What if it were your daughter?

It was definitely thought provoking reading some of your comments in response to my last post about Art Briles.  While I certainly have my share of misgivings about the way sexual assault claims are handled by schools sometimes, it’s fair to say that I have even greater misgivings about Jerry Falwell, Jr. and Donald Trump being the perfect vessels to bring greater fairness and clarity to the system.

That being said, aside from my ad hominems, there are a few basic issues, some specific to Baylor, others more general, that make it hard for me to decide what would make for a better system.  I’m curious to hear more from you about whether you share any of my qualms.

  1. Baylor’s problems don’t stem from Title IX enforcement.  Remember, the university didn’t even have a Title IX office until November 2014 and none of the coaches there ever received proper training.  Would things have gone differently if it had?  There’s no way to know, of course, but it’s hard to think of a way a Title IX office could have made things worse.
  2. Schools and their attendant athletic departments are bureaucracies.  The most reflexive thing bureaucracies do when facing threats is to circle the wagons in an attempt to protect their own.  A recent example of that can be found at the University of Colorado, where the school’s first reaction in response to being notified that one of its assistant coaches was a serial assaulter was to lock it down before being forced to face up to dismissing him.
  3. Expecting police departments and prosecutors in football towns to be able to provide an adequate venue in which to investigate assault claims is a hit and miss proposition at best.  Do I really need to bring up places like Knoxville and Tallahassee as a reminder?  Or the Duke lacrosse scandal?  Or the convenient collegiality between Huntley Johnson and the Gainesville prosecutor?  Even if you’re in a jurisdiction where the local justice personnel are willing to do their jobs professionally, what good is that in the face of a school that is prepared to do what it takes to keep information away and discourage witnesses from bringing charges?

On the flip side, how can you not be outraged about what happened with those kids at Minnesota, assuming what they allege is accurate?

The players got a two-day appeal hearing last week to argue their case. Pacyga said the players were pressured into speaking with the Title IX investigator and threatened that they could not practice until they did. And several of the players testified Friday that some of the comments that were attributed to them in the report were inaccurate. He also said the panel was not allowed to see a 90-second video that police officers reviewed that he claims proves the woman consented to sex with at least two of the players and the players also were denied individual hearings and instead were grouped together, despite the fact that five players were not accused of having any sexual contact with the woman.

“You walk into them and the deck is stacked against you if you’re an accused student in these hearings,” Pacyga said.

That ain’t right.

If there’s a common thread running through all of this, it’s leverage and what’s convenient for a school.  Maybe Minnesota shows that student-athletes on their own are deserving of more due process protection than a school wielding its Title IX office as a sword for its own ends rather than as a shield for the victims is willing to provide.  On the other hand, maybe what’s needed in the face of a school trying to protect its own is an even more forceful Title IX presence to force it to confront institutional actors more concerned about winning sports programs than making sure that innocent victims of sexual assault have redress.

I admit there aren’t a lot of easy answers here, human nature being what it is.  But I also have to figure that while we hear much about the places where things get out of control, there are also institutions that have come up with ways to balance the competing issues that, while not perfect, are better than what we see at Waco or Knoxville.  And better than what we’re likely to see come from Ian McCaw’s new boss.  I don’t think it’s reasonable to ask anyone with college-aged daughters to expect less.

Advertisements

64 Comments

Filed under Baylor Is Sensitive To Women's Issues

64 responses to “What if it were your daughter?

  1. The problem with institutions is that they are run by people and people suck. Far too few people care anything about honesty and integrity. Too often those in power are committed to maintaining the positions that they obtained, not through moral courage, but by going along to get along, i.e, they’re smart enough to know the key to success is moral weakness. Whether that results in a modern day public lynching of privileged white kids at Duke for political gain or the covering up of rapes and child molestation at Baylor and PSU it’s all the same. It’s people in power who simply don’t give a rats ass about anything but themselves and their position. I don’t know at what point “doing to the right thing ” lost to expediency and maybe that’s always been the case but it sure seems more pervasive the older I get. Luckily, that moral blindness and weakness is often the very thing that brings them crashing down.

    “You can run on for a long time, sooner or later God’ll cut you down.”

    Like

    • Sherlock

      The problem with institutions is that they are run by people and people suck. Far too few people care anything about honesty and integrity. Too often those in power are committed to maintaining the positions that they obtained, not through moral courage, but by going along to get along, i.e, they’re smart enough to know the key to success is moral weakness. Whether that results in a modern day public lynching of privileged white kids at Duke for political gain or the covering up of rapes and child molestation at Baylor and PSU it’s all the same. It’s people in power who simply don’t give a rats ass about anything but themselves and their position.

      I’m having a hard time reading that and trying to reconcile those beliefs with your general political beliefs. I’m not trying to have a political discussion here, but people are still self-interested shitheads when they work for the government. Philosophical discussion of negative liberty aside, your remarks are the general utilitarian argument libertarians / classical liberals use as to why power should not be centralized.

      I don’t know at what point “doing to the right thing ” lost to expediency and maybe that’s always been the case but it sure seems more pervasive the older I get. Luckily, that moral blindness and weakness is often the very thing that brings them crashing down.

      “Doing the right thing” didn’t lose to expediency. It was never considered important. What has happened though is that our society has lost any sense of intellectual honesty. It used not to be OK to make up or spread lies. People used to try to bend the truth. Now we have “alternative facts” (post-modernism for the win… unfortunately). The date that sticks out in my mind is September 11, 2012 and the whole youtube video nonsense. A complete intentional lie was effective in purpose. People noticed and intellectual honesty went out along with the truth. Well, that is my theory anyway.

      Like

      • Let me try to square you. First, just because I fervently hate right wing politics it does not automatically follow that I am a Bernie Sanders voter. I do agree that Sanders is more intellectually honest than the right although I’d never vote for him. My problem with the right is that they blatantly lie to gain power. Their entire purpose is to destroy the new deal without us noticing while the people who actually benefit from those policies, and the heirs, get well(er).

        I don’t think the markets work well for health care, education or retirement. I don’t think they work well for the disabled. Otherwise I’m a free market free trade capitalist. I also think that people who start at the bottom need opportunities that only their folllow citizens by way of the government can provide. It doesn’t mean I’m not cynical about institutions. They are a regrettable evil that protects us from a worse evil: poverty and anarchy.

        Ultimately democracy is the best government available out of a bunch of worse choices. The benefit of a government for the people, of the people and by the people is that we get, collectively, exactly what we deserve. What corrodes democracy is an uninformed or misinformed or apathetic populace that is manipulated by lies and fear and prejudice.

        I am not going to suggest that one side is pure and the other is never honest but I will say that there is a stark difference in the deviation from their public pronouncements and what is actually done with the power.

        I would agree also that power which is diffuse is better than power that is concentrated but when you have churches burning and cross burnings and lynchings to deny democracy to certain people in Mississippi a goverment of and for and by the people can and must act so that we can guarantee the rights and privileges of all Americans to every American.

        Like

        • Dawgflan

          Bravo, but needed more insults. 😋

          Like

          • Maybe we’ll get there. You never know.

            I’d like someone to tell me what right wing talk and fox news would do if a Democratic politician shared a cup of coffee with someone who said something this insulting and vacuous: “When O’Reilly asserted that “Putin is a killer,” Trump responded, “Well, you think our country is so innocent?””

            Proud yet Trumpists? He has made America great again. We’re on par with Russia now. What a dumb and dangerous asshole. Impeach him today!

            Like

            • Argondawg

              Not a Trump supporter here but I get his comment. You think we have had a US president in the last 50 years that hasn’t had someone popped? Your culpable whether you pull the trigger or not in fact I would dare say you are more culpable if you give the order. Pick your president and his admistration has been responsible for hundreds or thousands of collateral deaths. Also lying to gain power is a hallmark of both sides. To believe anything else is just nuts.

              Like

              • And that’s why stupid is so dangerous. We don’t imprison or kill domestic political opponents in this country. At least not yet. Moral equivalency can be a dangerous thing in the hands of the uninformed. https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.businessinsider.com/list-of-people-putin-is-suspected-of-assassinating-2016-3?client=safari

                Like

                • Napoleon BonerFart

                  So, bombing Middle Eastern children is cool, as long as the government leaves domestic children alone? Bush/Obama/Clinton/Trump/et al thank you for your support.

                  Like

                  • If you don’t see the difference between a gulag and Hiroshima please, by all means, eat a shotgun. You not using your head anyway and others could use the oxygen you’re wasting.

                    Like

                    • Argondawg

                      Well I’ve seen this country go Hiroshima but not gulag. How many civilians killed by drone strikes just last year. It’s easy to sit in your recliner and make a distinction. Not so much for the innocent people being blown to bits. I love this country. It to act like we don’t have a lot of blood on our hands ignores reality.

                      Like

                    • I’m not. But the so-called president doesn’t understand that there is a difference between military operations designed to target military objectives with collateral damage and punishing dissent by death. Apparently neither do you.

                      You don’t have to be Jesus to criticize Hitler. You don’t have to be Ghandi to see Pol Pot as a tyrant and an American leader should have the good damn sense to know that you can criticize Putin and NOT suggest that we are equals. It’s offensive and stupid.

                      Like

                    • Napoleon BonerFart

                      Touchy touchy. Hey, whatever you need to tell yourself to justify the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent people is your own business. I guess some baby killers really are the good guys.

                      Like

            • doofusdawg

              Trump wins super bowl!!!!!!!

              Like

            • 81Dog

              Trump probably should have sent someone over to Moscow with one of those Staples red buttons, and a bunch of flowers and happy talk about resetting the bad relationship. That certainly would show Putin he can’t push us around.

              I agree there is no moral equivalency between the US and Russia, but on the other hand, didn’t we just spend the last 8 years getting lectured on a daily basis, often from foreign capitals, about the multiple sins of the US? I admit, it’s all a bit confusing.

              Like

        • AthensHomerDawg

          I don’t think the markets work well for health care, education or retirement. I don’t think they work well for the disabled.

          ….and there you go. You don’t think. You believe you’re the smartest guy in the room.

          But you’re not. Not even close.

          Like

          • Good counterpoint. Very persuasive. Now I understand that insurance companies, indigent care and Medicare don’t distort markets. I also now understand that you don’t think UGA should be funded publicly. If we had no government education one benefit is that I wouldn’t have intersected lives with a complete idiot like yourself.

            Like

            • Napoleon BonerFart

              Right. Insurance companies distort markets because they coerce participation. Government, on the other hand, is a completely voluntary system run by angels that doesn’t distort markets. Very cogent economic analysis.

              Like

              • Had I made it. If you want to run on a platform where people can’t afford health care die, then do it. You’ll lose and we can move on. Third party payers make health care a non-market economy. If you could eat a Big Mac because you were hungry it would fuck up the fast food industry. It’s just common sense and that’s why it’s elusive to you. We can pretend it’s not while costs go up and up and up.

                The GOP sure has found dealing with it easy ain’t they? They got he house, the senate, the White House and 0 replacement plan and to top it off they lack the balls to just kick 20 million off the rolls.

                When are you folks going to come to grips with fact that you’re idiots incapable of running anything?

                Like

                • Sherlock

                  If you could eat a Big Mac because you were hungry it would fuck up the fast food industry. It’s just common sense and that’s why it’s elusive to you.

                  I understand what you meant here, but your point will be lost on most people. You needed to say that If you could just eat a Big Mac at any time with a third party being responsible for paying for it, it would fuck up the fast food industry. The same is true for socialized medicine or a single-payer government insurance scheme. Every healthcare system has to ration care. The question that is answered by each system is “who is the arbiter” for said rationing. That is a question that I do not want answered via a self-interested democratic vote. I am quite happy to allow market pricing to allocate care.

                  We can pretend it’s not while costs go up and up and up.

                  Costs are a function of pooling size and benefit level. Iceland has reasonable pricing with a 332K population. We could have 1000 private plans in this country with similar pricing given similar economies of scale.

                  The GOP sure has found dealing with it easy ain’t they? They got he house, the senate, the White House and 0 replacement plan and to top it off they lack the balls to just kick 20 million off the rolls.

                  The politics of the situation are confounding, but Rand Paul’s plan is actually pretty good. The question isn’t whether or not to kick 20 million off the rolls or not. Most of those so-called millions were just added onto Medicaid. The question is whether or not affordable healthcare is available to more people in a manner that is consistent with universal liberalism. Obamacare would have been better off if they had just nationalized Romneycare. It would have been even better if they had copied Switzerland’s healthcare system. Even better still if they replaced Medicare (for future generations) and Medicaid with HSAs and refundable tax credits. IMHO, Obamacare was explicitly designed to fail by making healthcare unfordable. Go read Rand Paul’s proposal. It is actually pretty good.

                  Like

                  • First, I trust democracy more than corporate bean counters when it comes to matters of life and death. The markets can decide the price of an almond, a dollar, a coke, etc. Deciding who does or doesn’t get health care has public consequences and the public should have a say in that.

                    Second, if people actually voted their own self-interest you’d have a hard time explaining voting patterns in the southern United States.

                    The bottom line is that the health care market can only be a free market if we decide that people who can’t afford it don’t have access to it. That’s not what’s been decided yesterday and won’t be the answer tomorrow. We should just adapt to that reality and go single payer. The longer we put that off the more expensive the market will be when we finally agree to that solution. It is not a perfect solution but like democracy and jury trials, two institutions fraught with their own perils, it is the best solution among other worse choices.

                    Like

                • Napoleon BonerFart

                  And the logical fallacies just keep on coming. The alternative to socialized medicine is death. Health care, education, food, housing, clothing, internet, and just about everything else is far too important to leave up to people making voluntary choices. Nope, we should let Joe Biden make our decisions for us. What could go wrong?

                  Like

        • Sherlock

          I got about 2/3rds of a well reasoned response, but with the game going I’ve had enough booze to where I shouldn’t finish and post it tonight. I’ll finish it and post it tomorrow.

          Like

    • 92 grad

      I agree with your first comment here. My first thought when reading senators post was “because people suck”. Your criticism of right/conservative minded people? I wish I hadn’t read it because it infuriates me. You’re well written and enjoy being all smart and you must enjoy intimidating people with your display when you comment on politics like you did here. I’m just glad I don’t know you personally.

      Like

      • Are you trying to hurt my feelings?

        Sorry the truth hurts and you’re incacble of an articulate response.

        Like

      • Napoleon BonerFart

        Well written? You think arguments like, “eat a shotgun” require any thought? This guy understands as much economics and foreign policy as my cat.

        Like

        • That wasn’t an argument. If you weren’t an idiot you’d know that. Your cat knew that wasn’t an argument.

          Like

          • Napoleon BonerFart

            Equal parts dumb and nasty is no way to go through life, Derek. Before you go accusing people of being idiots or suggesting they kill themselves, you might want to read some books. Maybe even some books on the function of prices. You’ve got a lot to learn, bless your heart.

            Like

            • You’re a loser. Sad. Someone should punch you in the face. I’ll pay their legal fees. I could shoot somebody and it would be ok.

              The last president was born in Kenya. There were people who placed birth announcements in two Honolulu newspapers in 1961 because they wanted him to be eligible for president.

              Yes Ted Cruz was eligible because his mom’s from Texas. Huh? Obama’s mom was born in Kansas? So what? Ted’s like not half black so it’s different.

              The above is equal parts dumb and nasty. You thought it was suited for the White House. Don’t lie and say you give a fuck about nasty or dumb. They’re both just great if the nasty and the dumb are if your particular brand.

              Like

              • Napoleon BonerFart

                Do you really think extolling violence makes you look good? Ignoring arguments and just resorting to ridiculous ad hominem attacks simply make you look exceedingly dumb. Like, short bus dumb.

                And speaking of dumb, what the hell do the birthplace of Obama and Cruz have to do with the price of tea in China? Has anybody raised that issue? Or are you simply trying to change the subject from your complete ignorance of political liberty and economics?

                “They’re both just great if the nasty and the dumb are if your particular brand.” No, dude. You’re ascribing your own motivations onto me. There’s no basis for you to do that. I wasn’t a Cruz supporter. I also wasn’t an Obama supporter.

                Please keep this thread going. Watching your brain short circuit is immensely entertaining. Maybe you can start arguing politics using Pokemon characters. I wouldn’t put it past you. Bless your heart.

                Like

                • Anybody with a functioning cortex would know that I was channeling Trump who is both dumb and nasty. This underscores the fact that you only have standards when they suit you. In other words, you have no standards.

                  Like

                  • Napoleon BonerFart

                    Sure. But there wasn’t any reason to. There is more to the world than Trump apologists and Obama groupies. But I don’t expect you to know that. Don’t let logic or reason stop you now. This is far too interesting watching you go off the rails. You’re the best argument against public education I’ve ever seen.

                    Like

  2. gastr1

    The safety of its students is job 1b of a university, with 1a being the academic success of its students. Schools are in competition with each other for students and bad press about the safety of a campus can really harm enrollment. So…universities will do almost anything to cover up bad press.

    Jerry Falwell Jr. knows a lot more about this than Donald Trump, who seems to think any press is good press because he can make himself look like the winner or the victim in all cases. But in the case of universities, privacy, secrecy, and a controlled message are absolute gold.

    Universities really don’t like open-records laws.

    Like

  3. HVL Dawg

    One thing that can really help a program is to have a head coach who demonstrates, and enforces, an uncompromising, high standard regarding the conduct of the young men in his charge.

    Like

    • gastr1

      The administration has to demand this in all of its hires.

      Like

    • Mayor

      I appreciate what you are saying HLV but who is responsible for demonstrating and enforcing an uncompromising, high standard regarding young WOMEN at the institution, there either as a student or as a visitor? I never participated in a “train” but I know they happened when I was growing up. If what the Minnesota players say is true then the female in question consented and they aren’t guilty of anything except poor judgment IMO. But this is 2017 and the rules have changed. A female can now change her mind the next day, decide after the fact she didn’t really mean to do it after all and wreak havoc on the male/males who participated. Doesn’t have to be a “train” either. They can do the same with individual one-on-one sex, too. My legal advice to a young man, certainly about group sex with one female, is: “DON”T DO IT!!” Period.!! Will a 19 year old guy full of raging hormones listen? Likely not.

      Like

      • HVL Dawg

        The coach I described will tell his players to stay away from crazy ass women- and that includes any woman who consents to group sex.

        Like

  4. No to increased power for Title IX in these cases. Because it’s already a dubious, sub-constitutional process where the accused enjoy no rights. No, the fact that a victim (alleged or otherwise) is present in the proceedings doesn’t mean we should be ignoring the rights of the accused. That leads exactly to Duke lacrosse.

    Ironically there, even though t he stakes were much higher the kids were better off because it was an actual legal proceeding and the players’ families could afford good lawyers. Who proceeded to completely dismantle the case against the players and wage a war that would cost Mike Nifong his career (justifiably). It’s an aside but there are other issues in play here (what happens to poor people in Durham county when the state decides to lean on them?). But if this had all happened “at the Title IX level” the players would have been railroaded and convicted without so much as anything resembling a fair trial.

    There is an irony here. With Title IX proceedings the institutions circle the wagons and take the path of least resistance because it’s safest for them. But that same wagon circling is also leads to accusers getting wrongfully brushed off, immoral and unethical behavior by administrators and coaches getting covered up, and bad player behavior being covered up.

    It’s a much longer conversation I guess but this eventually leads to me pointing out that any time someone says and means “if you ain’t cheatin’, you ain’t tryin'” we should probably hold that person down and punch them in the crotch until they learn a valuable lesson.

    It’s clearly possible to function without descending to this level, at least partially. I won’t say Athens is perfect but it doesn’t appear there has ever been any rug sweeping where players getting in trouble is concerned (not since the Richt era began, anyway). So if nothing else we can give some credit to the coaches and administrators there. It’s not the only school like that.

    Also, the other takeaway here is that the NCAA is beyond ineffectual. Baylor shouldn’t be allowed to compete in Football right now, period. Yes, this punishes kids that had nothing to do with this behavior. So what. The lack of institutional control here (or perhaps it’s better to say “the disturbing institutional behavior that enabled this to go on”) means that Baylor should be suffering on a level that’s as bad as Penn State if not worse. Every time the Baylor Football team plays next season it’s going to be an utter travesty.

    Like

    • Aladawg

      Your comment “at least since the Richt era began” is not true for CKS considering the open records lobbying and several abeyances of punishment this past fall. That’s why I am struggling with this new coach.

      Like

      • Napoleon BonerFart

        But hasn’t Smart’s disciplinary laxness been over trivial matters (drinking/marijuana)? I would be sorely disappointed to see him interfere with police or administrators over issues of sexual assault.

        Like

        • aladawg

          Multiple repeat drinking issues and tearing up others property are not trivial to me. In my view(Please note this), I believe allowing “trivial” things in your terms lead to the “aura” players have of being above the law. And then once they feel that they are “exempt” things like Baylor happen.

          Like

          • Napoleon BonerFart

            Agree to disagree. Shooting a BB gun is something boys do. It’s not sinister and it’s not dangerous. Charge them for damages and make them run stadium steps. Drinking and dope is something that 99% of college kids get into. There’s no need to insist our players be choir boys.

            Like

  5. reality check here

    Due process is never a part of university proceedings. If you want due process you must use the courts.

    The flip side to “what if it were your daughter?” is “what if it were your son being accused?” I have 3 daughters and 1 son. For any of them I would recommend the legal system rather than the kangaroo courts schools provide.

    Like

      • Napoleon BonerFart

        There is a big difference between a system that sometimes fails to live up to its standards of fairness and a system that is designed not to be fair.

        Like

        • Debby Balcer

          +1. I don’t know why we accept that being a college student means you deal with a college or the NCAA without legal representation. No adult would allow that to happen to them why should we want that to be standard practice for colleges.

          Like

    • gastr1

      What if the school/club/team threatens to kick you out if you go to the police? Oh, that never happens, I’m sure.

      Like

    • The flip side to “what if it were your daughter?” is “what if it were your son being accused?”

      If my son were Art Briles, I’d change my name out of embarrassment.

      Like

      • reality check here

        So you think university investigations provide due process?

        I said nothing about Art Briles.

        I am certainly not enthralled with the legal process especially with all the dishonest asshole lawyers trying to twist facts and put words in people’s mouths but in the court system at least you have a chance to get due process.

        Like

        • Which part of “Maybe Minnesota shows that student-athletes on their own are deserving of more due process protection than a school wielding its Title IX office as a sword for its own ends rather than as a shield for the victims is willing to provide.” didn’t you get?

          Like

          • reality check here

            I got it all. I agreed with you. What I don’t get is why you made your Art Briles comment in response. I don’t like him either.

            Like

            • Ah — now I get it.

              The point I was trying to make in the post is that there are two situations in play. One, like Minnesota, where the school comes down with a heavy hand using Title IX to pressure kids. Two, like Baylor, where the school makes no attempt to hold coaches and administrators accountable.

              Your “what if it were your son?” question is appropriate to raise in the context of the former question, but not in the latter.

              Like

              • reality check here

                We are on the same page.

                I would add that – just a hunch – due process is likely the reason people like Art Briles are not held accountable by the schools. In a legal proceeding attorneys are able to conduct discovery and I would be stunned if any school is pure as the driven snow. Due process is offensive to colleges. They want to stay above it all and be in total control.

                My main point is that anyone who faces serious disciplinary action from any school is likely to get a more just result in court. That was certainly true at Emory and obviously had nothing to do with athletics there

                Like

  6. Aladawg

    I am with you all the way Senator which is why I have been so against the new FOIA (sneak and hide) law for Georgia. While I expect fairness and the right way, I also am staunchly in favor of considering victims. Universities are looking filthiest by the day.

    Like

  7. Bright Idea

    The word I’ve been hung up on for awhile now is “excess.’ Everything about athletics is now excessive. When colleges bring in a team half-full of rapists and other misfits just to raise more money and get more students, what can be expected? As much as I love sports I hate what giving scholarships to young people who are there just because they play ball has done to the purpose of colleges and universities. Not accusing them of rape, Kentucky basketball is a prime example, but I digress. No Title IX laws or officers, no college presidents, no politicians or coaches will ever stop it as long as sports rules the roost. Everything they do will be wrong to somebody. Any coach taking the high ground better win every game. As long as people like you and I support the current model it will never get any better. With morals the way they are now, eliminating athletic scholarships would never totally solve this problem anyway. Perhaps that is just one of many excuses why they will never be eliminated. Another is anyone making an argument to eliminate athletic scholarships is likely to be called, sight unseen, the dreaded R word.

    Like

  8. South FL Dawg

    As a woman it’s definitely scary but then it always was. The night you spend out bar hopping with a bunch of friends easily becomes the night you meet a nice guy that offers to walk you home. Most of the time that’s really all it is. But I can remember once being suddenly tackled by the guy that was walking me home; I fought back and he gave up. It wasn’t even a football player. Another time my roommate and I had a party; everyone left or so I thought, until I turned around and one guy had hid and stayed inside. Eventually I got him to leave. Heck if I wasn’t one of the careful ones and I still had a couple of close calls.

    By the way it’s not just what happens to women ….teabagging? Just damn.

    The problem with athletes is that when one of them commits a crime, the athletic program protects them. Now we have 2 criminals, the accused and the adult protecting him. For the victim to have a chance the investigation needs to be completely outside the sphere of influence of the school (let’s not forget the heads of Penn State and Baylor helped to hide things). Even the Title IX officer being an employee is a problem. No liaising with the police departments should be allowed, which is a tall order so maybe the investigations need to be moved to another jurisdiction.

    In general though, boys/men need to respect women despite pop culture….I know it’s tough….but it’s a choice. Parents of both boys and girls have to beat the culture and teach their kids to make good choices, so hopefully we don’t have as many investigations needed.

    Like

  9. Satowndawg

    Waco PD and DA have put all their energy into putting every motorcycle rider within a mile radius of a gang shooting into jail for life…affiliated or not…one of the most corrupt and backwards areas in TX…absolutely pathetic “response” by all involved

    Like

  10. What if it were your daughter? Come on Senator ,you know that is a legally objectionable argument ,would be prohibited if objected to, and has been objectionable for decades. Our legal system differentiates between emotion and logic. Why ,for the exact reason reality check cites above…..for every Baylor football there is a Duke Lacrosse. For every daughter there is a son. If a woman is raped ….CALL THE COPS. The two Title IX administrators I’ve had the misfortune of dealing with assumed guilt because “a woman would never claim rape if it weren’t true”……I’m totally convinced this administrator was a women’s studies graduate but regardless what does the kid’s lawyer say to this idiot vested with the Title IX power to ruin your client’s life. Advocating for the dismantling of the Title IX bureaucracy is NOT advocating for free for all rape …its just not.

    Like

  11. The comment of “what is best for the school and is convenient for the school”, pretty much nails it for me. Come hell or high water that is what most will do. I say that quite sadly.

    Like

  12. Got Cowdog

    My freshman year at UGA I saw (and participated in) a lot of questionable behavior from both sexes. While some of it was regrettable by one party or the other, it was all consensual. Of course beer goggles and a target rich environment did not help. 🙂
    When you turn newly minted adults loose on the playground of a college campus with little or no supervision, there will be issues.There will always be those that are not mature or experienced enough to make the correct decisions. There will always be those who will readily take advantage of a situation.
    I appreciate South Fla Dawg weighing in from the feminine side, and I agree with her last paragraph in particular. Teach your children to respect themselves and others. This flies in the face of pop culture and is IMO the biggest hurdle in parenting. Self respect and personal responsibility starts in the home an cannot be legislated.

    Like