[Suits]

(12-23-2014 10:20 PM)Hotwheels Wrote:  

Are there not already laws on the books concerning bringing false charges against innocent individuals?

Enforce them.

You don't need a special false rape law. Just charge a few of these nutjobs and it will get national news, making others hesitate before attempting to ruin a man's life for no cause other than her feelings and the promotion of their warped feminist ideal.

It's generally called "making a false police report" and in the Anglosphere, the penalties are generally insignificant in comparison to the public humiliation and damage to employment possibilities that a man will suffer if he is accused of rape, even if he never spends a day in a legitimate court room.

[wolf]

Even though the German kid is most likely innocent he is not going to take any legal action or make any significant opposition statements.

Let me explain why.

He still has to graduate. Doing any of the above can get him kicked out of school. You can sue all you want but if the school kicks him out before he graduates he will not have that Columbia diploma.

I'm not going to go in depth into my situation but I wrote two complaints against a person, because practically almost was nothing being done about it. After the second one they were ready to kick me out because I was pushing them to at least do something about it. Without outside intervention I would of not been able to finish.

Then my parents wrote the school a nice letter pointing out step by step what's wrong with the situation, and sent it out to all the people that were aware of the situation.



Everything changed in a matter of a couple of days. Situation got solved right away, and I didn't get kicked out.

The fact that this German's parents got involved means the school can't kick him out because he was accused of something. Kids could be disregarded all day, but you really don't know his parents or who his parents know.

It's like a kid being bullied in a 3rd world country army and blows his brains out. Then it turns out his uncle is a general.

[TheWastelander]

(12-23-2014 10:34 PM)The Lizard of Oz Wrote:  

The ninth commandment:

Quote:

Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.

Deuteronomy 19:16

Quote:

If a false witness rise up against any man to testify against him [that which is] wrong;

Then both the men, between whom the controversy [is], shall stand before the LORD, before the priests and the judges, which shall be in those days;

And the judges shall make diligent inquisition: and, behold, [if] the witness [be] a false witness, [and] hath testified falsely against his brother;

Then shall ye do unto him, as he had thought to have done unto his brother: so shalt thou put the evil away from among you.

She should get whatever prison sentence he would've likely gotten had he been tried and convicted of rape.

Same thing with Jackie and the other false accusers.

Harsh punishment for this shit is the only way to curb it.

[TravelerKai]

(12-23-2014 10:02 PM)The Lizard of Oz Wrote:  

(12-23-2014 09:13 AM)TravelerKai Wrote:  

Seamus may not have perfectly articulated what he may have been trying to get at

Au contraire, TK. I think Seamus has articulated his concern trolling perfectly well, hiding behind a mock-reasonable tone and trash legalese terms like "probative" to sow doubt and confusion where there is none to be found.

As far as fucking feminists -- why not, if there is a hot "feminist" piece of snatch you can nail, I say go ahead and hate-fuck her to your heart's content.

Just do it sober and record everything.

He was trying to explain that the guy may not have done something not quite optimal in his approaches and that one bang. Poor game, socially awkward, bad moves, poor situational judgement , etc. He just did not articulate that correctly with the correct level of detail and nuance. He isn't a bad member. Alot of our younger members need to be coached up and learn. That's what vets like you are here for. Roosh gave him a time out and he accepted it like a man and he is in great spirits. If he isn't harboring any ill will towards you or anyone else here, you shouldn't either. He's taking his lumps, let it go.

I wish you guys would stop advocating the recording of stuff. That can make things much worst than what they would be. The sober part I agree with, although many here hate that idea. I drink hard liquor somewhat regularly, but while dating or actively nightgaming I would not drink a drop, or buy them more than 1 if that, and it served me well enough. Taping sex with women will not save you from persecution and might open up an additional possible felony charge depending upon the state you live in. If he taped them having sex, the university would have kicked him out with the quickness.

Some of the RVF lawyers have already written mini sheets and posts on what you can do to protect yourself, like Sp5. Please correct me if I am wrong, but I do not recall him instructing others to record sex.

The only recordings I can think of off hand that might work, would be security cameras on your house perimeter that would show people coming in and leaving, and if she left your house kissing and hugging on you, her rape claims could be seen as bullshit, but depending upon the state you probably need a sign in front of your house saying, this premises is being recorded or something like that.

[The Lizard of Oz]

(12-24-2014 08:02 AM)TravelerKai Wrote:  

He was trying to explain that the guy may not have done something not quite optimal in his approaches and that one bang. Poor game, socially awkward, bad moves, poor situational judgement , etc.

TK, that is not what he was trying to do. He wrote that this is a "tough" case, and that "he wouldn't be surprised" if this poor dude was "guilty of something". Please go back and reread the actual posts. I have no idea if he is a "bad member" or not but his posts in this thread were bad, not merely inarticulate (in fact they were articulate enough). There is really nothing more to say.

(12-24-2014 08:02 AM)TravelerKai Wrote:  

I wish you guys would stop advocating the recording of stuff. That can make things much worst than what they would be.

....

Some of the RVF lawyers have already written mini sheets and posts on what you can do to protect yourself, like Sp5. Please correct me if I am wrong, but I do not recall him instructing others to record sex.

This makes no sense to me. I don't see how having a recording could possibly "make things worse". At worst, if you don't have a chance to use the recording, you don't use it. But if you have video, audio, or text evidence of enthusiastic consent given by the female before, during, or after the act, it can only help you. A prosecutor will have a hard time bringing a case to trial if he knows that there is hard evidence that the main witness is lying. Even if the recording was obtained illegally by you, this does not preclude it from being evidence -- you are not the police or the authorities, so the rules for evidence being inadmissible without a warrant do not apply. At worst, you might face some charges of illegal recording which are very, very different from charges of rape or sexual assault.

As far as Sp5's extremely valuable thread/data sheet. Thank you for bringing it up. This is the thread in question:

http://www.rooshvforum.network/thread-29563.html

It is true that recording is not mentioned in Sp5's OP. I noticed that at the time and made the following follow-up post very early in that thread. Look at the last paragraph, suggesting recording enthusiastic consent whenever possible. There were no objections to this downthread from Sp5 or anyone else. If anyone has an objection, I'd like to know what it would be.

(10-31-2013 05:40 PM)The Lizard of Oz Wrote:  

Thanks for posting this Sp5. Few subjects are grimmer or more relevant.

Quote:

The U.S. Congress enacted a burden-shifting rule on consent defenses for the US military a few years ago, but it got shot down by a military judge on US Constitutional grounds.

I did not know this and it is chilling to find out. Damn.

Quote:

When I asked why, thinking that he was tired of sordid child molestation charges, brutal rapes and the like, he told me “I am tired of all these made up false charges we have to support.” And proceed to tell me stories of women who had made charges of rape obviously motivated by revenge or money, which were still brought forward by the DA for political reasons. So we ended up agreeing and swapping stories. This is the environment we live in.

This does not surprise me in the least. Prosecutors are pressing these charges knowing full well that they're made up. What sleaze.

Question: what can we do to make them think twice? Prosecutors have to start paying a price for bringing these false charges to trial.

Quote:

Rape by strangers is one of the rarest crimes, even in big dense cities.

Indeed. Few people really understand this.

Quote:

From her point of view, once she makes charges against you, she is going to be embraced by the state’s punitive and therapeutic institutions. She will have a “victim advocate” assigned to commiserate with her. She will meet with friendly prosecutors and police officers willing to believe her, even bending over backwards to do so. Her friends will sympathize with her.

You, on the other hand, are a cockroach which the power of the state is poised to bring the hammer down on.

Truer words were never spoken.

Given this, it seems to me that the key is to protect yourself well ahead of time. Ideally, have video and text records of enthusiastic consent for as many sexual encounters as possible. If you cannot obtain video evidence, elicit texts, emails, etc that reveal gushing consent after the fact. I feel that it would be much more difficult to press charges in such a context. Of course this applies more to outright sexual assault accusations and less to the even more frequent if somewhat less life-destroying domestic violence/restraining order cases.

[TravelerKai]

(12-24-2014 01:58 PM)The Lizard of Oz Wrote:  

(12-24-2014 08:02 AM)TravelerKai Wrote:  

He was trying to explain that the guy may not have done something not quite optimal in his approaches and that one bang. Poor game, socially awkward, bad moves, poor situational judgement , etc.

TK, that is not what he was trying to do. He wrote that this is a "tough" case, and that "he wouldn't be surprised" if this poor dude was "guilty of something". Please go back and reread the actual posts. I have no idea if he is a "bad member" or not but his posts in this thread were bad, not merely inarticulate (in fact they were articulate enough). There is really nothing more to say.

(12-24-2014 08:02 AM)TravelerKai Wrote:  

I wish you guys would stop advocating the recording of stuff. That can make things much worst than what they would be.

....

Some of the RVF lawyers have already written mini sheets and posts on what you can do to protect yourself, like Sp5. Please correct me if I am wrong, but I do not recall him instructing others to record sex.

This makes no sense to me. I don't see how having a recording could possibly "make things worse". At worst, if you don't have a chance to use the recording, you don't use it. But if you have video, audio, or text evidence of enthusiastic consent given by the female before, during, or after the act, it can only help you. A prosecutor will have a hard time bringing a case to trial if he knows that there is hard evidence that the main witness is lying. Even if the recording was obtained illegally by you, this does not preclude it from being evidence -- you are not the police or the authorities, so the rules for evidence being inadmissible without a warrant do not apply. At worst, you might face some charges of illegal recording which are very, very different from charges of rape or sexual assault.

As far as Sp5's extremely valuable thread/data sheet. Thank you for bringing it up. This is the thread in question:

http://www.rooshvforum.network/thread-29563.html

It is true that recording is not mentioned in Sp5's OP. I noticed that at the time and made the following follow-up post very early in that thread. Look at the last paragraph, suggesting recording enthusiastic consent whenever possible. There were no objections to this downthread from Sp5 or anyone else. If anyone has an objection, I'd like to know what it would be.

(10-31-2013 05:40 PM)The Lizard of Oz Wrote:  

Thanks for posting this Sp5. Few subjects are grimmer or more relevant.

Quote:

The U.S. Congress enacted a burden-shifting rule on consent defenses for the US military a few years ago, but it got shot down by a military judge on US Constitutional grounds.

I did not know this and it is chilling to find out. Damn.

Quote:

When I asked why, thinking that he was tired of sordid child molestation charges, brutal rapes and the like, he told me “I am tired of all these made up false charges we have to support.” And proceed to tell me stories of women who had made charges of rape obviously motivated by revenge or money, which were still brought forward by the DA for political reasons. So we ended up agreeing and swapping stories. This is the environment we live in.

This does not surprise me in the least. Prosecutors are pressing these charges knowing full well that they're made up. What sleaze.

Question: what can we do to make them think twice? Prosecutors have to start paying a price for bringing these false charges to trial.

Quote:

Rape by strangers is one of the rarest crimes, even in big dense cities.

Indeed. Few people really understand this.

Quote:

From her point of view, once she makes charges against you, she is going to be embraced by the state’s punitive and therapeutic institutions. She will have a “victim advocate” assigned to commiserate with her. She will meet with friendly prosecutors and police officers willing to believe her, even bending over backwards to do so. Her friends will sympathize with her.

You, on the other hand, are a cockroach which the power of the state is poised to bring the hammer down on.

Truer words were never spoken.

Given this, it seems to me that the key is to protect yourself well ahead of time. Ideally, have video and text records of enthusiastic consent for as many sexual encounters as possible. If you cannot obtain video evidence, elicit texts, emails, etc that reveal gushing consent after the fact. I feel that it would be much more difficult to press charges in such a context. Of course this applies more to outright sexual assault accusations and less to the even more frequent if somewhat less life-destroying domestic violence/restraining order cases.

I contend that I understood what he was trying to say, poorly worded or not, based on other things he has posted before, and that is all for now. I know he is not an SJW and that is enough for me. You are a very difficult person to go point for point against and he just learned it the hard way. Not a big deal in the grand scheme of things.

Enthusiastic consent is basically what I provided in the example about a girl leaving your place hugging you, etc. and catching that on camera. Outside of having your own crib to have a set up like this, I am not sure how much guys living in dorms can do aside from taking selfie videos or something else with various devices.

A college student will get kicked out for filming sex scenes. There is no disputing that. The legal part of it is still a risk and you must understand that if you bring one video of you fucking a person that claims they were raped by you, the police might ask you to turn around and put your hands behind your back on the spot. Audio would be just as bad as well. Then they will go get a warrant and seize the rest of your "Protective Evidences of Non-Rape" from your house/apartment, your harddrives, everything. Your suggestion of filming everything is a overly emotional response to something that is equally overly dramatic. You cannot always fight fire with fire.

[The Lizard of Oz]

(12-24-2014 02:20 PM)TravelerKai Wrote:  

Enthusiastic consent is basically what I provided in the example about a girl leaving your place hugging you, etc. and catching that on camera. Outside of having your own crib to have a set up like this, I am not sure how much guys living in dorms can do aside from taking selfie videos or something else with various devices.

A college student will get kicked out for filming sex scenes. There is no disputing that. The legal part of it is still a risk and you must understand that if you bring one video of you fucking a person that claims they were raped by you, the police might ask you to turn around and put your hands behind your back on the spot. Audio would be just as bad as well. Then they will go get a warrant and seize the rest of your "Protective Evidences of Non-Rape" from your house/apartment, your harddrives, everything. Your suggestion of filming everything is a overly emotional response to something that is equally overly dramatic. You cannot always fight fire with fire.

I'd like to hear a lawyer's opinion about this.

No one "brings a video" to the police. You never talk to the police, period. You tell them nothing except what your lawyer allows you to say.

You keep recordings, video, audio, texts etc on file and securely backed up. Your lawyer has access to this evidence at all times and he decides if and when to use it. If there is no need to use it, it never gets used.

There is absolutely no way that having video and audio evidence at your disposal, to use as your lawyer sees fit, can hurt -- at least I don't see it. However, if there is a possibility of your being actually prosecuted on rape or sexual assault charges -- not a hearing at a college kangaroo court but real charges -- and you have hard physical evidence that the charges are false and your accuser is lying, that can make a difference between the charges being thrown out and your life being ruined. A difference that might as well be the difference between life and death.

[Dusty]

Ironically, a young guy could be railroaded into being convicted of rape based on a false charge and end up in place where we will likely be really raped. Violently raped. A young pretty boy middle class soft college boy has a big target on his ass in prison.

There is a shit ton more rape in prison than there is on a college campus.

False rape can lead to real rape.

[The Lizard of Oz]

(12-24-2014 02:43 PM)Dusty Wrote:  

There is a shit ton more rape in prison than there is on a college campus.

Understatement of the century.

[TravelerKai]

(12-24-2014 02:33 PM)The Lizard of Oz Wrote:  

(12-24-2014 02:20 PM)TravelerKai Wrote:  

Enthusiastic consent is basically what I provided in the example about a girl leaving your place hugging you, etc. and catching that on camera. Outside of having your own crib to have a set up like this, I am not sure how much guys living in dorms can do aside from taking selfie videos or something else with various devices.

A college student will get kicked out for filming sex scenes. There is no disputing that. The legal part of it is still a risk and you must understand that if you bring one video of you fucking a person that claims they were raped by you, the police might ask you to turn around and put your hands behind your back on the spot. Audio would be just as bad as well. Then they will go get a warrant and seize the rest of your "Protective Evidences of Non-Rape" from your house/apartment, your harddrives, everything. Your suggestion of filming everything is a overly emotional response to something that is equally overly dramatic. You cannot always fight fire with fire.

I'd like to hear a lawyer's opinion about this.

No one "brings a video" to the police. You never talk to the police, period. You tell them nothing except what your lawyer allows you to say.

You keep recordings, video, audio, texts etc on file and securely backed up. Your lawyer has access to this evidence at all times and he decides if and when to use it. If there is no need to use it, it never gets used.

There is absolutely no way that having video and audio evidence at your disposal, to use as your lawyer sees fit, can hurt -- at least I don't see it. However, if there is a possibility of your being actually prosecuted on rape or sexual assault charges -- not a hearing at a college kangaroo court but real charges -- and you have hard physical evidence that the charges are false and your accuser is lying, that can make a difference between the charges being thrown out and your life being ruined. A difference that might as well be the difference between life and death.

Some states are 2 party states and some are not, in regards to recording another person. An opinion from a RVF lawyer would be good to help clarify some things.

[Vigo_the_Carpathian]

(12-24-2014 03:28 PM)TravelerKai Wrote:  

Some states are 2 party states and some are not, in regards to recording another person. An opinion from a RVF lawyer would be good to help clarify some things.

I am a lawyer, but I haven't practiced in years, let alone ever touched anything criminal, so take that for what it's worth.

The real problem here is that there's an odd tension between:

1) Wanting higher penalties for false rape reporting (which I wholeheartedly endorse), and;

2) Wanting more chicks to go to the cops when they're actually raped, as infrequently as that may be.

The problem is, higher penalties for false reports will cause fewer chicks to report real rapes, which will just feed fire to the SJW/feminist talking points about "1 in 5," etc.

I've thought quite a while about a "good enough" solution that works for everyone. I think I have a pretty good idea:

Make schools liable for the slanderous/libelous statements of their students

Let's face it, a lot of what these falsely-accused guys are up against are rumor and gossip--the tools of the trade of chicks and white knights. If these rumors and gossip become widespread enough to rise to the level of slander or libel, with real, tangible effects on the accused, and the school is liable, well, then they'd likely do all they could to nip this shit in the bud before it spread like wildfire, right?

The kangaroo courts would be forced to (at the very least) adhere to basic constitutional ideas of due process and representation. Even better, they'd flush out all of the ivory tower wanna-be judges with no legal training.

Accusers would be properly vetted by the schools before going forward--presumably, if every rape accusation was a potential $30 million Duke Lacrosse/UVA-level fuckup by the administration, the school would only move forward with/refer these cases to the cops when there's actual probable cause. Instead of SJW-type gender studies "advisers," schools would likely employ former cops and prosecutors as "advisers" who could separate the false claims from the chicks that actually should go and get more evidence taken after an actual rape.

If you could add something allowing the falsely-accused to recoup at least half of 30 years worth of the "average starting salary" posted by the school (inflated as that is already), then you might REALLY see some changes in a lot of the shittier aspects of college.

The only weakness in this plan? Duke lost $30 million on the lacrosse case. UVA stands to lose a decent amount in this Rolling Stone fiasco, as well. Instead of shutting some of these liberal idiot professors up, these results seem to embolden them. Maybe it's lack of loyalty to their own employer (who they likely view as an extension of the corporate bastion of oppression), or maybe they're just fucked in the head.

The deterrent effect isn't quite there...yet. My counter-argument would be that if schools would start having to pay out $30 million here, $50 million there, they'd reign in these SJW profs and tell them to cool the fuck out. Then, and only then, will we start to see real change.

Merry Fucking Christmas, fellas...

Vigo

[Sp5]

My fitst thought is that recording everything is extreme. It's better to screen women for crazy. You never really know who's crazy, though.

In two party states it would be illegal. On the other hand, anything would be better than a rape conviction.

You can build a record of consent with texts, pictures together, being close in places with surveillance cameras, as TravelerKai suggested, your trusted friends as witnesses.

If you did decide to record, the usual rule applies: don't get caught. Concealment and absolute data security.

[Seamus]

I wasn't planning on posting in this thread again, but after some reflection I feel compelled to.

Whether intentionally or not, a lot of posters have seriously mischaracterized the argument I was making. Reading back, maybe I wasn't clear enough, so I'll try again. In my original post (http://tinyurl.com/lekru9d) I made three basic points:

1) We don't know what happened, although three separate accusations obviously looks bad, BUT 2) clearly there is no substantial evidence against this guy, so 3) the fact he's had his reputation ruined while his accuser has been celebrated is a grave injustice.

That's it. I never once said I thought he was guilty, or that the women couldn't have lied. I've made the exact same three points in real-world conversation and been called an MRA rape-apologist.

Yet here guys relentlessly attacked me on point number 1, to the extent I felt compelled to defend the very idea that multiple separate accusations of anything is generally a bad sign (i.e. that across the broad spectrum of cases, multiple accusations will have a positive correlation with guilt). That shouldn't be a controversial argument, that should be common-sense.

Again, that's not saying this guy is guilty of anything. If I had to guess, I'd say he had bad / incongruous game, maybe on account of his foreigner status as some posters have suggested. I have a Dutch buddy who couldn't understand why girls got pissed when he grabbed their asses in clubs, since that was what he did back in Amsterdam. But he got slapped a couple of times and adjusted his game, as this guy will have to do as well.

None of that is the point of this story though, or of my original post. We can't prove his innocence or even know it conclusively (despite what guys are claiming), yet that's not what matters. What matters is that they couldn't carry the (reduced) burden of proof concerning his guilt and yet still he's been effectively judged and sentenced for life. The point is we live in a culture that's all too happy to forever paint men as rapists and women as victims without due process. This isn't about an individual case, it's about the systemic failure of society to support these accused men. If it came to light tomorrow that he was in fact guilty, it wouldn't change anything. The “rape culture” hysteria would still have victimized him to this point.

If the above arguments make me a retarded feminist troll mangina who probably hasn't gotten laid much - all of which I've been called in this thread - then so be it. I love the RVF, but if guys can't engage critically and unemotionally on subjects we all care about then all we have is an echo chamber.

Merry Christmas and happy hunting gents. I'm off to the DR. Hopefully I won't be banned when I get back.

[BortimusPrime]

True, three INDEPENDENT accusations correlate quite strongly with guilt. However these woman went to the campus authorities within days of each other. This is why cops separate suspects before interrogating them, because if they're together they can fix their story, which is what it looks like happened here.

It's gotta be that Ms. Asianjewowitz is the queen bee who pushed the other girls into such a suspicious-looking bevy of complaints. We've seen how dumb sjws are with their attempts to manufacture this kind of shit with the antigamergate people sending themselves pretend death threats on twitter where the screenshot shows the threat coming in five seconds before the person logged off the sockpuppet into their own account.

[placer]

I think we are very different from the feminists and manginas posting on Jezebel. If a woman claims to be raped there, her word is the gospel truth, and you're a troll/idiot/whatever shaming word we can think of if you doubt any rape accusation. It goes further: You're a bad person if you try and make a woman at all responsible for rape. If you drink heavily, go home, and take off you clothes in front of a man, he is still 100% responsible for the rape because feminists are above taking any responsibility for their actions.

I am not going to automatically say that any man accused of rape is innocent. Rapes really do happen and sometimes men with bad game do things to make girls feel uncomfortable. And I am not going to absolve a man of any responsibility if they treat women poorly. This forum is about taking responsibility, not expecting the fairy godmother to magically make the world "rape free" or whatever.

From reading the media accounts of what happened to this man, it appears the women started hating on him when they found out he was screwing around. His problem was not bad game. His problem was not being clear with the women that he didn't want an exclusive relationship with them.

[Days of Broken Arrows]

(12-25-2014 10:11 PM)placer Wrote:  

I think we are very different from the feminists and manginas posting on Jezebel. If a woman claims to be raped there, her word is the gospel truth, and you're a troll/idiot/whatever shaming word we can think of if you doubt any rape accusation. It goes further: You're a bad person if you try and make a woman at all responsible for rape. If you drink heavily, go home, and take off you clothes in front of a man, he is still 100% responsible for the rape because feminists are above taking any responsibility for their actions.

I am not going to automatically say that any man accused of rape is innocent. Rapes really do happen and sometimes men with bad game do things to make girls feel uncomfortable. And I am not going to absolve a man of any responsibility if they treat women poorly. This forum is about taking responsibility, not expecting the fairy godmother to magically make the world "rape free" or whatever.

From reading the media accounts of what happened to this man, it appears the women started hating on him when they found out he was screwing around. His problem was not bad game. His problem was not being clear with the women that he didn't want an exclusive relationship with them.

"If you drink heavily, go home, and take off you clothes in front of a man, he is still 100% responsible for the rape because feminists are above taking [i]any responsibility for their actions."[/i]

What we're dealing with here is something different and more insidious. It's regret rape. It's "not-in-the-mood" rape. It's "we had mutual drunk sex, but now YOU'RE guilty" rape.

It's coming very close to saying that women can rescind consent for any sexual act at any time for any reason. Men say all sorts of things to get sex. Years ago if the woman decided she made a bad choice she learned to judge better in the future. Now she can get litigious -- and think it's never her fault.

This kind of thinking will be disastrous for all relationships if it's absorbed into the law wholesale. Being married (for example), there are a lot of times one partner won't be in the mood, but will go along because that's what you do. Relationships are never exactly 50/50. Sometimes they're 80/20 on way, but the reverse of that some other day.

To claim that it's sexual assault unless the partner is 100 percent "enthusiastic" shows a complete misunderstanding of how relationships are often balanced. It also allows the state to examine and regulate the minutia of all sexual relationships. Allow this in colleges and it will change the game for marriage and dating.

Worst of all, it allows women to behave like children, basically saying "You'll do it my way on my terms OR ELSE." No relationship could ever survive these terms -- whether it's a business relationship, a friendship, or a sexual relationship. This puts men at the mercy of women -- just what feminists and their legal and media lackeys want.

It's in this sociological context in which this guy might have found himself. Maybe he was a bit too aggressive and the women thought "What the hell," then had second thoughts -- either on their own or after he acted rudely later on. Or after they conferred. This is part of the deal with any relationship. To try and litigate that is tyrannical.

Yes, where there's smoke there's fire. But considering the atmosphere on college campuses in regard to all this, there is a good chance the smoke is being generated by the women, not him. If this were 1985, I'd be likely to say "Hm, he probably did something." But it's a different era now, and with all we know about college hysteria and false accusations, that's not my instinct.

[Dusty]

I'm not sure if this was posted before, but here are some of the details about the incident (from a sympathetic article):

http://columbiaspectator.com/news/2014/0...ult-police

Quote:

According to the police report, Sulkowicz had had consensual sex with Nungesser twice before the alleged rape. Sulkowicz said that on the night of Aug. 27, 2012, she and Nungesser started to have consensual sex again, when suddenly things changed.

According to the report, Nungesser “hit her [Sulkowicz] across the face, choked her, and pushed her knees onto her chest and leaned on her knees to keep them up.” He then “grabbed [Sulkowicz’s] wrists and penetrated her anally.”

Sulkowicz reported to police that she told Nungesser to stop, but that he did not. She “struggled with [Nungesser] and tried to push his arms away,” according to the police report, but “[Nungesser] kept going and suddenly stopped without ejaculating.”

So they had consensual sex twice before. They were fuck buddies.

Sulkowicz said the night of the "rape" started out consensual, then it turned into "rape."

The guy didn't cum. That seems odd. Why would he anally rape a girl and not bust his nut? Isn't that the whole point of rape?

You don't stop before busting a nut unless you respect "no means no."

Reading between the lines, they probably tried anal as an experiment, and she decided she didn't like it. He tried to coax her into keep going and she told him to stop. So he stopped, put his pants on and left pissed off. She put an end to all sexual activity that night before he could nut, which is frustrating.

Emma made up the chocking and hitting to spice things up and make it sound like real rape.

Quote:

Sulkowicz said that she didn’t want to report her attack to the police because she was embarrassed and ashamed of what had happened to her.

So she walks around campus carrying a mattress with photographers and news crews following her and plastering her all over the interwebz.

Quote:

“There’s a reason survivors choose not to go to the police, and that’s because they’re treated as the criminals,” she said. “The rapists are innocent until proven guilty but survivors are guilty until proven innocent, at least in the eyes of the police.”

Quote:

Sulkowicz said she felt badly mistreated by the officers who came to her residence to take her statement. Because she and Nungesser had had consensual sex twice before he allegedly assaulted her, Sulkowicz said the police were dismissive of what she had to say.

Yeah, the police need to ignore that. Don't let those pesky facts get in the way of a good story.

Quote:

During that time, she said, the policeman to whom she originally gave her statement was standing outside the room, actively dismissing her story to the friends she had brought to the precinct office with her for support.

“They told me he said stuff like, ‘Of all of these cases, 90 percent are bullshit, so I don’t believe your friend for a second,’” Sulkowicz said.

Quote:

“It makes perfect sense why a survivor wouldn’t go to police the moment after she’s been physically violated,” she said. “If all the police are doing is stressing she’s going to suffer more, it’s unimaginable.”

Sulkowicz said this is why Columbia needs to be improving its own adjudication process for sexual assault.

This is crucial. I've said this before. These rape hysterics do not want "rape victims" to go to the police. The police want evidence. They don't care about "feelings" they want facts. The University-RapeHysterics-Industrial complex on the other hand will have a bunch of sympathetic social workers who will listen and believe anything and give them hugs and sympathy (see Emily Renda/Jackie Coakley), go along with your tall tales, and provide a kangaroo and rigged court with a low burden of proof. You see how offended Emma is when the police ask questions such as their past sexual relationship and she even got offended that they asked her what kind of shoes the guy wore. That's what police do, ask questions and gather details and facts.

They want to keep the rape allegations outside the influence of the masculine world of due process and facts, and in the feminine world of feelings.

[Slim Shady]

^ And it was in THIS VERY TYPE OF COURT that this dude was found innocent [shocking], and yet Seamus up there keeps talking about "3 independent cases" and all his bullshit. Dude comes back from a ban with this "objective and analytic post" when he is cleanly ignoring the basic facts of how these cases work which have been laid out before him.

[Lemmo]

(12-25-2014 06:37 PM)Seamus Wrote:  

I wasn't planning on posting in this thread again, but after some reflection I feel compelled to.

Whether intentionally or not, a lot of posters have seriously mischaracterized the argument I was making. Reading back, maybe I wasn't clear enough, so I'll try again. In my original post (http://tinyurl.com/lekru9d) I made three basic points:

1) We don't know what happened, although three separate accusations obviously looks bad, BUT 2) clearly there is no substantial evidence against this guy, so 3) the fact he's had his reputation ruined while his accuser has been celebrated is a grave injustice.

These weren't "separate" allegations. The accusers all met and discussed before bringing charges within days of each other. And why does it "look bad" given the admitted collusion between the accusers, the fact that there is "no substantial evidence" against this guy, the absence of any criminal charges and the findings of no wrongdoing by Columbia? What else would he need to do to not "look bad"?

(12-25-2014 06:37 PM)Seamus Wrote:  

Yet here guys relentlessly attacked me on point number 1, to the extent I felt compelled to defend the very idea that multiple separate accusations of anything is generally a bad sign (i.e. that across the broad spectrum of cases, multiple accusations will have a positive correlation with guilt). That shouldn't be a controversial argument, that should be common-sense.

Only if you haven't been paying attention to the numerous examples of victims groups on campuses fabricating crimes against themselves in order to advance their agenda. And if you ignore all the evidence of collusion and all the specific facts of this case (absence of evidence, no criminal charges, finding of innocence by Columbia, professional agenda of main accuser), which support his innocence. And if you are ignoring all these facts, I wouldn't call the resulting conclusion "common sense".

(12-25-2014 06:37 PM)Seamus Wrote:  

Again, that's not saying this guy is guilty of anything. If I had to guess, I'd say he had bad / incongruous game, maybe on account of his foreigner status as some posters have suggested. I have a Dutch buddy who couldn't understand why girls got pissed when he grabbed their asses in clubs, since that was what he did back in Amsterdam. But he got slapped a couple of times and adjusted his game, as this guy will have to do as well.

Irrelevant. He either committed rape or he didn't. I don't see the point of trying to guess whether he was "creepy" or had "bad game" or whether he needed to follow "game rules for banging mentally ill wannabe artists on feminist agenda driven campuses while preserving your reputation." The girl liked what he was doing enough to come back for a 3rd helping. The important story is that this appears to be the latest in a series of agenda-driven false rape accusations.

(12-25-2014 06:37 PM)Seamus Wrote:  

None of that is the point of this story though, or of my original post. We can't prove his innocence or even know it conclusively (despite what guys are claiming), yet that's not what matters. What matters is that they couldn't carry the (reduced) burden of proof concerning his guilt and yet still he's been effectively judged and sentenced for life. The point is we live in a culture that's all too happy to forever paint men as rapists and women as victims without due process. This isn't about an individual case, it's about the systemic failure of society to support these accused men. If it came to light tomorrow that he was in fact guilty, it wouldn't change anything. The “rape culture” hysteria would still have victimized him to this point.

In the absence of video or a confession, of course we can't know anything with 100% certainty. But all the facts as well as the finding of Columbia's kangaroo court suggest he is innocent. No criminal charges were filed. You still seem to be saying he is somehow tainted in your eyes in the absence of further conclusive proof of his innocence.

(12-25-2014 06:37 PM)Seamus Wrote:  

If the above arguments make me a retarded feminist troll mangina who probably hasn't gotten laid much - all of which I've been called in this thread - then so be it. I love the RVF, but if guys can't engage critically and unemotionally on subjects we all care about then all we have is an echo chamber.

I don't see how pointing out facts you were ignoring qualifies as arguing from emotion. Key tenets of SJWs on this issue is that men are guilty until proven innocent and that false charges are an acceptable way to further their political agenda and their individual careers. To the extent people here think you were supporting these positions or were at least being sympathetic to them, it is perfectly legitimate to say so.

[Duke Castile]

Well done Lemmo

[Simeon_Strangelight]

(12-25-2014 06:37 PM)Seamus Wrote:  

Yet here guys relentlessly attacked me on point number 1, to the extent I felt compelled to defend the very idea that multiple separate accusations of anything is generally a bad sign (i.e. that across the broad spectrum of cases, multiple accusations will have a positive correlation with guilt). That shouldn't be a controversial argument, that should be common-sense.

Again, that's not saying this guy is guilty of anything. If I had to guess, I'd say he had bad / incongruous game, maybe on account of his foreigner status as some posters have suggested. I have a Dutch buddy who couldn't understand why girls got pissed when he grabbed their asses in clubs, since that was what he did back in Amsterdam. But he got slapped a couple of times and adjusted his game, as this guy will have to do as well.

First of all your Dutch buddy used quite forward Game with instant kino on likely completely stoned and drugged chicks who are very likely comprised of mostly foreigners in Amsterdam. If he would try that on Dutch girls during Daygame he would get his ass kicked in no time at all. And I really don't know where you get your perception of German guys running some kind of aggressive Game. The men there are highly reserved and need to learn that part of Game for years to even reach a healthy dose of sexualization.

And besides - bad Game is no criminal offense! What the fuck does this have to do with anything? You accuse him of having bad Game - so what? No wonder we call you out for using the same feminazi-lingo. Next time read the story in detail - we are just sick of getting the same kind of arguments on the RVForum as well as on Jezebel.

I personally have learnt a few things here and even readjusted my viewpoints - especially about rape. I even idiotically believed the UVArape story for a day before rechecking it and then going into the whole rape culture for real, since I did not have exposure to the topic as until recently - busy with trying to fuck EE student girls instead of re-evaluating fake rape crap.

Also a funny tidbit - I talked just recently with some Polish chicks on what is their biggest fears when meeting an online match for real the first time.

For men everywhere it's the fear that she is a secret internet fatty. For Western girls it's the fear that he is a serial killer ( A sign of the crazy rape culture indoctrination in the West.).
For the Polish girls it was the fear of him being shorter than her! That's literally their biggest fear.
It did not even cross their minds that he could be a psycho, since they did not receive so much rape hysteria (despite higher incidences of real Rape in some regions than in the US.) Women have fragile minds and feeding them with that crap only makes it much worse.