After Reading the Report Thoughts

Donate To GopherHole
GopherinPhilly said:
You are way out of touch if this is how you think it happens. It is called Tinder (and others) and the accuser and one of the accused even discussed that they had connected on Tinder but never spoke.

Let me explain what Tinder is...it is a phone app where you upload a picture and a short tag line about yourself...then you will get show photos/tags of others in your area that are interested in hooking up and you swipe left or right. If you swipe one way it is a interested and the other is a not interested. If you and the other person both swipe interested then you can chat, exchange info and/or arrange a meeting.

In many instances the tag is simple -DTF which means "down to f*k" The world has changed and in so many ways than it was just 5 or 10 years ago.

I've had plenty of one night stands (most don't last all night if you can avoid it) and am quit open about sexuality and it still amazes me how much things have changed.
Click to expand...

Ok. Great.
So you walk into a room with a woman who is wrapped in a blanket... how did she consent ahead of time with you when you just ran into her then and she hasn't looked at her phone for 40 minutes to see if you swiped her or not?

And for the one who did swipe with her on tinder days past. That's consent a few days or weeks later? Didn't know the girl didn't have the right to change her mind.

Don't you find any of this disgusting?
 

Face The Facts said:
Ok. Great.
So you walk into a room with a woman who is wrapped in a blanket... how did she consent ahead of time with you when you just ran into her then and she hasn't looked at her phone for 40 minutes to see if you swiped her or not?
Click to expand...

I think he probably thought she was consenting when she blew him so he could get an erection and then helped him look for a condom. This is not a girl drugged out of her mind or totally incoherent for conversation. The fact that she knew him and they both talked about Tinder puts a different spin on the whole 'she was too scared to leave or was too drunk to consent' angle.
 

Yea if y'all aren't familiar with tinder, it was the first of its kind hookup app that boils things down to a 'hot or not' dynamic. there a bunch more like it now that change said dynamic including ones that only let women send the first message (Bumble) and ones where the platform uses mutual facebook friends to match you with people your friends know (Hinge). Tinder has the worst reputation for scamming, dangerous situations arising from strangers (you dont need to verify your ID or link a social media account)

Tinder these days has devolved into purely **** buddy territory, tags such as 'DTF' arent necessary because if you are on Tinder thats the operating assumption of the platform.
 

westcoastgopher11 said:
Still calling on the pearl clutching sanctimonious crowd to explain this to me:

We do not find that these behaviors indicate that RS did not experience the sexual misconduct that she describes. Rather, we find that RS' conduct during the sexual encounters likely resulted from her shock, confusion, and inability to focus because of the events she was experiencing.


its not even my biggest complaint about the report but I'd like one of the admin defending types to even try and take a stab at justifying this. (its in the first quarter of the report)
Click to expand...

The way I see that, and the way this whole thing went down, is that she started out being interested in some sort of wild sexual encounter, but ended up getting steamrolled into a level 10 absolutely insane sexual encounter. That likely did not change in an instant but developed over a period of time, and her behavior actually reflected that for the most part.

Not that hard to understand, and there is plenty of room to have a lot of sympathy for her. Even though, yes, she is a deeply flawed participant in this mess. Unfortunately things are rarely cut so clearly and in my opinion you should up your support for her side of this event because it is the right thing to do. A massive amount of fault lies on the other side no matter what way you look at it.
 

short ornery norwegian said:
There is a middle ground here. It is possible to believe the players acted shamefully - but ALSO believe the University has handled the situation poorly. That is where I'm at. I believe that some of the 10 players probably deserve to be suspended. (I feel expulsion is too harsh of a penalty) But, I also believe that some of the 10 players are being judged guilty through association, and don't deserve to be suspended. The EOAA's conclusions are based on believing the accuser, and not believing the players.

IF - and I say IF - the accuser does not remember the events clearly, there is at least a possibility that some players are being unfairly accused. There is a lot of grey area here. It is not as cut-and-dried as some people (on both side of the argument) are acting.
Click to expand...

I agree.

The EOAA report proves nothing, though it appears it doesn't have to, and the police report doesn't prove innocence.

There is a Witch Hunt involved with the players that weren't involved in the sexual act or wasn't even there. Mind blowing that they are still in jeopardy of being punished.

I'm completely fine with booting the players involved off the team. They put themselves and the team in this position and don't deserve sympathy.

I don't believe either side at all with the "facts" of this incident. This is now a problem for Admin. and the lawyers to figure out.
 


howeda7 said:
I've only read bits and pieces but:

-Whether the participating players broke the law, they absolutely violated the code of conduct and their punishment is warranted.

-Kaler and Coyle did a horrible job communicating this situation to the team. Blasting the names out in a news release and then refusing to answer questions was gutless. There should have been a team meeting before anything was released to the public. I think this entire situation could have been defused.

-I'm still not sure what to think about the players who wouldn't directly involved, but it feels unfair that they are lumped in with the others, and the punishment seems harsh.

-Coyle and Kaler should apologize for the way they communicated with the team.
Click to expand...

This is pretty much where I stand as well. It appears some of the guys should be expelled while I think others it isn't as simple. My biggest issue all along with the lack of communication is that all 10 have been portrayed across the country as being rapists without knowing the truth. Not that any form of harassment is good either, but it isn't he same as raping someone.
 

citywok said:
The way I see that, and the way this whole thing went down, is that she started out being interested in some sort of wild sexual encounter, but ended up getting steamrolled into a level 10 absolutely insane sexual encounter. That likely did not change in an instant but developed over a period of time, and her behavior actually reflected that for the most part.

Not that hard to understand, and there is plenty of room to have a lot of sympathy for her. Even though, yes, she is a deeply flawed participant in this mess. Unfortunately things are rarely cut so clearly and in my opinion you should up your support for her side of this event because it is the right thing to do. A massive amount of fault lies on the other side no matter what way you look at it.
Click to expand...

I agree. One of the key questions is what happened after she said no more dudes. That is the only time it's clear to me she said no.

It does seem to me she probably acted receptive thru most of the encounter in spite of whatever was going thru her mind. Also from her account it doesn't sound like she objected until the sex became painful.

I agree things went to far and it is reasonable to hold the players accountable. I think suspending the 5 who didn't participate for a year seems to be too much because the extent of their presence doesn't seem established. I mean they walking into the apartment looking around they may not have the context or anything. I have a feeling the treatment of those 5 was in actuality why the team did what they did. That is where the admin overstepped and could have avoided this mess.

Those that participated have varying levels of direct responsibility but I am fine with them all being gone . Even if the initial sex was completely consensual he brought her to his apt and in my opinion therefore bears responsibility for what happens to her, dumbass shoulda known better.
 

Wish I wouldn't have read that report.
 

Wally said:
he brought her to his apt and in my opinion therefore bears responsibility for what happens to her, dumbass shoulda known better.
Click to expand...

She is a grown woman - not an infant. She has responsibility for herself. Her own actions are what put this into a grey area legally. The only black and white here is with regard to the EOAA and student code.
 



Wally said:
I agree. One of the key questions is what happened after she said no more dudes. That is the only time it's clear to me she said no.

It does seem to me she probably acted receptive thru most of the encounter in spite of whatever was going thru her mind. Also from her account it doesn't sound like she objected until the sex became painful.

I agree things went to far and it is reasonable to hold the players accountable. I think suspending the 5 who didn't participate for a year seems to be too much because the extent of their presence doesn't seem established. I mean they walking into the apartment looking around they may not have the context or anything. I have a feeling the treatment of those 5 was in actuality why the team did what they did. That is where the admin overstepped and could have avoided this mess.

Those that participated have varying levels of direct responsibility but I am fine with them all being gone . Even if the initial sex was completely consensual he brought her to his apt and in my opinion therefore bears responsibility for what happens to her, dumbass shoulda known better.
Click to expand...

Great post. You are another voice of reason in the GopherHole snake pit.
 

citywok said:
The way I see that, and the way this whole thing went down, is that she started out being interested in some sort of wild sexual encounter, but ended up getting steamrolled into a level 10 absolutely insane sexual encounter. That likely did not change in an instant but developed over a period of time, and her behavior actually reflected that for the most part.

Not that hard to understand, and there is plenty of room to have a lot of sympathy for her. Even though, yes, she is a deeply flawed participant in this mess. Unfortunately things are rarely cut so clearly and in my opinion you should up your support for her side of this event because it is the right thing to do. A massive amount of fault lies on the other side no matter what way you look at it.
Click to expand...

What do you mean by that?

I have a lot of sympathy for her. At a minimum, she went through something that she greatly regrets. In my opinion, that is what almost all of the evidence suggests (we can agree to disagree on that point). That said, I feel bad for her. My anger about the situation is aimed at the EOAA, the mindsets that have perpetuated similar types of entities, and this new wave regressivism as a whole.
 

csom_1991 said:
She is a grown woman - not an infant. She has responsibility for herself. Her own actions are what put this into a grey area legally. The only black and white here is with regard to the EOAA and student code.
Click to expand...

No means NO. She said it after the first couple of players and at least one or more players have admitted it. When are you and your fellow deniers going to finally acknowledge that fact. Until you do, the whole bunch of you have zero credibility.
 

I think she will be haunted by this for a long time and actually this EOAA or whatever report will in effectively punish her also.

She is definitely at fault also, however her actions are far from the only thing that pushed this into a legal gray area.

Everyone involved should have known better....
 



Wally said:
I agree. One of the key questions is what happened after she said no more dudes. That is the only time it's clear to me she said no.

does seem to me she probably acted receptive thru most of the encounter in spite of whatever was going thru her mind. Also from her account it doesn't sound like she objected until the sex became painful.It

I agree things went to far and it is reasonable to hold the players accountable. I think suspending the 5 who didn't participate for a year seems to be too much because the extent of their presence doesn't seem established. I mean they walking into the apartment looking around they may not have the context or anything. I have a feeling the treatment of those 5 was in actuality why the team did what they did. That is where the admin overstepped and could have avoided this mess.

Those that participated have varying levels of direct responsibility but I am fine with them all being gone . Even if the initial sex was completely consensual he brought her to his apt and in my opinion therefore bears responsibility for what happens to her, dumbass shoulda known better.
Click to expand...

In response to the bolded part - - I really do feel bad for the girl, but don't you see how that is consent? If, by outward appearances, you are agreeing to something, it is consent. In no other situation is your state of mind part of determining consent.

Your last point is simply treating her like a child. She is an adult. The guy who brought her to the apartment didn't have "custody" of her. The EOAA never says that they didn't let her leave.
 

UpnorthGo4 said:
No means NO. She said it after the first couple of players and at least one or more players have admitted it. When are you fellow deniers going to finally acknowledge that fact. Until you do the whole bunch of you have zero credibility about everything you post about this case.
Click to expand...

Why do you believe her, with 100% certainty, but not anyone else?
 

UpnorthGo4 said:
No means NO. She said it after the first couple of players and at least one or more players have admitted it. When are you fellow deniers going to finally acknowledge that fact. .
Click to expand...

You are taking one comment that completely lacks context to condemn players are rapists. If it was this clear, there would have been criminal charges. You have no idea what she said 'no' to. It could have been anal, it could have been some other sex act but was okay with 'regular' sex. I don't know, you don't know either - but you pretend that you do. According to the EOAA - she said 'no' to the recruit and slapped him hand in a video clip in which she was still dressed - but then WE KNOW FOR A FACT that she agreed for a three way with that same guy. If it was black and white, we would not be having this discussion.
 

Face The Facts said:
Ok. Great.
So you walk into a room with a woman who is wrapped in a blanket... how did she consent ahead of time with you when you just ran into her then and she hasn't looked at her phone for 40 minutes to see if you swiped her or not?

And for the one who did swipe with her on tinder days past. That's consent a few days or weeks later? Didn't know the girl didn't have the right to change her mind.

Don't you find any of this disgusting?
Click to expand...

Help me understand how my explaining how Tinder works in response to how one night stands happened in 1988, but not how they happen today and in a broader context the prevalence of looser morals about sex than say just 10 years ago mean in any capacity that I agree with or fail to see the disgusting nature of what happened?

Find someone else to point your petty anger at...I aint your huckleberry.
 

Bob_Loblaw said:
What do you mean by that?

I have a lot of sympathy for her. At a minimum, she went through something that she greatly regrets. In my opinion, that is what almost all of the evidence suggests (we can agree to disagree on that point). That said, I feel bad for her. My anger about the situation is aimed at the EOAA, the mindsets that have perpetuated similar types of entities, and this new wave regressivism as a whole.
Click to expand...

Very few of us believe you have any sympathy for the girl. Nothing you have posted during the last couple of days supports that notion in any way. And If you had a clue about what regressivism is you wouldn't be directing your anger at the EOAA and similar entities. You would be looking in your own back yard and every other place you like to hang out.
 

csom_1991 said:
She is a grown woman - not an infant. She has responsibility for herself. Her own actions are what put this into a grey area legally. The only black and white here is with regard to the EOAA and student code.
Click to expand...

I don't care, what kind of a man just had sex with a woman and just leaves her naked in an open bedroom with apt full of dudes. Unless she directly told him she wanted to have sex with more guys then yes I hold him responsible.

I am sorry but some things while not explicitly illegal are just wrong on many levels. I see no reason to defend such behavior.
 

Again, one of the players said she said stop and no. This is evidence that Minnesota football players raped a woman according to a Minnesota football player who probably didn't realize what he was saying. The police report was pathetic. There are good investigations and lousy ones. There seemed to be very little follow up or attempts to sort out the truth. The EOCC is much more detailed and there were clear attempts to sort out what happened. No one seems to be attacking the police report for being done by two guys. Where is the female representation in the police department? Yet the EOCC gets attacked for having "too many women" on it. I haven't seen a single post complaining that it was just a couple of male cops. This entire fiasco will hopefully result in a top to bottom house-cleaning....
 

Bob_Loblaw said:
In response to the bolded part - - I really do feel bad for the girl, but don't you see how that is consent? If, by outward appearances, you are agreeing to something, it is consent. In no other situation is your state of mind part of determining consent.

Your last point is simply treating her like a child. She is an adult. The guy who brought her to the apartment didn't have "custody" of her. The EOAA never says that they didn't let her leave.
Click to expand...

This is where you lose most of us because you are basing consent off of what you think it should be. Look at the student code of conduct and sexual harassment policy. That is what matters. Whether you agree with it or not these players (and all students) are bound by a code of conduct that says they must obtain affirmative consent.

And I'll say it for probably the tenth time...one of the players admitted that he heard her tell them to stop. There is no grey area there.
 

God have the holiest damn mercy on my soul if I am ever represented in a court of law by Bob Loblaw.

Chiseling away at any part of her story that you can, like you have been consistently doing for the past 48 hours, and meek, shallow statements about how she likely regrets her behavior shows me that you actually don't have a whole lot of sympathy for her. You have been so, so far off on this story and so, so loud about it.
 

Wally said:
I don't care, what kind of a man just had sex with a woman and just leaves her naked in an open bedroom with apt full of dudes. Unless she directly told him she wanted to have sex with more guys then yes I hold him responsible.

I am sorry but some things while not explicitly illegal are just wrong on many levels. I see no reason to defend such behavior.
Click to expand...


+1000
 


CoMn said:
Again, one of the players said she said stop and no. This is evidence that Minnesota football players raped a woman according to a Minnesota football player who probably didn't realize what he was saying. The police report was pathetic. There are good investigations and lousy ones. There seemed to be very little follow up or attempts to sort out the truth. The EOCC is much more detailed and there were clear attempts to sort out what happened. No one seems to be attacking the police report for being done by two guys. Where is the female representation in the police department? Yet the EOCC gets attacked for having "too many women" on it. I haven't seen a single post complaining that it was just a couple of male cops. This entire fiasco will hopefully result in a top to bottom house-cleaning....
Click to expand...

this is a lie. I just read through the whole report. not once did a player tell the EOAA (you can't even get the name right) that she indicated a lack of consent. no ever reported that she said "stop"
 

Face The Facts said:
You're disgusting.
Click to expand...

Maybe, maybe not. IF she violated the code of conduct does what happened after that negate the fact that she violated it as well? Seems like a double standard of enforcement.
 

zman said:
Maybe, maybe not. IF she violated the code of conduct does what happened after that negate the fact that she violated it as well? Seems like a double standard of enforcement.
Click to expand...

STOP - this is no place for common sense.
 

bizzle22 said:
This is where you lose most of us because you are basing consent off of what you think it should be. Look at the student code of conduct and sexual harassment policy. That is what matters. Whether you agree with it or not these players (and all students) are bound by a code of conduct that says they must obtain affirmative consent.

And I'll say it for probably the tenth time...one of the players admitted that he heard her tell them to stop. There is no grey area there.
Click to expand...

I read the report, no where does it say that a player reported that the alleged victim said stop
 

I really would like bizzle and CoMn to address the fact that they are slandering players on the team. unless i somehow misread the fact that one of the players admitted that the alleged victim said stop (which I am 99% sure I did not miss)
 

UpnorthGo4 said:
Very few of us believe you have any sympathy for the girl. Nothing you have posted during the last couple of days supports that notion in any way. And If you had a clue about what regressivism is you wouldn't be directing your anger at the EOAA and similar entities. You would be looking in your own back yard and every other place you like to hang out.
Click to expand...

I don't care what absolute creeps like you think of me. You're a creep that wants to dictate what kind of sex others can have.

Like I've said multiple times and it's gone completely over your feeble head, I supported punishing the players from the beginning in September, I supported the Reggie Lynch suspension. The thing that angers me is the EOAA and similar entities.

I also respect women and think they should be treated like adults. You think they're children. You're a creep.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom