Boy gets sexually assaulted by two girls, nobody gives a shit.

 Pages PREV 1 2
 

thaluikhain:

Vegosiux:
Huh, I don't see how "only boys and men ever have to deal with this" follows from "if this was two boys undressing a girl who's screaming and trying to fight, we'd 100% see more outrage over it". Looks a bit like a stretch. Remotely makes sense what your line of thought was, but a stretch.

If things are "100% different" for people who aren't them, then obviously they are the only ones who have to deal with that.

Well, let's ask thethird0611 to clarify then - were they talking about the specific situation (which is the way I'm interpreting their post in), or were they talking about the entire sexual assault scene in general (which seems to be the way you're interpreting their post in). The only way to see which one of us has the right idea about what they're saying.

LifeCharacter:

CrazyGirl17:
...I... what?! That is just disgusting! Fuckin' double standards...

What double standard? This is like a retread of Steubenville with the genders reversed, a lesser crime being committed, and the attorney and mother worrying about the girls' futures instead of the newscasters.

You the Steubenville rapists did end up being convicted right?

This is really old news. But the mother could've pressed charges if she wanted to, she didn't. Let's just hope their parents or their school punished them for it

Qwurty2.0:
You guys, this is OLD.

Like, I don't mind discussing, but I literally saw this video months if not years ago... O_O

If I recall, there was a petition and the girls got punished.

Do you have a link?

I'd rather not go digging through such an unpleasant story.

MuffinMan74:
This is really old news. But the mother could've pressed charges if she wanted to, she didn't. Let's just hope their parents or their school punished them for it

I think the idea is 'why' didn't the mother press charges.

There are people who will say that there is a standard that men/boys cannot be sexually assaulted in the same way as girls and it's fine to just ignore crimes of that sort against them.

There are also people that will argue that because it happens to women far more, it's more important.

And lots of arguments between.

evilneko:

Batou667:
It'd be easy to downplay this. Kids messing around, why assume a sinister or sexual motivation, who didn't get pantsed as a kid? The boy was more embarrassed than hurt, the media circus is likely to have a worse effect on him than the actual incident, why demonise the girls, they're just children?

And if it were boys pantsing the kid, it wouldn't even be a thing.

Yeah because pantsing usually doesn't involve removing the underwear. Plus there's the part where they filmed it and put it on the internet.

MuffinMan74:

evilneko:

Batou667:
It'd be easy to downplay this. Kids messing around, why assume a sinister or sexual motivation, who didn't get pantsed as a kid? The boy was more embarrassed than hurt, the media circus is likely to have a worse effect on him than the actual incident, why demonise the girls, they're just children?

And if it were boys pantsing the kid, it wouldn't even be a thing.

Yeah because pantsing usually doesn't involve removing the underwear. Plus there's the part where they filmed it and put it on the internet.

Given he was wearing a bathing suit, there was no underwear to remove.

Batou667:
It'd be easy to downplay this. Kids messing around, why assume a sinister or sexual motivation, who didn't get pantsed as a kid? The boy was more embarrassed than hurt, the media circus is likely to have a worse effect on him than the actual incident, why demonise the girls, they're just children?

They should know better though.

And to be perfectly frank if I knew the girls' parents were giving them appropriate or harsh punishment then yeah I'd agree that they shouldn't be charged.

But I don't, and frankly I think the kind of kids who would do this have parents that either can't control them or just don't give a shit.

Bentusi16:

MuffinMan74:
This is really old news. But the mother could've pressed charges if she wanted to, she didn't. Let's just hope their parents or their school punished them for it

I think the idea is 'why' didn't the mother press charges.

She was worried about their futures. Can't say I blame her.

You know if they do get charged the law might not treat them as "a couple of assholes who should be forced to apologize and given a fine or community service or something small" but instead as "sexual predator" or "serious offender".

I blame the people who act like sexual assault is traumatizing 100% of the time.

evilneko:

MuffinMan74:

evilneko:

And if it were boys pantsing the kid, it wouldn't even be a thing.

Yeah because pantsing usually doesn't involve removing the underwear. Plus there's the part where they filmed it and put it on the internet.

Given he was wearing a bathing suit, there was no underwear to remove.

That...just makes the task easier.

Shadowstar38:
This is...kind of a difficult one.

At first I have to question why the OP would call it a sexual assault. There was nothing sexual about it. They just wanted to humilate him as standard bully protocol(that was their story anyway).

Then I thought, "Wait! Some people get sexual satisfaction from humiliating others! I Know this because I looked up fetishes on wikipedia"

But yeah. At first glance, this doesn't really look like a thing. Hope those girls got their ass beat though.

While yes I agree the charges mentioned in the video were not any sort of sexual assault, I do wonder if it would have been sexual assault this had been two boys forcibly stripping an 11 year old girl. While sexual assault is defined as "a statutory offense that provides that it is a crime to knowingly cause another person to engage in an unwanted sexual act by force or threat," I can't imagine a case in which a girl was forcibly stripped not having some sort of sexually-related charge added. Even if she wasn't inappropriately touched, apart from the stripping. I guess the question would be, is being naked in front of others considered a "sexual act."

Lilani:
I guess the question would be, is being naked in front of others considered a "sexual act."

If stripping and/or being naked in front of others is a sexual act, locker rooms across America are full of sexual predators! Not to mention parents bathing babies or *gasp* bathing with their children! Shock! Horror! Where's Chris Hansen when he's needed? :O

Vegosiux:

Kaulen Fuhs:

This is what you said. "It's not the act that objectifies said victims, it's the intent. Or in other words, if you're discussing the subject and trying to look how to improve lives for people who got through this, you're not objectifying these past victims."

Do you honestly believe for a second that the person who said "fuckin' double standards" had better intentions than the person who tried to show them why they might be wrong? Do you think they cared about the victim any more?

I don't know, why don't you go ask them?

I would, if I felt like they would tell the truth. Or are assumptions about the good faith of others reserved to your judgements on LifeCharacter?

Whether it was "politicized statements" or something equally loaded, like an established position in an internet debate, the result is the same; a victim is used as a bludgeon. And what you are doing in this thread is pursuing the comments coming from only one side of the fence for the "crimes" committed by both sides.

So, my argument is wrong because...not because there's something wrong with my argument, but because I, in your opinion, did not take the time to apply it consistently?

I suspect your lack of equal application is not an issue of time.

You keep bringing up ad hominems. Do you have evidence of personal attacks used to undermine your position?

I really shouldn't have to do this, unless we're suddenly in the middle of Memento, which I am pretty sure we are not. But here we go: One, taking issue with my argument not because of what it was, but because of something you considered wrong with me; two, calling me "painfully transparent", three, again taking issue with my point not because you had an issue with my point, but because you had an issue with me?

That's the thing; I took issue with your argument because I felt you were limiting it to one side in order to make the other look less guilty. Perhaps I've been less clear in communicating that then I should have been.
Second, a personal attack is only ad hominem if it acts as a placeholder to an argument. I do have an issue with your point, that issue being that your point appears to be specifically designed to attack LifeCharacter for doing something both sides appear to be doing in this thread. Th personal attacks/suspicion is tangential to my argument, not in place of it.

I feel my argument is substantiated, if not by reality, than by my reading of it.

If you have a problem with my point, then press my point instead of my behavior and integrity.

Pressing both is not a logical fallacy.

So far you've only "proved" that I might be a scumbag, but that says nothing about points I'm making. So either address my points for what they are, or tone it down on the smug and send me a private message with whatever you think is wrong with me, if my personal integrity is what you want to discuss. Or I don't know, make a thread in which you discuss how I'm a terrible person and why.

Then let me ask a question which will either make myself perfectly clear, or shut me out of this discussion. Why is using the Stuebenville case for this "Umm, haven't there been a number of cases where a girl was raped, not just stripped, and the police did jack shit until the internet called them out on it?" not okay, but using the topical case for this "What frightens me is that it's the mother who decided not to press charges, and quite frankly as a man I'm scared of ever getting raped because I know that it will go un-noticed and there will be no justice served because "we don't want to ruin the poor rapist's lives! They're girls, you misogynist!" not worth bringing up?

It seemed with your original post that you took issue with objectifying these crimes. "She's not an argument, she's a human being". Do you only take issue if the objectification is used to shut down discussion, or is it also bad on its own merits?

thaluikhain:

Er...the second post, about how things would be "100% different if the genders were reversed"? In response to which Steubenville was first mentioned to show that that isn't true?

Huh, I don't see how "only boys and men ever have to deal with this" follows from "if this was two boys undressing a girl who's screaming and trying to fight, we'd 100% see more outrage over it". Looks a bit like a stretch. Remotely makes sense what your line of thought was, but a stretch.

In the second post, I agree. A stretch.

"...I... what?! That is just disgusting! Fuckin' double standards..." seems to me a good example. As well as the quote from the OP I brought up earlier.

That's the issue I have, overall. There are people in this thread saying that only men get ignored when it comes to sexual assault, and are using this case as their trump card. It's pretty repulsive, but also incorrect. When LifeCharacter tried to demonstrate why it was incorrect, you jumped down his/her/it's throat.

MuffinMan74:

Qwurty2.0:
You guys, this is OLD.

Like, I don't mind discussing, but I literally saw this video months if not years ago... O_O

If I recall, there was a petition and the girls got punished.

Do you have a link?

I'd rather not go digging through such an unpleasant story.

I tried looking for one given that I figured people would demand a link, but I can't find one in a Google search. The video itself is from all the way back in January, but that's all I got.

Ironically, this very story had a thread some time ago, which is where I say it, but a quick search didn't turn it up. :(

Lilani:
I guess the question would be, is being naked in front of others considered a "sexual act."

Being nude in public is a public order offense and isn't considered decent behavior, and I'm pretty sure stripping someone naked with the intent of humiliating them is some form of sexual harassment, although to what extent I'm not sure? But can you imagine what it'd be like if two girls stripped a man naked? Or if two guys did the same to a girl? Seems terrible right? So why do some people put it down to childish fun? What it's okay because they're children? What do you think?

Vegosiux:

thaluikhain:

Vegosiux:
Huh, I don't see how "only boys and men ever have to deal with this" follows from "if this was two boys undressing a girl who's screaming and trying to fight, we'd 100% see more outrage over it". Looks a bit like a stretch. Remotely makes sense what your line of thought was, but a stretch.

If things are "100% different" for people who aren't them, then obviously they are the only ones who have to deal with that.

Well, let's ask thethird0611 to clarify then - were they talking about the specific situation (which is the way I'm interpreting their post in), or were they talking about the entire sexual assault scene in general (which seems to be the way you're interpreting their post in). The only way to see which one of us has the right idea about what they're saying.

Vego, I thank you for talking on my behalf. Just started a new temp job last week in electrical construction, and well, its beating the hell out of me.

But im talking about the former situation. If the genders were flipped, those boys would be going to juvi (or some form of bad punishment). Hell, the officers commented that it seemed like a 'prank', yet if a little girl had been the one being sexually assaulted and the video put up on youtube.... Oh lord the fire.

Qwurty2.0:

MuffinMan74:

Qwurty2.0:
You guys, this is OLD.

Like, I don't mind discussing, but I literally saw this video months if not years ago... O_O

If I recall, there was a petition and the girls got punished.

Do you have a link?

I'd rather not go digging through such an unpleasant story.

I tried looking for one given that I figured people would demand a link, but I can't find one in a Google search. The video itself is from all the way back in January, but that's all I got.

Ironically, this very story had a thread some time ago, which is where I say it, but a quick search didn't turn it up. :(

A quick google search showed youtube uploads and forum posts from two years ago. >.>

I was going to say "Because that boy was probably having the time of his life" but then I saw that he was 11.

I can't really call the actions of children and pre-teens sexual assault. It should be punished, of course, but someone that young is only barely sexually aware and probably has no concept of what he or she is doing. They don't understand the emotions of sexuality and its inherent potential, when abused, to cause severe trauma. In their minds, they probably think they are just screwing around with him as all bullies do.

It's bullying more than anything else, although a rather severe case, and I think the appropriate punishment is for bullying. Also, someone probably needs to explain to them that what they did was sexual.

Kaulen Fuhs:
-snip-

You know, I had a rather lengthy reply written out, but in the end, we'd just be firmly entrenched and getting nowhere. And I really do not wish to argue over this here.

On that note, I'm going to say I acknowledge your points and am taking them into consideration, but I will not be responding here - that is an issue of both time and tiredness, though (incidentally, I might be vanishing from Escapist entirely for a while).

So, have a good day and all that. Maybe next time we'll meet on more amicable terms.

Vegosiux:

So, have a good day and all that. Maybe next time we'll meet on more amicable terms.

Agreed. I apologize for my initial hostility.

It's been a long couple of weeks.

Lilani:
I guess the question would be, is being naked in front of others considered a "sexual act."

The law confuses on this. Exposing your genitals counts as a sex crime in some places but I don't classify streaking as sexual. As for attacking other people, there's the stipulation of "for the purpose of sexual gratification". That's where I think the double standard comes in. If it were boys stripping a girl, I'm sure no one would by the "It was just a prank" excuse, no matter how true it was.

Kaulen Fuhs:

It's been a long couple of weeks.

How so? What's been going on?

Shadowstar38:

Kaulen Fuhs:

It's been a long couple of weeks.

How so? What's been going on?

Having serious issues finding a job, getting back in contact with a girl I had a bit of a thing for back in the day... Just lots of personal crap that's straining my capacity for empathy and understanding :|

ToastiestZombie:

What frightens me is that it's the mother who decided not to press charges

And there you go - that's why nothing happened.

Don't pretend it is a sign of the state not caring about men's rights. No charges were pressed. Simple. It happens with man against women rapes too.

SillyBear:
And there you go - that's why nothing happened.

Don't pretend it is a sign of the state not caring about men's rights. No charges were pressed. Simple. It happens with man against women rapes too.

It's not *just* an issue of the state or legality (although legal double standards do exist), it's about social attitudes too. This case could be an illustration of how people tend to diminish assaults against males. Then again, the mother could be the kind of person who would also decide not to press charges if her daughter was held down and stripped by men, we don't know.

This reminds of a video I saw. A drunk woman on a bus sexually assaulting a young boy. I mean he did look like he was into it. And the some of the people on the bus were laughing. Then she tried to strip the boy. And, everyone still fucking laughed. Not the boy. He tried his best to keep his pants on. At that point I turned the video off, the double standard was making me sick.

Why is it, that when it is woman on man assault (sexual or otherwise), its somehow more okay than man on woman assault?

chaosord:

Why is it, that when it is woman on man assault (sexual or otherwise), its somehow more okay than man on woman assault?

My theory is that differences in evaluation of such male and female behaviors can be at least partly explained by differences in gender roles. Traditionally males are considered to be much more interested in sex than females so that when a male is sexually assaulted by a female people are probably less likely to consider it a sexual assault. Also, as males are often considered to want and enjoy sex at all times the implicit or even explicit assumption by many people is that male victims are enjoying such incidents, which leads to male victims not being considered victims.

chaosord:

Why is it, that when it is woman on man assault (sexual or otherwise), its somehow more okay than man on woman assault?

It's assumed the average male would willingly consent to any sexual advance by a woman. I mean, if it were me, I wouldn't mind. But I'm a sexual deviant. So I would be what's called an "outlier".

I don't think we can conclude by the mom's actions that she thinks that men cannot be sexually assaulted. She may just not think this was sexual assault. I know I've heard of other guys doing this to each other, and, while it's considered bullying, it's not considered sexual.

Heck, I'm not convinced it was sexual, although, I admit, I'm too squeamish to actually watch the video. But do we know that the women were doing it because it turned them on? Or could it just have been about humiliation?

And, yes, I'd be more likely to assume the opposite was sexual assault, because, on average, this sort of thing is done by guys who get off on it. It's so rare with women doing the action that I don't have a default, and thus just go to neutral--which means not assuming sexual assault.

And, note, this doesn't mean I don't think the whole thing is disgusting, and that I don't think the mom should have pressed charges. It's still assault, whether sexual or not. The idea that women can't commit assault and/or that a real man should be able to take it--that's a much more likely double standard at work here.

 Pages PREV 1 2

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked