Baseball & Sexual Misconduct Claims

[cheeseman]

5 hours ago, Pistol said:

No, I don't. If a girl reports a sexual assault, my instinct isn't to go, "Well, maybe you shouldn't drink so much so you can make better decisions." That's needlessly cruel.

I get your point but how do you also provide protection for the male.  If the girl and the boy are drunk then neither can make a good decision.  It still seems to me that if one is too drunk to consent then the other one is also.  I know we are in the "#me to" era and all pendulums must swing one way and then the other before a good equilibrium is reached so I guess we are just in the pendulum swinging period now and will have to just live through it.

[SLU_Lax]

I have always wondered how it would be handled if the man responded to a complaint with a complaint.  Title IX is suppose to be gender neutral.  It is not a women's right thing.  It is just that inequality typically impacted women.  The current swing of the pendulum makes that statement not always true.

I would be very curious to see how the complaint was handled.  How is it handled if the man is very drunk and the woman is sober?  How do we make sure that men do not get inebriated and then have inappropriate protections that prevent them from feeling the consequences of their drunken actions?  Lots of questions would begin to be answered if drunk men began to file complaints.

[White Pelican]

9 hours ago, SLU_Lax said:

I have always wondered how it would be handled if the man responded to a complaint with a complaint.  Title IX is suppose to be gender neutral.  It is not a women's right thing.  It is just that inequality typically impacted women.  The current swing of the pendulum makes that statement not always true.

I would be very curious to see how the complaint was handled.  How is it handled if the man is very drunk and the woman is sober?  How do we make sure that men do not get inebriated and then have inappropriate protections that prevent them from feeling the consequences of their drunken actions?  Lots of questions would begin to be answered if drunk men began to file complaints.

I stumbled across this article tonight. They were allegedly both hammered but after some drunken fumbling HE managed to get to the Title IX office FIRST. SHE is suspended indefinitely, apparently until he graduates, according to the article. There is more to it, i.e. ROTC involvement, previous similar encounter involving one of them, possible revenge motive on his part, etc. But in this case, so far, the guy got the girl suspended. Pistol, you're in Cincy, were you aware of this case? Anything to add?

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/06/title-ix-is-too-easy-to-abuse/561650/

[kmbilliken]

Great article. Weathers and Pesty should read it.

[Spoon-Balls]

7 hours ago, White Pelican said:

I stumbled across this article tonight. They were allegedly both hammered but after some drunken fumbling HE managed to get to the Title IX office FIRST. SHE is suspended indefinitely, apparently until he graduates, according to the article. There is more to it, i.e. ROTC involvement, previous similar encounter involving one of them, possible revenge motive on his part, etc. But in this case, so far, the guy got the girl suspended. Pistol, you're in Cincy, were you aware of this case? Anything to add?

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/06/title-ix-is-too-easy-to-abuse/561650/

Someone want to go ahead and email this to the office of the president? Good to know that Title IX administrators are about to be hit hard by the legal system.

[slufanskip]

So, I'm wondering if we can tell the guy who drinks to much has a sexual encounter and then regrets it to stop drinking if he can't control himself. I'm amazed were at a place where it's wrong to tell someone who drinks enough that they make decisions they later regret to stop drinking as that's just being mean. Why should they be held accountable for their own actions when they are drunk … hell, we have the rest of the world to be accountable for them, no reason they should have to do it.

I'm not talking about if they say no or try to stop the encounter, or were passed out and Incapacitated.  I'm talking about going along with it while drunk. The problem isn't the other party. It's you the drunk that can't control yourself. Don't go to the title 9 office, go to the mirror and file a complaint against the person you see in it, go to an AA meeting if needed, just stay away from the title 9 office the only problem is you. 

[SLU_Lax]

8 hours ago, White Pelican said:

I stumbled across this article tonight. They were allegedly both hammered but after some drunken fumbling HE managed to get to the Title IX office FIRST. SHE is suspended indefinitely, apparently until he graduates, according to the article. There is more to it, i.e. ROTC involvement, previous similar encounter involving one of them, possible revenge motive on his part, etc. But in this case, so far, the guy got the girl suspended. Pistol, you're in Cincy, were you aware of this case? Anything to add?

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/06/title-ix-is-too-easy-to-abuse/561650/

That is an amazing find. Thank you!!!

[cheeseman]

8 hours ago, White Pelican said:

I stumbled across this article tonight. They were allegedly both hammered but after some drunken fumbling HE managed to get to the Title IX office FIRST. SHE is suspended indefinitely, apparently until he graduates, according to the article. There is more to it, i.e. ROTC involvement, previous similar encounter involving one of them, possible revenge motive on his part, etc. But in this case, so far, the guy got the girl suspended. Pistol, you're in Cincy, were you aware of this case? Anything to add?

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/06/title-ix-is-too-easy-to-abuse/561650/

This is a great article - it sums the mess up pretty clearly.  The race to the Title 9 office would be funny if it was not so crazy.  As I said in an earlier post - how do you protect one because they were drunk but the other is considered guilty even if they were drunk and unable to make a wise choice.  While this article specifically talks about a public college not able to do this according to the 6th Circuit Court - I would still think that private schools are also lumped in here as well.  I know some think that private schools can do as they please but if they violate a civil right they are not protected - as this Court pointed out that gender discrimination took place in the school's decision process.  Private schools also can lose Federal money if they do not adhere to Federal rules and a private college is not about to lose that money for any reason.  Now the problem it seems is the current Federal law so I guess if that changes and it probably will at some point then the hammer of lost money will be implemented.

[RiseAndGrind]

 As Engel told me, “From a constitutional standpoint a public school violates the equal-protection rights of their students when there is no rational basis to differentiate between male and female students. The court found that even if only one student makes a report, if the school possesses knowledge that both were intoxicated, “the school has an affirmative obligation to investigate both students for misconduct without waiting for a ‘report,’” Engel said.

[dlarry]

9 hours ago, White Pelican said:

I stumbled across this article tonight. They were allegedly both hammered but after some drunken fumbling HE managed to get to the Title IX office FIRST. SHE is suspended indefinitely, apparently until he graduates, according to the article. There is more to it, i.e. ROTC involvement, previous similar encounter involving one of them, possible revenge motive on his part, etc. But in this case, so far, the guy got the girl suspended. Pistol, you're in Cincy, were you aware of this case? Anything to add?

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/06/title-ix-is-too-easy-to-abuse/561650/

Seems like the morning after walk of shame has been replaced by the morning after race to the  tittle 9 office.

[Pistol]

14 hours ago, White Pelican said:

I stumbled across this article tonight. They were allegedly both hammered but after some drunken fumbling HE managed to get to the Title IX office FIRST. SHE is suspended indefinitely, apparently until he graduates, according to the article. There is more to it, i.e. ROTC involvement, previous similar encounter involving one of them, possible revenge motive on his part, etc. But in this case, so far, the guy got the girl suspended. Pistol, you're in Cincy, were you aware of this case? Anything to add?

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/06/title-ix-is-too-easy-to-abuse/561650/

I had heard about this case back in fall/winter when it was new but forgot about it and hadn't seen this article yet. Thanks for sharing.

[Pistol]

6 hours ago, slufanskip said:

So, I'm wondering if we can tell the guy who drinks to much has a sexual encounter and then regrets it to stop drinking if he can't control himself. I'm amazed were at a place where it's wrong to tell someone who drinks enough that they make decisions they later regret to stop drinking as that's just being mean. Why should they be held accountable for their own actions when they are drunk … hell, we have the rest of the world to be accountable for them, no reason they should have to do it.

I'm not talking about if they say no or try to stop the encounter, or were passed out and Incapacitated.  I'm talking about going along with it while drunk. The problem isn't the other party. It's you the drunk that can't control yourself. Don't go to the title 9 office, go to the mirror and file a complaint against the person you see in it, go to an AA meeting if needed, just stay away from the title 9 office the only problem is you. 

I can't tell if you're missing the point intentionally or not. But then again, I'm the idiot, right?

[brianstl]

Why is anyone accepting as fact anything that Weathers put in her report?  If S1 did give everyone enough reason not to trust Weathers findings, S2 should have done the trick.

[brianstl]

7 hours ago, RiseAndGrind said:

 As Engel told me, “From a constitutional standpoint a public school violates the equal-protection rights of their students when there is no rational basis to differentiate between male and female students. The court found that even if only one student makes a report, if the school possesses knowledge that both were intoxicated, “the school has an affirmative obligation to investigate both students for misconduct without waiting for a ‘report,’” Engel said.

Since Title IX applies to public funding to schools, the same rules should apply to private institutions.  If a private institution doesn’t want to give equal protection to both parties, that is fine.  They should just lose any federal money they get.

[gobillsgo]

At this rate we should just shut down every university. Because by the standards of Title IX, every single student, male or female, has been both a victim and perpetrator of sexual assault. 

[SLU_Lax]

2 hours ago, Pistol said:

I can't tell if you're missing the point intentionally or not. But then again, I'm the idiot, right?

To be fair to Pistol and Skip, I think you both have a point. 

If someone’s drinking is putting them in compromising positions, they should consider slowing down or taking other appropriate measures. Of course every situation is unique and nuanced.  I am NOT saying that is what happened here  

That said, someone’s drinking (or attire) provides absolutely no moral justification to someone who is preying on them.  It is 100% wrong and cannot be justified by trying to pin any amount of responsibility on the victim. 

There are two people involved. Just because a victim may reevaluate some decisions that led them to a bad situation, that reevaluation has nothing to do with the perpetrator. 

[cheeseman]

1 hour ago, brianstl said:

Why is anyone accepting as fact anything that Weathers put in her report?  If S1 did give everyone enough reason not to trust Weathers findings, S2 should have done the trick.

I was not aware that Weathers was part of S1

[slufanskip]

7 hours ago, Pistol said:

I can't tell if you're missing the point intentionally or not. But then again, I'm the idiot, right?

please spell out what point it is that I'm missing

[brianstl]

4 hours ago, cheeseman said:

I was not aware that Weathers was part of S1

 S1 was one of the first cases she handled as Director of Student Responsibility and Community Standards.

[majerus mojo]

6 hours ago, brianstl said:

Why is anyone accepting as fact anything that Weathers put in her report?  If S1 did give everyone enough reason not to trust Weathers findings, S2 should have done the trick.

Goodwin defended himself in regards to the S2 claims. If this player wants to rebuff the claims that he admitted to actions without consent, you’d think he’d do the same. 

The slope this board is going down defending this guy, who’s apparently been accused multiple times, just because of the S2 f—ups, is gross imo (if not unwarranted, thanks Fred!).

If you want to reserve judgment, there are definitely more tasteful ways to do that then what I’ve seen in this thread. 

 

[kshoe]

9 hours ago, majerus mojo said:

Goodwin defended himself in regards to the S2 claims. If this player wants to rebuff the claims that he admitted to actions without consent, you’d think he’d do the same. 

The slope this board is going down defending this guy, who’s apparently been accused multiple times, just because of the S2 f—ups, is gross imo (if not unwarranted, thanks Fred!).

If you want to reserve judgment, there are definitely more tasteful ways to do that then what I’ve seen in this thread. 

 

Every basketball player defended himself during S2. That was the entire appeals process remember?

The real issue is that every situation is different yet SLU uses the same code words in all scenarios and it’s impossible from the outside to determine if someone is a real slime ball or just got caught in drunken sex. 

It’s akin to everyone getting the same speeding ticket whether they are going 6 miles over the limit on the highway (who cares) or 35 over on a residential area (very dangerous).

[majerus mojo]

4 hours ago, kshoe said:

Every basketball player defended himself during S2. That was the entire appeals process remember?

The real issue is that every situation is different yet SLU uses the same code words in all scenarios and it’s impossible from the outside to determine if someone is a real slime ball or just got caught in drunken sex. 

It’s akin to everyone getting the same speeding ticket whether they are going 6 miles over the limit on the highway (who cares) or 35 over on a residential area (very dangerous).

In reference to Goodwin, I meant more along the lines of the sit down with Frank (and maybe a statement or something will come down the road), but yea I agree with most here. Frustrating stuff

[billikenfan05]

https://www.ajc.com/news/breaking-news/report-dismisses-claim-georgia-tech-coach-sexually-assaulted-woman/0AZLIQUsp5yQdySoy2w9BK/

[Tilkowsky]

On June 3, 2018 at 1:38 PM, majerus mojo said:

In reference to Goodwin, I meant more along the lines of the sit down with Frank (and maybe a statement or something will come down the road), but yea I agree with most here. Frustrating stuff

Sitting down with Cusamano (who is a moron) is the last thing Goodwin needs to do.

I guess you want the juicy details?

Goodwin needs to play basketball and go to school and thank his lucky stars X his suspension wasn't longer.

[willie]

1 hour ago, Tilkowsky said:

Sitting down with Cusamano (who is a moron) is the last thing Goodwin needs to do.

I guess you want the juicy details?

Goodwin needs to play basketball and go to school and thank his lucky stars X his suspension wasn't longer.

You really are an idiot. Frank is great.