Fact or Fiction? Rolling Stone's UVA Gang Rape Story (1 Viewer)

[parasaurolophus]

“The main message we want to come out of all this is that sexual assault is a problem nationwide that we need to act in preventing. It has never been about one story. This is about the thousands of women and men who have been victims of sexual assault and have felt silenced not only by their perpetrators, but by society’s misunderstanding and stigmatization of rape.”

This is exactly why I originally said I found it sad that well-meaning people were clinging to Jackie's story. Now they can't let it go, even in the face of overwhelming evidence that it didn't happen. And it's making them look silly. And it's not helping their cause and could be doing the opposite.

Advocates for sexual assault victims need to acknowledge that false rape accusations happen, and devote part of their cause to recognizing the pathology behind it and helping people who feel that's the only way they can be heard. This stubborn denial is counterproductive, and it actually leaves women like Jackie who probably need help in a worse predicament because it adds tremendous pressure to what probably started out as a small lie.

I haven't heard many people clinging to Jackie's story- are there a lot of people doing that?

Not to diminish the importance of the sexual assault/false accusations angle, but I also don't see how Rolling Stone survives this, which is kind of a big story too. They have completely lost their credibility.

This is the most interesting part. Will be interested to see what kind of crap/fringe stories they latch on to.

 

[pantagrapher]

“The main message we want to come out of all this is that sexual assault is a problem nationwide that we need to act in preventing. It has never been about one story. This is about the thousands of women and men who have been victims of sexual assault and have felt silenced not only by their perpetrators, but by society’s misunderstanding and stigmatization of rape.”

This is exactly why I originally said I found it sad that well-meaning people were clinging to Jackie's story. Now they can't let it go, even in the face of overwhelming evidence that it didn't happen. And it's making them look silly. And it's not helping their cause and could be doing the opposite.

Advocates for sexual assault victims need to acknowledge that false rape accusations happen, and devote part of their cause to recognizing the pathology behind it and helping people who feel that's the only way they can be heard. This stubborn denial is counterproductive, and it actually leaves women like Jackie who probably need help in a worse predicament because it adds tremendous pressure to what probably started out as a small lie.

I haven't heard many people clinging to Jackie's story- are there a lot of people doing that?

Not to diminish the importance of the sexual assault/false accusations angle, but I also don't see how Rolling Stone survives this, which is kind of a big story too. They have completely lost their credibility.

Not in this thread. But before this latest WaPo piece, there were plenty of people eager to stick to her story. Hell, her roommate wrote an article backing her up. Plenty of people who invested in the story closed ranks, and people who questioned them were "throwing Jackie under the bus." And now their line is "Well, was never about Jackie's story but about the larger problem of blah blah blah."

 

[Baloney Sandwich]

“The main message we want to come out of all this is that sexual assault is a problem nationwide that we need to act in preventing. It has never been about one story. This is about the thousands of women and men who have been victims of sexual assault and have felt silenced not only by their perpetrators, but by society’s misunderstanding and stigmatization of rape.”

This is exactly why I originally said I found it sad that well-meaning people were clinging to Jackie's story. Now they can't let it go, even in the face of overwhelming evidence that it didn't happen. And it's making them look silly. And it's not helping their cause and could be doing the opposite.

Advocates for sexual assault victims need to acknowledge that false rape accusations happen, and devote part of their cause to recognizing the pathology behind it and helping people who feel that's the only way they can be heard. This stubborn denial is counterproductive, and it actually leaves women like Jackie who probably need help in a worse predicament because it adds tremendous pressure to what probably started out as a small lie.

I haven't heard many people clinging to Jackie's story- are there a lot of people doing that?

Not to diminish the importance of the sexual assault/false accusations angle, but I also don't see how Rolling Stone survives this, which is kind of a big story too. They have completely lost their credibility.

A Rolling Stone gathers no facts

 

[dhockster]

If this were an SVU episode, Randall would end up being the rapist

Oh, and it probably will be the basis for an SVU episode.

 

[pantherclub]

“The main message we want to come out of all this is that sexual assault is a problem nationwide that we need to act in preventing. It has never been about one story. This is about the thousands of women and men who have been victims of sexual assault and have felt silenced not only by their perpetrators, but by society’s misunderstanding and stigmatization of rape.”

This is exactly why I originally said I found it sad that well-meaning people were clinging to Jackie's story. Now they can't let it go, even in the face of overwhelming evidence that it didn't happen. And it's making them look silly. And it's not helping their cause and could be doing the opposite.

Advocates for sexual assault victims need to acknowledge that false rape accusations happen, and devote part of their cause to recognizing the pathology behind it and helping people who feel that's the only way they can be heard. This stubborn denial is counterproductive, and it actually leaves women like Jackie who probably need help in a worse predicament because it adds tremendous pressure to what probably started out as a small lie.

I haven't heard many people clinging to Jackie's story- are there a lot of people doing that?

Not to diminish the importance of the sexual assault/false accusations angle, but I also don't see how Rolling Stone survives this, which is kind of a big story too. They have completely lost their credibility.

No now people are saying regardless if her story is true or not rape is a serious issue and UVA has a problem with it and Jackies "story" opened up dialogue and exposed the problem

 

[SacramentoBob]

“The main message we want to come out of all this is that sexual assault is a problem nationwide that we need to act in preventing. It has never been about one story. This is about the thousands of women and men who have been victims of sexual assault and have felt silenced not only by their perpetrators, but by society’s misunderstanding and stigmatization of rape.”

This is exactly why I originally said I found it sad that well-meaning people were clinging to Jackie's story. Now they can't let it go, even in the face of overwhelming evidence that it didn't happen. And it's making them look silly. And it's not helping their cause and could be doing the opposite.

Advocates for sexual assault victims need to acknowledge that false rape accusations happen, and devote part of their cause to recognizing the pathology behind it and helping people who feel that's the only way they can be heard. This stubborn denial is counterproductive, and it actually leaves women like Jackie who probably need help in a worse predicament because it adds tremendous pressure to what probably started out as a small lie.

I haven't heard many people clinging to Jackie's story- are there a lot of people doing that?

Not to diminish the importance of the sexual assault/false accusations angle, but I also don't see how Rolling Stone survives this, which is kind of a big story too. They have completely lost their credibility.

No now people are saying regardless if her story is true or not rape is a serious issue and UVA has a problem with it and Jackies "story" opened up dialogue and exposed the problem

But don't you know? This completely fake story is a teachable moment. Men everywhere should be reflecting upon how they view and treat women in society.

 

[FlapJacks]

This is exactly why I originally said I found it sad that well-meaning people were clinging to ______ Now they can't let it go, even in the face of overwhelming evidence that it didn't happen. not true. And it's making them look silly. And it's not helping their cause and could be doing the opposite.

This could be said for so many things....

 

[TobiasFunke]

“The main message we want to come out of all this is that sexual assault is a problem nationwide that we need to act in preventing. It has never been about one story. This is about the thousands of women and men who have been victims of sexual assault and have felt silenced not only by their perpetrators, but by society’s misunderstanding and stigmatization of rape.”

This is exactly why I originally said I found it sad that well-meaning people were clinging to Jackie's story. Now they can't let it go, even in the face of overwhelming evidence that it didn't happen. And it's making them look silly. And it's not helping their cause and could be doing the opposite.

Advocates for sexual assault victims need to acknowledge that false rape accusations happen, and devote part of their cause to recognizing the pathology behind it and helping people who feel that's the only way they can be heard. This stubborn denial is counterproductive, and it actually leaves women like Jackie who probably need help in a worse predicament because it adds tremendous pressure to what probably started out as a small lie.

I haven't heard many people clinging to Jackie's story- are there a lot of people doing that?

Not to diminish the importance of the sexual assault/false accusations angle, but I also don't see how Rolling Stone survives this, which is kind of a big story too. They have completely lost their credibility.

No now people are saying regardless if her story is true or not rape is a serious issue and UVA has a problem with it and Jackies "story" opened up dialogue and exposed the problem

But don't you know? This completely fake story is a teachable moment. Men everywhere should be reflecting upon how they view and treat women in society.

Maybe I'm missing your point here- are you saying that men shouldn't reflect on how they view and treat women?

 

[Jules Winnfield]

“The main message we want to come out of all this is that sexual assault is a problem nationwide that we need to act in preventing. It has never been about one story. This is about the thousands of women and men who have been victims of sexual assault and have felt silenced not only by their perpetrators, but by society’s misunderstanding and stigmatization of rape.”

This is exactly why I originally said I found it sad that well-meaning people were clinging to Jackie's story. Now they can't let it go, even in the face of overwhelming evidence that it didn't happen. And it's making them look silly. And it's not helping their cause and could be doing the opposite.

Advocates for sexual assault victims need to acknowledge that false rape accusations happen, and devote part of their cause to recognizing the pathology behind it and helping people who feel that's the only way they can be heard. This stubborn denial is counterproductive, and it actually leaves women like Jackie who probably need help in a worse predicament because it adds tremendous pressure to what probably started out as a small lie.

I haven't heard many people clinging to Jackie's story- are there a lot of people doing that?

Not to diminish the importance of the sexual assault/false accusations angle, but I also don't see how Rolling Stone survives this, which is kind of a big story too. They have completely lost their credibility.

No now people are saying regardless if her story is true or not rape is a serious issue and UVA has a problem with it and Jackies "story" opened up dialogue and exposed the problem

But don't you know? This completely fake story is a teachable moment. Men everywhere should be reflecting upon how they view and treat women in society.

Maybe I'm missing your point here- are you saying that men shouldn't reflect on how they view and treat women?

So your point is to falsely accuse a frat and a university to get your point across?

 

[Sweet J]

An interesting thought experience for me: What if one of the Palin girls (or some similar polarizing conservative figure) said that 6 years ago she was raped by Marcus, the black fiscal liberal with dreadlocks who went to Oral Roberts university. And it turns out there was, indeed, a black guy named Marcus who went to Oral Roberts University, and he was known to be, I don't know, a Keynseian liberal. But he was bald, no dreadlocks.

Would I think differently than I do here? I dunno.

Exactly. Anyone with an ounce of intellectual honesty knows Dunham had a motive. She's now been exposed as just another left wing nut willing to accuse a man of rape for ideological points. Sick.

Hmmmm. Not exactly the conclusion I was heading for

 

[TobiasFunke]

“The main message we want to come out of all this is that sexual assault is a problem nationwide that we need to act in preventing. It has never been about one story. This is about the thousands of women and men who have been victims of sexual assault and have felt silenced not only by their perpetrators, but by society’s misunderstanding and stigmatization of rape.”

This is exactly why I originally said I found it sad that well-meaning people were clinging to Jackie's story. Now they can't let it go, even in the face of overwhelming evidence that it didn't happen. And it's making them look silly. And it's not helping their cause and could be doing the opposite.

Advocates for sexual assault victims need to acknowledge that false rape accusations happen, and devote part of their cause to recognizing the pathology behind it and helping people who feel that's the only way they can be heard. This stubborn denial is counterproductive, and it actually leaves women like Jackie who probably need help in a worse predicament because it adds tremendous pressure to what probably started out as a small lie.

I haven't heard many people clinging to Jackie's story- are there a lot of people doing that?

Not to diminish the importance of the sexual assault/false accusations angle, but I also don't see how Rolling Stone survives this, which is kind of a big story too. They have completely lost their credibility.

No now people are saying regardless if her story is true or not rape is a serious issue and UVA has a problem with it and Jackies "story" opened up dialogue and exposed the problem

But don't you know? This completely fake story is a teachable moment. Men everywhere should be reflecting upon how they view and treat women in society.

Maybe I'm missing your point here- are you saying that men shouldn't reflect on how they view and treat women?

So your point is to falsely accuse a frat and a university to get your point across?

Yup, you nailed it. That's exactly my point.

 

[Jules Winnfield]

“The main message we want to come out of all this is that sexual assault is a problem nationwide that we need to act in preventing. It has never been about one story. This is about the thousands of women and men who have been victims of sexual assault and have felt silenced not only by their perpetrators, but by society’s misunderstanding and stigmatization of rape.”

This is exactly why I originally said I found it sad that well-meaning people were clinging to Jackie's story. Now they can't let it go, even in the face of overwhelming evidence that it didn't happen. And it's making them look silly. And it's not helping their cause and could be doing the opposite.

Advocates for sexual assault victims need to acknowledge that false rape accusations happen, and devote part of their cause to recognizing the pathology behind it and helping people who feel that's the only way they can be heard. This stubborn denial is counterproductive, and it actually leaves women like Jackie who probably need help in a worse predicament because it adds tremendous pressure to what probably started out as a small lie.

I haven't heard many people clinging to Jackie's story- are there a lot of people doing that?

Not to diminish the importance of the sexual assault/false accusations angle, but I also don't see how Rolling Stone survives this, which is kind of a big story too. They have completely lost their credibility.

No now people are saying regardless if her story is true or not rape is a serious issue and UVA has a problem with it and Jackies "story" opened up dialogue and exposed the problem

But don't you know? This completely fake story is a teachable moment. Men everywhere should be reflecting upon how they view and treat women in society.

Maybe I'm missing your point here- are you saying that men shouldn't reflect on how they view and treat women?

So your point is to falsely accuse a frat and a university to get your point across?

Yup, you nailed it. That's exactly my point.

Hence the reason I asked you but you still haven't answered.Question still stands

 

[SacramentoBob]

Let's assume for the sake of argument that Dunham's underlying story is true. Do you think he was really a Republican or was that another embellishment like the mustache and cowboy boots?

 

[TobiasFunke]

“The main message we want to come out of all this is that sexual assault is a problem nationwide that we need to act in preventing. It has never been about one story. This is about the thousands of women and men who have been victims of sexual assault and have felt silenced not only by their perpetrators, but by society’s misunderstanding and stigmatization of rape.”

This is exactly why I originally said I found it sad that well-meaning people were clinging to Jackie's story. Now they can't let it go, even in the face of overwhelming evidence that it didn't happen. And it's making them look silly. And it's not helping their cause and could be doing the opposite.

Advocates for sexual assault victims need to acknowledge that false rape accusations happen, and devote part of their cause to recognizing the pathology behind it and helping people who feel that's the only way they can be heard. This stubborn denial is counterproductive, and it actually leaves women like Jackie who probably need help in a worse predicament because it adds tremendous pressure to what probably started out as a small lie.

I haven't heard many people clinging to Jackie's story- are there a lot of people doing that?

Not to diminish the importance of the sexual assault/false accusations angle, but I also don't see how Rolling Stone survives this, which is kind of a big story too. They have completely lost their credibility.

No now people are saying regardless if her story is true or not rape is a serious issue and UVA has a problem with it and Jackies "story" opened up dialogue and exposed the problem

But don't you know? This completely fake story is a teachable moment. Men everywhere should be reflecting upon how they view and treat women in society.

Maybe I'm missing your point here- are you saying that men shouldn't reflect on how they view and treat women?

So your point is to falsely accuse a frat and a university to get your point across?

Yup, you nailed it. That's exactly my point.

Hence the reason I asked you but you still haven't answered.Question still stands

Huh?

Obviously my point was not to "falsely accuse a frat and a university to get my point across." I would have thought my obvious sarcasm would have made that pretty clear, but apparently not. I have no idea what sort of bizarre logic got you to that conclusion, since I didn't even mention a frat or a university in my post and I've criticized the accuser, the reporter and Rolling Stone repeatedly throughout the thread, including in this very dialogue. I bolded it for you to help you out.

 

[pantagrapher]

Let's assume for the sake of argument that Dunham's underlying story is true. Do you think he was really a Republican or was that another embellishment like the mustache and cowboy boots?

I haven't read her book, and I never will, but earlier I speculated that she might have included that detail to highlight how impaired she was.

 

[sublimeone]

It seems like an extremely high percentage of high profile rape accusations turn out to be false: Duke Lacrosse, UVA, Dunham, Kobe... and the one only high profile convicted rapist I can think of, Mike Tyson, is enjoying a resurgence in popularity. Odd world we live in.

 

[rockaction]

Let's assume for the sake of argument that Dunham's underlying story is true. Do you think he was really a Republican or was that another embellishment like the mustache and cowboy boots?

I haven't read her book, and I never will, but earlier I speculated that she might have included that detail to highlight how impaired she was.

pantagrapher, you have a capacity for generosity towards her that makes me want to subscribe to your newsletter when I make my own really poor decisions in my own life (and I do).

As for the bolded from SacraementoBob, I hold the opinion that it doesn't matter. What matters is she identified enough traits for an individual to have suffered essentially what was a rape allegation, and I think the Republican part indicates that her motive was bad and politically-motivated in doing so. It could have been some Democrat named "Jerry" for all we know. And it wouldn't really matter to anybody but her and Jerry at this point. Well, and Barry.

 

[SacramentoBob]

I dunno if that Kobe case was false.

 

[TobiasFunke]

I dunno if that Kobe case was false.

Yup. Roethlisberger too.

Also ignores a number of high-profile rape cases (Steubenville and New Delhi immediately come to mind) as well as the fact that cases often become high-profile because the facts are controversial, not the other way around. Easy sexual assault convictions don't make the news. When was the last time you heard Darren Sharper's name?

 

[Sweet J]

Let's assume for the sake of argument that Dunham's underlying story is true. Do you think he was really a Republican or was that another embellishment like the mustache and cowboy boots?

Maybe because I am more commonly thought of as a Dem, but for the life of me, I don't really care about whether the guy was a Dem or a Repub. He was an idiot college student who (regardless of whether at the time he was a D or an R), has probably changed his affiliation since anyway. He may have been a raging liberal then and a raging conservative now. Or vice versa. I just don't really care.

 

[Gawain]

It seems like an extremely high percentage of high profile rape accusations turn out to be false: Duke Lacrosse, UVA, Dunham, Kobe... and the one only high profile convicted rapist I can think of, Mike Tyson, is enjoying a resurgence in popularity. Odd world we live in.

Oh no, Kobe raped that girl.

 

[pantagrapher]

Let's assume for the sake of argument that Dunham's underlying story is true. Do you think he was really a Republican or was that another embellishment like the mustache and cowboy boots?

I haven't read her book, and I never will, but earlier I speculated that she might have included that detail to highlight how impaired she was.

pantagrapher, you have a capacity for generosity towards her that makes me want to subscribe to your newsletter when I make my own really poor decisions in my own life (and I do).

As for the bolded from SacraementoBob, I hold the opinion that it doesn't matter. What matters is she identified enough traits for an individual to have suffered essentially what was a rape allegation, and I think the Republican part indicates that her motive was bad and politically-motivated in doing so. It could have been some Democrat named "Jerry" for all we know. And it wouldn't really matter to anybody but her and Jerry at this point. Well, and Barry.

The only detail of this story I've really paid any attention to is this notion that she intentionally implicated a guy she never met in her bad sexual experience from college instead of used a pseudonym that turned out to be the name of a student who fit the general description. I lean toward the latter because the former makes little sense to me. As for the other details of her story, I'm not terribly interested, because it would require me delving into a book I don't want to read. The UVA story was a magazine piece I'd read back when it was published, so I was familiar with it and had opinions about it that have kind of bared out over time.

 

[rockaction]

Let's assume for the sake of argument that Dunham's underlying story is true. Do you think he was really a Republican or was that another embellishment like the mustache and cowboy boots?

I haven't read her book, and I never will, but earlier I speculated that she might have included that detail to highlight how impaired she was.

pantagrapher, you have a capacity for generosity towards her that makes me want to subscribe to your newsletter when I make my own really poor decisions in my own life (and I do).

As for the bolded from SacraementoBob, I hold the opinion that it doesn't matter. What matters is she identified enough traits for an individual to have suffered essentially what was a rape allegation, and I think the Republican part indicates that her motive was bad and politically-motivated in doing so. It could have been some Democrat named "Jerry" for all we know. And it wouldn't really matter to anybody but her and Jerry at this point. Well, and Barry.

The only detail of this story I've really paid any attention to is this notion that she intentionally implicated a guy she never met in her bad sexual experience from college instead of used a pseudonym that turned out to be the name of a student who fit the general description. I lean toward the latter because the former makes little sense to me. As for the other details of her story, I'm not terribly interested, because it would require me delving into a book I don't want to read. The UVA story was a magazine piece I'd read back when it was published, so I was familiar with it and had opinions about it that have kind of bared out over time.

Understood. I wasn't being in any way negative. I'm generally not cheeky enough for restrained passive-aggressiveness. Subscribing to newsletters is I guess a negative internet thing, but to me it's a positive. I've heard it used both ways.

I wish I could see things that way instead of seeing them as bad faith is really what I should have said. That's how I feel about it. I just see bad faith in her doings.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

It seems like an extremely high percentage of high profile rape accusations turn out to be false: Duke Lacrosse, UVA, Dunham, Kobe... and the one only high profile convicted rapist I can think of, Mike Tyson, is enjoying a resurgence in popularity. Odd world we live in.

Oh no, Kobe raped that girl.

The celebrity/politician/powerful person thing is its own category. People feel entitled and they get a Mad Men mentality to the girls/women around them, lack of accountability plus fame (groupie mentality) plus power plus the fact that no one will believe the accuser.

 

[pantagrapher]

Let's assume for the sake of argument that Dunham's underlying story is true. Do you think he was really a Republican or was that another embellishment like the mustache and cowboy boots?

I haven't read her book, and I never will, but earlier I speculated that she might have included that detail to highlight how impaired she was.

pantagrapher, you have a capacity for generosity towards her that makes me want to subscribe to your newsletter when I make my own really poor decisions in my own life (and I do).

As for the bolded from SacraementoBob, I hold the opinion that it doesn't matter. What matters is she identified enough traits for an individual to have suffered essentially what was a rape allegation, and I think the Republican part indicates that her motive was bad and politically-motivated in doing so. It could have been some Democrat named "Jerry" for all we know. And it wouldn't really matter to anybody but her and Jerry at this point. Well, and Barry.

The only detail of this story I've really paid any attention to is this notion that she intentionally implicated a guy she never met in her bad sexual experience from college instead of used a pseudonym that turned out to be the name of a student who fit the general description. I lean toward the latter because the former makes little sense to me. As for the other details of her story, I'm not terribly interested, because it would require me delving into a book I don't want to read. The UVA story was a magazine piece I'd read back when it was published, so I was familiar with it and had opinions about it that have kind of bared out over time.

Understood. I wasn't being in any way negative. I'm generally not cheeky enough for restrained passive-aggressiveness. Subscribing to newsletters is I guess a negative internet thing, but to me it's a positive. I've heard it used both ways.

I wish I could see things that way instead of seeing them as bad faith is really what I should have said. That's how I feel about it. I just see bad faith in her doings.

Oh, I didn't take it negatively, but I did feel like I should explain why the UVA story rankles me while the Dunham one doesn't.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Let's assume for the sake of argument that Dunham's underlying story is true. Do you think he was really a Republican or was that another embellishment like the mustache and cowboy boots?

It's starting to sound all embellished to me. The part about a college girl who didn't want unprotected sex and the jerk did it anyway after they gotten drunk is very believable, if they did it with cocaine as she says then it's very, very believable. It doesn't compare to the story of a brutal rape by seven guys in a dark room in a frat coordinated by a nice guy working at the gym pool on a first date.

 

[Joe Summer]

I think Lena Dunham considers anyone outside of her liberal/hippie/artsy bubble to be a Republican.

 

[Jayrod]

I have doubts that story is all true.

College frat brutal gang rape? Everyone is "too afraid of backlash" to report it?

Seems way too Hollywood, IMO.

I'm not saying it's impossible or that there aren't a ton of unreported rapes, but that particular story seems far fetched.

 

[tommyboy]

“The main message we want to come out of all this is that sexual assault is a problem nationwide that we need to act in preventing. It has never been about one story. This is about the thousands of women and men who have been victims of sexual assault and have felt silenced not only by their perpetrators, but by society’s misunderstanding and stigmatization of rape.”

This is exactly why I originally said I found it sad that well-meaning people were clinging to Jackie's story. Now they can't let it go, even in the face of overwhelming evidence that it didn't happen. And it's making them look silly. And it's not helping their cause and could be doing the opposite.

Advocates for sexual assault victims need to acknowledge that false rape accusations happen, and devote part of their cause to recognizing the pathology behind it and helping people who feel that's the only way they can be heard. This stubborn denial is counterproductive, and it actually leaves women like Jackie who probably need help in a worse predicament because it adds tremendous pressure to what probably started out as a small lie.

I haven't heard many people clinging to Jackie's story- are there a lot of people doing that?

Not to diminish the importance of the sexual assault/false accusations angle, but I also don't see how Rolling Stone survives this, which is kind of a big story too. They have completely lost their credibility.

No now people are saying regardless if her story is true or not rape is a serious issue and UVA has a problem with it and Jackies "story" opened up dialogue and exposed the problem

But don't you know? This completely fake story is a teachable moment. Men everywhere should be reflecting upon how they view and treat women in society.

Maybe I'm missing your point here- are you saying that men shouldn't reflect on how they view and treat women?

#### no

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

I think Lena Dunham considers anyone outside of her liberal/hippie/artsy bubble to be a Republican.

Maybe the most unbelievable story is that she went on a date with, got loaded, did coke with, and willingly shagged a college Republican (albeit under the false presumption that he would wear protection).

Was she like a totally different girl back then?

 

[Sweet J]

I think Lena Dunham considers anyone outside of her liberal/hippie/artsy bubble to be a Republican.

Maybe the most unbelievable story is that she went on a date with, got loaded, did coke with, and willingly shagged a college Republican (albeit under the false presumption that he would wear protection).

Was she like a totally different girl back then?

My gut tells me that freaky liberal girls will slum it with a Republican more than a freaky conservative girl will slum it with a Dem. Maybe in both situations, girls don't really care.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

I think Lena Dunham considers anyone outside of her liberal/hippie/artsy bubble to be a Republican.

Maybe the most unbelievable story is that she went on a date with, got loaded, did coke with, and willingly shagged a college Republican (albeit under the false presumption that he would wear protection).

Was she like a totally different girl back then?

My gut tells me that freaky liberal girls will slum it with a Republican more than a freaky conservative girl will slum it with a Dem. Maybe in both situations, girls don't really care.

Hmmm, yes... you are wise...

 

[TobiasFunke]

I think Lena Dunham considers anyone outside of her liberal/hippie/artsy bubble to be a Republican.

Maybe the most unbelievable story is that she went on a date with, got loaded, did coke with, and willingly shagged a college Republican (albeit under the false presumption that he would wear protection).

Was she like a totally different girl back then?

It's weird how obsessed people are with this one twenty-something writer/actress. Seems like every conservative-leaning poster on this message board believes they have some deep insight into her persona and dating habits.

Also, have you all never been to college or done coke? I was so horny and indiscriminate during either of those phases of my life I would have nailed Bea Arthur.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

I think Lena Dunham considers anyone outside of her liberal/hippie/artsy bubble to be a Republican.

Maybe the most unbelievable story is that she went on a date with, got loaded, did coke with, and willingly shagged a college Republican (albeit under the false presumption that he would wear protection).

Was she like a totally different girl back then?

It's weird how obsessed people are with this one twenty-something writer/actress. Seems like every conservative-leaning poster on this message board believes they have some deep insight into her persona and dating habits.

Also, have you all never been to college or done coke? I was so horny and indiscriminate during either of those phases of my life I would have nailed Bea Arthur.

I object to that. Bea Arthur was hot damnit.

 

[TobiasFunke]

I think Lena Dunham considers anyone outside of her liberal/hippie/artsy bubble to be a Republican.

Maybe the most unbelievable story is that she went on a date with, got loaded, did coke with, and willingly shagged a college Republican (albeit under the false presumption that he would wear protection).

Was she like a totally different girl back then?

It's weird how obsessed people are with this one twenty-something writer/actress. Seems like every conservative-leaning poster on this message board believes they have some deep insight into her persona and dating habits.

Also, have you all never been to college or done coke? I was so horny and indiscriminate during either of those phases of my life I would have nailed Bea Arthur.

I object to that. Bea Arthur was hot damnit.

You sure you're not thinking of Estelle Getty? She looked pretty good once you got her out of that Sophia getup.

 

[Baloney Sandwich]

I like Dunham's show, it can be a little all over the map and outside of Adam there isn't a likable character but it is interesting tv. I think she has talent. If my memory serves me right, there is an episode where she has a random hook up with her neighbor while high on coke.

 

[chauncey]

DOJ report released today states that .03/5 female college students are victims of sexual assault, not 1/5 as claimed by many in the media and politics.

Right wing version:

http://thefederalist.com/2014/12/11/new-doj-data-on-sexual-assaults-college-students-are-actually-less-likely-to-be-victimized/

CBS version:

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/doj-releases-report-on-college-age-rape-and-sexual-assault/

BJS site:

http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=5176

 

[IvanKaramazov]

DOJ report released today states that .03/5 female college students are victims of sexual assault, not 1/5 as claimed by many in the media and politics.

Right wing version:

http://thefederalist.com/2014/12/11/new-doj-data-on-sexual-assaults-college-students-are-actually-less-likely-to-be-victimized/

CBS version:

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/doj-releases-report-on-college-age-rape-and-sexual-assault/

BJS site:

http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=5176

Also, college students are less likely to be sexually assaulted than non-students, which is kind of hard to reconcile with the "rape culture" thing.

 

[rockaction]

I think Lena Dunham considers anyone outside of her liberal/hippie/artsy bubble to be a Republican.

Maybe the most unbelievable story is that she went on a date with, got loaded, did coke with, and willingly shagged a college Republican (albeit under the false presumption that he would wear protection).

Was she like a totally different girl back then?

It's weird how obsessed people are with this one twenty-something writer/actress. Seems like every conservative-leaning poster on this message board believes they have some deep insight into her persona and dating habits.

Also, have you all never been to college or done coke? I was so horny and indiscriminate during either of those phases of my life I would have nailed Bea Arthur.

I can only speak for myself: I'm not obsessed with her nor pretend to know that which she hasn't already explicitly stated in overtly political terms. It just happens that she's a very vocal critic of anything to the right and people on the right see her as a non-traitorous Jane Fonda, really. Her activism is part of her notoriety and her fame. It's inextricable.

And on the contrary about college: She also plays exactly to collegiate liberal "type," and those of us -- ahem -- lucky enough to have experienced that special sort of feminist/leftist hate reserved for even somewhat outspoken critics of various campus political fads have our skin crawl just at the thought of her. It's actually the converse of your statement. It's having actually been to college from which some of my problems with her stem. Liberal arts colleges are, in some cultural critics and in my estimation, a hostile place to be for a man who likes masculine things. I never should have gone to a small liberal arts school (and we were considered conservative!) and I wouldn't do it again. I made great friends, but I dislike the institution.

I don't think anybody here is judging her for screwing and using cocaine. I'm certainly not.

 

[parasaurolophus]

DOJ report released today states that .03/5 female college students are victims of sexual assault, not 1/5 as claimed by many in the media and politics.

Right wing version:

http://thefederalist.com/2014/12/11/new-doj-data-on-sexual-assaults-college-students-are-actually-less-likely-to-be-victimized/

CBS version:

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/doj-releases-report-on-college-age-rape-and-sexual-assault/

BJS site:

http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=5176

Also, college students are less likely to be sexually assaulted than non-students, which is kind of hard to reconcile with the "rape culture" thing.

This report has to have so many feminists furious. .03/5 is still a problem, but it is hardly enough to say it is a "rape culture". The way some women describe it they make it sound like they can't walk down a hallway without every guy grabbing their hoohah.

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

What kind of stupid fraction is .3/5? Can't we just go with 6%? Or at least 1/16?

 

[rockaction]

What kind of stupid fraction is .3/5? Can't we just go with 6%? Or at least 1/16?

Because the headline was always "one in five." .3 out of 5 keeps the denominator intact and lets you subtract out the .7 from the numerator, and ...

gosh, that's stupid. Good call.

 

[Sweet J]

DOJ report released today states that .03/5 female college students are victims of sexual assault, not 1/5 as claimed by many in the media and politics.

Right wing version:

http://thefederalist.com/2014/12/11/new-doj-data-on-sexual-assaults-college-students-are-actually-less-likely-to-be-victimized/

CBS version:

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/doj-releases-report-on-college-age-rape-and-sexual-assault/

BJS site:

http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=5176

I hate to argue to hard here, because I do believe it's a lost cause -- people are going to interpret data, surveys, and studies in a way consistent with their worldview (including me, you, and the smartest and dumbest people in the world).

So just a note: I'd be careful in making any hard and fast conclusions with numbers. Just take a look at page 2 and 3 of the actual report here (discussing the methodology and differences in questioning among each survey): http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/rsavcaf9513.pdf.

I don't really have time today to argue the merits and conclusions of this study. But I'd be just as careful throwing around the .03/5 number as I would the 1/5 number, just because these numbers better align with your worldview.

 

[GroveDiesel]

DOJ report released today states that .03/5 female college students are victims of sexual assault, not 1/5 as claimed by many in the media and politics.

Right wing version:

http://thefederalist.com/2014/12/11/new-doj-data-on-sexual-assaults-college-students-are-actually-less-likely-to-be-victimized/

CBS version:

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/doj-releases-report-on-college-age-rape-and-sexual-assault/

BJS site:

http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=5176

Wow. 20% and .61% aren't even in the same universe. Those numbers absolutely destroy the claims of rape culture.

Maybe it's time for us to stop portraying all men as monsters.

 

[GroveDiesel]

What kind of stupid fraction is .3/5? Can't we just go with 6%? Or at least 1/16?

Well, for one thing, 6% and 1/16 are wrong...so....

 

[TobiasFunke]

I think Lena Dunham considers anyone outside of her liberal/hippie/artsy bubble to be a Republican.

Maybe the most unbelievable story is that she went on a date with, got loaded, did coke with, and willingly shagged a college Republican (albeit under the false presumption that he would wear protection).

Was she like a totally different girl back then?

It's weird how obsessed people are with this one twenty-something writer/actress. Seems like every conservative-leaning poster on this message board believes they have some deep insight into her persona and dating habits.

Also, have you all never been to college or done coke? I was so horny and indiscriminate during either of those phases of my life I would have nailed Bea Arthur.

I can only speak for myself: I'm not obsessed with her nor pretend to know that which she hasn't already explicitly stated in overtly political terms. It just happens that she's a very vocal critic of anything to the right and people on the right see her as a non-traitorous Jane Fonda, really. Her activism is part of her notoriety and her fame. It's inextricable.

And on the contrary about college: She also plays exactly to collegiate liberal "type," and those of us -- ahem -- lucky enough to have experienced that special sort of feminist/leftist hate reserved for even somewhat outspoken critics of various campus political fads have our skin crawl just at the thought of her. It's actually the converse of your statement. It's having actually been to college from which some of my problems with her stem. Liberal arts colleges are, in some cultural critics and in my estimation, a hostile place to be for a man who likes masculine things. I never should have gone to a small liberal arts school (and we were considered conservative!) and I wouldn't do it again. I made great friends, but I dislike the institution.

I don't think anybody here is judging her for screwing and using cocaine. I'm certainly not.

I think there's a bit of a chicken and egg problem here. She wouldn't be famous for being an activist were it not for conservatives holding her up as an easy target because she fits their stereotype of a hated feminist so perfectly- wealthy background, well-educated, NYC resident and kinda chubby. If you think they'd treat her like this if she was a feminist who occasionally said some antagonizing things but was also smoking hot you're out of your mind- here's exhibit A.

If they didn't obsess about her she'd just be that woman with that weird HBO show. I stopped watching the show early in Season 2 so I could be wrong on this, but I don't believe there is anything political/strongly feminist in it at all. If anything, parts of it made women look kinda weak and needy.

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

What kind of stupid fraction is .3/5? Can't we just go with 6%? Or at least 1/16?

Well, for one thing, 6% and 1/16 are wrong...so....

Thanks, my mind was jumping over the 0 for some reason. .6% or 1/160.

 

[Sweet J]

DOJ report released today states that .03/5 female college students are victims of sexual assault, not 1/5 as claimed by many in the media and politics.

Right wing version:

http://thefederalist.com/2014/12/11/new-doj-data-on-sexual-assaults-college-students-are-actually-less-likely-to-be-victimized/

CBS version:

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/doj-releases-report-on-college-age-rape-and-sexual-assault/

BJS site:

http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=5176

Wow. 20% and .61% aren't even in the same universe. Those numbers absolutely destroy the claims of rape culture.

Maybe it's time for us to stop portraying all men as monsters.

You sure your numbers are right?

edit: yeah, I see I did the same thing as fatguy.

And I'll do one more edit: those who were really quick to question the methodology at the 20% number may want to use an equally wary eye with this number. I'm not sure this one is that much more "correct" than the other. These things are hard to measure.

 

[rockaction]

I think Lena Dunham considers anyone outside of her liberal/hippie/artsy bubble to be a Republican.

Maybe the most unbelievable story is that she went on a date with, got loaded, did coke with, and willingly shagged a college Republican (albeit under the false presumption that he would wear protection).

Was she like a totally different girl back then?

It's weird how obsessed people are with this one twenty-something writer/actress. Seems like every conservative-leaning poster on this message board believes they have some deep insight into her persona and dating habits.

Also, have you all never been to college or done coke? I was so horny and indiscriminate during either of those phases of my life I would have nailed Bea Arthur.

I can only speak for myself: I'm not obsessed with her nor pretend to know that which she hasn't already explicitly stated in overtly political terms. It just happens that she's a very vocal critic of anything to the right and people on the right see her as a non-traitorous Jane Fonda, really. Her activism is part of her notoriety and her fame. It's inextricable.

And on the contrary about college: She also plays exactly to collegiate liberal "type," and those of us -- ahem -- lucky enough to have experienced that special sort of feminist/leftist hate reserved for even somewhat outspoken critics of various campus political fads have our skin crawl just at the thought of her. It's actually the converse of your statement. It's having actually been to college from which some of my problems with her stem. Liberal arts colleges are, in some cultural critics and in my estimation, a hostile place to be for a man who likes masculine things. I never should have gone to a small liberal arts school (and we were considered conservative!) and I wouldn't do it again. I made great friends, but I dislike the institution.

I don't think anybody here is judging her for screwing and using cocaine. I'm certainly not.

I think there's a bit of a chicken and egg problem here. She wouldn't be famous for being an activist were it not for conservatives holding her up as an easy target because she fits their stereotype of a hated feminist so perfectly- wealthy background, well-educated, NYC resident and kinda chubby. If you think they'd treat her like this if she was a feminist who occasionally said some antagonizing things but was also smoking hot you're out of your mind- here's exhibit A.

If they didn't obsess about her she'd just be that woman with that weird HBO show. I stopped watching the show early in Season 2 so I could be wrong on this, but I don't believe there is anything political/strongly feminist in it at all. If anything, parts of it made women look kinda weak and needy.

I haven't watched the show, but her celebrity is socio-political. The New York Times was covering her liberal, debutante-esque parties in the social pages when she was sixteen, which is a long time before she'd made a name for herself in any way but being from that wealthy background with those liberal views. That's…pretty early. She's also been a willing participant in the culture wars as a spokesperson for the left, and receives nothing but positive media coverage in mainstream media. This drives right-wingers apoplectic. I can go into reasons for this, but then this post gets long as the day. Let's say that her political activism appeals to a particular voter that conservatives are losing in droves as the years increase -- single, unmarried, white women in their twenties who then form lifelong bonds with cultural leftism and the political parties that represent these views.

 

[Sinn Fein]

Meh - the "made up numbers" were probably from women who had regrets about a sexual encounter, and thus considered it to be unwanted, and an assault.