patrick.net

Yeah, so it is a campus policy bill that makes funding dependent on implementing these policies. Regardless of whether or not the bill has consequences beyond the campus, it is effectively inverting in dubio pro reo which is pretty much the gateway to totalitarianism, You could make a case for a less harsh view of this bill if the accuser would have to prove that they never gave affirmative consent or revoked it at some point, but even that would not make the totalitarian picture much prettier. Pretty much most times sex evolves from a prior unrelated chat and then some non-verbal clues, so you're basically going against nature. But worse it seems like it is interpreted that the defendant has to prove that there was consent, which is pretty much turning a free nation into a totalitarian state where people can be denounced like it happened to jews, heretics, infidels etc. So you may be right that nobody may have gone to prison because it is campus funding law only at this point, but it doesn't change neither the essence nor tone of it and if this ever gets adopted beyond campus it will mark a dark chapter in human history. At least now parents can decide whether to send their sons(/daughters) to such a campus or not. When you give up the in dubio pro reo principle and invert the proof of guilt to a proof of innocence, the "free" country will cease to exist and give reign to institutional terror - which is why it dates so far back as the Romans and even Aristotle.

mell says

in dubio pro reo

Can you please point out where in the statute you believe that has been repealed? As you noted, the statute addresses funding and requires institutions to formulate policies, but none of those repeal in dubio pro reo. It would be a defense, for example, to say that the complainant said "yes". Even if the complainant claims later to have been so intoxicated as not to understand the meaning of the word "yes," the burden of proof remains on the complainant.

curious2 says

Can you please point out where in the statute you believe that has been repealed?

It hasn't been explicitly repealed and since it is a funding law only, it should have no bearing on criminal law (doesn't mean though it cannot wreck someone's career/societal future).

curious2 says

It would be a defense, for example, to say that the complainant said "yes". Even if the complainant claims later to have been so intoxicated as not to understand the meaning of the word "yes," the burden of proof remains on the complainant.

If you interpret it that way, it obviously seems less harsh and more in line with common standards of criminal law. But many do interpret it as an inversion, that's why apps have come out and become popular where you sign your consent digitally, or at least many record their adventures with their phone now (thus involuntarily making porn that could leak) to be on the safe side. And the few prominent cases also point to interpretation of inversion, e.g. nobody seems to have asked the mattress girl to produce any proof of the alleged rape, instead Nungesser had to come up with stored text messages that clearly indicated her sexual interest and raunchiness on and around the date of interest. What if he had deleted that thread or lost/upgraded his phone? He certainly wouldn't be in the better position he is in today after almost losing everything.

mell says

many do interpret

in the manosphere echo chamber, polluted by noise from that guy. In real life, however, rape remains difficult to prosecute, partly because nobody serious has proposed repealing in dubio pro reo. Nungesser was never prosecuted, let alone convicted. I can agree that some people took the accuser's side, which is a common problem in commercial media, but that happens every time a prosecutor does a "perp walk" and claims to have caught "the bad guy." It reminds me of a cartoon, where a guy says he hopes his conviction in the media will be overturned in the courts. BTW, Nungesser is actually suing Columbia for that, and he may have a case.

Fair enough, it remains to be seen how this law plays out as it is still fairly young and we probably only hear about spectacular cases. WRT to the manosphere, the alleged hate-speech you reference from Roosh V. wrt to rape on private property was supposedly sarcasm/satire as commented by Roosh V. himself. Arguably distasteful, but if the SPLC puts him on their hate-org list they pretty much have to put most of the 2nd and 3rd wave radical feminist groups on that list too, who with predictable frequency tweet and post calls to violence and death against men. I also once linked a skype interview of Roosh and a self-declared feminist writer/journalist where the two had a really great conversation going despite quite opposing views at http://hyperallergic.com/199218/what-happens-when-a-feminist-artist-interviews-a-pickup-artist/
Roosh has a big provocateur jerk mouth and but is not the monster he is portrayed to be IMO. I prefer the writings of Rollo Tomassi (a married guy who is considered part of the manosphere) at the rational male blog who are very scientific, (sometimes philosophic), logic, and free of polarization or spiteful attacks.

hmmmm...a glitch in the new 'Ignore' function???

SBH says

Since i have all the Rep/Cons/Teas on ignore, I can now freely admit that I, and only I, was the runner in that race picture I posted countless times where the runner was shitting his pants all over the track. Lets just keep this between ourselves LibBros...no need to restock the enemy's munitions...

bgamall4 says

http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/10/europe/amputee-soldier-muslim-facebook-donald-trump/index.html

Good article, nice guy, but consider. Where he refers to "a Muslim nurse," for example, try substituting "a nurse who is a smoker." Would that be an argument in favor of smoking, or against restrictions on smoking? Of course not. Restrictions on smoking are not "tobacco-phobia," they are simply recognition that smoking kills people. ''Cigarettes are the only legal product that when used as intended cause death," and Islam is the only religion that combines Old Testament violence with New Testament global missionary proseletyzing. Considering that Muslim terrorists have killed more Americans than all other terrorists combined in the last 50 years (at least), while comprising only 1% of the population, the concern is not a phobia.

I took my Kanger tank to the shop yesterday to get a new coil. The owner was like let the new girl do it. She did it, and it's been leaking like a sieve ever since.
I'm sure She's a cracker jack.

Alcohol and guns are also legal, and when used as intended, cause death

Thats why the ATF gang holds so much power

curious2 says

Please direct your statement to Elizabeth of Windsor, who worked as a mechanic during the war.

8 Things You May Not Know About Queen Elizabeth II

She drove a truck during World War II.

Elizabeth wears an officer’s uniform and stands beside an Auxiliary Territorial Service first aid truck during World War II. (Credit: Keystone/Getty Images)

After months of begging her father to let his heir pitch in, Elizabeth-then an 18-year-old princess-joined the Women’s Auxiliary Territorial Service during World War II. Known as Second Subaltern Elizabeth Windsor, she donned a pair of coveralls and trained in London as a mechanic and military truck driver. The queen remains the only female member of the royal family to have entered the armed forces and is the only living head of state who served in World War II.

She sent an email in 1976.

On March 26, 1976, Queen Elizabeth sent her first email while taking part in a network technology demonstration at the Royal Signals and Radar Establishment, a research facility in Malvern, England. The message was transmitted over ARPANET, the forerunner of the modern Internet. She is considered the first head of state to have used electronic mail.

Damn, that's pretty cool on both counts.

@Dan8267, I wanted to ask you about the comment I've quoted below. I missed what it was based on, and wonder if you have a link?

Dan8267 says

no one can be as homophobic as CIC without being a repressed homosexual.

If you had said Fap33/Bap33 or Fortwayne/Forthood, I would certainly agree. Regarding CIC, though he says occasionally crazy things to criticize President Obama, I hadn't noticed much of a pattern other than trolling two of my favorite commenters into extraordinary flame wars. (Trying to understand those is a bit like trying to understand WWI. It's possible to identify villainous acts and legitimate grievances, but the reactions get sometimes over the top, and people wonder what was it all for.)

curious2 says

Good article, nice guy, but consider. Where he refers to "a Muslim nurse," for example, try substituting "a nurse who is a smoker." Would that be an argument in favor of smoking, or against restrictions on smoking? Of course not. Restrictions on smoking are not "tobacco-phobia," they are simply recognition that smoking kills people. ''Cigarettes are the only legal product that when used as intended cause death," and Islam is the only religion that combines Old Testament violence with New Testament global missionary proseletyzing. Considering that Muslim terrorists have killed more Americans than all other terrorists combined in the last 50 years (at least), while comprising only 1% of the population, the concern is not a phobia.

how did I miss this? Right on.

Ironman says

what type of psycho puts someone on ignore, then goes and starts an attack thread about them?

Marcus, who also uses the screen name "humanity", and refuses to get vaccinated against influenza even when schoolchildren are dying from H1N1.

curious2 says

@Dan8267, I wanted to ask you about the comment I've quoted below. I missed what it was based on, and wonder if you have a link?

Dan8267 says

no one can be as homophobic as CIC without being a repressed homosexual.

CIC is obsessed with Georgie's Alibi, a typical restaurant/bar in Fort Lauderdale that is supportive of gay rights and marriage equality. It's not actually a gay bar. If it weren't for the rainbow flags, you wouldn't distinguish between it and any other place like Brewskis or Miler's Ale House or a thousand other inside/outside bar restaurants. I went there a total of three times in my life. The first two times were with coworkers while I was working in Fort Lauderdale. The third time was to prove to all PatNet that CIC is a coward who would not show up to a public place after begging like a slut for my home address.

I picked Georgie's just on the million to one chance he did show up. I knew he was a major bigot and homophobe and I'd love to expose his vileness in public. If he had shown up and acted like he does on PatNet, there's a damn good chance he would offend the wrong person and get the crap kicked out of him and I'd post the video on YouTube. Of course, the coward chickened out like he always does.

Nonetheless CIC is obsessed about this place and mentions it in every third post he makes. I'm thinking he's fantasizing about all the gay stuff he imagines goes on at the place like men screwing on the tables. He's even written about these fantasies on PatNet. Again, the actual restaurant is no different from any other south Florida bar restaurant except for the rainbow flags, and that's mostly just solidarity. Yes, many gay people support the business, but so do a lot of straight people. It has good food, strong drinks, and a relaxed atmosphere, and you can eat lunch outside pretty much all year round. But that's common in South Florida so it's not at all special.

CIC is also obsessed with homosexuality, bringing it up pretty much at the drop of a hat, any hat, no matter how irrelevant it is to the conversation. He tries to insult people by calling them gay, which is like trying to insult people by calling them blue-eyed when they are not. Am I suppose to think that having blue eyes is bad?

He also gets really upset when I say he must be a repressed homosexual to be so obsessed about it, much like Fort Wayne. This just makes me even more suspicious.

I've always said, the more sexually repressed a society or an individual is, the more perverted and self-loathing it is. CIC and the Middle East are perfect examples of this principle.

curious2 says

Marcus, who also uses the screen name "humanity"

Sounds appropriate.

www.F54rqDh2mWA

Dan8267 says

CIC is obsessed with Georgie's Alibi, a typical restaurant/bar in Fort Lauderdale that is supportive of gay rights and marriage equality.

AFAIK, he never mentioned the place until you offered to meet him there.

Dan8267 says

CIC is also obsessed with homosexuality, bringing it up pretty much at the drop of a hat, any hat, no matter how irrelevant it is to the conversation. He also gets really upset when I say he must be a repressed homosexual to be so obsessed about it, much like Fort Wayne.

Fortwayne/Forthood did that many times, and when I started pointing it out with links to prove it, he put me on Ignore because he couldn't handle the truth. CIC/Ironman just keeps on trolling, which seems to be a hobby for him: once he gets a rise out of someone, he tries to reel in whoever took the bait.

Dan8267 says

He tries to insult people by calling them gay, which is like trying to insult people by calling them blue-eyed when they are not.

I agree, but it seems like you've maybe done that to each other. I return to the WWI metaphor: using chemical weapons is bad, mkay? Once both sides have joined in that exchange, it gets complicated trying to sort out who started it or escalated it to its ultimate extent. Several users have asked both of you to end the flame war.

curious2 says

AFAIK, he never mentioned the place until you offered to meet him there.

True, but as soon as I told everyone it was a gay friendly restaurant and that if CIC had shown up, he'd make an ass of himself there anyway, CIC hasn't stopped talking about it.

curious2 says

I agree, but it seems like you've maybe done that to each other.

Most of my insults towards CIC revolves are bestiality, necrophilia, incest, and him being a 50 cent whore working out of New Jersey turnpike rest stops. And I'm pretty sure at least two out of those four things are true.

Would a, FUCK YOU! be too abrasive as response to all threads & comments?

HEY YOU says

Would a, FUCK YOU! be too abrasive as response to all threads & comments?

Not creative enough. If you are going to insult someone, put a little effort into it.

I don't know how anyone could think anything bad of you. They might not agree with your opinions on things, but I don't see how anyone can argue that your ideas aren't well thought out and well-communicated. You seem to always keep your cool no matter how rude someone else is to you. I've never seen you engage in petty verbal sniping. Perhaps some people simply feel insecure around such an obviously highly intelligent person. So they lash out and call you a troll... Or perhaps I'm never on the site when you go into Hyde mode. But I've been here a long time. It seems statistically unlikely that I wouldn't have caught you just once as Mr. Hyde, if it were in your nature to be so.

You forgot to add your fondness of posting naked pictures of your gay, fat, old boyfriends from Georgie's.

Those are your selfies.

Ironman says

You can be the judge.

CIC fantasizes that Georgie's is like the Blue Oyster from the Police Academy films with men screwing each others on the tables. Reality is much more boring. And being gay is not a prerequisite to have lunch there. It's not like they check.

That's one swinging orgy.

It's pretty sad if you are so insecure about your own sexuality that the above images frighten you.

turtledove says

I don't know how anyone could think anything bad of you.

Only the weak minded who cannot justify their positions do. There's actually only a few trolls on PatNet, but they the most vocal members.

The thing is, you can completely disagree with someone and still not be an ass, but America is soooo polarized today that it's impossible to talk about politics or religions without someone making it into a war. Of course, this is why places like PatNet are needed in the first place. You really can't talk politics today except anonymously online.

Dan8267 says

CIC fantasizes that Georgie's is like the Blue Oyster from the Police Academy films with men screwing each others on the tables.

It's not the sex that's disturbing, it's the lethal gossip.