Do you have a dumb question that you're kind of embarrassed to ask in the main thread? Is there something you're just not sure about?
This is your opportunity to ask questions. No question too simple or too silly.
Culture war topics are accepted, and proposals for a better intro post are appreciated.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
My wife and I have different views of the discourse around the Cornell 7. I'm seeing people sympathizing with Jane Doe and declaring the "obvious" guilt of the men. I have major problems with this, because there's not nearly enough evidence that actually indicates the men are guilty.
My wife told me that she isn't seeing so much of randos casting their judgement on the case, but rather women sharing their own stories of times they felt taken advantage of or were sexually assaulted, etc. And she thinks that's important and valuable in it's own right. Essentially, whether or not the allegations are true, this has had an brought women together to share their stories in a moment of cultural solidarity.
Even if my wife is correct, and the women reacting to the news coverage weren't just declaring these men guilty based on their own feelings, I still have some issues with the notion that this discourse is positive in its own right, and I'm trying to put it in a lens my wife would understand. I don't really think that she and progressives would agree that discourse and people sharing their victimization stories is always a good thing. As one example, there are many stories in the UK and Europe about people being victimized by new waves of immigrants. But for alleged victims to share those stories in solidarity would (in most progressive minds) create hatred and bias people against immigrants as a whole.
As an aside – could anyone give me a quick rundown on what we currently know about the case? I haven't been following it that closely since the story first broke. Is there any chance of criminal proceedings?
I think reading the DA's statement about why they didn't initially investigate or press charges is enlightening. It's not long, so I'd read it if you're interested in the case.
The tl;dr is Jane Doe's initial statement about the night didn't meet the 3 criteria for rape under NY state law, those being 1) she was never unconscious 2) any drugs/alcohol she took she took was of her own volition 3) any sex acts she had were consented to and to the extent she rejected the boys' advances (grabbing her thigh/crotch iirc, I haven't read the statement in a couple weeks) they stopped when she made it clear she wasn't into it. They only started this "renewed" investigation after public outcry/lots of people calling the DA's office.
As I broadly understand it: she was really into Male Number 1 and consented to some slutty behavior because of it + her inhibitions were lowered from the drugs/alcohol. The boys, or at least 5 of them, were being shitty stereotypical frat boys who crossed some lines concerning upright behavior but never broke the law. Tons of women have a story like this and so it resonated. I sympathize with everyone but especially Jane Doe because she got sold an idea of female empowerment and sexuality that is pretty incompatible with like 80% of women and found out the hard way. Crap situation all around.
More options
Context Copy link
The NY Governor set up Letitia James as a special prosecutor to look into charges. So probably an attempt at charges. Guaranteed in NYC, but this is Tompkins County so I'm not sure how that will play out.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link