its not even assault.
Real rape should be handled by real policemen and real courts, not some university created group that places all the virtue on the woman, and all the blame and responsibility on the man.
if a woman can't consent, it's rape.
if she says no... it's rape.... even if she got naked first.
Being drunk is not being unable to give consent. Being passed out is unable to give consent.
The 2nd standard is completely judgmental if the sex was initially consensual. So you are asking men to be listen distinctly during coitus, or repeatedly ask a woman IS THIS OK IS THIS OK IS THIS OK during penetration from start to finish.
colleges have the right to make disciplinary decisions about their students. they are not jailing anyone.
So you do believe in guilty until proven innocent, nice to know.
How many women have you managed to lure into your mommy's basement under promises of enrichment from the change machine at Wal Mart, @QuantumWindbag ?
George Will: Colleges become the victims of progressivism - The Washington Post
You wanna try that shit again?
The problem you have with George Will is that he is right. I know that offends you, and upsets your victim status, but that is your fucking problem, not mine.
Want to try and explain why he is wrong so I can shove your incredible ignorance down your throat, or do you just want to point to the facts he is slamming you idiots with and cry because you can't deal with the truth?
http://www.usmessageboard.com/media...-george-will-over-rape-claim.html#post9296368
What's the problem, again?
This is two.
Sorry but what?
First off..if a woman is raped? She should go directly to the police so they can collect evidence.
And why would you post some as ridiculous as I don't believe in "innocent until proven guilty".
That patently absurd.
The thread is about how college campuses are ignoring due process, yet you haven't said one word against that practice. Can you explain how it is absurd to assume that, if you do not condemn kangaroo courts that hold people to the guilty until proven innocent standard, you might be seen as supporting them?
No its not.
Two college students getting drunk and having sex is not rape, its not even assault.
Real rape should be handled by real policemen and real courts, not some university created group that places all the virtue on the woman, and all the blame and responsibility on the man.
if a woman can't consent, it's rape.
if she says no... it's rape.... even if she got naked first.
Is it rape if she says no and they stop?
Are there different degrees of rape? This is from the George Will column:
Theyd now decided mutually, she thought just to be friends. When he ended up falling asleep on her bed, she changed into pajamas and climbed in next to him. Soon, he was putting his arm around her and taking off her clothes. I basically said, No, I dont want to have sex with you. And then he said, OK, thats fine and stopped. . . . And then he started again a few minutes later, taking off my panties, taking off his boxers. I just kind of laid there and didnt do anything I had already said no. I was just tired and wanted to go to bed. I let him finish. I pulled my panties back on and went to sleep.
This is rape if rape is simply lack of consent; however, this case of rape seems much less severe than what one would consider to be forcible rape. Usually people think of rape as being a horrible crime, but in the case described above there is very little damage suffered by the rape victum. The incident seems to be more of an inconvenience than a brutality.
And the 500 pound gorilla in the room is that all of this could have been avoided if the girl had asserted herself and kicked the boy out of her bed and made him go home when he was persistent. According to the narrative, going to sleep was more important to her at this time than not being "raped".
Major Newspaper Dumps George Will, Apologizes For 'Offensive' Rape Column | ThinkProgress
Early this month, Washington Post columnist George Will wrote a column claiming that being a rape victim is now a coveted status that college women seek out. Will argued that complaints of rape and sexual assualt on college campus were overblown. He also suggested that women claiming to be raped were delusional.
Wills column is syndicated in newspapers across the country by the Washington Post, which bills him as the most influential writer in America. The St. Louis Post-Dispatch, which has published Wills column for a number of years, has had enough. In a message today to readers, the paper announced they were dropping Will from their paper and apologized for running his column on sexual assault:
The change has been under consideration for several months, but a column published June 5, in which Mr. Will suggested that sexual assault victims on college campuses enjoy a privileged status, made the decision easier. The column was offensive and inaccurate; we apologize for publishing it.
Doesn't matter. The right will go right on lying about rape, rapists and the victims of rape. We see the willful ignorance from the right here every day.
Are there different degrees of rape? This is from the George Will column:
Theyd now decided mutually, she thought just to be friends. When he ended up falling asleep on her bed, she changed into pajamas and climbed in next to him. Soon, he was putting his arm around her and taking off her clothes. I basically said, No, I dont want to have sex with you. And then he said, OK, thats fine and stopped. . . . And then he started again a few minutes later, taking off my panties, taking off his boxers. I just kind of laid there and didnt do anything I had already said no. I was just tired and wanted to go to bed. I let him finish. I pulled my panties back on and went to sleep.
This is rape if rape is simply lack of consent; however, this case of rape seems much less severe than what one would consider to be forcible rape. Usually people think of rape as being a horrible crime, but in the case described above there is very little damage suffered by the rape victum. The incident seems to be more of an inconvenience than a brutality.
And the 500 pound gorilla in the room is that all of this could have been avoided if the girl had asserted herself and kicked the boy out of her bed and made him go home when he was persistent. According to the narrative, going to sleep was more important to her at this time than not being "raped".
Here's the thing.
Men are vastly stronger than women.
One on one? Resistance is essentially futile.
That's why this really needs to be something that is codified and enforced.
No means no.
At whatever point.
