• "Sickening" Fla. spring break gang rape video found
    64 replies, posted
These guys were college aged, most likely in college, and have gone through a battery of rape education They knew EXACTLY what they were doing.
[QUOTE=Starlight 456;47519574]Far too many teenagers out there think that sex with someone too drunk to respond isn't rape, and this might be a case of that for some people. [I][B]They may not have known it was even illegal[/B][/I].[/QUOTE] With the seriousness of the crime and all the education that goes towards teaching our kids that this is bad, Ignorance should not be accepted as a defense.
[QUOTE=_Axel;47519070]Textbook example of the bystander effect. I wonder if there are efficient ways to deter it.[/QUOTE] I'm glad you asked! The psychological term for this effect is diffusion of responsibility. A person is less likely to take responsibility for an action when other people are present. The more people, the lower the chances that someone will take responsibility. This is due to a number of reasons, with more people the more we can minimize our feeling of guilt over the situation, and the more we lack personal responsibility. We also tend to look to others to gauge the social norm for many situations. If no one else is stopping these people from assaulting this person, then I won't either, because that would be out of the norm, it would make feel uncomfortable, it would make me the outcast of this particular group. The problem with this thought is that there is most likely multiple people who feel it's wrong, but won't stand up out of fear of standing out. However, there's one very simple way to break this spell. All you need to do is point to someone. Say you're in the audience watching this rape taking place. Point to someone else watching and say, "you need to do something about this!" I know this sounds silly, because the person you're talking to probably has nothing to do with the situation, but chances are it will work and the person you called out will do something, because now you forced them to stand out. So now the act of not acting will make them stand out and be the outcast of that group. If any of this piqued your interest at all I'd suggest reading about the [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Kitty_Genovese"]murder of Kitty Genovese[/URL]. She's covered in just about every social psychology lecture there is, and it's a very important phenomenon to understand.
I'm at work, and haven't seen the video, but is she giving signs of distress? Because if she is, then those bystanders should feel ashamed. However, if she's not showing signs of distress, you kinda can't blame bystanders from not intervening. If she's not relaying that it's unwanted, then bystanders have no clue it's non-consensual, and are even less likely to intervene. It's not her fault, because sexual assault is a terrifying thing. But you can't blame the bystanders either IF the only thing they know is that 2 people are having sex.
[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;47525660]I'm at work, and haven't seen the video, but is she giving signs of distress? Because if she is, then those bystanders should feel ashamed.[/QUOTE] You may say that now, but statistically speaking if you were in that same situation you would be one of those bystanders.
Truly sickening. It is good to know that they were caught afterwards. I watched the video couple more times and the third time I watched it I was left with a lot of questions racing in my thoughts. Who was recording everything? The recorder almost aimed the camera directly towards the event, so the they knew what was going on, 95.8% sure of it. Which begs the question; why didn't they stop it? Were they in on the whole thing? The recorder was right near the incident as well a shit ton of other people and not [U]one person[/U]stopped to say [B]"Hey that girl right there is getting raped in broad daylight!".[/B] Why didn't anyone say anything? According to research, more incidents happened during spring break than last year, the highlight being armed and dangerous. That still doesn't foreshadow the increase in sexual assaults. [B]This might be a stupid question but,[/B] are the influences of social media and our culture continuously promote crimes such as rape? I have more questions that could be asked but are too sensitive and may lead me to being banned.
[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;47525660]I'm at work, and haven't seen the video, but is she giving signs of distress? Because if she is, then those bystanders should feel ashamed. However, if she's not showing signs of distress, you kinda can't blame bystanders from not intervening. If she's not relaying that it's unwanted, then bystanders have no clue it's non-consensual, and are even less likely to intervene. It's not her fault, because sexual assault is a terrifying thing. But you can't blame the bystanders either IF the only thing they know is that 2 people are having sex.[/QUOTE] Maybe the article is using charged language, but from this excerpt: [quote]Several men can be seen surrounding an incapacitated woman on a beach chair. [...] The victim told police that she thought she had been drugged at the time, and she did not remember the incident well enough to report it.[/quote] Consider that the only reason this came to light is because the phone with the video on it was found at the scene of a shooting, it's pretty reasonable to believe that it was without consent. As she was physically incapable of showing restraint and was allegedly unconscious.
[QUOTE=Zeke129;47520298]Nobody should be pressed into a situation where they're put at risk under penalty of criminal charges. If you don't at least call for help or ensure someone else does so you're a shitty person, but not a criminal.[/QUOTE] My experience in situations like this is everyone is there to have a good time, and everyone expects other people to have made arrangements to make sure they have a good time. So, if I was there, I'm having a good time and not looking around to see who might be getting assaulted and who isn't. If I see two guys and a girl doing their thing, the only way I might have to know if it's consensual or not is if I go over there, interrupt them, and talk to her. LOL, that's not happening. So I wouldn't call these bystanders shitty people. IF, on the other hand, someone was calling for help and they ignored that, yes that's shitty. If I was there and she cried out for help then I'd help her. It might sound unreasonable, that I'm putting it on the the victim, but the problem is in those circumstances you can't KNOW she's a victim unless she says something. So, no matter what, she needs to be able to speak up. This is also why it's important to be with a friend or friends when partying like this. You all need to have each other's backs, since things can get out of control fast.
[QUOTE=Michael haxz;47524744]With the seriousness of the crime and all the education that goes towards teaching our kids that this is bad, Ignorance should not be accepted as a defense.[/QUOTE] Oh absolutely, these people need to go to jail for a long fucking time, I don't mean it in that way at all. My point was simply that they (probably not in this case) might not have known it was rape, though after thinking about it more, I can't really believe that they didn't know what they were doing.
[QUOTE=Starlight 456;47519574]Not to try and inject drama into the thread, but this is what people mean when they say "Teach kids not to rape" - Far too many teenagers out there think that sex with someone too drunk to respond isn't rape, and this might be a case of that for some people. They may not have known it was even illegal. Though I would think that most knew and didn't care.[/QUOTE] People are told not to rape, not to steal and not to kill. They do it anyway.
[QUOTE=Ragekipz;47526785]People are told not to rape, not to steal and not to kill. They do it anyway.[/QUOTE] Welp, guess laws are pointless! People will just break them!
[QUOTE=Starlight 456;47527125]Welp, guess laws are pointless! People will just break them![/QUOTE] That's not my point at all. My point is that people that break the law either: A) Think they won't get caught, B) Don't care about laws, C) Have mental disorders that either prevents them to understand what laws are or simply can't stop themselves. And they do that regardless of being told "Do not kill/steal/rape". Also I trully wonder where the fuck people get this idea that men aren't told that they shouldn't be raping.
[QUOTE=Starlight 456;47527125]Welp, guess laws are pointless! People will just break them![/QUOTE] Talk about jumping to conclusions.
[QUOTE=Ragekipz;47526785]People are told not to rape, not to steal and not to kill. They do it anyway.[/QUOTE] Most rapes aren't gang rapes like this. Most are a result of someone going too far and not understanding when they should have stopped. "Teaching people not to rape" means teaching people what consent is. Crimes like the one discussed here are, thankfully, the minority.
[QUOTE=Ragekipz;47527713]That's not my point at all. My point is that people that break the law either: A) Think they won't get caught, B) Don't care about laws, C) Have mental disorders that either prevents them to understand what laws are or simply can't stop themselves. And they do that regardless of being told "Do not kill/steal/rape". Also I trully wonder where the fuck people get this idea that men aren't told that they shouldn't be raping.[/QUOTE] Honestly there's too much sugarcoating in lessons of the law, especially to children. You're told to not physicially abuse or rape or kill or steal but you never truly understand the implications of your actions until it happens to you. A big thing is we're told "you'll go to jail and become an outcast" but it's just as important to say how badly it can traumatize the victim, how much one life is worth no matter what, how it will affect other people.
[QUOTE=Ragekipz;47526785]People are told not to rape, not to steal and not to kill. They do it anyway.[/QUOTE] Okay, let me explain why people stress teaching not to rape over teaching not to steal and kill. Pretty much everyone knows stealing is wrong, and there's barely any complex situations where it's uncertain as to whether something is stealing or not. Most people know they aren't supposed to steal, but still do it because they need money. It's an economic issue. Pretty much everyone knows that murder is wrong too, and again, there aren't really many complex situations of "is it okay to kill this guy?". The only real situation where killing someone is morally uncertain is if you're trying to defend yourself, which requires you to be afraid of being murdered yourself. So even in situations where killing is okay, it's still because killing is wrong. Then there's war, which is also a "kill, be killed, or watch others be killed" situation. Most murders happen either due to mental illness or 'organized' crime. Pretty much everyone knows that rape is wrong. [I]However[/I], not everyone knows [U]what actually counts as rape[/U]. Most people think of rape as "oh no this modest virgin girl was beaten and forced to have sex by a stranger in a dark alleyway", which is the vast minority of rapes. Most rapes are actually committed by someone the person knows, and there isn't always physical violence, but many people either don't know this or deny this. Basically, a large amount of rape is due to ignorance and archaic views of women and sex. When (most) people say "teach not to rape", they don't mean "teach that rape is wrong", they mean "teach what rape encompasses". It won't stop all causes of rape, obviously, but it will help reduce one major cause.
[QUOTE=Last or First;47530600]Okay, let me explain why people stress teaching not to rape over teaching not to steal and kill. Pretty much everyone knows stealing is wrong, and there's barely any complex situations where it's uncertain as to whether something is stealing or not. Most people know they aren't supposed to steal, but still do it because they need money. It's an economic issue. Pretty much everyone knows that murder is wrong too, and again, there aren't really many complex situations of "is it okay to kill this guy?". The only real situation where killing someone is morally uncertain is if you're trying to defend yourself, which requires you to be afraid of being murdered yourself. So even in situations where killing is okay, it's still because killing is wrong. Then there's war, which is also a "kill, be killed, or watch others be killed" situation. Most murders happen either due to mental illness or 'organized' crime. Pretty much everyone knows that rape is wrong. [I]However[/I], not everyone knows [U]what actually counts as rape[/U]. Most people think of rape as "oh no this modest virgin girl was beaten and forced to have sex by a stranger in a dark alleyway", which is the vast minority of rapes. Most rapes are actually committed by someone the person knows, and there isn't always physical violence, but many people either don't know this or deny this. Basically, a large amount of rape is due to ignorance and archaic views of women and sex. When (most) people say "teach not to rape", they don't mean "teach that rape is wrong", they mean "teach what rape encompasses". It won't stop all causes of rape, obviously, but it will help reduce one major cause.[/QUOTE] It would be easier if people weren't changing what is rape based on their own definitions, as well as the many variations that law. What men are learning is not "do not rape" it's "avoid women, because everything is rape".
[QUOTE=Ragekipz;47531880][B]It would be easier if people weren't changing what is rape based on their own definitions, as well as the many variations that law. [/B] What men are learning is not "do not rape" it's "avoid women, because everything is rape".[/QUOTE] This never happens and I have no fucking idea where you got the idea that it does (I mean, I have some hypotheses, but whatever). Rape has always been defined in a pretty static manner since the awareness of just how much rape actually occurs has increased. Rape has pretty much always been the act of non-consensual intercourse. Whether the victim never actually agreed, was incapable of agreeing, or was forced in to agreeing. But please do tell me on how the definitions "changed" and what "variations" of the law exist to confuse you.
[QUOTE=_Axel;47519625]It's really a shame that a lot of grave crimes are not reported for fear of being punished for having less important skeletons in the closet.[/QUOTE] Mind this is also the U.S. where your entire life can actually be ruined for incredibly petty things like doing drugs. [editline]15th April 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=hexpunK;47532292]This never happens and I have no fucking idea where you got the idea that it does (I mean, I have some hypotheses, but whatever). Rape has always been defined in a pretty static manner since the awareness of just how much rape actually occurs has increased. Rape has pretty much always been the act of non-consensual intercourse. Whether the victim never actually agreed, was incapable of agreeing, or was forced in to agreeing. But please do tell me on how the definitions "changed" and what "variations" of the law exist to confuse you.[/QUOTE] I think that Rapekipz is confusing the fringe, poe's law type people that have become stereotyped to frequenting tumblr and to an extent twitter. Oh and the incredible minority if crazy ass college kids who have never seen the real world at all.
[QUOTE=hexpunK;47532292]This never happens and I have no fucking idea where you got the idea that it does (I mean, I have some hypotheses, but whatever). Rape has always been defined in a pretty static manner since the awareness of just how much rape actually occurs has increased. Rape has pretty much always been the act of non-consensual intercourse. Whether the victim never actually agreed, was incapable of agreeing, or was forced in to agreeing. But please do tell me on how the definitions "changed" and what "variations" of the law exist to confuse you.[/QUOTE] The famous "1 in 4 women" is one of the most famous examples of people making up their own definition of rape. Also, US only got a federal law rape in 2013.
[QUOTE=Ragekipz;47534111]The famous "1 in 4 women" is one of the most famous examples of people making up their own definition of rape. [/QUOTE] As far as I know that figure only stops being true if you exclude things like spousal rape and rape by coercision, in which case it's you changing the definition
[QUOTE=Zeke129;47534290]As far as I know that figure only stops being true if you exclude things like spousal rape and rape by coercision, in which case it's you changing the definition[/QUOTE] I urge you to look further into this matter, you will find that the studies that made these claims are very flimsy.
[QUOTE=Ragekipz;47534111]The famous "1 in 4 women" is one of the most famous examples of people making up their own definition of rape. Also, US only got a federal law rape in 2013.[/QUOTE] So are you going to link to that study and provide a rebuttal (or link to one)? Because I can't work out which of the numerous studies you could be talking about. But you're still not really giving me anything to go by here. How are there "variations" of the laws that could confuse you? Has anyone actually suffered from these supposed "changed definitions"? And how the fuck did the US only get such a law in 2013? If that's accurate, then what the hell is going on over there.
[QUOTE=hexpunK;47534568]So are you going to link to that study and provide a rebuttal (or link to one)? Because I can't work out which of the numerous studies you could be talking about. But you're still not really giving me anything to go by here. How are there "variations" of the laws that could confuse you? Has anyone actually suffered from these supposed "changed definitions"? And how the fuck did the US only get such a law in 2013? If that's accurate, then what the hell is going on over there.[/QUOTE] State laws ban a lot of things that are not at the federal level. The states are like smaller central governments that are self sufficient enough to manage within their borders for the most part, with very little federal involvement. It is rare for federal involvement to occur in anything less than appeals in the judicial system, or the FBI to take over an investigation.
[QUOTE=deadoon;47534686]State laws ban a lot of things that are not at the federal level. The states are like smaller central governments that are self sufficient enough to manage within their borders for the most part, with very little federal involvement. It is rare for federal involvement to occur in anything less than appeals in the judicial system, or the FBI to take over an investigation.[/QUOTE] Oh I know about the state/federal system. But like, why wasn't something like that a federal offence from the get go? It's a pretty damn horrendous act, but I have no doubt that some chucklefuck in one state would make an attempt to strike it out of that states' laws given a chance. Your right wing are all fucking lunatics.
[QUOTE=hexpunK;47534716]Oh I know about the state/federal system. But like, why wasn't something like that a federal offence from the get go? It's a pretty damn horrendous act, but I have no doubt that some chucklefuck in one state would make an attempt to strike it out of that states' laws given a chance. Your right wing are all fucking lunatics.[/QUOTE] The states all based their laws on common law(of one form or another), thus it was redundant to make it a federal offense most likely.
[QUOTE=hexpunK;47534568] And how the fuck did the US only get such a law in 2013? If that's accurate, then what the hell is going on over there.[/QUOTE] The US used to have a real hodgepodge of rape laws, some of which were gendered. (ie, a woman couldn't [i]rape[/i] a man, the most the law would allow for was aggravated sexual assault which would often carry a lesser sentence) This may even still be the case in some states, I'm not sure how the whole federal/state law thing really works in the case of conflicting laws. But either way I don't see how this would affect the rate at which women are raped and invalidate the 1-in-4 thing. It would only serve to artifically lower the rate at which men are raped.
[QUOTE=Zeke129;47534836]I'm not sure how the whole federal/state law thing really works in the case of conflicting laws. [/QUOTE] The more strict law takes priority generally. A state law can be more strict than federal, but a less strict one would be ignored in place of the more strict federal. Like marijuana is legal at the state level in some areas, but can still be prosecuted federally. While a rifle with a removable magazine is illegal in California but legal in Arizona just next door and at the federal level.
[QUOTE=Zeke129;47534836] But either way I don't see how this would affect the rate at which women are raped and invalidate the 1-in-4 thing. It would only serve to artifically lower the rate at which men are raped.[/QUOTE] The surveys that claim 1 in 5 are flimsy as fuck and have been debunked over and over. You can read them both and draw your own conclusions. 1 in 5 women on campuses [url]https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/221153.pdf[/url] 1 in 5 women during their lifetime [url]http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/ss6308a1.htm?s_cid=ss6308a1_e[/url]
[QUOTE=Ragekipz;47536089]The surveys that claim 1 in 5 are flimsy as fuck and have been debunked over and over. 1 in 5 women during their lifetime [url]http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/ss6308a1.htm?s_cid=ss6308a1_e[/url][/QUOTE] I'm not exactly sure why you say the 1-in-5 figure is "debunked" and then you link me to a CDC study that says 1-in-5 women have been raped Unless you're trying to say that it's not 1-in-4, it's actually 1-in-5, in which case 25% to 20% isn't much of an improvement
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.