The Christians have all forgiven me by now, right? »« People paying to see me talk?

It’s odd how culture shelters some who should be shamed

I’d like to know the names of the two boys who took advantage of an inebriated minor who was passed out at a party: they apparently assaulted her while she was unconscious, took pictures of the attack with their cell phones, and sent them around to their friends. I guess this was their idea of bragging. I’d like to know because I never want to have anything to do with them, ever.

Their victim, Savannah Dietrich, posted their names after they were found guilty of felony sexual abuse, but as part of the deal, was told that she was not allowed to ever mention their names in public. So they were found guilty, given a slap on the wrist, and then protected from the social stigma of being abusers. I guess the judge didn’t think they were quite so naughty that they deserved to be shunned from civilized company, or that the public didn’t deserve to know who these little monsters were.

After revealing their identities, Dietrich was threatened with 6 months in prison and a $500 fine (that charge has been dropped, fortunately). That was news: that the victim of sexual abuse could face greater penalties than the two jerks who took advantage of her. And it is now all over the web.

But here’s the strange thing: in all of these serious stories, especially the ones praising Dietrich for her bravery in coming forth with the details of the crime against her, none of them dare to name the two felons. Everywhere we have people talking about the victim, Savannah Dietrich, and we know her name well…but the criminals still remain sheltered by the major media and it’s tough to find them (but not too hard!), despite Dietrich’s stand. It’s weird.

Shouldn’t Austin Zehnder and Will Frey be far more notorious than Savannah Dietrich? Although Dietrich should be more widely recognized for her courage.

Comments

  1. andusay says

    You named them. THANK YOU! I swear, what the hell is wrong with these people. These god dammed little monsters. Where is our sense of decency?

  2. No Light says

    Austin Zehnder and Will Frey you say, eh?

    Fancy that!

    If only I. wasn’t a woman, with a fluffy ladybrain and a penchant for gossip.

    We should call this the Zehnder Effect.

  3. Bernard Bumner says

    Although Dietrich should be more widely recognized for her courage.

    Yes.

    I hope those boys come to understand the terrible nature of their crimes, rather than somehow feeling victimized themselves.

  4. Beatrice says

    Shouldn’t Austin Zehnder and Will Frey be far more notorious than Savannah Dietrich? Although Dietrich should be more widely recognized for her courage.

    Yes, they should. Thank you, PZ.


    I admire the courage of this young woman.

    These men had made their assault on her public. Now, they had convinced a court to keep it all under wraps. “If reporting a rape only got me to the point that I’m not allowed to talk about it, then I regret it,” she wrote in a note on her Facebook wall. “I regret reporting it.”

    (emphasis mine)

    And then someone will wonder why women don’t report rape. This is just one of many ways in which women are being silenced and discouraged from reporting.

  5. Randomfactor says

    For the life of me I can’t understand why the VICTIM should be under any obligations to the court in this travesty. Especially (as the article points out) considering the fact that the victim didn’t find out the information in court. She knew her assailants’ names independently.

    Thank you for naming the real villains.

  6. Larry says

    If you Google Austin Zehnder and Will Frey, you get about 7.5 million hits plus the bonus of their pictures. It appears Savannah’s courageous actions have made them well known rapists throughout the intertubes.

    Their fame will follow them forever.

  7. A Hermit says

    In related news…

    Looks like Pappa got the message…


    To my fellow Rationalians, all Skepchicks and any people of the world who are interested…. I’m genuinely sorry for my lame attempt at humour that trivialised rape. I shall be more mindful of my words and how they can negatively affect others in future.

    In particular, Gallstones, I’m sorry that my crassness caused you any hurt/anger/distress. I like you a lot and had no intention of being the source of any negativity in your life.

    Gallstones was a member of the Rationalia forum who had the courage to stand up and explain how hurt she was by Pappa’s “joke”. The reaction she got led her to quit the forum. Guess it’s harder to laugh at the “joke” when someone you know gets hurt…

  8. says

    Just did a Google on the name of one of them and they seem to have been outed 734,000 times (allowing for the notorious inaccuracy of Ghits) with pictures.

  9. Joey Maloney says

    Yeah, they probably should be shamed. What they did was shameful. But – I’m just asking you to think about this – for the rest of their lives? Everywhere in the world? For something they did when they were 17?

    It’s the internet. It never goes away. Every time for the next sixty years when they apply for college admission or for a job or to volunteer for a nonprofit?

    I don’t think we’ve quite figured this out yet.

  10. Beatrice says

    It’s the internet. It never goes away.

    You know what will never go away? Her rape.

  11. Gregory Greenwood says

    Once again we see the rush here to blame the woman – the victim of this sexual assault is subject to a gagging order (with associated threats of legal sanction) in order to protect the perpetrators from entirely justified public vilification.

    And yet oblivious MRAs keep trying to tell us that there is no such thing as a rape culture…

    ——————————————————————

    Beatrice @ 4;

    These men had made their assault on her public. Now, they had convinced a court to keep it all under wraps. “If reporting a rape only got me to the point that I’m not allowed to talk about it, then I regret it,” she wrote in a note on her Facebook wall. “I regret reporting it.”

    And then someone will wonder why women don’t report rape. This is just one of many ways in which women are being silenced and discouraged from reporting.

    As you say, it is no surprise that women are hesitant to report rape when they know that they will almost certainly be put on trial with regard to every tiny aspect of their dress and behaviour in order to take any opportunity to blame them for notionally ‘leading their rapist(s) on’. Add to that the low conviction rates and the possibility that, even in the event of conviction, they will face a gagging order intended to protect their attackers (with greater legal penalties attached then the actual perpetrators faced) then why should a woman trust the legal system to protect her? It is obviously weighted against her from the off.

  12. sqlrob says

    For something they did when they were 17?

    This isn’t getting drunk or high. Rape is not a momentary lapse of judgement. Damn straight it should follow them the rest of their lives.

  13. says

    Savannah was marvelously courageous throughout this entire ordeal, it seems. Seriously, way to have something horrible happen to you and take the entire situation by the reigns. Being willing to talk so openly about this, especially when it’s shedding so much light on the fucked up ideas that women should be ashamed and quiet about their attacks, and the culture that worries more about a rapist’s reputation than the victim’s… it’s amazing.

    The situation itself though is fucked up as all hell though. When I first found out about the story (before reading it) I was actually anticipating to hear that it had happened in a third world country. But fucking America? God damn.

    Anyways, her rapists should be thankful that their faces aren’t on a goddamned billboard and that their asses aren’t in jail for life.

    Are they even in jail?

  14. anteprepro says

    But – I’m just asking you to think about this – for the rest of their lives? Everywhere in the world? For something they did when they were 17?

    Yes. 17 is more than old enough for most people to get tried as an adult. It is more than old enough to know better. If they become better people, they can go out of their way to prove it to the people they come across. But no-one has a right to throw their crimes down the memory hole. The very idea is disgusting.

    But, seriously everyone: Let’s cry for the rapists. They’re the real victims here.

  15. says

    #8: Yeah, people can be rotten — girls as well as boys. In my youth, I was tormented (it never went beyond cruel teasing) by a gang of girls, too, so I’m well aware that bullying is something that transcends the boundaries of the sexes.

  16. Beatrice says

    Joey Maloney,

    And do you seriously suggest that the order for her not to mention her rapists’ names is just? That a rape victim shouldn’t be allowed to make the names of her rapists known? Because that will ruin their lives forever, poor darlings. You know how they could have avoided it? They shouldn’t have raped her. It’s quite easy.

    I do have some understanding for people who have committed a crime they might feel sorry about, but the stigma follows them and makes it impossible for them to live normal lives.

    But this campaign to publish their names came to be because the judge forbid the rape victim from mentioning them. It happened because the woman they raped had enough courage and support to start it. Not many do. So it’s not exactly a widespread problem. Rape victims being silenced, on the other hand, is a widespread problem.

  17. Bernard Bumner says

    For something they did when they were 17?

    It is something they are going to have to confront time and again, and they will have to prove time and again whether they fully understand the terrible thing they did.

    Do they deserve a second chance? Time will tell. Do they deserve a clean slate? I think not.

  18. Beatrice says

    dukelupus,

    I haven’t read about that before. I hope the boy recovers and those two girls are found guilty for their crime.

  19. QueQuoi, traded in her jackboots for jillstilettos says

    @10 I hear “boys will be boys” apologia.

  20. truthspeaker says

    I know a plea bargain can be binding on the defendants and the prosecutor, but can it really be binding on the victim? I’m not a lawyer but that doesn’t make sense to me, even if the defendants are minors.

    Courts and police can be forbidden from revealing the identity of minors, and the press usually goes along but I thought that was voluntary on the part of the press.

  21. anteprepro says

    Oh, thanks for the insight, dukelupus. Obviously we are all hypocritical misandrists for even concerning ourselves about this case, because there’s another horrific crime that was committed by girls against a boy. Who cares about the slap on the wrist, the fact that the rape victim in this situation was potentially going to receive a bigger punishment than the rapists? Who cares about the fact that this shit PZ is posting about is actually part of a much larger trend? A teenage boy was harmed by teenage girls, therefore our argument is invalid.

    ——————

    Suggestion: “Zehnder” and “Frey” should become stronger, more vitriolic alternatives to “Cupcake”. For when the privilege, cowardice and misogyny has reached critical mass.

  22. says

    dukelupus- The difference is that in your case, the girls were charged and the victim isn’t being shamed.

    If the courts told the boy/his mother that they couldn’t talk about this because it might hurt the poor girls’ reputation, and if the girls got off with nothing, then we would have an issue.

  23. Beatrice says

    Ooh, I know! The pictures that were taken of her and distributed?

    Oh, I forgot about those. So much about his “internet is forever and it will ruin their lives” argument.

  24. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain says

    Is there any other crime where the victim is not allowed to publicly name those who did the crime? Well, besides murder?

    The names of Austin Zehnder and Will Frey should be known by all people who are in their area, just so they can be aware of the danger.

    Sadly, their are dudebros who would want to party with them. But this can be useful for people who are paying attention.

  25. says

    @Joey Maloney -

    But – I’m just asking you to think about this – for the rest of their lives? Everywhere in the world? For something they did when they were 17?

    YES.

    FFS, they didn’t swipe a candy bar or hotwire their neighbor’s car or try smoking pot. THEY RAPED SOMEONE. And then bragged about it. And publically humiliated their victim by posting the pictures they took.

    There is nothing complicated or subtle about this situation or its implications. That someone could even consider allowing these individuals to simply put their vile deeds behind them is sickening.

  26. largeswope says

    #10 This information should especially be known if these boys go to college. It might help to prevent another rape. Rape takes years to recover from. It also impacts any intimate relationships for the rest of the victim’s life.

  27. sambarge says

    It’s the internet. It never goes away. Every time for the next sixty years when they apply for college admission or for a job or to volunteer for a nonprofit?

    Just like the pictures they took of her rape and then shared with their “friends” via text. For the rest of her life, Savannah will never know all the people who saw pictures of her being raped. She won’t know how or with whom those people chose to share the pictures with. And, not that her rape will be the only thing that defines her, but for the rest of her life, she will be a rape survivor because of these boys.

    I know a lot of men who managed to not rape anyone when they were 17 yrs old and I would like to know the names of men who failed to learn that ethical lesson prior to their 17th birthday.

  28. truthspeaker says

    If a 17-year-old was busted for felony drug possession with intent to distribute – it would be on his record for at least five years, searchable on the internet.

    So yeah, I’m OK with this following Austin Zehnder and Will Frey around for the rest of their lives.

  29. kurt1 says

    Yeah, they probably should be shamed. What they did was shameful. But – I’m just asking you to think about this – for the rest of their lives? Everywhere in the world? For something they did when they were 17?

    That is something you (and they) can rationalize then. The internet may never forget, but it will get a lot harder to remember in a few years.

    The outrageous thing is that the victim has to sacrifice her right to free speech and protect the offenders from stigma. Good thing she is brave and spoke out against this injustice. Savannah Dietrich you are inspiration to us all.

  30. jthompson says

    Thank you for naming their names, PZ.

    @23: I hear rape culture apologia. Shaming the perpetrators of rape instead of the victims? How *dare* we?!

    It probably wasn’t intended that way, but feh. I’m totally ok with the role reversal. At least this way the shaming is being directed at the only people that have any control over the decision to rape someone: the rapist(s).

  31. says

    for the rest of their lives? Everywhere in the world? For something they did when they were 17?

    Savannah is going to be haunted by this for the rest of her life, everywhere in the world, for something they did when they were 17.

    This is equal retribution.

  32. mythbri says

    @Joey Maloney

    Yeah, they probably should be shamed. What they did was shameful. But – I’m just asking you to think about this – for the rest of their lives? Everywhere in the world? For something they did when they were 17?

    Would you have asked this question if they had killed Dietrich? If they had beaten her? If they had cut her up? How severe does a rape need to be before we stop worrying about the impact it will have on the rapists, regardless of how old they were when they committed this crime?

  33. robro says

    Joey — In case you didn’t hear, yet, those young men published pictures of their victim on the Internet. It seems fitting that their names be attached to their work.

  34. hieropants says

    @Joey Maloney

    Considering most rapists have multiple victims over the course of their lives, I think it’s practical to have this kind of information available so that their acquaintances can take the appropriate caution around them.

    They won’t be locked up in jail forever, and they’ll be able to build lives of their own, but they’re not entitled to demand a social circle ignorant of the need to protect themselves around them.

  35. jehk says

    Their punishment shouldn’t be about revenge or retribution. It should be about reckoning. Not just what they might do in the future but other people who would commit such crimes. Publicly shaming them for the rest of their lives is a good way to send the message that this is not acceptable behavior in our society.

  36. says

    In case you didn’t hear, yet, those young men published pictures of their victim on the Internet. It seems fitting that their names be attached to their work.

    Were they really definitely posted on the internet? I thought it was only by text message.

    Not that this isn’t already horrible enough, but if it was publicly on the internet as opposed to between ‘friends’… that seriously just makes it impossible to feel any pity for the rapists because of how they’ll ‘have to be shamed forever’ (not that it wasn’t impossible already). If it was publicly on the internet, those pictures will be around forever.

  37. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain says

    Barkeron, please. This kind of inhumanity is not confined to one particular nation.

    Please, let us know what nation you are from so we can find a sick news story and bring out The Wide Brush&trade:. It is painting time.

  38. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain says

    And the Typo Monster gets it’s snack.

    The Wide Brush™

  39. Beatrice says

    Since most mobiles these days have internet connection, it’s not improbable that photos ended up on the net.

  40. Pteryxx says

    They shared pictures of the victim’s rape with other friends. If those friends share the same attitude about rape being cool, those friends may have passed the pictures on to others, and so on… folks *trade and collect* such things, and yes, post them on sites that may or may not be members-only.

    Heck, publicly naming the photographers may have been the only move that WOULD help damp the spreading of those pictures.

  41. shouldbeworking says

    They even had a Wikipedia entry. Each have been deleted. The scum deserve all the media attention they get. The Internet is a two-edged sword.

  42. neuzelaar says

    I’m disappointed by the vigilante justice nature of PZ’s article and most comments. In a proper functioning judicial system we have outsourced justice to an impartial judge, who in her/his wisdom decided on a particular punishment for this crime. In this case it included a gag order not to reveal the names of the juvenile criminals. There are probably good reasons for this, which we as armchair judges are not not familiar with. The distinctly American process of publicly naming and shaming criminals and victims is barbaric. You guys need to grow up!

    We might not like the punishment, but the only proper way is to change the law or vote the judge away. No matter how cute or brave the victim is, I only trust the system if it applies to everyone in the same way.

  43. truthspeaker says

    Your phone doesn’t even have to be internet capable to get photos from it onto the internet.

    Once you send a digital photo to someone else, you can pretty much assume it’s going to end up on the internet eventually.

  44. truthspeaker says

    neuzelaar
    24 July 2012 at 12:29 pm

    I’m disappointed by the vigilante justice nature of PZ’s article and most comments. In a proper functioning judicial system we have outsourced justice to an impartial judge, who in her/his wisdom decided on a particular punishment for this crime. In this case it included a gag order not to reveal the names of the juvenile criminals.

    Judges in the United States don’t have the authority to issue gag orders on 3rd parties.

    And frankly I’ve never heard of a criminal case that involved a gag order.

  45. rowanvt says

    But – I’m just asking you to think about this – for the rest of their lives? Everywhere in the world? For something they did when they were 17?

    It’s the internet. It never goes away. Every time for the next sixty years when they apply for college admission or for a job or to volunteer for a nonprofit?

    Yes, yes, a THOUSAND times yes! That would have happened if they were 18. A mere year doesn’t make *that* much of a huge difference in understanding and maturity. I was able to understand that hurting others = wrong/bad by the time I was 5.

  46. says

    …for the rest of their lives? Everywhere in the world? For something they did when they were 17?

    Oh, grow the fuck up and quit whining. This isn’t an official sex-offender registry, this is the Internet; and the Internet is an ocean, and this is just one brief but heavy rainfall into it. Chances are: a) most of the sites on which the perps’ names are posted won’t even exist ten years from now; b) the number of hits on their names will drop off dramatically in that time; c) their names won’t be on prominent display “everywhere in the world,” just when someone searches for them or similar incidents; and d) as sites fade from prominence to the Wayback Machine, it will be harder every year to find any mention of the perps’ names anywhere. Trust me, the victim will remember being raped (and those photos will still be on miscellaneous porn sites) long after the rest of the world have, for all practical purposes, forgotten the rapists’ names.

  47. Jerry says

    At the age of 17 -in some U.S. states with parental permission- a person can marry, get a job, and join the military (and later on, carry a weapon and kill). These adult decisions follow the person for the rest of one’s life. Rape is certainly an adult decision, a violent crime, not a childish prank or indiscretion. Posting a video of it makes the crime of rape no better or worse. It just adds another crime. I would want my niece to know if the person she was considering dating or potentially marrying had been a dangerous criminal. Hiding that fact would not make him any less dangerous (perhaps more so), nor her any safer (perhaps mess so). If he was a better man afterwards, then let him prove it.

  48. macrophage says

    Thank goodness this will be online forever. That way future girlfriends (or boyfriends) can look it up and see. That way future employers can see it and prevent them from becoming primary school teachers or victims’ advocates.

    I was in college at 17. I knew better than to assault someone who was unconcious. Saying these guys shouldn’t have to deal with that because they were “only” 17 is ridiculous. 17 is old enough to commit the crime and to deal with the consequences.

    And any jerkoff who would record the crime and distribute it to their friends likely posted it online as well. So in addition to the assault the woman involved gets to deal with bullying and the prospect of her assault living on forever on the internet. So F- those guys!

  49. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain says

    Please explain to us, oh wise neuzelaar, why it is fine that the victim’s name is out there for all to see. But not those assholes who were celebrating their crime?

  50. Beatrice says

    neuzelaar,

    The victim of rape was forbidden from sharing the names of her rapists. Do you seriously consider that just?
    I’m not asking if it’s against the law, I’m asking if you consider it just.

  51. says

    In this case it included a gag order not to reveal the names of the juvenile criminals.

    It’s one thing for a newspaper or police department to not release the name of underage criminals, or to seal records, et cetera, but to try to leverage that power onto private citizens who know them? To silence ordinary discourse between people that serves many, many social functions? That’s wrong. And can you think of any other crime where a judge would try to tell the victim not to use the name of the perpetrator when describing his or her experiences?

    Should teenage embezzlers be protected from being named by their victims at school? Should vandals? Should scam artists?

    This has nothing to do with laws being applied the same way to all people, no matter how cute they are. This rape victim is being treated in an unusual way, and not like most other victims of crimes. I’d be pretty darn surprised to learn that most underage criminals get this kind of judicial protection.

  52. Josh, Official SpokesGay says

    Yep, pix of those little bastards are on Twitter. You can see them here at the hashtag #savannahdietrich

  53. says

    folks *trade and collect* such things, and yes, post them on sites that may or may not be members-only.

    I was fearing that from the beginning, sadly.
    Mostly I was curious as to whether or not it had been confirmed as happening.

    There are probably good reasons for this, which we as armchair judges are not not familiar with. The distinctly American process of publicly naming and shaming criminals and victims is barbaric. You guys need to grow up!

    There aren’t good reasons for defending a rapist, just going to throw that right out there.

    This isn’t being an armchair judge. This has nothing to do with knowledge of the law that we don’t understand. This is being human.

  54. Rev. BigDumbChimp says

    But – I’m just asking you to think about this – for the rest of their lives? Everywhere in the world? For something they did when they were 17?

    It’s the internet. It never goes away. Every time for the next sixty years when they apply for college admission or for a job or to volunteer for a nonprofit?

    Here’s an idea.

    If you don’t want people knowing you raped someone, don’t rape someone.

    easy.

    I don’t give a fuck if you are 17. I knew at 17 not to rape anyone and I was by no means the picture of well behaved.

    This goes beyond simple childhood “mistakes”.

  55. Pteryxx says

    neuzelaar: where rape and sexual predation are concerned, we don’t HAVE a “proper functional judicial system”. The shaming, silencing and victim-blaming is such that only a few percent of cases ever go to court at all, much less result in rapists serving time.

    From the Salon article cited in the OP (bolds mine):

    Last night, Dietrich unlocked her Facebook page to the hundreds of strangers—myself included—who have requested to make her a “friend.” They have flooded her wall with offers of financial support and links to Change.org petitions calling for justice in her case. Of course, Dietrich is also fielding spammy notes from strangers with dogs for avatars (“since they took pictures isn’t this child pornography?”) and all-caps rants about the sex offender registry.

    But here, Dietrich is the editor of her own story. She has the power to delete the comments she doesn’t like and promote the ones she does. Thanks to a few brave tweets, a 17-year-old rape victim is now curating an international conversation about sexual assault in America. She’s created a public Twitter account to represent her new online role. And she’s speaking out not only about the details of her own assault, but the ways that the justice system is failing others like her. “All I am hoping for out of this is to get not only justice for myself but to future victims,” she wrote in response to one commenter offering of financial support. “The laws that protect criminals shouldn’t cross over and take away victims rights. Victims rights should come first. And thank you.”

  56. says

    I’m disappointed by the vigilante justice nature of PZ’s article and most comments.

    Yeah, well, we’re disappointed by the inadequate response of the “justice” “system” in this case.

    …I only trust the system if it applies to everyone in the same way.

    We’re all aware that the system doesn’t treat everyone equally. That’s why this “vigilante justice” response was necessary. Duh.

  57. mythbri says

    @neuzelaar

    No matter how cute or brave the victim is

    Emphasis mine.

    I just want to point out to you, neuzelaar, that your choice of words there made me a little sick to my stomach, considering the context of the conversation. We are talking about someone who was sexually violated, and it’s squicky to me to see a comment on her appearance.

    Maybe I’m the only one bothered by that, but I just thought I’d mention it.

  58. anteprepro says

    I’m disappointed by the vigilante justice nature of PZ’s article and most comments.

    Apparently simply wanting the names of rapists to not be information that is hidden, and not even allowed to be mentioned by the victim herself, is akin to recruiting a lynch mob, or at very least putting on a cape and cowl and positioning ourselves to be real world Caped Crusaders. Aside from that, here is your problematic assumption, assclown:

    In a proper functioning judicial system

    Also: All of the “you just don’t understand” in the world doesn’t make your blind faith in the judge any less blind.

    We might not like the punishment, but the only proper way is to change the law or vote the judge away. No matter how cute or brave the victim is, I only trust the system if it applies to everyone in the same way.

    This is how we know you have no fucking idea what you’re talking about. There is no law saying . Judges aren’t voted in, they are appointed. This entire case is an example of how the system ISN’T being applied to everyone in the same way. But you’re too busy being daft and indignant

  59. truthspeaker says

    Pteryxx
    24 July 2012 at 12:38 pm

    neuzelaar: where rape and sexual predation are concerned, we don’t HAVE a “proper functional judicial system”

    FTFY

  60. says

    What, nobody yet wringing their hands about how these 17-year-old children just don’t have the brain development to know it’s wrong to rape a girl, take her photos, and distribute them over the net?

    …oh, wait. Hello, Joey Maloney! Please see SQLRob’s comment at #15.

    Dukelupus, we have an open thread for unrelated topics. But you probably knew that. Anteprepro, thanks for calling him out.

    Largeswope:

    This information should especially be known if these boys go to college. It might help to prevent another rape.

    Given how prevalent rape is on college campuses? Absolutely.

    Barkeron, do you really think there’s no such rape culture in other countries?

    Neuzelaar, your concern has been noted, as has been your sexist remark about Dietrich’s looks. Now fuck off, you fucking apologist for silencing rape victims.

  61. says

    Anotehr thing to be considered here: the perps, and their parents, still have some ability to ask ISPs to remove content containing their names, and maybe even to sue ISPs who don’t comply immediately, most likely on grounds of “refusal to comply with a judicial order” or some such. So at this time, we’re not really sure how much shame the perps will have to endure for their crimes. I hope this story doesn’t get erased from the Internet, but ISPs are well known for cowardice in the face of lawyered-up crybabies.

  62. anteprepro says

    Shit, accidentally submitted the last comment when it wasn’t ready. Just ignore the last part, as I’m not sure that there is “no law saying [whatever I was going to finish that sentence with” and I’m wrong about judges: They are actually voted in. So, yeah, that last paragraph needed to be removed. Fuck my slippery fingers.

  63. Pteryxx says

    Mostly I was curious as to whether or not it had been confirmed as happening.

    Grimalkin: with all due respect, I’m not fucking going to go searching rapey internet sites to find out. It happens, it ain’t rare.

    In some cases predators use the threat of spreading the victim’s pics to shut them up; also, sharing them among *the same social circle the victim is in* cements the dudebro network. Dietrich going public just defanged that circle.

  64. sambarge says

    mythbri @ 62

    I was going to comment on the exact same thing. A victim of rape and exploitation? Cute? I don’t think anyone was thinking that this is worse because she’s cute. Actually, I don’t even know what she looks like and I haven’t googled her rapists’ images either. But thanks for coming out, neuzelaar

  65. says

    If I’d done something that awful to another person, I’d think it fair that I suffer whatever penalties the state throws at me, and then be done. I should not have to suffer further sanctions from the government.

    But at the same time, that act should not be something I get to forget — it should be something for which I have to spend the rest of my life making amends. It should be a part of me, not forgotten, that I have to deal with always. My youthful mistakes (and there were cruelties and errors there, although nothing of the magnitude of harm even close to sexually abusing anyone) should be something I have to accept. And correct. And hold in my memory as something I did wrong.

  66. grumpyoldfart says

    I hope the local girls are reminded that most rapists are control freaks, and most control freaks are wife-bashers, and most wife-bashers never ever stop bashing.

  67. Randomfactor says

    In this case it included a gag order not to reveal the names of the juvenile criminals

    Which the victim didn’t violate. She didn’t tell information learned in court–which is where the judge’s jurisdiction applies.

    IMHO, IANAL.

  68. says

    No matter how cute or brave the victim is

    Ah, if only she were ugly or frightened. Then it wouldn’t need to be mentioned what she looks like or how she reacted.

  69. starrkline says

    This is not an example of “rape culture”. This is an example of plea bargaining, and the shitty consequences it can result in. The judge wasn’t trying to protect the men, the judge was trying to avoid having to go to trial since that is fucking expensive.

    Should she have been found in contempt for violating the court order? Yes, because she was in contempt. Should she be praised for her actions? Yes, because sometimes the law doesn’t give you justice and getting justice means breaking it.

  70. Rev. BigDumbChimp says

    You may want also to get outraged about http://www.news.com.au/national/teenage-girls-charged-with-torturing-autistic-boy-12/story-fndo4ckr-1226431414946 – for some reason, this story has been hardly mentioned…

    Yes that is horrible. Lets hope the boy is ok and the girls who tortured him are dealt with accordingly.

    I can’t help but notice that you chose to post this in a thread about rape, something only connected to your story by the thread of both being a crime by one person against another. I also notice that it appears you posted this because you wanted to make a point that girls can do nasty things to boys too. Of course, we all know this.

    But the disturbing part about this is that you seem to want to equate the isolated case in your story to the well documented culture of rape we have at least in this country and I would bet elsewhere.

    Are you really so desperate to play the tu quoque game when it comes to rape that you’re willing to abandon all semblance of logic and critical thinking by throwing your, admittedly horrible but incredibly off topic story, out there and make yourself look like the weak thinking person so determined to defend men everywhere against any accusations of rape culture that such an action would make you appear?

    Are you?

  71. macrophage says

    As someone else mentioned above, rape is not something you just “OOPS!” do by accident. The action that would have required the least amount of effort on their parts would have been to leave her alone. They made a serious of conscious decisions to assault her. This isn’t a simple boyhood prank. This isn’t being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

    Silence is the worst thing that can happen here. Silence is what allows rapists to serially rape people time and again. At my university a couple years back the entire community was shocked to find out their prized honor student had raped at least 6 women. They found out there was an institutional attitude that silenced each of the women and allowed him to continue. Namely, the first thing the women were asked when they showed up at the health center was “were you drinking?” followed by “did you say no?” If they answered yes to the first OR no to the second they were told to remain silent. So this guy, discovered as a junior in undergrad, was able to continue his behavior. HOW OLD DO YOU THINK HE WAS WHEN HE STARTED RAPING WOMEN? Thankfully he’s in jail now and won’t be release for another year or so. Thankfully his name is also up on the internet as a rapist. But I can’t help but think what would have happened if that first woman was encouraged to proceed, instead of being shamed by the local victims’ advocate.

  72. Josh, Official SpokesGay says

    The judge wasn’t trying to protect the men, the judge was trying to avoid having to go to trial since that is fucking expensive.

    Part of rape culture is the fact that rape is seen to be a crime in which it is acceptable to weight the cost and inconvenience of a trial higher than the injustice to the victim and the danger to society of not knowing who the rapists are and engaging in shunning and shaming.

  73. Rev. BigDumbChimp says

    The judge wasn’t trying to protect the men, the judge was trying to avoid having to go to trial since that is fucking expensive.

    Was he?

    Did I miss this in the article. It’s highly possible, I sometimes skim over parts when I’m between meetings during the day. Can you point out where this was said?

  74. starrkline says

    @Josh

    Plea bargains happen for absolutely everything, including murder. It is a consequence of an overloaded legal system, not a culture that is OK with rape or murder.

  75. Pteryxx says

    This is not an example of “rape culture”. This is an example of plea bargaining, and the shitty consequences it can result in.

    Plea bargaining’s generally supposed to be inappropriate when the offender’s at high risk of reoffending upon new victims. Given the high rate of multiple assaults by acquaintance rapists, I’d argue that the decision to plea-bargain IS influenced by the rape-minimizing that’s part of rape culture.

  76. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain says

    But Audley, it is not fair that their youthful mistake follow them for the rest of their life. Never mind that they were willing to share the pictures with their friends so that they could share in the rape.

  77. anubisprime says

    Joey Maloney @ 10

    I don’t think we’ve quite figured this out yet.

    What has not been sorted out is the sheer dumb ignorance of judges that make such a stipulation in such a case in such a technologically media flooded world…the judge is no better then a jackass for trying to enforce a decree which is guaranteed to be blown apart in a click of a mouse button!
    The case was so abhorrent what did the judge expect such a ruling would achieve?

    As for threatening to jail the victim…what a dumb ass…methinks a judicial ego crept in there and not jurisprudence.
    If no such draconian conditions were introduced in the first place then it is likely they would still be basically anonymous to the world at large!
    Maybe not in their neighborhood but unknown globally for sure!

    Very bad judgment whatever …some folks are just not the ‘right stuff’ it would seem.

    Same with the geriatric crew of judges in Blighty…

    There has been ‘debate’ on the roll of ‘super injunctions’ in Blighty recently.

    One judge that started the rot declared pompously that the Internet was not a serious problem but the printed media was!
    Granting an injunction just on the printed & televised media in the country.

    Within 6 hours the whole story including who asked for the super injunction was common knowledge around the world via twitter.

    A week later parliamentary privilege covered an MP that revealed his name in debate and to the public gallery…total meltdown of the super injunction legal veracity…I think few folks bother with it now..it is shown to be so much utter bollix…but ok if you want to waste a few thousand quid by instructing lawyers to petition for one….more a status symbol now then a protection…just says you got cash aplenty…that’s it! …oh and that you have been up to something not morally defensible.. the one thing it seems guaranteed to do is reveal dirty little secrets faster then a gavel hits the bench.!

  78. anteprepro says

    This is not an example of “rape culture”. This is an example of plea bargaining, and the shitty consequences it can result in.

    “This isn’t a kind of tomato product. This is a kind of condiment.”

    Not. Mutually. Exclusive.

  79. zodee says

    @A Hermit

    Read the comments, a lot are thanking him for apologizing (and I thank him, too) but you still get clueless shit like:

    “Coito ergo sum wrote:
    Paula Kirby explains it quite well why the Skepchick/Myers reaction to Pappa’s joke is far worse than the joke itself: “Sisterhood of the Oppressed.” https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B02RDDb … edit?pli=1

    it’s long, but well-written. And, this is why many of us will not join the Myers/Skepchick camp on these kinds of issues.”

  80. says

    Loved this one quote from one article.

    “On Monday, attorneys for the boys dropped their motion to charge her with contempt. David Mejia, an attorney for one of the boys, said the decision to withdraw the motion had nothing to do with public sentiment and online attention to the case.

    He said the purpose of the motion had been to enforce the law that protects juveniles and their actions from disclosure.”

    “The horse is out of the barn,” he said. “Nothing is bringing it back.”

    Attorneys can be full fledged assholes. The horse was out of the barn when your “boys” got the young lady intoxicated and proceeded to rape her. And video the event.

    Though I have many friends who are lawyers sometimes I have to share the sentiment of “Dick the butcher” from “Henry VI”, “The first thing we do, let’s kill all the lawyers”. Just not all of them, just the assholes.

  81. macrophage says

    “Youthful mistake”? Are you f-ing kidding me? Rape is not a “youthful mistake”.

  82. Azkyroth, Former Growing Toaster Oven says

    Joey — In case you didn’t hear, yet, those young men published pictures of their victim on the Internet.

    Speaking of which, she was 17. Why haven’t they been charged with distributing child pornography?

  83. says

    Janine,

    But Audley, it is not fair that their youthful mistake follow them for the rest of their life. Never mind that they were willing to share the pictures with their friends so that they could share in the rape.

    So… supporting a woman who named her rapists is exactly like advocating violent vigilante justice. Good to know!

  84. Azkyroth, Former Growing Toaster Oven says

    I’m disappointed by the vigilante justice nature of PZ’s article and most comments. In a proper functioning judicial system we have outsourced justice to an impartial judge, who in her/his wisdom decided on a particular punishment for this crime. In this case it included a gag order not to reveal the names of the juvenile criminals. There are probably good reasons for this, which we as armchair judges are not not familiar with.

    BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

  85. Azkyroth, Former Growing Toaster Oven says

    Should she have been found in contempt for violating the court order? Yes, because she was in contempt. Should she be praised for her actions? Yes, because sometimes the law doesn’t give you justice and getting justice means breaking it.

    Make up your mind.

  86. truthspeaker says

    starrkline
    24 July 2012 at 12:55 pm

    This is not an example of “rape culture”. This is an example of plea bargaining, and the shitty consequences it can result in. The judge wasn’t trying to protect the men, the judge was trying to avoid having to go to trial since that is fucking expensive.

    Should she have been found in contempt for violating the court order? Yes, because she was in contempt.

    Since she was not a defendant or plaintiff in the case, the judge did not have any authority to subject her to a court order. She did not reveal any information that was learned in court.

  87. anteprepro says

    No one is advocating that the colostomy bags known as Austin Zehnder and Will Frey be taken behind the woodshed and shot, for fuck’s sake.

    No, but making sure these two are known as rapists for something dumb they did as typical naive, foolish, happy-go-lucky 17 year old boys is equivalent to setting ourselves up as judge-jury-executioners, howling for blood in the name of Vengeance. Every time we type the names Austin Zehnder and Will Frey, we might as well be tying a noose or loading a shotgun. Every time we mention that Austin Zehnder and Will Frey are rapists, we might as well be putting a chainsaw to their skulls. Fuck the facts, fuck the truth, fuck justice, fuck preventing future victimization, fuck the right to peace of mind of former victims. We are to not speak the names of Austin Zehnder and Will Frey because the ruling of “boys will be boys” says that they have the FREEDOM to not be held accountable for their past deeds. They have the freedom to not be treated with suspicion or disrespect for things that they have done to deserve suspicion and disrespect. What kind of America would we live in if we restricted a rapist’s right to have everyone never mention how they are a rapist? That’s definitely not the America I know and love!

  88. Barkeron says

    @Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain

    Barkeron, please. This kind of inhumanity is not confined to one particular nation.

    As they saying goes in France, “we may not have perfected the revolution, but we perfected it”. It’s the same with the barbarism and backwardness of the US.

    And I’m not going to disclose my home country. There’s no place for infantile “but YOU too!” games here I hope you agree.

  89. says

    Grimalkin: with all due respect, I’m not fucking going to go searching rapey internet sites to find out. It happens, it ain’t rare.

    Sorry, I didn’t mean to imply that you should do that, and I’m definitely not implying that it’s rare. I was wondering if Robro had heard such on a news site or something.

    You do bring up a good point that this is a massive defanging to the ‘try to shut her up’ crowd, though. I hope that being so public about this does have that effect for her.

  90. anubisprime says

    Azkyroth, Former Growing Toaster Oven @ 93

    . In a proper functioning judicial system we have outsourced justice to an impartial judge, who in her/his wisdom decided on a particular punishment for this crime. In this case it included a gag order not to reveal the names of the juvenile criminals. There are probably good reasons for this, which we as armchair judges are not not familiar with.

    I stand corrected after all we can all see just how affective that ‘mature’ approach was!

    Maybe …just maybe a more ‘mature’ approach to ‘mature’ jurisprudence might not go amiss…cos this shit sure as hell ain’t workin’!

  91. Azkyroth, Former Growing Toaster Oven says

    Oh for fuck’s sake, doesn’t ANYONE understand what a fucking blockquote is?

  92. Azkyroth, Former Growing Toaster Oven says

    No, but making sure these two are known as rapists for something dumb they did as typical naive, foolish, happy-go-lucky 17 year old boys is equivalent to setting ourselves up as judge-jury-executioners, howling for blood in the name of Vengeance.

    “rapist (ˈreɪpɪst)

    — n
    a person who commits rape

    Collins English Dictionary – Complete & Unabridged 10th Edition
    2009 © William Collins Sons & Co. Ltd. 1979, 1986 © HarperCollins
    Publishers 1998, 2000, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2009″

  93. anteprepro says

    Imagine my previous post with the Star-Spangled Banner playing, from quiet in the background to a loud crescendo at the end, to attain maximum sarcasm.

    On that decidedly anti-patriotic note:

    Barkerton:

    It’s the same with the barbarism and backwardness of the US.

    Fuck right off. I would ask for you to make your case, but you obviously don’t care about facts, considering your mockery of, as you put it, a “but YOU too” argument. A simple “but YOU too” would be a perfectly acceptable way of illustrating that the U.S. is not the worst of the worst, but you’re too much of a moron to even bother considering that possibility. It’s knee-jerk, all the way down.

  94. says

    No, but making sure these two are known as rapists for something dumb they did as typical naive, foolish, happy-go-lucky 17 year old boys

    Wait, so rape is something a typical naive, foolish, happy-go-lucky, 17-year-old by does? Do you seriously believe that?

  95. Rev. BigDumbChimp says

    aleph squared, perhaps you and Azkyroth can get a deal on batteries if you go in on it together.

  96. Azkyroth, Former Growing Toaster Oven says

    …I have mentioned I have a disability that makes discerning other’s intentions and picking up on hints difficult, haven’t I?

  97. Rev. BigDumbChimp says

    …I have mentioned I have a disability that makes discerning other’s intentions and picking up on hints difficult, haven’t I?

    Probably, but I either missed it or forgot it. Figured I’d just give you a little heads up.

  98. Pteryxx says

    Sorry, I didn’t mean to imply that you should do that, and I’m definitely not implying that it’s rare. I was wondering if Robro had heard such on a news site or something.

    Thanks Grimalkin; I suspected you might be espousing hyperskepticism. *nods to*

    To clarify, I think that BY naming her attackers, Dietrich just *forestalled* those pictures being widely shared. As long as the offenders get to be anonymous, having rapey pictures circulated doesn’t hurt THEM at all; and they and all their friends can attach Dietrich’s name to them. But now, because they’re outed, those same pictures aren’t just of Dietrich being raped – they’re pictures of Zehnder and Frey *committing rape*. (Felony sexual assault, to be completely accurate.) Because of that, *now*, I don’t think any reputable news source will discuss where those pictures might be found. Neither will most of the rapey sites that normally distribute such photos. They won’t spread all over the net if *fellow rapists* could get hurt. Which both appalls and disgusts me, and fills me with appreciation for Dietrich’s tactical brilliance. Try and shame HER? See how they like it.

    So, I think proof never will be forthcoming, and that’s a GOOD THING.

  99. anteprepro says

    Azkyroth and others: Don’t kick yourself for not seeing what I meant to do with that first sentence. I realized after I already posted it that my first sentence was kind of convoluted and what exactly was sarcastic about it wasn’t clear. The “something dumb” and the description of them as typical 17 year olds was meant to mock the idea that rape wasn’t something serious enough that a 17 year old shouldn’t have it held over their head for the rest of their life. It is definitely serious enough, and if it is something that could be expected of 17 year olds, there is something seriously wrong with our 17 year olds. It was a poorly made sentence. I was hoping the rest of the paragraph would give enough of an idea of what I was going for to defuse the confusion that might have come from the first sentence, but I suppose that this is the danger of first impressions, lol.

  100. Joey Maloney says

    So, I got a good amount of crap for raising the question. Fair enough. And I get the moral outrage. I share it.

    Still. Y’all are okay then with saying these guys are irredeemable? Maybe they are. But you’re more or less endorsing the idea that some transgressions should prevent a person from ever being able to find a place in society. Would you endorse sentencing the rapists to LWOP? Because in some ways that would be kinder. At least they’d know where they stood.

    They fucked up. They fucked up horribly. They did terrible things to that girl. And I don’t know, maybe they don’t deserve even the chance at redemption. Even if they don’t, though, we know that making them social pariahs makes it more, not less likely that they’ll commit another outrage in the future. Is that worth considering?

    That young woman is awesome. There’s no way I had even a tenth of a percent of her courage when I was her age. As an act of civil disobedience, that took some ovaries.

  101. says

    Who said they’re irredeemable? They made a decision that ought to affect them for the rest of their life. They don’t get to run away from it.

    That doesn’t mean they can’t struggle to be better human beings.

  102. anubisprime says

    Azkyroth, Former Growing Toaster Oven @ 101

    Oh for fuck’s sake, doesn’t ANYONE understand what a fucking blockquote is?

    My bad…I was aware of the original by neuzelaar…and I was trying to offer moral support for your comment….

    I should have made it clearer!

  103. starrkline says

    “This isn’t a kind of tomato product. This is a kind of condiment.”

    Not. Mutually. Exclusive.

    They don’t have to be mutually exclusive, but there is no reason to think that the judge thought the assault was not a big deal, or that the boys needed to be protected for what he thought was a minor transgression. Therefore there is NO valid reason to call this an example of “rape culture”, any more than you can say we have a “murder culture” when a murderer strikes a plea bargain.

  104. Rev. BigDumbChimp says

    Still. Y’all are okay then with saying these guys are irredeemable? Maybe they are. But you’re more or less endorsing the idea that some transgressions should prevent a person from ever being able to find a place in society. Would you endorse sentencing the rapists to LWOP? Because in some ways that would be kinder. At least they’d know where they stood.

    You keep being concerned about the rapists and how hard this is going to be on them, and I’ll focus on the victim and what we can do to help them and future possible victims.

  105. Beatrice says

    Joey Maloney,

    They are not irredeemable. Neither has she ruined their lives forever and ever. Internet remembers, but internet is also a large place where things soon get pushed into the background by new information and news.

  106. Rev. BigDumbChimp says

    Therefore there is NO valid reason to call this an example of “rape culture”, any more than you can say we have a “murder culture” when a murderer strikes a plea bargain.

    unless of course you take into account what rape culture actually is

  107. Stacy says

    Yeah, they probably should be shamed.

    Probably?

    What they did was shameful. But – I’m just asking you to think about this – for the rest of their lives? Everywhere in the world? For something they did when they were 17?

    It’s the internet. It never goes away. Every time for the next sixty years when they apply for college admission or for a job or to volunteer for a nonprofit?

    Just think. If all potential rapists knew raping someone would be considered so shameful that they would have to live with the consequences of their actions for the rest of their lives.

    Society might be a tad different, ya think? Maybe there’d be fewer rape victims.

  108. Cipher, OM, Sweetness and Fluff says

    So, Joey, to shield these men from being considered irredeemable, you’re okay with preventing their victim from talking about what happened to her and who did it?

  109. Pteryxx says

    Even if they don’t, though, we know that making them social pariahs makes it more, not less likely that they’ll commit another outrage in the future. Is that worth considering?

    That’s not true for acquaintance rapists. They mainly use social acceptance as cover to assault more victims who won’t be believed; see the research cited in “Meet the Predators” and Lisak’s “Understanding the Predatory Nature of Sexual Violence” linked here as a PDF:

    http://yesmeansyesblog.wordpress.com/2009/11/24/predator-redux/

    From that work:

    This picture conflicts sharply with the widely-held view that rapes committed on university campuses are typically the result of a basically “decent” young man who, were it not for too much alcohol and too little communication, would never do such a thing. While some campus rapes do fit this more benign view, the evidence points to a far less benign reality, in which the vast majority of rapes are committed by serial, violent predators.

  110. Beatrice says

    Therefore there is NO valid reason to call this an example of “rape culture”, any more than you can say we have a “murder culture” when a murderer strikes a plea bargain.

    Judge trying to forbid the rape victim from sharing her rapists’ names… Nah, nothing to do with rape culture. Whatever gave us this idea.

  111. Azkyroth, Former Growing Toaster Oven says

    Still. Y’all are okay then with saying these guys are irredeemable?

    Supposing they aren’t irredeemable. How are they ever going to be redeemed if they don’t face any consequences for what they did wrong? Why should they redeem themselves, when society has let them get away with it with a slap on the wrist? They obviously didn’t see raping someone as “that big of a deal” before, and letting them get away with it is just going to reinforce that.

  112. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain says

    And I’m not going to disclose my home country. There’s no place for infantile “but YOU too!” games here I hope you agree.

    I will agree that I was not playing the “but you too” game. I do not give a fuck where you are from. I was mocking you for saying a very stupid statement.

  113. equisetum says

    Still. Y’all are okay then with saying these guys are irredeemable?

    Nope. Nobody said that.

    They fucked up. They fucked up horribly. They did terrible things to that girl.

    And it was a fuck up that should follow them. They should have to explain to the college admissions office why they should be trusted. They should have to explain to any woman they meet why they should be trusted. If they can explain that well enough, then they’ll get their second chance to be decent human beings. In the meantime, let’s put the shame where it belongs, instead of trying to muzzle the victim.

  114. neuzelaar says

    Janine & Beatrice,
    I agree it does not ‘feel’ just to only have the name of the victim released. But we must suck up whatever the judge decides, irrespective of what we feel is just. You are free to help change the laws, but really, you are not judge individual cases. In this case we all know very little about the facts, except one side of the story.

    I think it would make a lot of sense to not release the names and pictures of the victims nor the perpetrators by default. Many civilized countries do that.

    Reply to:
    Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain
    Please explain to us, oh wise neuzelaar, why it is fine that the victim’s name is out there for all to see. But not those assholes who were celebrating their crime?

    Beatrice
    The victim of rape was forbidden from sharing the names of her rapists. Do you seriously consider that just?
    I’m not asking if it’s against the law, I’m asking if you consider it just.

  115. Cipher, OM, Sweetness and Fluff says

    But we must suck up whatever the judge decides, irrespective of what we feel is just.

    Fuck you, asshole.

  116. thepint says

    They don’t have to be mutually exclusive, but there is no reason to think that the judge thought the assault was not a big deal, or that the boys needed to be protected for what he thought was a minor transgression. Therefore there is NO valid reason to call this an example of “rape culture”, any more than you can say we have a “murder culture” when a murderer strikes a plea bargain.

    Absent any context regarding the very stark differences with which rape and murder are treated as crimes by our society and justice system, of course. Please. This is a false comparison. We do not have a society that condones or makes excuses for murder, or finds ways to blame murder victims for being in “the wrong place at the wrong time” or for “wearing something that enticed the murderer to murder them” and so forth. We do have a society that regularly blames rape victims for being raped and finds excuses for rapists by tying itself into verbal knots over “gray areas” and “not really real rape” and so forth.

  117. Pteryxx says

    Besides:

    It’s the internet. It never goes away. Every time for the next sixty years when they apply for college admission or for a job or to volunteer for a nonprofit?

    What if they end up in a position of power at a university, or running a charity for vulnerable young kids? Shouldn’t some public accountability be involved here? *glare*

  118. Cipher, OM, Sweetness and Fluff says

    Ugh. And learn to blockquote, you callous fucking douche. The HTML is right above the goddamn comment box.

  119. Gvlgeologist, FCD says

    To those (few) posters who are worried about whether these “naive, foolish, happy-go-lucky” boys will have their lives ruined by exposure, that depends on them. They did a terrible, despicable thing, not only in assaulting her, but in deliberately humiliating her by distributing photos. That will, in fact, follow her for years to come. And you say that their identities should be hidden so that they won’t be embarrassed or affected in the future? I suppose you also agree that Mitt Romney’s “prank” of assaulting a classmate should not be brought out either. There should be repercussions.

    And it’s not as if these boys’ lives will necessarily forever be tainted. There are well known cases of people who were doing despicable things who changed, and took active steps to mitigate the damage that they caused. George Wallace, a segregationist for most of his life, repented and appointed African Americans to his cabinet and state government.

    If Zehnder and Frey don’t want to be remembered as the colostomy bags (thanks, Audley, that was wonderful) that they currently are, let them take the steps. Learn why they were so wrong (since they don’t apparently know yet). Speak, or at least write, about why they were wrong and how they want to make amends. Make amends. The ball’s in their court.

  120. Azkyroth, Former Growing Toaster Oven says

    I agree it does not ‘feel’ just to only have the name of the victim released. But we must suck up whatever the judge decides, irrespective of what we feel is just.

    This sentiment probably read better in the original German.

  121. Makoto says

    I know it’s been said, but just to add my small two cents – yes, these guys ADMITTED that they raped the girl. They admitted it before it even got to trial by sending pictures around (on the internet or just to friends, doesn’t matter – they still sent pictures. You know, pics or it didn’t happen? It happened). They admitted in court that they did it.

    All she has done is spread their names for something that can never go away, the crime against her. She didn’t rape them, she just made sure that others know their names.

    But she is a strong voice against letting just slightly underage perps (they were 17, they should know not to rape people at that age) get away with crimes once they become “adults”.

    Most rapists go on to rape others, this is well known. Less well known are the names of such rapists before they acquire quite a history. I’m proud of her for “outing” her rapists now, rather than waiting for years in fear of the court.

  122. truthspeaker says

    starrkline
    24 July 2012 at 1:46 pm

    “This isn’t a kind of tomato product. This is a kind of condiment.”

    Not. Mutually. Exclusive.

    They don’t have to be mutually exclusive, but there is no reason to think that the judge thought the assault was not a big deal, or that the boys needed to be protected for what he thought was a minor transgression.

    If this had taken place in a vacuum, unconnected to history and social context, there would be no reason to think that.

    But it didn’t. It took place in a judicial and law enforcement setting that has downplayed sexual assault and protected rapists for centuries.

    Context matters.

  123. Illuminata, Genie in the Beer Bottle says

    Yes, Joey, the real tragedy here is that these boys got away with raping someone, posting pictures of the rape to brag about it and humiliate the girl after raping her, but won’t get to get away with it anonymously.

    Oh the poor, poor rapists! Won’t someone care about the rapists!

    neuzelaar – you are a terrible person.

  124. says

    neuzelaar:

    But we must suck up whatever the judge decides, irrespective of what we feel is just.

    No. While a deal can be made between the defendant and the state, there is no reason why that should apply to the victim. She wasn’t on trial. The state prosecuted Austin Zehnder and Will Frey. Not her.

    We can’t go and force Austin Zehnder and Will Frey into prison. We can’t force them to pay restitution to their victim. We can’t change any of their legal punishment.

    But we can say the truth. We can say what a court of law decided: Austin Zehnder and Will Frey are rapists.

  125. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain says

    But we must suck up whatever the judge decides, irrespective of what we feel is just.

    So you are an authoritarian. So what that the victim gets punished while Austin Zehnder and Will Frey can remain in the shadows.

    Fuck off, women who are around them should know what they are capable of.

  126. truthspeaker says

    neuzelaar
    24 July 2012 at 1:56 pm

    I agree it does not ‘feel’ just to only have the name of the victim released. But we must suck up whatever the judge decides, irrespective of what we feel is just

    No, we don’t. Judges have limits to their authority. Just as you are under no legal obligation to obey an unlawful order from a police officer, you are under no legal obligation to obey an unlawful order from a judge.

  127. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls says

    But we must suck up whatever the judge decides, irrespective of what we feel is just.

    That is why the law is an ass to many people. And it shouldn’t be, nor would be, with the proper reforms. The judge had no business censoring the victim from talking, as it is probably judicial overreach, and never should have allowed such nonsense in the first place by modifying the plea bargain.

  128. Azkyroth, Former Growing Toaster Oven says

    I agree it does not ‘feel’ just to only have the name of the victim released. But we must suck up whatever the judge decides, irrespective of what we feel is just.

    Laws and those who enforce them derive their legitimacy and authority from upholding justice and the public good. Laws and applications of laws that are destructive of these ends have no value. To insist that unjust laws must be obeyed and enforced – or worse, that they must not even be criticized – simply because they are laws is to repudiate one’s freedom and dignity but one’s very humanity.

    I hope that you are allowed to persist in your ignorance of how much you owe to the heroes who have throughout history refused to honor your and others’ repudiations of their own humanity and fought against those who would eagerly make you the slave – or the cattle – that you wish to be.

  129. says

    Austin Zehnder and Will Frey are sexual predators, and for the rest of their lives they will face the possibility of their crime being thrown up in their faces every time they apply for a job or start dating someone or try to get a loan. Unfortunately, this possibility exists for them right now, rather than in 5-10 years when they are up for parole for the first time. So yeah, being outed as sex offenders by their victim is a terrible thing, but not for the reasons the rape apologists come up with.

  130. Beatrice says

    I agree it does not ‘feel’ just to only have the name of the victim released. But we must suck up whatever the judge decides, irrespective of what we feel is just.

    No, actually we don’t. Because laws can be wrong or judges can be wrong when implementing those laws. Your blind obedience is pathetic. Ever heard of the term civil disobedience?

    You are free to help change the laws, but really, you are not judge individual cases.

    Judges aren’t infallible. They fuck up. And there are differences between individual cases.

    In this case we all know very little about the facts, except one side of the story.

    Ooooh, you did not just go there.

    I think it would make a lot of sense to not release the names and pictures of the victims nor the perpetrators by default. Many civilized countries do that.

    THE VICTIM WASN’T ALLOWED TO NAME HER RAPISTS. We are not talking about papers publishing their names, that came only later as resistance to an unjust order and support of the young woman.

  131. Marta says

    “Yeah, they probably should be shamed. What they did was shameful. But – I’m just asking you to think about this – for the rest of their lives? Everywhere in the world? For something they did when they were 17?”

    jumpin jesus on a jukebox. These young men raped a woman when she was unconscious, and then posted the pictures of their rape of her on the internet.

    Yes. They should be shamed. Everywhere in the world. For the rest of their lives.

  132. Synfandel says

    @anteprepro #25:

    A teenage boy was harmed by teenage girls, therefore our argument is invalid.

    Easy there, fella. Take a few breaths. dukelupus didn’t say or imply anything of the sort. He pointed out another heinous abuse case that’s not getting the press it deserves.

  133. says

    Also, have we learned nothing from the internet? There are communities that will applaud Zehnder and Frey. They can go off to college and find a frat that will welcome them with high fives and ask them for dating advice. They can find hail-and-well-met-fellows at slimepits all around the world

  134. starrkline says

    Judge trying to forbid the rape victim from sharing her rapists’ names… Nah, nothing to do with rape culture. Whatever gave us this idea.

    17-year old drunk driver hits and kills your kid. His lawyer plea bargains, and part of the plea is that no one publicly shames the driver. Is such plea the result of a “murder culture” or “manslaughter culture”, which subtlety enables the killing of innocents? No, of course not. So why the fuck do you think rape is special in this regard. Why do you think that a stupid plea bargain is a clear indication of a culture that is A-OK with rape!

    The only good argument I’ve seen is that the judge had no right to gag her, since she wasn’t involved in the case as plaintiff (the State is) or defendant. This seems fairly plausible to me, but I am not sure if it is true or not. Furthermore I do not know with absolute certainty that the gag was a condition of the plea, or a separate condition of the judge. However, the difference between you an me seems to be that you assume the judge is an asshole without evidence, and I assume the judge is not until evidence otherwise is presented.

    Of course that doesn’t mean the plea bargain wasn’t bullshit, but that is another discussion. Plea Bargains a usually bullshit and the entire process is in serious need of reform.

  135. Louis says

    Youthful mistake. Youthful mistake? YOUTHFUL mistake? YOUTHFUL MISTAKE?

    Oh dear I appear to have accidentally slipped and put my cock in someone. Whoops there I go taking photos of it with my friend and uploading them to the internet. Whadda mistaka ta maka. Ayayayayay.

    Erm…no.

    Dear parochial people apologising for these rapists. The age of consent is not 18 everywhere, yes it is in the USA where this happened, but it’s not here in the UK for example. By 17 I knew the difference between consensual sex and non-consensual sex. Not from experiment, I learned it from a book. A little book called “the book of fucking empathy and not being a rapist douchenozzle”. It’s a readily available book, you can get it anywhere that boys/men are taught that their peepees don’t make them magic.

    American 17 year old youths are not magically and massively different from their UK counterparts, oh there’s a superficial difference here or there but if for one second you think the vast majority of UKian 17 year old youths are not trying to put their peepees in practically everything to a near identical degree that USAian youths are, you’re mistaken. These “kids” knew what they were doing. Magical Americanness or local laws don’t suddenly give them a get out of being a rapist free card. What these “kids” did was rape, pure and fucking simple. The failure of the American legal system to treat them accordingly is not a reflection of their youth and cupidity, it’s a reflection of the flaws of that system (just as it would be of the UK system or any other, this really is not a UK vs US thing, it’s a “stop making excuses for rapists thing”).

    Everything PZ said at #71 and #116 I agree with.

    Louis

  136. Azkyroth, Former Growing Toaster Oven says

    Easy there, fella. Take a few breaths. dukelupus didn’t say or imply anything of the sort. He pointed out another heinous abuse case that’s not getting the press it deserves.

    Unfortunately, bringing up other things that we should supposedly be talking about instead is a very common derailing tactic when issues of institutional and societal misogyny are being discussed. I quote:

    If this had taken place in a vacuum, unconnected to history and social context, there would be no reason to think that.

    It’s quite possible that dukelupus didn’t know about this (I can’t recall ever seeing the name before), and/or isn’t familiar enough with this debate to avoid triggering a false positive, but this IS a common derailing tactic, and while the dismissal of a disabled person being tortured and sexually assaulted as merely “off-topic” is grating, I can at least understand why regulars would jump on it.

  137. Pteryxx says

    In this case we all know very little about the facts, except one side of the story.

    What do you want now besides guilty pleas and the victim’s story substantiated in court, real evidence? Do you want to see the pictures for yourself now? /snarl

  138. says

    It seems to me that there really are two sides to this story. Everybody sympathizes with the young women who obviously has reason to feel that justice wasn’t done, but treating juveniles differently than cases involving adults surely makes some sense. You’re not excusing the behavior of these kids if you take notice that they were 17 and not 27 and judge them accordingly.

    I also wonder if anger at keeping the names of the perpetrators secret would be the same if they had been guilty of an equally serious but non-sexual crime. People seem to put sexual offenses in a special, almost sacred category, and demand especially draconic punishments for them. Of course Americans are rather vindictive in general and the trend has been to lengthen jail terms and saddle offenders with permanent civil disabilities no matter their violation.

    I do wish PZ would think before he did things like publishing the names of these two guys. The victim may have been justified in doing so, but PZ has simply decided he’s wiser than the judge. Well, PZ is an atheist so he doesn’t believe in the gods and that apparently includes two old Greek Gods, Hubris and Nemesis.

  139. Rev. BigDumbChimp says

    Easy there, fella. Take a few breaths. dukelupus didn’t say or imply anything of the sort. He pointed out another heinous abuse case that’s not getting the press it deserves.

    Please read #77 and reconsider what you are saying.

  140. Azkyroth, Former Growing Toaster Oven says

    Is such plea the result of a “murder culture” or “manslaughter culture”, which subtlety enables the killing of innocents?

    Is there a kilofuckton of other evidence that such a thing even exists?

  141. quidam says

    It’s worth noting that Savannah Dietrich wasn’t raped, she was sexually assaulted*, and was unaware of the assault until her abusers made the assault public. They weren’t shy about their acts and their publicizing of the the assault resulted in their conviction. Had they not done so the victim would likely still have been unaware that she had been assaulted.

    It’s ironic and rather satisfying that their conviction is also now being publicized.

    *Lest anyone get the wrong impression, that’s still a serious offence.

  142. Azkyroth, Former Growing Toaster Oven says

    It’s worth noting that Savannah Dietrich wasn’t raped, she was sexually assaulted*

    This is a distinction without a difference.

  143. Rev. BigDumbChimp says

    17-year old drunk driver hits and kills your kid. His lawyer plea bargains, and part of the plea is that no one publicly shames the driver. Is such plea the result of a “murder culture” or “manslaughter culture”, which subtlety enables the killing of innocents? No, of course not. So why the fuck do you think rape is special in this regard. Why do you think that a stupid plea bargain is a clear indication of a culture that is A-OK with rape!

    you
    don’t
    understand
    what
    rape culture is
    period

  144. says

    starrkline:

    17-year old drunk driver hits and kills your kid. His lawyer plea bargains, and part of the plea is that no one publicly shames the driver. Is such plea the result of a “murder culture” or “manslaughter culture”, which subtlety enables the killing of innocents?

    Did your hypothetical drunk driver purposefully run your kid down, take pictures of the body, and then post them on the Internet?

    There is a very big ethical difference between manslaughter and rape. If you can’t grasp that difference, shut the fuck up and learn.

  145. ltft says

    Just wanted to chime in- from what reading I’ve done, the males plead guilty to a class D felony. Sentencing is in a month, but Kentucky sentencing guidelines should put them in jail for 1 – 5 years (plus the mis. voyeurism).

  146. says

    But we must suck up whatever the judge decides, irrespective of what we feel is just.

    Judges fuck up all the time. It’s why we have higher courts to appeal to.
    I’m wondering about the victim’s first amendment rights. This was a plea bargain struck between the court and the defendants, not a settlement between victim and defendants. As far as I can tell at this point, she agreed to nothing–she was ordered not to talk about it by the judge. IANAL, but I’m thinking the judge overstepped his bounds. She should be able to speak publicly about something that happened to her. It’s not libel; the court confirmed that her account was true.
    And Son of Sam laws don’t apply to victims.
    .
    .
    By an odd coincidence, last night I dreamed about a girl I knew in high school, nearly 40 years ago. My memory of this girl is still clear, and disturbing. What I remember is that almost overnight she changed from a sweet, mildly flirty young woman into a girl utterly terrified of being left alone, in any situation, with guys. Any guys. It wasn’t until much later that I put two and two together and realized what most likely happened. I wish I could have helped her. Obviously she still inhabits my subconscious all these years later.
    Rape changes lives.

  147. Pteryxx says

    People seem to put sexual offenses in a special, almost sacred category, and demand especially draconic bend over backwards to avoid enacting punishments for them.

    fix’d.

  148. Rev. BigDumbChimp says

    It seems to me that there really are two sides to this story. Everybody sympathizes with the young women who obviously has reason to feel that justice wasn’t done, but treating juveniles differently than cases involving adults surely makes some sense. You’re not excusing the behavior of these kids if you take notice that they were 17 and not 27 and judge them accordingly.

    17 year olds get tried as adults all the time.

    I also wonder if anger at keeping the names of the perpetrators secret would be the same if they had been guilty of an equally serious but non-sexual crime. People seem to put sexual offenses in a special, almost sacred category, and demand especially draconic punishments for them. Of course Americans are rather vindictive in general and the trend has been to lengthen jail terms and saddle offenders with permanent civil disabilities no matter their violation.

    There’s good reason for the fact that rape and sexual assault of various types is considered different than stealing someone’s car. I’ll let you see if you can figure out why.

    I do wish PZ would think before he did things like publishing the names of these two guys. The victim may have been justified in doing so, but PZ has simply decided he’s wiser than the judge. Well, PZ is an atheist so he doesn’t believe in the gods and that apparently includes two old Greek Gods, Hubris and Nemesis.

    The names are out there already. Have you heard the name of any other criminals on the internet recently?

  149. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain says

    You are a fucking idiot, jimharrison. PZ did not disclose the names of Austin Zehnder and Will Frey.

    Also, why do you want the victim to allow other women to know the danger of dealing with Austin Zehnder and Will Frey.

    I sure as fuck would like to know who the rapists are in the group of people I am with.

  150. truthspeaker says

    Louis
    24 July 2012 at 2:15 pm

    Dear parochial people apologising for these rapists. The age of consent is not 18 everywhere, yes it is in the USA where this happened, but it’s not here in the UK for example.

    It’s actually 17 in many US states, and 16 in some.

  151. carlie, who has nice reading comprehension says

    I can understand the court sealing juvenile records, because that’s pretty much enshrined in law, and I can even see the media having a blackout on revealing any names of minors. But the actual people involved in the crime have a right to talk about what happened.

  152. truthspeaker says

    starrkline
    24 July 2012 at 2:15 pm

    Judge trying to forbid the rape victim from sharing her rapists’ names… Nah, nothing to do with rape culture. Whatever gave us this idea.

    17-year old drunk driver hits and kills your kid. His lawyer plea bargains, and part of the plea is that no one publicly shames the driver

    I’ve never heard of a plea bargain with such a condition – certainly not in a vehicular homicide.

  153. Beatrice says

    starrkline,

    Rape culture already exists. This case didn’t make it, it’s just a tiny little part of it.

  154. anteprepro says

    His lawyer plea bargains, and part of the plea is that no one publicly shames the driver.

    What is more analogous is that the family of the victim isn’t allowed to mention that the person who killed their child is reckless and irresponsible, and how that along with his drinking resulted in the death of their child. Whenever they are asked how their kid died, they are to say “natural causes” or the lawyers will swarm in. “Publicly shame the driver?” You think that is what is analogous to “can’t mention the names of the people who admitted to raping someone?” Fuck you.

  155. starrkline says

    you
    don’t
    understand
    what
    rape culture is
    period

    You
    don’t
    understand
    what
    discussion,
    arguements,
    or
    proper
    formatting
    are.

  156. tiredofusernamerules says

    1) Zehnder and Frey have not yet been sentenced and the judge is permitted to reject the recommended sentence.

    2) The recommended sentence is reportedly very light, which is what spurred the victim to go public in the first place.

    3) Word on the street as of this afternoon is that Zehnder and Frey have been kicked out of their private Catholic school, coincidentally the same one the prosecutor attended.

  157. Tony the Parkour Kat [safe and welcome at FtB] says

    Grimalkin:

    Savannah was marvelously courageous throughout this entire ordeal, it seems. Seriously, way to have something horrible happen to you and take the entire situation by the reigns. Being willing to talk so openly about this, especially when it’s shedding so much light on the fucked up ideas that women should be ashamed and quiet about their attacks, and the culture that worries more about a rapist’s reputation than the victim’s… it’s amazing.

    Yes.
    It is damn amazing.
    It reminds me of the courage displayed by Jessica Ahlquist.
    In fact, it might be wonderful if someone created/sold a shirt in Savannah’s honor.

  158. truthspeaker says

    carlie, who has nice reading comprehension
    24 July 2012 at 2:26 pm

    I can understand the court sealing juvenile records, because that’s pretty much enshrined in law, and I can even see the media having a blackout on revealing any names of minors.

    Suck blackouts are voluntary, and the media has been known to release names of juvenile defendants in cases of mass shootings.

  159. TonyJ says

    but as part of the deal, was told that she was not allowed to ever mention their names in public.

    WTF? Does this kind of shit happen often? The victim shouldn’t have to respect these assholes’ privacy.

  160. shockna says

    If they hadn’t been judged guilty yet, that’d be one thing.

    But since they’re now confirmed as guilty, I don’t see why the hell we allow bullshit plea deals like the one they got. Here’s to hoping the Streisand Effect the court unleashed proves far more harmful to the predators than the law ever would have.

  161. Synfandel says

    @Rev. BigDumbChimp (#156)

    Easy there, fella. Take a few breaths. dukelupus didn’t say or imply anything of the sort. He pointed out another heinous abuse case that’s not getting the press it deserves.

    Please read #77 and reconsider what you are saying.

    I have read #77 and haven’t changed my view. The relevance of dueklupus’s reference was that it was to another youth crime that isn’t getting reported. PZ said, “…but the criminals still remain sheltered by the major media.” That’s the relevance.

    You then said,

    I also notice that it appears you posted this because you wanted to make a point that girls can do nasty things to boys too.

    I didn’t get that impression at all when I first read his comment. That’s your inference, not his implication, as far as I can see.

    I just wish commenters in here didn’t feel the need to jump savagely all over each other like piranhas in a feeding frenzy.

  162. Beatrice says

    jimharrison,

    It seems to me that there really are two sides to this story.

    *eye twitch*

    These names are being published to show support to the victim who was forbidden from telling people names of her rapists. Their names are being widely published because the judge had more interest in protecting the rapists than protecting the rape victim, or any possible future rape victims.

    And no, I’m not American.

    Also, fuck you. I’m sick of all of you defending rights of these little rapist fuckers.

  163. Josh, Official SpokesGay says

    Why can I still not find one major media source that will name the rapists? Why? WHY?

  164. says

    @joey

    Yeah, they probably should be shamed. What they did was shameful. But – I’m just asking you to think about this – for the rest of their lives? Everywhere in the world? For something they did when they were 17

    their victim doesn’t get to just forget, it will never go away for her. Why the fuck should they get to forget what they did to her?

  165. reallythisisapain says

    Shouldn’t Austin Zehnder and Will Frey be far more notorious than Savannah Dietrich? Although Dietrich should be more widely recognized for her courage.

    This. A thousands times *this.

  166. mythbri says

    For everyone who’s wondering about whether or not it’s appropriate to release the names of these criminals, ask yourselves if you would still have objections if they had killed Dietrich. If they had beaten her. If they had cut her. What if they had sexually assaulted a 7-year-old? Would it still be inappropriate to name them? This is a crime that they originally publicized (among their friends – and if those friends kept quiet about it, shame on them), and that they have admitted to committing. This is a bad thing they did. It should follow them. They should remember it. They should not do it again.

  167. Tony the Parkour Kat [safe and welcome at FtB] says

    Rev:

    This goes beyond simple childhood “mistakes”.

    QFT.

    My childhood mistakes involved stealing a few adult magazines from convenience stores. They do NOT involve raping anyone.

  168. Rev. BigDumbChimp says

    You
    don’t
    understand
    what
    discussion,
    arguements,
    or
    proper
    formatting
    are.

    Yes I do, and if you read any of my other comments you’d realize that. But keep ignoring them in place of quick deflecting comments. Argument seems to be wasted on you as you keep playing the blind man to the giant movie screen in front of you explaining that rape culture exists. It has a long detailed history of excusing, hiding and protecting rapists. This happens in the culture, the courts and even in families. You trying to create some falsely equivalent analogy of “murder culture” to excuse what seemingly looks like a another data point in the big giant book of this is how rape culture excuses rapists is only doing one thing…

    Showing exactly how little you know about what rape culture is.

    Well, two things. The above and making you look like someone that excuses it.

  169. tricycle says

    Damn!

    “The horse is out of the barn. Nothing is bringing it back.” says David Mejia, an attorney for one of the boys.

    The idea that these dirt bags get to live out their lives in relative obscurity with a “minor” youthful indiscretion buried in their past is long gone. That horse has indeed left the barn.

    I was pleasantly amazed to see Free Republic, reddit, a drag racing forum, Pharyngula and many other sites on the same cultural page today. Shazam!

    Is it possible the rape apologists are on the run? Maybe? Slightly?

  170. Louis says

    Audley and Truthspeaker,

    Thanks for correcting me. I was wrong.

    I had this impression in my obviously confused brain that the USA had normalised age of consent across all states to be 18. Maybe I was thinking of drinking and 21 and maybe that’s wrong too!

    Thanks again.

    Louis

    P.S. Audley, the more you know? LOL Sarcastic bastard. I like you. :-)

  171. says

    Joey Malone,

    Saying that someone “fucked up” implies that they made a mistake, like pulling a new-forged sword from its quenching bath too soon, or did something accidental like knocked over a set of tools onto someone’s foot.

    This doesn’t go anywhere near what rape is. Rape is not something that anyone does mistakenly or accidentally. Rape is an act of predation, done with forethought, malice, and no more regard for the rights, and autonomy and wishes of the victim than what a falcon regards for the struggling fish it just plucked out of the lake. Or a pack of wolves for the panicky doe they tear apart.

    Predation is not a one-off thing. It is not a “youthful indiscretion”. It is not happenstance. It is not an ill-considered refelx that later prompts one to say “Oops.” It is something that the predator wants to do, plans to do, and expects to be able to get away with.

    And a good part of the reason that predators have that expectation is people who wring their hands over the horror of the predators being identified for what they are.

    Maybe these young men can be redeemed. Maybe they can take a good hard look at themselves from their victim’s perspective and decide they don’t like what they see. Maybe they can can repudiate their crime and make a conscious and deliberate choice to not be predators within their own species. But if so, it will be searing daylight that makes it happen, not sweeping their crime under the rug to shield them from shame.

  172. Rieux says

    For whatever it’s worth, it certainly appears to me that the threats to punish Dietrich for outing her rapists never had a leg to stand on legally. (IAAL, but this is not my area of expertise; this is not legal advice for anyone, so please consult your own counsel.)

    This idea, from truthspeaker @49, is not quite correct:

    Judges in the United States don’t have the authority to issue gag orders on 3rd parties.

    Oh, they certainly do—most relevantly in litigation (such as many/most criminal proceedings concerning juveniles) in which court records are sealed. U.S. courts absolutely do have jurisdiction over any party that would publicize confidential information contained in court records.

    But, as multiple people on this thread and in the two articles PZ links to have pointed out, Dietrich’s decision to out her rapists does not constitute publicizing information from court records. She’s stating simple facts (true ones, not incidentally) that she has knowledge of that’s independent of anything she learned in or from the court, which means that her publications can’t possibly violate any enforceable order from that court. Her own First Amendment right—here, to tell the story of her own life—is an obvious and (AFAIK) insuperable obstacle to any legal attempt to silence her.

    As I read the linked articles, everyone who matters seems to have accepted this reality, at least on Streisand Effect grounds:

    On Monday, attorneys for the boys dropped their motion to charge her with contempt. David Mejia, an attorney for one of the boys, said the decision to withdraw the motion had nothing to do with public sentiment and online attention to the case.

    He said the purpose of the motion had been to enforce the law that protects juveniles and their actions from disclosure.

    “The horse is out of the barn,” he said. “Nothing is bringing it back.”

    No one should minimize the coercive potential of a prosecutor, judge, or other lawyer threatening criminal sanctions, regardless of the legal illegitimacy of that threat. And fighting off an illegitimate prosecution (or civil suit) can be hell—a hell Dietrich and innumerable other parties don’t deserve.

    But as long as Dietrich had competent counsel (i.e., not me!), I can’t imagine that she could be convicted or found civilly liable for telling the truth about what happened to her. And for whatever it’s worth, I don’t see anyone in the news stories in question seriously arguing otherwise.

  173. klatu says

    It seems to me that there really are two sides to this story.

    Not that old, shit-covered chestnut again.

    You’re not excusing the behavior of these kids if you take notice that they were 17 and not 27 and judge them accordingly.

    Accordlingy how?

    I also wonder if anger at keeping the names of the perpetrators secret would be the same if they had been guilty of an equally serious but non-sexual crime. People seem to put sexual offenses in a special, almost sacred category, and demand especially draconic punishments for them.

    It’s just jolly that you wonder about this and that it seems like that to you. But in the real world rape and sexual assault/abuse are vastly under-reported, under-prosectuted and not taken seriously in general.

    I do wish PZ would think before he did things like publishing the names of these two guys.

    I’m fairly sure he did think about it. Or maybe he spilt some coffee on the keyboard and accidentally typed and submitted the OP when cleaning it up… We’ll never know.

  174. says

    I forgot to add (to my post at 185) that this especially true when someone makes PORN OF YOUR RAPE AND PASSES IT AROUND. If you wanna play the “internet is forever” game imagine the worst thing that ever happened to you being masturbated over by pornsick dudes for all eternity. Your rape being a “fantasy” for someone else out there, your rape being their fucking FUN is unbearable enough when its just the rapist, I can’t imagine what it must be like for strangers to have that kind of joy at a womans expense.

  175. bpcross says

    It will, of course, come as no surprise that these fine upstanding young gentlemen attend a Catholic college prep school so you know that they have been taught how to treat women.

  176. starrkline says

    Rape culture already exists. This case didn’t make it, it’s just a tiny little part of it.

    There are no black people in my office. Racism has always existed, this is just a tiny part of it right? Well, I doubt it, the owner is white but most of the people I work with are Indian, not white.

    You can’t just say that just because something exists, this has to be an example of it. You have to look at this under it’s own merits. I could certainly be totally wrong about how this went down in court. I can freely admit that, I find it odd that so many in this thread can’t, and start insulting people who point it out.

  177. Pteryxx says

    This is a crime that they originally publicized (among their friends – and if those friends kept quiet about it, shame on them), and that they have admitted to committing.

    To put it another way, all she’s doing is seeing that the sexual assault photos are circulated with correct attribution.

  178. Tony the Parkour Kat [safe and welcome at FtB] says

    starrkline:

    This is not an example of “rape culture”.

    Please go read up on what ‘rape culture’ is before you spout off at the mouth with this kind of BS.

  179. thunk's grog-powered spaceship says

    Despicable:

    And to whoever’s supporting the rapist, you are part of the culture that tolerates this. I used to be part of the “poor poor criminals” camp, but that’s just an attempt at minimizing the victim’s suffering.

    Remember, those pictures were spread online too.

  180. says

    jim, dukelupus, starkline: There’s an ENTIRE page of links to studies and articles on the Pharyngula wiki which covers defects in prosecution and rape culture. There’s proof, loads and loads of proof, that there are problems.

  181. Josh, Official SpokesGay says

    Shorter JimHarrison: I’ve looked at rape from both sides now

  182. thunk's grog-powered spaceship says

    skeptifem:

    I forgot to add (to my post at 185) that this especially true when someone makes PORN OF YOUR RAPE AND PASSES IT AROUND. If you wanna play the “internet is forever” game imagine the worst thing that ever happened to you being masturbated over by pornsick dudes for all eternity. Your rape being a “fantasy” for someone else out there, your rape being their fucking FUN is unbearable enough when its just the rapist, I can’t imagine what it must be like for strangers to have that kind of joy at a womans expense.

    QFFT.

    *gets some brain bleach*

  183. neuzelaar says

    As a recent European immigrant to the USA I was hoping to find a community of likewise liberal, rational, godless and thoughtful people in this community. But it appears this crowd is surprisingly similar to the Glenn Beck audience:

    - Live long shaming is perfectly OK as punishment for a juvenile offense, Tit-for-tat revenge justice by public humiliation is apparently a decent way to reduce rape incidence.
    -An absolutist black-and-white world view: the victim is an angel, the aggressors are deranged devils for which no punishment is ever harsh enough. There is no room for grey, so no hope whatsoever that the bad guys ever turn out decent.
    - PZ and the rest of the armchair justices here don’t have the slightest doubt about their judgement. Its no problem that its based on incomplete data about the case: they know better than the judge.
    - This mob appears very eager to participate in ‘internet lynching’.
    - Load of whining, but not the slightest initiative to structurally change what’s broken with the laws or the judicial system.
    - Ad-hominem attacks galore.

    Very disappointing to see this come from a supposedly rational and intelligent atheist crowd.

  184. Beatrice says

    starrkline,

    Rape victims get silenced and discouraged to report their rapes. The judge made a decision that is completely outrageous and it seems unprecedented, silencing a rape victim. She didn’t just forbid her from sharing details about the case, but the named of her rapists. Yes, I claim that this is a symptom of rape culture.

    Also, fuck, but your pathetic examples are pathetic.

  185. Rev. BigDumbChimp says

    I have read #77 and haven’t changed my view. The relevance of dueklupus’s reference was that it was to another youth crime that isn’t getting reported. PZ said, “…but the criminals still remain sheltered by the major media.” That’s the relevance.

    Well everyone has their opinion.

  186. thepint says

    starrkline – every word coming out of your mouth is just proving you don’t have a goddamned clue what rape culture is. I’d advise you to go and educate yourself before sticking your foot in it any further. I’m feeling charitable today, so why don’t you start here:

    http://finallyfeminism101.wordpress.com/2009/10/19/rape-culture-101/

    This is especially relevant, considering your demonstrated ignorance about how rape culture works and your horribly flawed comparisons to “manslaughter or murder culture” and how such crimes are treated:

    Rape culture is the myriad ways in which rape is tacitly and overtly abetted and encouraged having saturated every corner of our culture so thoroughly that people can’t easily wrap their heads around what the rape culture actually is.

    MURDER is not tacitly and overtly abetted and encouraged in our culture. DRUNK DRIVING is not tacitly and overtly abetted and encouraged in our culture. Your analogies are hopelessly flawed and in error. Stop. Using. Them.

  187. Beatrice says

    neuzelaar ,

    Do you have a farm? All that straw from #2o5 could be better used there.

    ALso, go fuck yourself.

  188. Josh, Official SpokesGay says

    As a recent European immigrant to the USA I

    Paging Jadehawk!

  189. Tony the Parkour Kat [safe and welcome at FtB] says

    Barkeron:

    It’s the same with the barbarism and backwardness of the US.

    And I’m not going to disclose my home country. There’s no place for infantile “but YOU too!” games here I hope you agree.

    Comments like this:

    The brokenness and inhumanity of the US society disgusts me time and again.

    Imply that the US is the only country with problems like this.
    It’s also a blanket condemnation of US society, as if *everyone* here supports a rape culture.
    Frankly, I’m insulted.
    I’ve never raped anyone.
    I’ve never wanted to rape anyone.
    I will stand by the side of the victims.
    I will *never* side with the rapists.
    I AM NOT part of the problem and you really need to go elsewhere with your stupid comments.

  190. maureenbrian says

    No rape culture, starrkline?

    You’d get better ratings on this blog if you showed some sign of knowing what you were talking about.

    To make your learning easy, try this movie – the original gang-rape in 1983 and the pretty good movie in 1988. Apart from the non-availanility of the internet to civilians at that point it’s the same fucking story.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Accused_(1988_film)

    A rape, an attempt to keep it quiet, a plea bargain and the pressure to silence the victim who, fortunately and as in this case, has more courage than the judicial system. Almost 30 years later the same story is played out – as if to a script – and you say there is no rape culture.

    Well, starrkline, fuck you and all who sail in you!

  191. says

    neuzelaar: How… quaint.

    So, you moved to another country and expect to not have to learn or respect the culture. Instead, you expect to be proudly ignorant of efforts to reform the judicial system, the culture around rape and sexual assault here and the history of the term ‘lynch’.

    Buddy, you aren’t looking for a culture of skeptics or rationalists. Since you can’t be arsed to do due diligence, you should probably stick to places where people don’t think or do due diligence.

    I recommend you stay away from the internet, too. People will keep trying to educate you, but you’ll just be wasting their time.

  192. thepint says

    @ 205: TL:DR translation: you guys are totally too angry about how the rights and privacy of rapists are given far more consideration than rape victims.

    Clearly our sympathies here are going to the wrong people. /SARCASM – lots of it.

  193. anteprepro says

    You’re not excusing the behavior of these kids if you take notice that they were 17 and not 27 and judge them accordingly.

    Yeah, you could use that as factor, just like you could use other assessments of their mental competence to determine exactly how severely they should be punished based on how much control they had of their actions and how well they grasp the fact that what they did was wrong. But, that’s the thing: The difference between age 17 and age 27 in levels of mental competence shouldn’t be too significant in the matter of them understanding that rape is wrong. Whine and posture all you like, that doesn’t change. A person that didn’t quite get that rape was bad at 17 but did at 27 probably had other problems going on than simply being young.

    I also wonder if anger at keeping the names of the perpetrators secret would be the same if they had been guilty of an equally serious but non-sexual crime.

    Oh look: An assclown who doesn’t quite grasp that the extra offense for sexual crimes is largely because sexual crimes currently aren’t dealt with adequately.

    Please, lecture to us some more, oh enlightened one taking the oh-so unique stance of not particularly caring about sexual abuse. Tell us how to be as unemotional and detached as you are. How can we be as above it all as you are, Male Christian Who Thinks People Get Too Offended About Rape?

  194. Josh, Official SpokesGay says

    But mouthyb teh victim maybe wazn’t angel innocent11!!! Sum girlz are moar rapey than otherz what if she was slut? How com she wuz so drunk she past oute huh? Parent should teech thar kidz about responzibilz for rape prevenshun

  195. Louis says

    Neuzelaar, #205,

    Utter bullshit.

    These rapists, these sexual assaulters, these youths, might indeed redeem and correct themselves over the course of their lives, I sincerely hope they are given the opportunity to do so and DO SO. Their crime has lifelong consequences for their victim, why should they be protected from the lifelong consequences of their crime, especially when protecting them from the lifelong consequences of their crime is inimical to them redeeming and correcting themselves?

    If they get to hide their crime, pretend like it never happened to people around them, they might just find it easier to hide the crime to themselves. It’s a pretty normal human response. Hiding the crime to themselves gives them greater opportunity to not redeem or correct themselves, perhaps even to repeat it (the stats show repeat rape/sexual assault, especially “acquaintance rape,” rates are comparatively high).

    A murderer cannot hide his or her name, a burglar cannot, a fraudster cannot, why a rapist? What’s special about rapists?

    Louis

  196. mythbri says

    @neuzelaar

    A tit-for-tat revenge would be for Dietrich and others here to wish rape on these two young men. I think that you’ll find that if someone here tried to do that, everyone would come down extremely hard on them.

  197. Josh, Official SpokesGay says

    Also? Raping a passed out woman, photographing it, then making porn out of it to share online tells me something deep and unchangeable about the character of these young men. Yes, it pretty much defines what kind of people they are. That’s not going to change. They’re predators to the bone and women should be warned of their presence for the rest of their natural lives.

  198. Beatrice says

    *deep breath*

    Let’s look at this point by point:

    - Live long shaming is perfectly OK as punishment for a juvenile offense, Tit-for-tat revenge justice by public humiliation is apparently a decent way to reduce rape incidence.

    Tit-for-tat would be wishing rape on them. I don’t. I don’t wish rape on anyone.
    Public humiliation I approve of.

    -An absolutist black-and-white world view: the victim is an angel, the aggressors are deranged devils for which no punishment is ever harsh enough. There is no room for grey, so no hope whatsoever that the bad guys ever turn out decent.

    No one said that the victim is an angel. Besides, I don’t see how that’s relevant to anything. No matter who she is, it was wrong to rape her and it was wrong to silence her.

    If those guys become decent, good for them and especially any women they come in contact with.

    You are lying and misinterpreting what we are saying. That makes me like you less and less.

    - PZ and the rest of the armchair justices here don’t have the slightest doubt about their judgement. Its no problem that its based on incomplete data about the case: they know better than the judge.

    What incomplete data? What are you talking about??! YOu are making shit up.

    And it wouldn’t be the first time people know better than a judge. Judges aren’t infallible.

    - This mob appears very eager to participate in ‘internet lynching’.

    Go fuck yourself. This is not lynching. Don’t you use lynching every time someone’s nasty to you on the internet you little whiner.

    - Load of whining, but not the slightest initiative to structurally change what’s broken with the laws or the judicial system.

    This judge indicated what’s brooken in the judicial system. And if you’d read what people have been writing you would notice discussion about justice system. You lying fucker.

    - Ad-hominem attacks galore.

    Do you even know what that term means?

  199. thepint says

    A murderer cannot hide his or her name, a burglar cannot, a fraudster cannot, why a rapist? What’s special about rapists?

    I was gonna hazard a guess that it’s due to RAPE CULTURE but according to people like starrkline, it doesn’t exist.

  200. thunk's grog-powered spaceship says

    Neuzellar:

    – Live long shaming is perfectly OK as punishment for a juvenile offense, Tit-for-tat revenge justice by public humiliation is apparently a decent way to reduce rape incidence.

    Read above– it’s not some juvenile mistake. Rape is a heinous crime, and the victim should not have to deal with worse consequences than the rapist. But apparently, Frye and Zehnder are the poor oppressed people.

    -An absolutist black-and-white world view: the victim is an angel, the aggressors are deranged devils for which no punishment is ever harsh enough. There is no room for grey, so no hope whatsoever that the bad guys ever turn out decent.

    What evidence do you have for this assumption? We do hope the rapists wisen up and take full complicity for their crimes. But they have still committed crimes.

    – PZ and the rest of the armchair justices here don’t have the slightest doubt about their judgement. Its no problem that its based on incomplete data about the case: they know better than the judge.

    1. Pharyngula is not a court of law.
    2. The rapists have been found guilty.
    3. And have taken photographs and posted them online.

    Again, a baseless assumption.

    – This mob appears very eager to participate in ‘internet lynching’.

    Poor poor Frye and Zehnder! You seem very eager to minimize the rape.

    – Load of whining, but not the slightest initiative to structurally change what’s broken with the laws or the judicial system.

    Pointing out the actions of a rapist is not whining.

    And we support changing the laws– see above, or read the Pharyngulawiki feminism links.

    – Ad-hominem attacks galore.

    Citation needed.

    Very disappointing to see this come from a supposedly rational and intelligent atheist crowd.

    If you are not satisfied with Pharyngula, you are free to go away and stop whining about it here.

  201. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain says

    Oh wise neuzelaar, please, teach us. We are just so short sighted.
    What would you do for the victim. The one who was raped. The who that was photographed. The one who’s photo was passed along to the rapists’ friend. The one who will be considered “tainted” by a segment of the population because she was raped and her name and the images are out. What can be done to help her.

    Oh. Wait. I know. I liked what she did.

    If this makes me the same as a braying fool of a Glenn Beck follower to you, I am willing for that to be my fate.

    And fuck you, you simpering fool.

  202. says

    In Canada those under 18 are subject to the Youth Criminal Justice Act. Normally if you’re convicted as a young offender your name will not be revealed to the public, nor will the name of the victim or victims. Violating such a ban is against the law. Therefore I would imagine Ms. Dietrich might face a similar legal problem up here if that was the case. On the other hand given the nature of the crime it’s possible the Crown would have considered this an aggravated sexual assault, in which case it would be considered what is called a presumptive offense, and therefore their names could be revealed if they were tried under such circumstances. Presumptive offenses are those that are considered of such seriousness that the defendant should be sentenced as if they were an adult.

  203. Nepenthe says

    Jeez, from the reaction of some people you’d think that people were doing this to these turds.

    (TW: mentions of rape and pedophilia in a perpetrator-mocking context)

  204. Marta says

    @205

    “-An absolutist black-and-white world view: the victim is an angel, the aggressors are deranged devils for which no punishment is ever harsh enough. There is no room for grey, so no hope whatsoever that the bad guys ever turn out decent.”

    The victim was no angel, so it’s not so terrible she is raped? This is a grey area? But the boys who raped her while she was unconscious and then put sent pics of it to their friends–they might be decent? This is a grey area?

    What the fuck is wrong with you?

  205. Beatrice says

    mouthyb,

    Are we allowed that? Won’t my lady brainz get brokens if I learn a big word?

  206. anteprepro says

    Aww, poor neuzelaar. Xe thought that he would find skeptics that would automatically assume that a judge telling rape victims that they are legally bound to not mention the name of her rapists was in the right. Xe thought that we would assume that our legal system was perfect, despite all its well-known flaws. Xe thought that we should think that every decision a judge makes is pure gold. Xe read Judge Dredd and thought it was either a legal ideal or at very least was Non-Fiction. The Judges ARE THE LAW. And neuzelaar wants us all to bow down and obey them unquestioningly as such. Sorry, but complain about “ad hominems” all you want, you deserved nothing more. Hell, you actually deserved far more of them. The legal system is fucked up when it comes to rape. This is well established. Pretending that it isn’t will only make you look like a fool and/or a scumbag. And you will be treated as such. Deal with it.

  207. Illuminata, Genie in the Beer Bottle says

    starrkline – congrats on winning the Dumbest Troll of the Day award. Have you picked up your crown yet?

    protip, diddums: If you don’t know what the fuck you’re talking about, DON’T TALK ABOUT IT. Your staggering ignorance is plain to everyone. Google is your friend and can explain to you what rape culture actually is. Good luck to you not making such an incredible ass of yourself in the future.

  208. Stevarious says

    @nauzelaar #205

    - Live long shaming is perfectly OK as punishment for a juvenile offense, Tit-for-tat revenge justice by public humiliation is apparently a decent way to reduce rape incidence.

    Do you really think that protecting rapists from punishment is a decent way to reduce rape incidence? Really? Do you really think that rape is a juvenile offense? Really?

    There is no room for grey, so no hope whatsoever that the bad guys ever turn out decent.

    This is exactly the opposite from what a number of people, including PZ, have stated.

    - PZ and the rest of the armchair justices here don’t have the slightest doubt about their judgement. Its no problem that its based on incomplete data about the case: they know better than the judge.

    They fucking pled guilty. There are pictures and video of them committing the crime that they pled guilty to. What exactly do you think there is to know about the case that would change the situation?
    And the judge has no right whatsoever to gag her from sharing information that she did not learn in court. Therefore, nothing the judge said or did has any affect on whether it’s right for PZ or anyone else to share information not obtained from the court. This has been pointed out time and time again.

    - This mob appears very eager to participate in ‘internet lynching’.

    Because shaming a rapist on the internet is exactly like murdering him by hanging.

    It has been explained, time and again, WHY forcing victims to silence is harmful to victims and helpful to rapists. Perhaps you’d actually like to address the substance of that argument, instead of lynching that poor straw-man?

    - Load of whining, but not the slightest initiative to structurally change what’s broken with the laws or the judicial system.

    What makes you think that ‘convincing people that protecting rapists from the consequences of their actions is wrong’ is not integral to those structural changes?

    - Ad-hominem attacks galore.

    An insult is not an ad-hominem. If I call you a worthless douchebag, it’s not an ad-hominem. If I say that, because you are a worthless douchebag, your argument is invalid, then I’ve committed an ad-hominem. Please learn what the words you say mean before you make a fool of yourself on the internet.
    Oh, too late.

  209. equisetum says

    - Live long shaming is perfectly OK as punishment for a juvenile offense, Tit-for-tat revenge justice by public humiliation is apparently a decent way to reduce rape incidence.

    Tit-for-tat? Nobody suggested sexually assaulting the guilty parties.

    -An absolutist black-and-white world view: the victim is an angel, the aggressors are deranged devils for which no punishment is ever harsh enough. There is no room for grey, so no hope whatsoever that the bad guys ever turn out decent.

    Nobody said she’s an angel, and it’s irrelevant, you twit. She’s a rape victim. The last sentence has already been adressed in here by me, PZ and others.

    - PZ and the rest of the armchair justices here don’t have the slightest doubt about their judgement. Its no problem that its based on incomplete data about the case: they know better than the judge.

    The judge is trying to silence the victim, to keep her from talking about her own life. That’s all the data I need, and it is not in dispute. I have not the slightest doubt that this is wrong.

    - This mob appears very eager to participate in ‘internet lynching’.

    Internet lynching: this is now defined as allowing rape victims to name their rapists.

    - Load of whining, but not the slightest initiative to structurally change what’s broken with the laws or the judicial system.

    Huh? So the judge is right, he knows best, and we’re supposed to fix the broken system? In the meantime, well, just suck it up, Savannah.

    - Ad-hominem attacks galore.

    I haven’t seen one yet. But your strawmen are on fire.

  210. says

    Beatrice: We’re allowed to learn, but we have to trade in our ovaries. We wouldn’t want all that intellectual effort to curdle our eggs if we can reproduce.

  211. CT says

    There is no room for grey,

    “There is a very interesting debate raging at the moment about the nature of sin, for example,” said Oats.
    “And what do they think? Against it, are they?” said Granny Weatherwax.
    “It’s not as simple as that. It’s not a black and white issue. There are so many shades of gray.”
    “Nope.”
    “Pardon?”
    “There’s no grays, only white that’s got grubby. I’m surprised you don’t know that. And sin, young man, is when you treat people as things. Including yourself. That’s what sin is.”
    “It’s a lot more complicated than that—”
    “No. It ain’t. When people say things are a lot more complicated than that, they means they’re getting worried that they won’t like the truth. People as things, that’s where it starts.”
    “Oh, I’m sure there are worse crimes—”
    “But they starts with thinking about people as things…”

    Granny Weatherwax, and the Omnian priest Mightily Oats –Terry Pratchett Carpe Jugulum

  212. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain says

    Illuminata, I am having a hard time judging which troll is more dumb, starrkline or nauzelaar.

  213. says

    Also? Raping a passed out woman, photographing it, then making porn out of it to share online tells me something deep and unchangeable about the character of these young men. Yes, it pretty much defines what kind of people they are. That’s not going to change. They’re predators to the bone and women should be warned of their presence for the rest of their natural lives.

    I am not convinced that people who do awful things are irreversibly scum, it would be difficult to prove one way or the other. It is much harder for me to say one way or another in our culture, where this sort of behavior isn’t really discouraged at all.

    I don’t think they should be able to forget what they did, which is what would have happened with this bullshit gag order. They could move on and pretend like it never happened, while their victim deals with a lifetime of bullshit. That simply isn’t fair.

    What I do know for sure is that having people know you are a rapist isn’t The Worst Punishment Evar like people are making it out to be. Mike Tyson is a convicted fucking rapist, and he was on the view last week. He still gets parts in movies. Roman Polanski got to accept his academy award for his films via satelite instead of in person (the horror). Accused rapists like Kobe Bryant (whose attorneys decided to shame the victim out of court, while calling her a shameless gold digger and using her name in violation of shield laws) got all kinds of corporate sponsorship ads after the trial. No one gives a fuck about rape. I have been thinking for a long time about making a post about how hyperbolic and stupid all this “ONE FALSE ACCUSATION CAN RUIN A MANS LIFE” shit is compared to how society actually treats people accused/convicted of rape. People take the dudes side generally (unless he fucked kids who had not hit puberty, and he fucked so many of them that he can’t deny it happened). The most likely consequence is that their employment in certain sectors will be restricted which is how it SHOULD BE.

  214. screechymonkey says

    FYI, here is a brief blog post by UCLA law professor Eugene Volokh explaining why, based on well-established precedent, the court’s order was unconstitutional.

    I would add, in response to Raging Bee’s speculation way upthread about ISPs being ordered to take down the information, that even if the order purports to apply to third parties (I haven’t seen the text of the order itself), it can’t bar the publication of information that was lawfully received. In Florida Star v. B.J.F., the Supreme Court overturned the conviction of a newspaper that published the name of a rape victim after the police erroneously released the information, and you’d have to be extraordinarily twisted to try to argue that the rule should be different for publication of the perpetrator’s name.

  215. truthspeaker says

    Just a historical note:

    There was a time in this country when drunk driving was not taken seriously be the justice system, and you might find a prosecutor and/or judge caring more about the protecting the reputation of the perpetrator than about any victims.

    There was a time, in many states, where murder of black people was technically illegal, but often excused and minimized by prosecutors, judges, and juries.

    There are still many parts of the country where murder and manslaughter committed by police officers is not taken seriously by the justice system, and protecting the reputation and career of the perpetrator seems to be the highest priority.

    You can’t look at a single case in isolation and say “Well, there’s no evidence that cultural considerations played a role in the plea agreement and sentence”. Context matters.

  216. Louis says

    I also wanted to pick up on the “rape victim is possibly not perfect angel” thing. But I had to go somewhere else and punch a wall.

    [Severe Sarcasm]

    I forgot that if someone looks a bit rapey then they need to be given a damned good raping to make sure they know it. Naughty rapey people, don’t go looking rapey.

    Oh look over there. On my sofa is a semi naked woman drinking white wine.* We all know that being semi naked and drinking alcohol increase the rapeyness of ladies don’t we lads? I better go and give her an damned good raping for not being a perfect angel…

    …No you say? Gosh. I am surprised.

    I wonder, could it be that my status as either a rapist or a non-rapist is entirely in my hands? Why yes it is. Thank you for playing “being a bit rapey is no real reason to be raped” do come again next time.

    [/Severe Sarcasm]

    Louis

    * There actually is, she’s my wife, it’s hot, she’s tired, and we’ve just put my son to bed. She is relaxing with a wine, I am relaxing by bashing morons on the web. I will soon relax with her and the wine. It seems like a good idea.

  217. Illuminata, Genie in the Beer Bottle says

    Agreed, Janine. starkline is a – so far – merely ignorant. Whereas nauzelaar’s comments are heading straight toward misogynyland. We’re a few posts away from his shut up bitches! swan song, but the lengths nauzelaar will go to in order to disappear the rape, blame the victim and cheerlead for rapists isn’t boding well for nauzelaar.

  218. quidam says

    It’s worth noting that Savannah Dietrich wasn’t raped, she was sexually assaulted*

    This is a distinction without a difference.

    Sorry, but no. A sexual assault (i.e. sexual touching) that the victim was unaware had happened is not the same as a rape. It is both a distinction and a very real difference.

  219. truthspeaker says

    On “two sides to every story” – this isn’t a civil trial where two parties are suing each other. It doesn’t matter how much of an angel the victim was. Even if she is an absolutely horrible person, she is the victim of a crime and the people on the other “side” are the admitted perpetrators.

  220. starrkline says

    Wow, I expected a little more rational discussion, but apparently I am in the wrong place. At no point did I say that there wasn’t any rape culture. At no point did I say that what these guys did wasn’t despicable. They fully deserved to be named, whatever the legal consequences. I merely pointed out that the information available for this case in no way indicates that this was anything more than another shitty plea bargain, rather than an indictment of American culture as a whole (as though American culture needed any further indictments against it). The fact that so few of you seem to be able to respond with anything approaching a reasoned counter-argument is almost depressing.

    Once again, the existence of something (a rape culture), doesn’t imply that anything that furthers that thing (a rape culture), happened because of that thing (a rape culture). Get it? For this to have happened because of a rape culture, a desire, overt or sublimated, to protect the men, and silence the woman, would need to be the reason for the gag order. The fact that the gag order results in a furtherance of a rape culture is horrible, and a good enough reason to break it, but doesn’t indicate the cause of the gag order in the first place.

    Do you people seriously NOT understand this!?

  221. alanworsley says

    I failed with my first comment…

    I had a longish reply to nauzelaar #205

    but failed with blockquote and then hit submit instead of preview so will just say this about being a “recent European immigrant to the USA” who is asserting that

    “Live long shaming is perfectly OK as punishment for a juvenile offense, Tit-for-tat revenge justice by public humiliation is apparently a decent way to reduce rape incidence.”

    Well, only in Malta would Austin Zehnder and Will Frey be considered juveniles. Everywhere else in Europe the age of consent or being considered a juvenile offender is 16 and under.

  222. says

    starrkline: How do you seriously take that position in defiance of the evidence? You’ve been referred to information. It’s not our fault you refuse to read it.

  223. says

    @neuzelaar –

    neuzelaar As a recent European immigrant to the USA I was hoping to find a community of likewise liberal, rational, godless and thoughtful people in this community.

    You’re in luck! You have! But –

    But it appears this crowd is surprisingly similar to the Glenn Beck audience

    - are you sure you’re from Europe, and not some other planet? Let’s see…

    - Live long shaming is perfectly OK as punishment for a juvenile offense,

    It would be more accurate to say that shielding a criminal from shame for no other reason than being just shy of their 18th birthday is not OK.

    Tit-for-tat revenge justice by public humiliation is apparently a decent way to reduce rape incidence.

    You’re almost getting near a valid point here, though perhaps not the one you think. Reducing incidence of rape, or at least making reports of same more frequent and more frequently acted upon, is achieved by sending a clear signal that the rapists will not be provided with cover or excuses. Outing them publically is one means of doing so, and a perfectly valid one.

    -An absolutist black-and-white world view: the victim is an angel, the aggressors are deranged devils for which no punishment is ever harsh enough. There is no room for grey, so no hope whatsoever that the bad guys ever turn out decent.

    Did you actually read any of the comments here, or do you simply have a prepared script? No one said such things as this.

    -No one called the vitim an “angel” (btw, care to explain exactly what you mean by that?); in fact, it makes no difference whatsoever if she is or is not. She is still the victim and the rapists are still the rapists.

    -No one called the rapists “deranged devils”; we called them rapists, because that’s what they are.

    -What do you mean by “Grey”? Does it relate in any way to your use of the term “angel”?

    -”no hope whatsoever that the bad guys ever turn out decent” is also something that no one said. Granted, few if any of us would hold out for vast amounts of hope there, but that’s hardly unreasonable.

    - PZ and the rest of the armchair justices here don’t have the slightest doubt about their judgement.

    None of us are “armchair justices”; we are people to whom such issues matter and whom are commenting on this particular issue. And no, we have no reason to doubt out judgement based on the known facts. Do you have other facts to present that would give us reason to reasess our judgement? If so, feel free to present them.

    Its no problem that its based on incomplete data about the case: they know better than the judge

    Incomplete? The facts were presented, the criminals quilt was established by their own admission before this case ever went to the judge, and they were pronounced guilty. I’ll repeat my question from immediately above: “Do you have other facts to present that would give us reason to reasess our judgement? If so, feel free to present them.” Seriously. If you are in possession of something super-secret that could change our perspective on this, share!

    - This mob appears very eager to participate in ‘internet lynching’.

    Yes, indeed; showing support for a courageous young woman and stating that people who sexually assault others have done something terrible and shouldn’t get away with it is just like lynching. On some planet. Probably not Europe.

    - Load of whining, but not the slightest initiative to structurally change what’s broken with the laws or the judicial system.

    So, in other words, you haven’t made the slightest effort to find out if there are people in this crowd who work to address problems with our laws or judicial system? Like anywhere from voting to outright activism? Do you think you should be taken seriously?

    - Ad-hominem attacks galore.

    Oh? Show me. And don’t just show naughty names, show naughty names used in the absence of an argument (thus demonstrating that you know what that word means).

    Very disappointing to see this come from a supposedly rational and intelligent atheist crowd.

    If standing up for women and against rapists seems something other than rational and intelligent to you, I’m sure that you can find other forums more congenial to your outlook.

  224. Tony the Parkour Kat [safe and welcome at FtB] says


    But we must suck up whatever the judge decides, irrespective of what we feel is just.


    So this is how we’re supposed to treat this situation?
    Sure judge.
    These guys raped a young woman.
    She has to live with it for the rest of her life.
    They get a slap on the wrists.
    The victim doesn't get to talk about who raped her.
    she has to stay silent

    That sounds like a fair and balanced judicial system that has not been impacted by rape culture?
    I’d tell you to buy a clue, but you have so much to learn you’d be broke before long.
    How about you just sit back and listen, instead of chiming in with rape culture apologetics.

  225. Beatrice says

    starrkline,

    You were given explanations of rape culture and the connection of this case to it. You chose to ignore all.
    *shrug*
    That’s your ignorance. Don’t try to mirror it on us.

  226. maureenbrian says

    quidam,

    It depends where you are. We just re-wrote the definition of rape in England and Wales so that what happened here would, rightly, be considered rape. Oh, and the fact that she was unconscious would be an aggravating not a mitigating factor. It’s that consent idea, again.

  227. Illuminata, Genie in the Beer Bottle says

    I expected a little more rational discussion, but apparently I am in the wrong place.

    I take it back. Starrkline is just another clueless asswipe who thinks he’s clueless opinions are gold.

  228. Rieux says

    screechymonky @242:

    FYI, here is a brief blog post by UCLA law professor Eugene Volokh explaining why, based on well-established precedent, the court’s order was unconstitutional.

    What, you’re going to credit a famous law professor like him providing relevant precedent rather than a pseudonymous internet commenter like me @194 providing off-the-cuff analysis?

    Pffft.

  229. Richard Austin says

    quidamL

    Sorry, but no. A sexual assault (i.e. sexual touching) that the victim was unaware had happened is not the same as a rape. It is both a distinction and a very real difference.

    Depends on jurisdiction. Federally, there is no such crime as “rape”: it’s all sexual assault, with two categories: sexual abuse and aggravated sexual abuse.

    What the boys actually pleaded was guilty to “first-degree sexual abuse”, which is how Kentucky defines what we’d call rape. Here’s the statute.

  230. truthspeaker says

    starrkline
    24 July 2012 at 3:24 pm

    Wow, I expected a little more rational discussion, but apparently I am in the wrong place. At no point did I say that there wasn’t any rape culture. At no point did I say that what these guys did wasn’t despicable. They fully deserved to be named, whatever the legal consequences. I merely pointed out that the information available for this case in no way indicates that this was anything more than another shitty plea bargain, rather than an indictment of American culture as a whole

    And you were wrong, and we pointed out why.

  231. Tony the Parkour Kat [safe and welcome at FtB] says

    Beatrice @147 quoting our resident rape culture apologist:

    In this case we all know very little about the facts, except one side of the story.

    How the fuck did I miss this the first time?

    Neuzelaar:

    Please tell me what *other* side there possibly can be here. By that, I mean another side of equal weight. Remember, on one side we have:
    “I was violated on a fundamental level and robbed of my bodily autonomy by two young men. They raped me.”
    What is comparable on the other side?

    FFS, I was trying to be civil to you in my responses, but you are an unmitigated fuckwad who needs to crawl back into the slimepit you belong in.

  232. truthspeaker says

    In many jurisdictions, “sexual assault” is the legal term for rape, or a legal term that includes rape and other sexual offenses.

  233. zmidponk says

    neuzelaar #205:

    As a recent European immigrant to the USA I was hoping to find a community of likewise liberal, rational, godless and thoughtful people in this community. But it appears this crowd is surprisingly similar to the Glenn Beck audience:

    - Live long shaming is perfectly OK as punishment for a juvenile offense, Tit-for-tat revenge justice by public humiliation is apparently a decent way to reduce rape incidence.

    Let’s just recap here. These rapists quite willingly and purposefully took advantage of an unconscious person for no other purpose than their own sexual gratification. They also took pictures to pass around to boast about doing this, and some reports state they also posted them online. The only way this is a ‘juvenile offense’ is in a purely technical sense – it was an offense they committed whilst technically being juveniles, in much the same way it would still be a ‘juvenile offense’ had they also kidnapped her, tortured her for several hours/days, killed her slowly and painfully, continuing on and doing the same thing to several other people before finally being caught. If that had happened, would you still argue that their identities should be protected because it was ‘juvenile offenses’, rather than released to the public?

    -An absolutist black-and-white world view: the victim is an angel, the aggressors are deranged devils for which no punishment is ever harsh enough. There is no room for grey, so no hope whatsoever that the bad guys ever turn out decent.

    Shit-for-brains, no-one said the victim was an angel. In fact, the reason she was unconscious was from drinking too heavily – hardly the actions of a sweet angel, innocent of all things.

    THIS DOES NOT MEAN SHE DESERVED TO BE RAPED!!!!!

    There is also little doubt that the perpetrators did what they are accused of, principally because they admitted it. Their actions show them to be pretty fucking warped right now. Whether they can become better people is an open question – but I can sure as hell tell you they won’t if they get the message that actions like this have little or no real consequences, and, in fact, they’re the victims in all this.

    - PZ and the rest of the armchair justices here don’t have the slightest doubt about their judgement. Its no problem that its based on incomplete data about the case: they know better than the judge.

    Yes, this ‘incomplete data’ includes the victim’s version of events, and the perpetrators saying they’re guilty of what they’ve been accused of.

    - This mob appears very eager to participate in ‘internet lynching’.

    No, the ‘mob’ seems to believe, like most sane people, that a perpetrator of a crime shouldn’t have more right to privacy about that crime than the victim of that crime. In this case, it appears the judge doesn’t agree. Which is utterly fucking insane, quite frankly.

    - Load of whining, but not the slightest initiative to structurally change what’s broken with the laws or the judicial system.

    For all you know, every single motherfucking person here could also be doing anything and everything they can to get the system fixed. They’re just not doing it here because, in case you haven’t noticed, this is a fucking blog, not the US government or court system, dumbass.

    - Ad-hominem attacks galore.

    I guess you don’t know the difference between an insult and an ad-hominem attack.

  234. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain says

    Tony, you are now sounding like a fan of Glenn Beck.

    *snort*

  235. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls says

    Do [I] you people seriously NOT understand this!?

    FIFY, and Yes

  236. Tony the Parkour Kat [safe and welcome at FtB] says

    synfandel:

    Easy there, fella. Take a few breaths. dukelupus didn’t say or imply anything of the sort. He pointed out another heinous abuse case that’s not getting the press it deserves.

    What he (and you) are doing is distracting from the topic at hand. No one has said that women don’t abuse men. We know it happens. But that’s not the subject at hand. Wanna discuss that? Go find the appropriate blogpost somewhere.
    It’s.
    Not.
    This.
    One.
    This is another, insidious aspect of rape culture. Trying to balance the scales. Fuck that. Women are raped and shamed to a massive degree. The abuse and rape some men go through-while tragic and always condemnation worthy-is just not as prevalent and pervasive as the shit women go through.
    Stop distracting from the topic at hand.
    It aids rape apology.

  237. says

    Rape prevalence stats for men and women are on the Pharyngula feminist link round up. The difference between the two is that women are 1.5-2 times more likely to suffer rape and/or assault.

  238. says

    I’m so glad this issue was discussed here; the first discussion I read about this presented it as a sort of grey issue, and while I noticed something wrong, I couldn’t quite put my finger on it. this thread makes it clear. There’s only question I have.
    Does anyone know what the exact terms of the plea agreement were? I’ve seen conflicting accounts, from forbidding the girl from naming the suspects to not allowing her to discuss the events of her rape at all.

  239. says

    But – I’m just asking you to think about this – for the rest of their lives? Everywhere in the world? For something they did when they were 17

    Oh, please. When I was 16 years old, I was hit on the back of the head and knocked out. When I came around, I was bound and being raped. I was beaten, raped repeatedly and strangled repeatedly. There was also a knife involved. Two months in the hospital, two years of trials afterward.

    Don’t you even fucking dare bring up this “oh, whine, whine, whine, what about the poor rapists, what about their lives?” What about their lives, you dipshit? Do you think I walked away from what happened to me? Do you think I didn’t get a life sentence?

    Unholy godspawn, you have a fucktonne of nerve. Every single person who has been raped, no matter when it took place in their life, gets an automatic life sentence. We get a lifetime of PTSD. We get a lifetime of emotional, mental and physical reverberations of what was done to us. We pay a terrible toll. Most of us have had to deal with a society and family and friends who blame us. Some days, it’s almost too painful to fucking breathe.

    These rapists aren’t even being punished, you shameless fuckstick. Their victim is already serving her life sentence.

    It’s been 38 years since I was 16 and raped. It’s been much longer than that since I was raped for six years by a family member, starting when I was three years old. It never goes away. On top of the fallout from being raped, I’ve had the joy of having to deal with regular parole hearings for the piece of shit who raped and almost murdered me. For 38 godsdamn years.

    Take a fast hike off a tall cliff.

  240. fastlane says

    The brokenness and inhumanity of the US most human societies disgusts me time and again.

    FTFY.

  241. Tony the Parkour Kat [safe and welcome at FtB] says

    starrkline:

    17-year old drunk driver hits and kills your kid. His lawyer plea bargains, and part of the plea is that no one publicly shames the driver. Is such plea the result of a “murder culture” or “manslaughter culture”, which subtlety enables the killing of innocents? No, of course not. So why the fuck do you think rape is special in this regard. Why do you think that a stupid plea bargain is a clear indication of a culture that is A-OK with rape!

    You truly are a VILE person.
    Go educate yourself on rape culture before you compare it to drunk driving or DUI related manslaughter.
    Here:

    Rape Culture is an environment in which rape is prevalent and in which sexual violence against women is normalized and excused in the media and popular culture. Rape culture is perpetuated through the use of misogynistic language, the objectification of women’s bodies, and the glamorization of sexual violence, thereby creating a society that disregards women’s rights and safety.

    Rape Culture affects every woman. The rape of one woman is a degradation, terror, and limitation to all women. Most women and girls limit their behavior because of the existence of rape. Most women and girls live in fear of rape. Men, in general, do not. That’s how rape functions as a powerful means by which the whole female population is held in a subordinate position to the whole male population, even though many men don’t rape, and many women are never victims of rape. This cycle of fear is the legacy of Rape Culture.
    http://www.marshall.edu/wpmu/wcenter/sexual-assault/rape-culture/

    And would fuckwits like you stop acting like the judge has any judicial power over the victim?
    She wasn’t on trial.
    The judge doesn’t get to issue orders to her.
    Did you not learn as a child to educate yourself before spouting off at the mouth?

  242. starrkline says

    I think I understand people’s problem with my argument now. Perhaps I am just making a distinction that has no real meaning in the larger scheme of things.

    My argument really boiled down to questioning whether the cause of the gag order was an underlying rape culture. Clearly the result is a perpetration of a rape culture, and I don’t think I’ve disagreed with anyone about that, though I didn’t really bring it up in my initial argument either. I think I have read people’s responses as “No the cause of the gag order was clearly the underlying rape culture and could not have possibly been anything else!” when what people were really saying may have been “Who the fuck cares what the ultimate cause of the gag order was, the result is still the same!”

    Am I totally off base in my reinterpretation of this conversation?

  243. screechymonkey says

    Rieux, if your analysis was indeed off-the-cuff, then I salute you, as you got it right (unlike most off-the-cuff opinions!)

  244. Tony the Parkour Kat [safe and welcome at FtB] says

    jimharrison:

    It seems to me that there really are two sides to this story. Everybody sympathizes with the young women who obviously has reason to feel that justice wasn’t done, but treating juveniles differently than cases involving adults surely makes some sense. You’re not excusing the behavior of these kids if you take notice that they were 17 and not 27 and judge them accordingly.

    I’m fresh out of my “be nice to rape apologists” pills right now, so kindly fuck off.
    There aren’t two sides to a rape.
    Two sides implies that there are two sets of stories that should be treated equally.
    You’re minimizing the rape this young woman went through by implying that we should go easy on her victimizers.
    They’re 17 years old.
    They’re old enough to know that rape is wrong.
    They raped a girl.
    They did something that massively violated another human being and she has to live with it for the rest of her life.
    What do they get?
    A slap on the wrist.
    And people like you *always* come crawling out of the woodwork apologizing for the actions of the rapists. *Always* coming up with ways to minimize what a rape victim went through.

    I HAVE HAD ENOUGH OF PEOPLE LIKE YOU.

    You are vile, reprehensible, scum.

  245. mythbri says

    @starrkline

    Essentially, yes – I think that’s basically what has been said. There’s no way to know specifically whether rape culture influenced the judge’s ruling, but nevertheless the judge’s ruling is part of, and contributes to, rape culture. Victims are silenced as a matter of course in rape culture. This smells the same.

  246. Beatrice says

    starrkline,

    The problem is that the court order contributes to the rape culture, that’s for sure.

    But also, we can’t ignore that the judge has to live and work in that same culture. Is influenced by it, as we all are.
    Are these kind of court orders usually given? Does it happen often that a hit and run victim is forbidden from stating who hit her? If those boys had beaten and stabbed her but not raped, for example, would she have been given the same order? Or is it possible that rape has a special standing in the justice system? And when I say special, I don’t mean that in a good way.

  247. Tony the Parkour Kat [safe and welcome at FtB] says

    Synfandel:

    I just wish commenters in here didn’t feel the need to jump savagely all over each other like piranhas in a feeding frenzy.

    You don’t like it, move on.
    No one is forcing you to read or post here.
    This is how it is at Pharyngula.
    If you say something stupid, you’re going to get called out on it.
    It won’t always be polite.
    My first few replies in this thread were polite.
    Then the rape apologists started showing up.
    Politeness went out the window.
    What, should I be polite to the idiots like starrkline or neuzalaar who are making excuses for rapists and rape culture?
    It’s somehow a much worse thing for me to use foul language in discussions with people like that than it is for them to make apologies for rapists?
    Are you out of your fucking mind?

  248. Richard Austin says

    Beatrice:

    Are these kind of court orders usually given? Does it happen often that a hit and run victim is forbidden from stating who hit her? If those boys had beaten and stabbed her but not raped, for example, would she have been given the same order? Or is it possible that rape has a special standing in the justice system? And when I say special, I don’t mean that in a good way.

    Actually, my understanding is that in general any trial involving minors has their names (as victims or perpetrators) covered by a gag order, explicitly because they’re minors. It’s only when they’re tried as adults that their names are released automatically.

    I say “in general” as I don’t know this particular judge’s history or that of Kentucky, but to my casual understanding, it’s pretty common. Note that that doesn’t make it “right” or correct to do so, but it means it may simply have been a “this is what we always do” decision based on their ages rather than on the crimes.

  249. Beatrice says

    And a third point, sort of a mix between those first two.

    Shouldn’t a judge take the impact of her decision in this climate of rape denial and victim blaming in consideration? She should be aware of the fact that rape victims are silenced and that silencing this one can have wider implications. That she is doing harm. The judge should be aware that this is not a burglary or a hit and run, that this is an offense that is often not reported, that often ends up with rapists going free and victims getting shamed.

  250. fastlane says

    Caine, it doesn’t do anything to change your past, but you have my deepest sympathies.

    I would add for those clueless (at best) and reprehensible (more likely) posters here that the damage rape inflicts doesn’t end with the victim, although they clearly take the brunt of it. Those family members, and significant others wind up dealing with it eventually as well.

    I can’t describe the rage I experience when I think about something like that happening to the person I love, even though it all happened long before we met.

    Know this: those of you who would defend the rapists and the culture that surrounds the protection of those monsters. I would never wish rape on you. By the same token, I would never wish you on someone who has experienced rape or sexual assault.

  251. says

    Here’s the thing.

    These young men publicly confessed to a felony. They did so when they posted the pictures. To me, this removes any and all expectation they might have to privacy under juvenile offender statutes.

    I think the judge’s actions were inappropriate. It was all about saving reputations of these two perpetrators. This is “Sandusky thinking”. Justice for the victim(s) is never even considered. It’s instead about protecting the perpetrator(s). It’s abhorrent.

    Yes, plea bargains suck and judges have a tough job. But the gag order aspect doesn’t make sense. The perpetrators already went public themselves. Can’t do much more harm than that to their expectations of privacy. Even via the rumor mill — and of course, the internet is just a great big international rumor mill. Just a lot more efficient than before.

  252. Beatrice says

    Richard Austin,

    I figured the order was only for journalists and similar who weren’t allowed to publish the info.

    But for victim of whatever crime too?

    *off to search through the thread where I missed this*

  253. Tony the Parkour Kat [safe and welcome at FtB] says

    starrkline:

    I could certainly be totally wrong about how this went down in court. I can freely admit that, I find it odd that so many in this thread can’t, and start insulting people who point it out.

    You *ARE* wrong.
    About virtually everything you’ve said.
    Until you educate yourself on rape culture, you opinion is meaningless. It’s not an informed opinion.
    It’s shit.
    Stop whining about insults and go learn what rape culture is and how you *ARE* helping to contribute to it.

    For the love of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, I’m sick of people like you.

  254. says

    A word on tone: the fact that I don’t have to be polite to assholes makes this site a lot of fun. I’d imagine those of us who have been raped/molested/harassed/assaulted sometimes rather enjoy not having to be polite and/or not talk about what happened to us because it’s not ‘polite’ to mention it.

  255. Richard Austin says

    Beatrice:

    I figured the order was only for journalists and similar who weren’t allowed to publish the info.

    But for victim of whatever crime too?

    *off to search through the thread where I missed this*

    Such orders don’t specify who they cover, but they’re theoretically intended to cover anyone who would receive the information via court documents or proceedings – basically, the media and such. Also, if she hadn’t known their names ahead of time, it could be seen as covering her with regards to that. However, since her knowledge precedes the case, it’s reasonable to argue that she can’t be gagged by the case. I’ve even seen at least one lawyer argue that, if this were challenged, she would be fine – which is a suspected reason why the counter charges were dropped.

  256. neuzelaar says

    Weeding out the spectacular nonsense and ad-hominems among the responses to my post #205 let me home in on the real issue. One of the comments summed it up:


    A murderer cannot hide his or her name, a burglar cannot, a fraudster cannot, why a rapist? What’s special about rapists?

    I’m not arguing to make an exception for a rapist. I agree that rape is one of the worst crimes, and the criminal justice system must have appropriate harsh punishment for that. But public humiliation or enabling public lynching should not be a punishment for any crime, so not in this case either. Just like I find the death penalty an inappropriate punishment under any circumstance.

    So: both the victim and the aggressor of a crime should be held secret by default, just like it is done in most European countries. It is a medieval aspect of the US criminal justice system that all identities are public. Change that system: you guys can vote here!

    Here is a challenge: Define what would be an appropriate punishment for the two rapist. How should it rank vs. murder or beating up an old lady? Pick a number and turn that into a law for future use. I bet its pretty close where you want it in many red states. Just don’t play the judge yourself by collaborating in an angry internet-enabled lynch mob. That is not much different than radical ‘pro-lifers’ who publish the names and addresses of abortion doctors (which they think are as criminal as rapist). Doing that is unleashing evil powers that you cannot control.

  257. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain says

    Dammit, mouthyb! Now I am thinking of that loathsome troll who complained that he was being oppressed by Caine’s story.

  258. says

    fastlane:

    I would add for those clueless (at best) and reprehensible (more likely) posters here that the damage rape inflicts doesn’t end with the victim, although they clearly take the brunt of it. Those family members, and significant others wind up dealing with it eventually as well.

    You’re absolutely right and I shouldn’t have left them out. The damage and harm of rape is widespread and it is very difficult for all involved to deal with, to say the least.

  259. Beatrice says

    Richard Austin,

    Thanks. My newly obtained google law degree says the same thing.

    —-

    I see neuzelaar had something more to say, I shall fortify myself with some tea before reading that.
    (sleep deprivation, here I come)

  260. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls says

    But public humiliation or enabling public lynching should not be a punishment for any crime, so not in this case either.

    Prove a public lynching will result from the publication of the names, or shut the fuck up about it. Quit being a pompous theoritician, and get down to reality. Or, whuit the fuck up.

  261. says

    neulazaar: Oh, you’re back again? Maybe you could try reading what you’ve been given as evidence. Your speculation is not better than academic studies or the FBI’s Uniform Crime Report.

  262. thepint says

    neuzelaar @ 285

    Having their names aired publicly =/= being “lynched by a mob.” That’s a horribly false equivalent, not to mention stupidly insensitive, seeing as how lynching has historically been used against REAL PEOPLE in this country’s not so very distant past.

  263. Feats of Cats says

    Just for correctness, the judge was Judge Dee McDonald, who is a woman. This doesn’t have any impact on the ruling, but I’ve been seeing male gender references and y’know. Assumptions.

    http://www.citizensforbetterjudges.org/endorsements/mcdonald.htm

    Also, thanks everyone. Pharyngula is important to me for these discussions because it makes life a little less depressing to see other people being outraged about outrageous things.

  264. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain says

    Fuckface, I will tell you what a lynching is.

    It is when a crime in pinned on a person by a mob, usually a minority. In the US, they were usually black though a few Jews were tossed in. That person is then murdered, usually hanged but some were burned. Sometimes, it was both.

    Do not ever fucking use the term “lynching”, you dishonest and frankly, stupid shitstain.

    It is good to see where your priorities are. You have not even said what can be done for the victim, who’s name and image is already out.

    Go to sleep in a bed of decaying porcupines.

  265. Tony the Parkour Kat [safe and welcome at FtB] says

    neuzalarr:

    As a recent European immigrant to the USA I was hoping to find a community of likewise liberal, rational, godless and thoughtful people in this community.

    I imagine quite a few people in Europe are glad you’re gone. Personally I wish you and your rape apology ilk would find a nice deserted island to go live on so the rest of humanity
    WHO ACTUALLY UNDERSTAND WHAT RAPE CULTURE IS can fight against it without having you morons chiming in with the “what about the rapists” routine.


    - Live long shaming is perfectly OK as punishment for a juvenile offense, Tit-for-tat revenge justice by public humiliation is apparently a decent way to reduce rape incidence.

    This wasn’t stealing a porno magazine.
    It wasn’t stealing a car.
    It wasn’t being a juvenile delinquent.
    THIS WAS RAPE.
    I dare say I can’t think of a crime more abhorrent or even close to an equivalent.
    That you think rebellious teenage acts = RAPE shows what kind of human being you are.
    HINT: you’re the kind of human being I’m ashamed to share the planet with.
    BTW, can you point me to some cases where RAPISTS even face public humiliation? I haven’t heard of any (and yes, I’m aware that my subjective experiences are limited, hence my asking the question). I have seen many cases where rapists are not treated any worse for their actions.
    That’s part of the problem.
    Imagine having someone forcibly thrust their penis, finger, or a cucumber inside your vagina or your anus.
    Imagine that being done completely against your will.
    Imagine that being done by two boys who should know better.
    Imagine that shit being photographed.
    Imagine those photographs being spread around to others.
    Please tell me how YOU would react.
    I’d love to hear how your morally superior way of living would handle this situation.


    -An absolutist black-and-white world view: the victim is an angel, the aggressors are deranged devils for which no punishment is ever harsh enough. There is no room for grey, so no hope whatsoever that the bad guys ever turn out decent.

    Please show me where the grey area is when we’re talking about 2 boys that RAPED a young woman!
    What did she do that was remotely comparable?
    They’ve fucked her life up six ways to Sunday.
    She revealed their names.
    They should be shamed.
    Rape is not right.
    Ever.
    Under any circumstances.
    Rapists should be shamed.
    Our culture needs to stop protecting the rapists and start treating rape as the violation of fundamental human rights that it *is*.

    Very disappointing to see this come from a supposedly rational and intelligent atheist crowd.

    Believe me, we just hate that you’re disappointed in us.
    Hey Horde!
    Who is all pouty that we don’t side with the rape apologists? :::I know I am:::
    (that was sarcasm for the rape apologists who are so dense they probably don’t get it).

  266. hieropants says

    But public humiliation or enabling public lynching should not be a punishment for any crime, so not in this case either.

    Well, how about you think of letting people know that rapists are rapists as a public service (so that people can protect themselves by being careful around known rapists) rather than a punishment?
    Also you don’t seem to understand what lynching is, maybe you should look that up.

  267. mythbri says

    @neuzelaar

    PLEASE stop comparing this situation to the act of publicly, unlawfully stringing someone up.

    One of these situations is that two criminals are not able to sweep their crime under the rug. Remember that THEY were the ones who took pictures and distributed them.

    The other of these situations is that someone was murdered by hanging.

    The two are not even close to equivalent, nor does your comparison make sense. I have not seen one call for violence to be done to these criminals from any commentor on this thread. These are not the same things.

  268. Richard Austin says

    So: both the victim and the aggressor of a crime should be held secret by default, just like it is done in most European countries. It is a medieval aspect of the US criminal justice system that all identities are public. Change that system: you guys can vote here!

    Sure, because publicly releasing the names of the perpetrators and the nature of the crimes has never resulted in additional victims or witnesses coming forward and additional crimes being discovered. Nope, that never happens. There’s absolutely zero public interest in releasing such bits of information.

  269. says

    Just don’t play the judge yourself by collaborating in an angry internet-enabled lynch mob.

    They plead guilty to rape.

    They were found guilty of rape.

    The victim said, “These are the men who raped me.”

    Here we have said, “These men are rapists.”

    Who’s playing judge? We’re simply repeating facts that are not in question, which all parties and a court of law agree with.

    No one has so much as wished them a stubbed toe here. There’s no seeking them out, no harassment, nothing. Certainly nothing to warrant you appropriating the horror of lynch mobs to your purpose.

    We’re simply stating a fact: Austin Zehnder and Will Frey are rapists.

  270. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain says

    Here we go again, acting like Glenn Beck fans.

  271. says

    If you wanna play the “internet is forever” game imagine the worst thing that ever happened to you being masturbated over by pornsick dudes for all eternity. Your rape being a “fantasy” for someone else out there, your rape being their fucking FUN is unbearable enough when its just the rapist, I can’t imagine what it must be like for strangers to have that kind of joy at a womans expense.

    This.
    Not much else, just, this.

    @228- I think you’ve found one of the few examples where someone can put ‘rape’ and ‘joke’ together and actually be funny.

    I would love to see that used as an actual punishment.

  272. Beatrice says

    I imagine quite a few people in Europe are glad you’re gone.

    Yes.

    I am sorry that he is going to inflict his presence on unsuspecting Americans. You’ve got enough shitstains of your own, without getting ours.

  273. becca says

    Dammit, mouthyb! Now I am thinking of that loathsome troll who complained that he was being oppressed by Caine’s story.

    WHAT? I don’t often post here, and can’t always read all the comments, so this one passed me by. Can soneone give me a link?

  274. says

    Big giant trigger warning applies here. For neulazaar’s instruction, he can find the lynching postcards circulated through the US mail until 1960 at the website withoutsanctuary (dot) org

    If you can look at that collection and still casually use the word lynching, you are someone who ought to never be allowed in public.

  275. says

    Janine beat me to it: “lynching” has a very specific meaning, and a racist history, and using it to describe public shaming for a crime someone has FUCKING ADMITTED TO DOING is an insult to two different classes of victims. Fuck you, rape apologists who invoke lynching to describe the normal shunning that every rapist deserves as an insufficient minimum punishment for their crime.

  276. screechymonkey says

    Re the misuse of “lynching”: having misappropriated the word “bullying” and squeezed it for everything it was worth, it was only a matter of time before the apologists started reaching for even less appropriate words.

  277. Matt Penfold says

    The judge wasn’t trying to protect the men, the judge was trying to avoid having to go to trial since that is fucking expensive.

    Justice is not something that should be done on the cheap.

  278. Tethys says

    And would fuckwits like you stop acting like the judge has any judicial power over the victim?

    I wonder where all the “free-speach” trolls are?

    You would think that they would be incensed at a judge’s attempts to silence a rape victim.
    ____

    To all trolls whining about the poor poor rapists:

    Sexual assault is not a youthful indiscretion. It is proof that the youth is a sexual predator. The fact that they are only 17 should fill you with horror.

    Anyone who commits this sort of a crime at 17 is in need of swift, and severe correction. Outing them at 17 hopefully stops them from growing up to be Dominique Strauss-Kahn or Ted Bundy.

  279. Matt Penfold says

    It depends where you are. We just re-wrote the definition of rape in England and Wales so that what happened here would, rightly, be considered rape. Oh, and the fact that she was unconscious would be an aggravating not a mitigating factor. It’s that consent idea, again.

    And to add to what Maureen has said, it is normal in the UK for the identities of those under 18 convicted of a criminal offence to not be made public. However the judge has a right to remove such anonymity, and in cases in where the conviction is for a serious criminal act, such as rape, murder, serious assault, it is unheard of for such anonymity not to be removed.

  280. quidam says

    Please show me where the grey area is when we’re talking about 2 boys that RAPED a young woman!

    Please show me where “two boys RAPED a young woman”

    Two male minors groped and assaulted a drunk and unconscious female minor. She was unaware that an assault had even taken place and only found out when they circulated photos of their actions.

    Serious? Yes. But not as serious as rape or violent assault.

  281. Khantron, the alien that only loves says

    This is not an example of “rape culture”. This is an example of plea bargaining, and the shitty consequences it can result in. The judge wasn’t trying to protect the men, the judge was trying to avoid having to go to trial since that is fucking expensive.

    @Starrkline
    Have you ever stopped to think for just one second why it is that the prosecutors agreed to a plea bargain? It isn’t because of expense, it’s because if it goes to trial the prosecutor could lose. And that is rape culture right there. Two boys can rape someone take photographic evidence of it, spread it around, and brag about it and the prosecutor can think that this is something other than a slam dunk case. That’s the very definition of rape culture. The plea bargain itself is every bit a convincing argument for the existence of rape culture as is the gag order.

  282. Matt Penfold says

    Oh, and what the fuck is that thing with plea bargins anyway ?

    If you have a good case, prosecute. If you don’t have a good case, don’t prosecute. How fucking hard is it to work out ?

    And if you want to offer a deal, make sure that the victim gets a veto. Otherwise, what is the fucking point ?

  283. Matt Penfold says

    Two male minors groped and assaulted a drunk and unconscious female minor. She was unaware that an assault had even taken place and only found out when they circulated photos of their actions.

    The fact she was unconscious is not a mitigating factor. You do understand that right ?

  284. Beatrice says

    She was unaware that an assault had even taken place and only found out when they circulated photos of their actions.

    In your universe, that makes the assault less serious?!

  285. Matt Penfold says

    In your universe, that makes the assault less serious?!

    That is what I don’t understand. In civilised places that would make the offence worse.

  286. Khantron, the alien that only loves says

    @Quidam

    See Richard Austin @257.

    Why are you bending over backwards to bring up semantic quibbles?

  287. mythbri says

    @quidam

    Do you think that not being conscious during the assault makes Dietrich feel better, or worse? How about the fact that the people who assaulted her distributed pictures of their crime? Better, or worse?

    Do you think that focusing on the victim is better or worse than focusing on the perpetrators?

  288. Tethys says

    free-speach

    Oh FFS! Spell check and auto-correct combined do some odd things.

    Free-speech damnit.

    /derp

  289. quidam says

    We just re-wrote the definition of rape in England and Wales so that what happened here would, rightly, be considered rape.

    What legislation are you referring to?

    The most recent act (to my knowledge) is the Sexual Offences Act 2003 which clearly distinguishes Rape, Assault by penetration and Sexual assault.

    Oh, and the fact that she was unconscious would be an aggravating not a mitigating factor.

    No. Being unconscious certainly means that she did not consent which is the defining criteria for determining that it is assault. It is not an aggravating factor when compared with subduing an actively protesting victim.

  290. says

    She was unaware that an assault had even taken place and only found out when they circulated photos of their actions.

    The fact that you think this somehow makes it less serious shows that you are one creepy person.

  291. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain says

    Hey, as long as the victim is not aware of what is happening, what is the problem?

    *bile*

  292. quidam says

    The fact that you think this somehow makes it less serious shows that you are one creepy person.

    You mean less serious than rape? Given the choice between being physically subdued and penetrated, causing injury and pain; and being groped while unconscious so that I was unaware that it had happened – I know which I would prefer. Both are assaults, but it’s ridiculous to suggest that they are the same.

    Does that make me creepy or rational?

  293. starrkline says

    Have you ever stopped to think for just one second why it is that the prosecutors agreed to a plea bargain? It isn’t because of expense, it’s because if it goes to trial the prosecutor could lose. And that is rape culture right there. Two boys can rape someone take photographic evidence of it, spread it around, and brag about it and the prosecutor can think that this is something other than a slam dunk case. That’s the very definition of rape culture. The plea bargain itself is every bit a convincing argument for the existence of rape culture as is the gag order.

    I can’t agree. What you have said here is certainly possible, but not definite, plea bargains are not only used to deal with cases which are not “slam dunks”. Plea bargains exist because of a lack of resources. I said earlier it was because it was so expensive, but you have to think of expense as more than simply money, it is resource intensive, and judges encourage plea bargains because there just is not enough resources to deal with every case.

    Now, on the other hand, I can certainly agree that this is not the way things should be. Perhaps the best solution to the plea bargaining problem would be to allow plea bargaining for minor felonies, but NOT for major felonies like murder or rape. I can see a downside to this, which is that in many cases rape unfortunately comes down to a matter of he-said/she-said, and as you said, it may be hard to get a conviction. Then the case might be dropped, and the victim would not receive any justice at all.

    I’m really not sure what a good solution would be, and maybe changes to the laws cannot bring a good solution. Certainly a change in the culture of prosecutor’s offices, where rather than seeking to plead out as many defendants as possible they seek to prosecute as many as they reasonably can, would help. Cases like this were there is clear evidence would be forced to go to trial by the prosecution, even when the defense offers to plead out.

    Frankly I think gag orders are a bigger problem than plea bargins. It may just be because all the cases I hear about with gag orders deal with gags that are horrible, but based on everything I’ve ever seen, I think they should be illegal. In both criminal and civil cases.

  294. says

    quidam, I’ve been violently sexually assaulted while conscious. I’ve also been drugged into blacking out and then assaulted.

    I can assure you, I don’t prefer one experience over the other. Should a rapist give you a choice, though, I guess you can let them know your personal preferences.

  295. Matt Penfold says

    No. Being unconscious certainly means that she did not consent which is the defining criteria for determining that it is assault. It is not an aggravating factor when compared with subduing an actively protesting victim.

    Not all victim of sexual assault and rape actively resist. Indeed, many do not, since doing so will often make the ordeal worse, by adding a serious physical assault on top of the sexual assault or rape.

    Are you really happy coming across as such a vile person ?

  296. says

    Does that make me creepy or rational?

    Trying to perscribe how other people determine the severity of their assaults based on what you would prefer?

    Creepy.

    Trying to make distinctions about which kinds of assault are ‘worse’?

    Creepy.

    Hell, trying to define what this woman faced as not a rape when she clearly regards it as such?

    Creepy.

  297. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain says

    But I made sure she was passed out before I fucked her. It is not like I held her down and forced myself on her. She never would have know what had happened except for…

    Am I the only one feeling just a little fucking rage here?

  298. quidam says

    Khantron,
    @Quidam

    Why are you bending over backwards to bring up semantic quibbles?

    If it’s a semantic quibble, then why insist on calling it rape when it was sexual assault? They are not the same crime, they have different punishments and yes – sexual assault without injury is not as serious as rape.

  299. Azkyroth, Former Growing Toaster Oven says

    Given the choice between being physically subdued and penetrated

    Oh, I see, you think this is the only kind of rape that “counts.”

    Eww.

  300. says

    Yep, very creepy. Also, as someone who has been both assaulted and raped, and also been assaulted after someone slipped me drugs/while I was drunk, I don’t see any damn need to weigh those experiences and evaluate which one I disliked more.

    And as Matt mentioned, above, sometimes resisting gets your face beat in.

  301. Beatrice says

    Am I the only one feeling just a little fucking rage here?

    No, you’re not.

    Especially if by little rage you mean a burning fire in your stomach that makes you want to spit said fire into certain person’s face.

  302. starrkline says

    Just wanted to add that another solution to the plea bargain problem would be to have less things be crimes. Refocus our legal system on violent crimes, and spend less legal resources on shit like drug crimes. I don’t know how many resources in our legal system that would free up, but I have a hard time believing that we can’t deal with all our violent crimes without plea bargains.

  303. Matt Penfold says

    I said earlier it was because it was so expensive, but you have to think of expense as more than simply money, it is resource intensive, and judges encourage plea bargains because there just is not enough resources to deal with every case.

    Then give up any pretence of having a judicial system.

    Other countries seem to manage OK, so it can be done. What you are arguing therefore is it is just too much bother, and when you have that attitude it is better simply not to pretend you give a fuck about justice.

  304. says

    You know, I think I’m going to step away from the computer now. On the plus side, this conversation has grossed me out enough that I’m going to add more stats and studies to the feminism round up on the Pharyngula wiki. If the trolls won’t read the content, at least people interested will be better armed with knowledge.

  305. Tethys says

    Quidam

    Serious? Yes. But not as serious as rape or violent assault.

    Why are you defending sexual predators?
    So if they had gently raped her while she was unconscious, that would be less serious than if they had violently raped her?

    Excuse me while I go and puke with revulsion at that sentence.

  306. quidam says

    quidam, I’ve been violently sexually assaulted while conscious. I’ve also been drugged into blacking out and then assaulted.

    I can assure you, I don’t prefer one experience over the other. Should a rapist give you a choice, though, I guess you can let them know your personal preferences.

    I’m very sorry to hear of your experiences. I’m sure both were traumatic – but I’m guessing the time you were assaulted without your knowledge was easier for you.

  307. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls says

    They are not the same crime, they have different punishments and yes – sexual assault without injury is not as serious as rape.

    Actually, you are wrong as far as many states are concerned. Rape is no longer used at all. Sexual assault with varying degrees, like with murder is usually the legal term used.

  308. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls says

    I’m guessing the time you were assaulted without your knowledge was easier for you.

    Citation needed, or shut the fuck up. Assualt is assault, whether conscious or not.

  309. says

    Given the choice between being physically subdued and penetrated, causing injury and pain; and being groped while unconscious so that I was unaware that it had happened – I know which I would prefer.

    And how would you feel if you learned what happened from the photos that were passed around? And weren’t sure what else might have happened? How would you feel if the perpetrators were never actually identified? Where, exactly, would you feel safe?
    How would you feel if you were not the victim, but another young woman living in the town where it happened, but were never able to learn who did it?

  310. starrkline says

    The Holocaust was “worse” than the Armenian Genocide. They were still both fucking horrible. They were still both fucking genocide.

  311. Beatrice says

    I’m very sorry to hear of your experiences. I’m sure both were traumatic – but I’m guessing the time you were assaulted without your knowledge was easier for you.

    What the fucking hell are you guessing?! She just told you how she felt about both.

    Fuck the hell off and never ever even talk to a woman again. Or man. He could be a rape survivor too.

  312. maureenbrian says

    quidam,

    I fear you have failed to grasp the whole notion of consent, which is one of the ways in which the law was clarified.

    Also the whole notion of personal autonomy seems to have passed you by.

    Whatever! I don’t have the patience to argue with an idiot, especially an idiot who believes that it is the possibility of greater injury which makes rape a bad thing.

    Point of information: many women are raped and suffer no significant injury. Does that mean it did not happen?

  313. says

    If it’s a semantic quibble, then why insist on calling it rape when it was sexual assault? They are not the same crime, they have different punishments and yes – sexual assault without injury is not as serious as rape.

    Because the rape victim called it rape and by insisting that she’s using a word that’s too harsh to describe the assault that she experienced you are being a trivializing fuckhead.

    Also, the law saying that rape is only penetration does not mean that rape is only penetration in the same way that a law saying that wives cannot be raped by their husbands does not makes wives who were raped by their husbands not raped.

  314. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain says

    Quidam, Caerie gave you her answer. You just refuse to read it even though you copied and pasted it.

    Fucking go away, you fucking creep.

  315. LicoriceAllsort says

    quidam @340

    I’m not even going to blockquote what you just wrote. You’re a sick fuck, as illustrated by the fact that you get pleasure taunting a rape victim. She just said that the two experiences were the same. Why would you even pretend to know which one’s “easier”? You’re no rational thinker–you’re a predator who enjoys belittling people. Fuck you.

  316. kagekiri says

    @340:

    Really, quidam? Caerie said “I don’t prefer one experience over the other” in the quote you listed and you condescend with “I’m guessing the time you were assaulted without your knowledge was easier for you.”??

    Caerie JUST FUCKING SAID neither was “better”, and you apparently missed it entirely. Fuck off. You’re obviously not arguing in good faith.

  317. starrkline says

    Then give up any pretence of having a judicial system.

    Other countries seem to manage OK, so it can be done. What you are arguing therefore is it is just too much bother, and when you have that attitude it is better simply not to pretend you give a fuck about justice.

    Did you read my whole post? I certainly did not argue that this state of affairs was ok.

  318. quidam says

    Why are you defending sexual predators?

    I’m not

    So if they had gently raped her while she was unconscious, that would be less serious than if they had violently raped her?

    Yes.

    (they did neither)

  319. zmidponk says

    neuzelaar #285:

    Weeding out the spectacular nonsense and ad-hominems among the responses to my post #205 let me home in on the real issue.

    No, by the looks of it, you’re actually weeding out everything you can’t answer. And still showing you don’t understand the difference between an insult and an ad hominem.

    A murderer cannot hide his or her name, a burglar cannot, a fraudster cannot, why a rapist? What’s special about rapists?

    I’m not arguing to make an exception for a rapist. I agree that rape is one of the worst crimes, and the criminal justice system must have appropriate harsh punishment for that. But public humiliation or enabling public lynching should not be a punishment for any crime, so not in this case either.

    This is neither public humiliation nor public lynching. This is letting society know that potentially dangerous people are in their midst, and who those people are. Why should society be prevented from knowing this, and why should the perpetrators have zero social cost to their crimes, especially in such a heinous crime as rape?

    So: both the victim and the aggressor of a crime should be held secret by default, just like it is done in most European countries. It is a medieval aspect of the US criminal justice system that all identities are public. Change that system: you guys can vote here!

    No.

    Here is a challenge: Define what would be an appropriate punishment for the two rapist.

    One thing that would be part of that punishment – not being able to hide from or deny that crime, especially if, as in this case, you specifically removed that self-same right from the victim.

  320. Pteryxx says

    quidam, can’t you even read the frickin’ words of the person you’re supposedly expressing sympathy for?

    I can assure you, I don’t prefer one experience over the other.

    Which makes your REPLY:

    but I’m guessing the time you were assaulted without your knowledge was easier for you.

    a vile, transparent attempt to impose your own narrative over an actual survivor’s stated experience.

    Your “guess” is wrong, callous, wrong, hateful and wrong.

  321. Matt Penfold says

    Actually, you are wrong as far as many states are concerned. Rape is no longer used at all. Sexual assault with varying degrees, like with murder is usually the legal term used.

    And even in the UK, which uses a rather outdated legal definition of rape that requires a penis to be inserted into a body orifice, has a crime for sexual assault that are not rape, with the same potential penalties. You can go to prison for life for either offence.

    And the law regards assaulting someone whilst they are unconscious as an aggravating factor which will increase the sentence.

  322. 'Tis Himself says

    quidam, you are not arguing in good faith. When someone says that two things are equal, that does not mean you’re allowed to second guess her as to which was worse.

  323. Beatrice says

    quidam,

    Yes they did. It says right there in the article, WHERE SHE CALLS THEM RAPISTS.

  324. quidam says

    Caerie JUST FUCKING SAID neither was “better”, and you apparently missed it entirely. Fuck off. You’re obviously not arguing in good faith.

    You’re missing the point. She was aware of both assaults – that’s why she is able to relate the experience.

    However if there was an assault that she was unaware of – that would presumably be easier to take. I find things I’m not aware of easier to cope with.

  325. kagekiri says

    @360: Holy shit, I’m missing the point?

    Really? The fact is (as in, what actually happened, here in reality), both Caerie and Ms. Dietriech became aware of it. Your “point” lacks relevance. Badly.

  326. Beatrice says

    quidam ,

    Caerie told you how she feels about her assaults, stop fucking telling her how she should feel about them!

    How you personally cope with things has nothing to do with how other people cope with things. Especially when it comes to something you have never experienced, you narcissistic fuck.

  327. Pteryxx says

    I find things I’m not aware of easier to cope with.

    how convenient for you. Then quit inflicting your comfy denial-based judgement upon people who don’t GET to ignore horrible things happening to them and their friends. Oh, and please don’t serve on any juries.

  328. starrkline says

    @quidam

    You are splitting a hair that doesn’t need to be split. Is being beaten within an inch or your life worse than being beaten within two inches of your life? Yes. Does it matter? No.

  329. reasonabel says

    I’ve just read through the thread title, the links and skimmed this thread. I think rape has a pretty clear definition but all the sources are calling it sexual assault. Does anyone know the exact details of what these two scumbags actually did to her, and can they link it?

  330. 'Tis Himself says

    I find things I’m not aware of easier to cope with.

    Are you Caerie? This is a yes or no question and your final grade depends on you getting the right answer.

    Who gives a rat’s ass what you find easier to cope with? This is a rhetorical question, because the only answer is nobody who isn’t a fucking rape apologist.

  331. Matt Penfold says

    Holy shit, one fucking idiot things the other fucking idiot is a fucking idiot.

  332. Beatrice says

    reasonabel,

    Since there is a slight possibility that you are asking that question in good faith, I would advise to fuck off and google. If you don’t, you’ll probably just dig yourself into a deep(er) hole or get caught in the crossfire.

    This was me being nice.

  333. Pteryxx says

    Does anyone know the exact details of what these two scumbags actually did to her, and can they link it?

    To properly rationally examine the issue, we need all the juicy details er, evidence! That’s it, evidence! <_<

  334. Beatrice says

    Holy shit, one fucking idiot things the other fucking idiot is a fucking idiot.

    Now that we’ve probably got a third fucking idiot, all we need is a clown and we’ll have a juggling act.

  335. says

    However if there was an assault that she was unaware of – that would presumably be easier to take. I find things I’m not aware of easier to cope with.

    Have you ever been informed that your opinions are not representative of the opinions of fucking everyone?

    And for the record, even though this should mean fuck all because individual perceptions of how you think you would react to a horrible fucking tragedy are meaningless, if I had to choose between being raped (not ‘assaulted’) while asleep or while aware of what was happening?

    I would choose aware of what was happening. I have issues with paranoia, and the thought that I would never know exactly what happened to me in that instance would drive me insane.

    But apart from you, who I am assuming has never dealt with anything like assault in their life from how fucking callous you’re being towards people’s experiences, I’ve already had my experiences with sexual crimes and I know that for me, the most fucking terrifying, disturbing part of it is the factor of the unknown. The factor that would be massively increased in a sleeping rape as opposed to an awake rape.

    So fuck you for trying to say how people should feel about shit that happens to them.

  336. starrkline says

    @reasonabel

    All we can say is that they didn’t have intercourse with her. Or rather, all we can say is that whatever was in the pictures didn’t show them having intercourse with her. That is really the only distinction between rape and criminal sexual abuse in Kentucky law.

  337. Matt Penfold says

    Now that we’ve probably got a third fucking idiot, all we need is a clown and we’ll have a juggling act.

    Will no one send in the clowns ?

  338. reasonabel says

    @Beatrice

    24 July 2012 at 5:43 pm
    reasonabel,

    Since there is a slight possibility that you are asking that question in good faith, I would advise to fuck off and google. If you don’t, you’ll probably just dig yourself into a deep(er) hole or get caught in the crossfire.

    I honestly can’t find anything on this, and frankly the growing interchangeability of the term ‘rape’ and ‘sexual assault’ isn’t good. If anything it trivialises rape. You’re right though i’m going to get shot in the crossfire here no matter what I say. I’m fucking off from this one starting now.

  339. Illuminata, Genie in the Beer Bottle says

    A word on tone: the fact that I don’t have to be polite to assholes makes this site a lot of fun. I’d imagine those of us who have been raped/molested/harassed/assaulted sometimes rather enjoy not having to be polite and/or not talk about what happened to us because it’s not ‘polite’ to mention it.

    Oh fuck yeah. My current boss is the perfect example of this. he’s a racist, misogynistic, homophobic teapublican. he thinks its the height of hilarity to email racist jokes around, or mock our clients (who, because of the type of law we do in the type of city we live in, are generally not white) for being poor or undereducated.

    And I have to bite my tongue. I’ve just recently started here and very much need to be employed. I simply munch down on the inside of my cheeks til I can taste a little blood.

    (sidebar: which is why I lose my shit when clueless asswipes talk about how cool the women at work are, because they don’t get upset over nothing, like feminists do. I’m sure my boss would say the same thing about me, even though I spend most of my time around him redoing my resume in my head and occasionally, really funny ways for him to be publicly embarrassed).

    So Pharyngula is the counterbalance. And, if I eve meet PZ in person, I will shake his hand for providing a place to retain my grip on myself.

  340. says

    If anything it trivialises rape

    Yeah, and putting down arbitrary distinctions between what ‘counts’ as assault/rape/etc. makes people who legitimately suffered because of this kind of shit judge themselves based on how other people suffered, and tells them to feel like they don’t deserve to be affected by it because it “could have been worse”.

    totally not just as bad.

  341. rowanvt says

    Gosh, it was so much easier coping with having cancer when I didn’t know I had cancer! Everything would have been fine if my doctor hadn’t told me!

    /sarcasm

  342. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls says

    I honestly can’t find anything on this, and frankly the growing interchangeability of the term ‘rape’ and ‘sexual assault’ isn’t good.

    Never mind many states have dropped “rape” and use degrees of sexual assault instead. But then, facts have never been your strong point. Unevidenced opinion has…

  343. Illuminata, Genie in the Beer Bottle says

    Gosh, it was so much easier coping with having cancer when I didn’t know I had cancer! Everything would have been fine if my doctor hadn’t told me!

    *reaches to back of the shelf*

    I KNOW there is a shiny new internet back here somewhere. As soon as I find it, it’s yours!

  344. Beatrice says

    I honestly can’t find anything on this, and frankly the growing interchangeability of the term ‘rape’ and ‘sexual assault’ isn’t good. If anything it trivialises rape.

    Oh, so you chose the hole digging path.

  345. kagekiri says

    @377:

    Heck yes, having a place to vent with like minded (and generally more intelligent/funny) commenters is pretty amazing. I’ve been trying very hard not to alienate my Christian family or friends as I move towards coming out, but man, some of their beliefs make me want to punch someone.

    I see how fucked up their beliefs are, I know from personal experience how harmful they can be to your emotional and mental health, but I can’t stand against them using Biblical cherry picking; I can only deflect them from some of the wrongness by shifting them away from fundamentalism.

    I’m not sure it’ll get better once I’m out, as they might just distrust me entirely once I tell them I don’t think the Bible has much value, but man, it’s nice to be somewhere online where assholes get called on their shit.

  346. Ogvorbis says

    I honestly can’t find anything on this, and frankly the growing interchangeability of the term ‘rape’ and ‘sexual assault’ isn’t good. If anything it trivialises[sic] rape.

    So, where, exactly, is that dividing line? Penis in vagina with no consent is rape, right? What about penis in anus with no consent? Penis in mouth with no consent? Insertion of an object into vagina or anus? Digital penetration of vagina or anus? Do these qualify? Or is that trivializing rape? Please be specific as to what acts you think trivialize rape?

  347. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls says

    Where the fuck is that banhammer?

    From the timing, I would guess PZ’s house.

    @reasonabel
    which gives a detailed summary of all Kentucky sexual assault crimes.
    You didn’t try very hard.

    Yep, unreasonably lazy finding/presenting evidence.

  348. says

    Neuzelaar:

    I agree it does not ‘feel’ just to only have the name of the victim released. But we must suck up whatever the judge decides, irrespective of what we feel is just.

    Because people concerned about rape culture are just a bunch of emotional, irrational women and manginas, and we should let the manly rational law, that which lets so many rapists walk free, do as it will without comment.

    Others have already noted your ignorance about the limitations of judicial power.

    In this case we all know very little about the facts, except one side of the story.

    You’re yet another liar grinding a “bitches be lyin’ sluts, even when they have evidence on their side” axe.

    An absolutist black-and-white world view: the victim is an angel, the aggressors are deranged devils for which no punishment is ever harsh enough.

    WHY SHOULD A RAPE VICTIM HAVE TO BE AN “ANGEL” TO GET JUSTICE?! Do you think she should have to be a white virgin in long skirts who never takes a drink and always looks demurely groundward when men address her?

    This mob appears very eager to participate in ‘internet lynching’.

    Calling you out for your shitbaggery is just like the gruesome mob murders of African-Americans by racist whites, who treated the occasions as public entertainment.

    Fuck off and die, you revolting flap of skin, and stop whining about being treated rudely when you’re defending rape culture and minimizing racist brutality.

    Synfandel:

    Easy there, fella. Take a few breaths.

    Gosh, that wasn’t condescending at all. Or ignorant of how derailing happens.

    I just wish commenters in here didn’t feel the need to jump savagely all over each other like piranhas in a feeding frenzy.

    Because tone trolling is so much more “civil.”

    Starrkline, I’m glad you’re reconsidering what you’ve been told w/r/t rape culture. However:

    Racism has always existed, this is just a tiny part of it right? Well, I doubt it, the owner is white but most of the people I work with are Indian, not white.

    Er, racism is a bit more complicated than “hates all people of color.” Your boss could be fine with Indians but not with black people. Or they might not have any overt biases but have unconscious ones.

    Jimharrison:

    It seems to me that there really are two sides to this story…. I also wonder if anger at keeping the names of the perpetrators secret would be the same if they had been guilty of an equally serious but non-sexual crime. People seem to put sexual offenses in a special, almost sacred category, and demand especially draconic punishments for them.

    Only if the victims are the “right kind” of victims and the perp the “wrong kind” of perp. In all other cases, excuses are made. As you’ve been doing.

    Anteprepro:

    Neuzelaar thought that he would find skeptics that would automatically assume that a judge telling rape victims that they are legally bound to not mention the name of her rapists was in the right.

    Someone ought to direct him to Rationalia. I think those are the skeptics he’s looking for.

    Skeptifem:

    I have been thinking for a long time about making a post about how hyperbolic and stupid all this “ONE FALSE ACCUSATION CAN RUIN A MANS LIFE” shit is compared to how society actually treats people accused/convicted of rape.

    Has anyone checked in lately with the former Duke Lacrosse team? Because, last I heard, they’re doing just fine, despite being the most oppressedest “boys” in the world according to every MRA and dudebro out there.

    Illuminata, Neuzelaar already crossed the line into misogyny with his sneer about how “cute” Dietrich is and the “two sides” nonsense and the implication that Dietrich not being an “angel” = bitch asked for it.

    Quidam, please show me where the distinction is relevant to this fucking conversation.

    I know which I would prefer.

    Awesome, it’s all about you and what you’d prefer.

    I’m very sorry to hear of your experiences. I’m sure both were traumatic – but I’m guessing the time you were assaulted without your knowledge was easier for you.

    Wow. Just… wow. Did you type that with one hand in your pants, you nasty little glob of pus-infected smegma?

    Reasonabel, I’m sure you can find rape porn elsewhere on the internet to whack off to.

  349. says

    She was unaware that an assault had even taken place

    That does not make sexual assault of any kind alright, you toxic bag of rancid pus. Take your rape apologia and slither out of here. You’re disgusting and there is no excuse on the planet for your vileness.

  350. Azkyroth, Former Growing Toaster Oven says

    @reasonabel

    Dude, the link in the blog post tells you what they were charged with (1st degree felony criminal sexual abuse and misdemeanor sexual misconduct). A google search for Kentucky criminal sexual abuse will bring up this:

    http://kyasap.brinkster.net/Portals/0/pdfs/Kentucky%20criminal%20law%20chart%200407.pdf

    which gives a detailed summary of all Kentucky sexual assault crimes.

    You didn’t try very hard.

    But how is he supposed to fap to that? *retch*

  351. starrkline says

    @Ms. Daisy Cutter, Vile Human Being

    Er, racism is a bit more complicated than “hates all people of color.” Your boss could be fine with Indians but not with black people. Or they might not have any overt biases but have unconscious ones.

    I understand that, and it was probably a bad way to phrase the argument. I have a tendency to overuse analogies it seems.

    My point, which I didn’t make well at all, was that the lack of black people at my work isn’t necessarily indicative of any inherent racism. It could be, but simply seeing a lack of black people doesn’t give you enough information to say “That is because the people who are doing the hiring are racist”. Of course this is all a matter of degree, my company only has about 20 employees, if you had a company with 20,000 employees, and none of them were black, that may actually indicate some racial profiling is going on. Given that I didn’t specify the size of my company, that made the argument even worse. Damn It!

  352. Louis says

    Neulezar, #285,

    Given that I am a) in the UK, and b) people’s identities are not hidden here upon conviction (AFAIR, IANAL), nope I cannot vote in the US and so a large part of what you are saying does not apply to me.

    I am, in fact, in favour of people’s criminal records not being permanent, if suitable conditions are met. I think the ability to erase one’s criminal record in almost all cases should be possible but with varying degrees of difficulty depending on the crime. One desperate youthful non violent burglary? Easy. One minor drug conviction? Easy. One murder? Very hard if not impossible. Serial rape? Impossible.

    I think rape should carry the same penalties as murder by the way, and I too oppose the death penalty utterly.

    You have assumed that my agreeing that convicted criminals’ names be made publicly available in the records of the court system is the same as me agreeing to their pictures being posted, internet fora fulminating about them, vigilante justice etc etc etc. It’s not the same thing. Keep your straw men to yourself.

    Louis

  353. Tethys says

    Quidam replies to me:

    So if they had gently raped her while she was unconscious, that would be less serious than if they had violently raped her?

    Yes.

    (they did neither)

    Let me assure you that you could not be more wrong.

    My rapist was extremely gentle. He went to great lengths to try to make my body orgasm while he raped me. I was close to catatonic because I had disassociated from my body when he locked the door to stop me from escaping. I watched my rape from an almost clinical perspective. I could not move or experience emotion, but I was aware throughout the whole rape.

    The thing you are failing to understand is that no matter how gentle a rape is, it is a violent violation that can never be undone.

    Oh, and fuck you for thinking that you get to decide if the victim has been raped based on how physically injured they are.

  354. says

    http://www.volokh.com/2012/07/22/the-dark-side-of-privacy/

    I’m reposting this because it covers some legal issues peopel keep speculating about incorrectly.

    Judges to not have the power to prevent the media from publishing the names of juvenile offenders, even if they get them through surreptitiously obtained court documents. Any reluctance to publish the names of minors is strictly voluntary on the part of the press.

    Legally speaking, people are obligated to disobey illegal court orders. This is because if you think an order is invalid, you’re supposed to challenge it rather than disobeying it because a system where people could just disregard court orders could cause problems.

    Thankfully, discretion worked how it’s supposed to in the case. The whole idea of this rule is to ensure respect for the courts. Attempting to enforce an order that was so blatantly illegal and unjust would have done the opposite.

  355. mythbri says

    @Tethys, and everyone else who has shared their stories

    I’m really sorry that those things were done to you. I wish that there was something I could do to lessen your pain.

  356. says

    Dear FSM, Tethys. I am so sorry. One of the worst things about rape is “body betrayal,” and some rapists know this.

    Ace of Sevens: I’d just come over from that Volokh thread, and… ew, the rape apologetics. Which I suppose one should expect on a conservative/libertarian blog. Plus some asshole over there bleating:

    It’s not the dark side of privacy, it’s the dark side of race. Your legal analysis will not apply when the levers of justice are manipulated by leftists intent on suppressing the truth of black violence.

    The implication is that the rapists are black and they were committing a “hate crime” against Dietrich. Too bad for that idiot that they’re both white.

    Starrkline, given that black people are ~11% of the American population, you’d expect one or two to be at your place of employment, on average. Institutional racism doesn’t require anyone at your office to be harboring conscious or unconscious bias, because it causes structural problems that many white people don’t see.

    I’m going to guess this is a white-collar office? The comparatively poor educational and vocational odds faced by African-Americans probably means fewer of them ever submitted a résumé to your HR person. You may work in a suburb with comparatively few black people, possibly because of redlining and because the relative poverty of African-Americans leaves more of them unable to afford to live in “nice” neighborhoods. If there is no public transit near your office, that would make a job there a no-go for people living in the city without a car.

    But even a company with 20,000 people and some black employees will almost certainly reflect these problems, because the higher up the chain of command you go, the whiter the faces will be.

  357. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls says

    My point,

    Well, you think you’ve had some, but had none. What a loser…

  358. says

    Dear Vile Human Being,

    Not that it much matters on a highly ideological site, but even somebody dedicated to joining in on the umpteenth group hate should know better than to “edit” somebody’s comments in order to convert them into the standard villain.

    You quoted me as writing:

    It seems to me that there really are two sides to this story…. I also wonder if anger at keeping the names of the perpetrators secret would be the same if they had been guilty of an equally serious but non-sexual crime. People seem to put sexual offenses in a special, almost sacred category, and demand especially draconic punishments for them.

    What’s hiding in the … is: Everybody sympathizes with the young women who obviously has reason to feel that justice wasn’t done, but treating juveniles differently than cases involving adults surely makes some sense. You’re not excusing the behavior of these kids if you take notice that they were 17 and not 27 and judge them accordingly.

    The two sides of this story, as far as I’m concerned, are not about whether what these guys did was wrong but about whether there is a policy conflict between recognizing the rights of victims and making some reasonable adjustments in law when dealing with offending juveniles.

    Well, maybe there’s a career opportunity for you in the Romney campaign. He also likes to leave out words to misrepresent other people’s statements on the theory that anything goes so long as you’re on the side of the angels.

    One more thing: Somebody accused me of being a Christian. Hey, I don’t mind being abused. One expects it from true believers. But why on earth would you assume I’m a Christian? Are you all so besotted with group think that you assume that every atheist follows your version of the party line?

  359. isilzhaveni says

    @10, Joey–

    But – I’m just asking you to think about this – for the rest of their lives? Everywhere in the world? For something they did when they were 17?

    You don’t think the VICTIM is going to suffer to some extent for the rest of her life. At the very least she will never be the same person she was before this happened and she will always carry the memory of it with her. Plus, these to monsters took PICTURES of violating her. In this age of the Internet and digital media it’s likely those pictures will outlive HER.

    So, now tell me again why those boys shouldn’t have the shame of this crime follow them for the rest of their lives?

  360. Azkyroth, Former Growing Toaster Oven says

    You’re not excusing the behavior of these kids if you take notice that they were 17 and not 27 and judge them accordingly.

    There is nothing about being a 17 year old that ought to be regarded as a mitigating factor in the commission of rape.

  361. ibelieveindog, the silent beagle says

    I just read Quidam @312.

    No, actually I just threw up. I’m back, after wiping my mouth and rinsing.

    I’m trembling and crying.

    You did it, Quidam. You triggered me.

    Thanks a fucking lot for reminding me that my rape is inferior because I was unconscious. If you keep on, maybe you can convince me it wasn’t really rape, right? Because, what the hell, I don’t remember that part of it.

    Fuck you fuck off for fucking ever. With or without porcupines – your choice.

  362. starrkline says

    The thing you are failing to understand is that no matter how gentle a rape is, it is a violent violation that can never be undone.

    This is why I don’t think a distinction between “rape” and “criminal sexual abuse” is very relevant. The lack of penetration doesn’t necessarily make the violation any less. Certainly there are grey areas, but this isn’t one of them. For instance, from a purely legal standpoint, I was raped when I lost my virginity. I was wasted, and the entire event is blacked out. Was the girl involved a horrible rapist? I don’t think so. According to everyone I was quite coherent at the party I was at, she had no reason to think I was incapacitated (because I wasn’t, my lack of memory doesn’t imply anything more than my brain failed to persist the memories of the events). The only problem with current rape law is that grey areas like this are all prosecuted as rape.

    But this isn’t a case in such a grey area, this is a clear cut case of 2 guys undressing and interacting sexually with an unconscious girl, whether they penetrated her is beside the point. If the girl at that party hadn’t had sex with me, but rather took my pants off and played with my penis, I wouldn’t have any trouble saying that is on the same level as rape.

  363. says

    You’re not excusing the behavior of these kids if you take notice that they were 17 and not 27 and judge them accordingly.

    What on earth about being 17 is so important as to mitigate the results of being determined to be a rapist? Seriously. 17-year-olds are not so young/immature/poorly developed as to not know that raping someone is wrong. Fuck, I knew this long before that.

  364. 'Tis Himself says

    Why look, jimharrison is back for more rape apologetics.

    Hey, jimharrison, have you figured out that there aren’t two sides to this particular story? Or are you pretending that rape is no big deal and we’re just being mean to those two nice, upstanding young men?

    One more thing: Somebody accused me of being a Christian. Hey, I don’t mind being abused. One expects it from true believers. But why on earth would you assume I’m a Christian? Are you all so besotted with group think that you assume that every atheist follows your version of the party line?

    You’re right. You don’t have to be a Christian to be a rape apologist asshole. On behalf of The Horde™, I apologize for labeling you a Christian when you should have been labeled an asshole. Are you happy now?

  365. isilzhaveni says

    @47–

    We might not like the punishment, but the only proper way is to change the law or vote the judge away. No matter how cute or brave the victim is, I only trust the system if it applies to everyone in the same way.

    Why is our justice system punishing the VICTIM??? That is NOT the way it’s suppose to work. I think some people need to take a close look at the judge in this case. Maybe the judge needs to be voted out if he’s punishing women and protecting rapists.

  366. vaiyt says

    Thanks for proving our point for us, neuzelaar and quidam.

    If the judge’s decision isn’t a strong enough indictment of rape culture, you bending over backwards to excuse and defend Austin Zehnder and Will Frey certainly is.

  367. QueQuoi, traded in her jackboots for jillstilettos says

    quidam, are you proud of the fact that you have not one ounce of empathy? If perhaps you do, and you are just typing away like a self-centered, smug, entitled shitstain, I recommend that you show us your empathy by going the fuck away.

  368. John Morales says

    [meta]

    ibelieveindog, you are not wrong.

    (I’m sorry the specimen triggered you, but you are not wrong)

  369. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls says

    Dang,I’m getting old and hard of hear. Who are fuckwits convicted of sexual assault again, and who are the fuckwits defending the sexual assaultists without citing one iota of evidence they are right???

  370. thepint says

    quidamn #312

    Please show me where “two boys RAPED a young woman”

    Two male minors groped and assaulted a drunk and unconscious female minor. She was unaware that an assault had even taken place and only found out when they circulated photos of their actions.

    Serious? Yes. But not as serious as rape or violent assault.

    Oh you have GOT to be fucking kidding me.

  371. Tethys says

    One of the worst things about rape is “body betrayal,” and some rapists know this.

    Yes, and yes.

    The realization that my rape was well planned is one of the more horrifying aspects. The other was that he clearly had done it before, and knew how best to avoid prosecution.

    It pisses me off when assholes like Quidam try to say that its not as bad a rape if it doesn’t leave marks.

  372. says

    Tethys:

    The realization that my rape was well planned is one of the more horrifying aspects. The other was that he clearly had done it before, and knew how best to avoid prosecution.

    Yes, I know exactly what you mean. I had that same realization. Knowing it was planned carefully–and so that it would be harder to prosecute–still chills me when I think about it. I can think over stray comments people made about the rapist and see that he had done it before, but was practiced enough that rape culture completely masked his acts.

    “Predator” is absolutely the right word to use because I was fucking prey. I was as dehumanized as a deer in the woods, that a hunter baits and waits for and laughs over what a good time it was wearing her down.

    The lack of bodily harm did jack shit to protect my fucking mind.

  373. macrophage says

    Went back to see the comments that were left after I returned to work. And I’m quite glad I missed much of this. What the fucking fuck is up with some of you? Wanting to get the boys side? Their side is all over the article. The point of all this is that no one bothered to listen to the victim. At least not until she spoke for herself on twitter.

    Having to have fine details of exactly what is and isn’t rape? Oh, good grief! Could you be more dismissive?

  374. QueQuoi, traded in her jackboots for jillstilettos says

    The Department of Juvenile Justice is listed as a donor to the LaCrosse Team that these two rapists play for.

    http://www dot bluegrassbats dot com/179512.html

    I call bullshit.

  375. says

    Please show me where “two boys RAPED a young woman”

    Two male minors groped and assaulted a drunk and unconscious female minor. She was unaware that an assault had even taken place and only found out when they circulated photos of their actions.

    Serious? Yes. But not as serious as rape or violent assault.

    I just love how people rush to defend the rapists*. Just keep scoring those own goals, guys!

    *I do not

  376. macrophage says

    Tethys, I’m so sorry. That’s a horrible thing for anyone to every have to experience. I’m sorry you’re being triggered here. I’m a survivor too and there are so many things that are so wrong with how society relates to everything involve in rape culture that I don’t even know where to begin. It’s all messed up.

  377. robro says

    Grimalkin — I first read this story late last night and when I posted my comment this morning I didn’t look at the story again, so I appear to have been doing some interpretative remembering when I said “published on the Internet.” I went back to the sources and what the AP reported is they “shared with others.” That’s certainly not “published on the Internet,” which I think they would say if it was known to be the case. (And I’m not about to try to find out.)

    My apologies for the misinformation.

    I still think they made the pictures public if all they did was show them to friends, and I still think it’s appropriate for their names to be made public.

  378. Stevarious says

    Please show me where “two boys RAPED a young woman”

    Two male minors groped and assaulted a drunk and unconscious female minor. She was unaware that an assault had even taken place and only found out when they circulated photos of their actions.

    Serious? Yes. But not as serious as rape or violent assault.

    Whenever I see something like this, I can only think that the person is really saying: “When I groped that unconscious minor, it wasn’t rape, because I don’t think of myself as a rapist even though I groped that unconscious minor. With my penis.”

    Of course we all know that simply implying that quidam in a rapist isn’t as serious as actually calling him a rapist.

  379. says

    Of course we all know that simply implying that quidam in a rapist isn’t as serious as actually calling him a rapist.

    And if you imply it while quidam is asleep, it’s even less serious.

  380. Stevarious says

    And if you imply it while quidam is asleep, it’s even less serious.

    Oh, yeah, obviously. If he never finds out that everyone thinks he’s a rapist, it will be way easier for him to deal with.

  381. Tony the Parkour Kat [safe and welcome at FtB] says

    Janine:

    Illuminata, I am having a hard time judging which troll is more dumb, starrkline or nauzelaar.

    Is there an Olympic sport the two of them are trying out for?

  382. Tethys says

    Thanks to all who have offered support, and big hugs to mouthyb and ibelieveindog, and Caerie.

    I’m feeling pretty darn happy right about now actually.

    Rape leaves such nasty jagged edges to one’s psyche.
    It feels empowering to use those edges to flay rape apologists or at least get them to examine their beliefs.

    ——

    Trolls are trolling each other!? Hee!

  383. says

    Using an ellipsis to cut out some material that isn’t pertinent to my point, i.e. the point of this thread, isn’t changing the gist of what you’re saying, Harrison, you fuckwit.

    Well, maybe there’s a career opportunity for you in the Romney campaign. He also likes to leave out words to misrepresent other people’s statements on the theory that anything goes so long as you’re on the side of the angels.

    Your tears are delicious and nummy. Please, resort to a full-on Godwin next time.

    Ibelieveindog, please take care of yourself.

    Edmundog, the small white text on a black background is kind of hard to read, but it’s a good effort.

    (And, boy, both those shitstains are truly afflicted with Backpfeifengesicht, aren’t they?)

  384. sc_5231bb81bdfea7af1d0864dae088fe46 says

    The relevant word here being “little” monsters. We try not to name underage offenders because a criminal conviction can ruin a child’s life.

    Now, let me preempt the inevitable screaming about how OMG HER LIFE WAS RUINED, TOO. Nobody is debating that–actually, scratch that. After you folks introduced me to those recondite cockdrones that call themselves “men’s rights activists,” I have too little faith in my sex to say that with any confidence. Nobody worth listening to is debating that, how about that? Anyway, ruining two more is not going to help anybody–all she’s done is take two stupid, drunken children and pretty much ensured that they’ll grow up to be bitter, resentful adults.

    The law is not concerned with revenge, but ideally with rehabilitation–you don’t get to hurt somebody back just because they hurt you, no matter how repulsive the crime. And we have separate penal systems for children because we want even more badly to salvage them if we can–and letting them move on with only their consciences permanently stained is a very effective way of easing that process.

    Ms. Dietrich’s crime is the act of a vindictive child, and I hope that she, at least, will be given the leniency the law demands when children transgress.

  385. mythbri says

    @sc-numbers

    Have you read the thread? Have you read about people talking about the judge making an over-reach with the gag order? Have you read about these two “children” having distributed pictures of their assault to their friends? This wasn’t a civil case, it was a criminal case.

    Does being one year under the age of 18 magically make you too stupid to understand that sexual assault is wrong? All of my brothers managed to make it past 17 and beyond without assaulting anyone.

  386. Tethys says

    all she’s done is take two stupid, drunken children and pretty much ensured that they’ll grow up to be bitter, resentful adults.

    Your victim blaming and support for rapists is noted.

    Comment by sc_523mess blocked. [unkill]​[show comment]

  387. says

    Ms. Dietrich’s crime is the act of a vindictive child, and I hope that she, at least, will be given the leniency the law demands when children transgress.

    I hope that you, at least, will insert your junk into a meat grinder and turn the crank several hundred times.

  388. Tony the Parkour Kat [safe and welcome at FtB] says

    starrkline:

    Wow, I expected a little more rational discussion, but apparently I am in the wrong place.

    What has been said that wasn’t rational?
    A girl was raped.
    She was raped by two boys.
    The two boys also took pictures and distributed them.
    The two boys admitted their guilt.
    The two boys were found guilty.
    The two boys got off with a light punishment; one that does NOT fit the severity of the crime.
    The girl is told not to speak the names of the perpetrators, even though her knowledge of them was not revealed in court, so the judge’s gag order is baseless.
    Why is it ok to tell a rape victim that she can’t tell her story and include the names of those who raped her? They violated her on such a deep level, and all you’re concerned with are the repercussions they *might* face in life?
    Where the hell are your priorites?

    At no point did I say that there wasn’t any rape culture.

    Did you state that?
    No.
    However, you have no problem with a rape victim being forced to stay silent about the rape. THAT is part of rape culture. THAT is what you’re not accepting. By not accepting and understanding that, you show you don’t know much about rape culture.

    At no point did I say that what these guys did wasn’t despicable.

    This is true. I can’t recall you saying anything about their actions either way though.

    They fully deserved to be named, whatever the legal consequences.

    I don’t recall you saying this either.

    I merely pointed out that the information available for this case in no way indicates that this was anything more than another shitty plea bargain, rather than an indictment of American culture as a whole (as though American culture needed any further indictments against it).

    You still don’t get it.
    Anything that silences a woman who has been raped is part of rape culture. How can you be this dense? Rape culture is pervasive. It is insidious. It has infected otherwise good people and made them think that worrying about the future of the rapists is more important that the future of the young woman who was raped.

    The fact that so few of you seem to be able to respond with anything approaching a reasoned counter-argument is almost depressing.

    Virtually *everyone* has presented a counter argument. That you refuse to see the arguments or even understand them is a fault of yours.

    Once again, the existence of something (a rape culture), doesn’t imply that anything that furthers that thing (a rape culture), happened because of that thing (a rape culture). Get it?

    We get it.
    You have no idea what rape culture is. You can quit beating that dead horse.

    For this to have happened because of a rape culture, a desire, overt or sublimated, to protect the men, and silence the woman, would need to be the reason for the gag order.

    False.
    Wrong.
    Incorrect.
    Go fucking educate yourself on what rape culture is.
    Stop assuming you have a clue, because you’re demonstrating over and over that you DO NOT.
    Did you know that part of rape culture is victim blaming and silencing the victim? What the judge attempted to do was silence the victim. That’s part of rape culture. You’re ignorant about the topic at hand and yet you continually dig your hole deeper as you try to present yourself as some hoity toity intellectual come down to teach all of us the error of our ways.
    It’s not working.
    It’s not going to work.
    You. Are. Wrong.

  389. Pteryxx says

    The law is not concerned with revenge, but ideally with rehabilitation…

    You left something out – prevention. The law is also, or should be, concerned with preventing other potential victims from being harmed. Given that the majority of sexual assaults are committed by repeat predators under cover of benefit-of-the-doubt, and that sexual predators and abusers have extremely high recidivism rates without any effective means of rehabilitation, there’s also a public service aspect to outing these names.

    Revenge and rehabilitation both focus on the offenders as the subjects. What about innocent potential victims? Heck, what about possible *actual* victims who remain silent because nobody will believe them?

  390. klatu says

    shorter sc mess:
    “Oh, those poor rapists! Won’t someone think of the rapists?!”

    The fact that she has warned and will possible prevent future rape by those two… children has, of course, utterly escaped you.

  391. says

    Paging Jadehawk!

    *sigh*, like I said (in the post the blog for some reason won’t post). I’m sorry such numpkins exist, and I’m sorry we’ve started exporting them, apparently.

    However the judge has a right to remove such anonymity, and in cases in where the conviction is for a serious criminal act, such as rape, murder, serious assault, it is unheard of for such anonymity not to be removed.

    you barbaric American you.

  392. klatu says

    Also:
    Comment by sc_5231bb81bdfea7af1d0864dae088fe46 blocked. [unkill]​[show comment]

  393. says

    –for some reason, I can’t post this comment. I’ll split it up and see how that works–

    pt1.

    since it started raining, I can’t go to the garden to deal with the weeds there, after all. So instead, I’ll deal with the weeds here:

    The brokenness and inhumanity of the US society disgusts me time and again.

    as opposed to which societies? The ones that kill rape victims, or the ones that name aphrodisiacs after Rapists and promote said rapists for higher office?

    I’m disappointed by the vigilante justice nature of PZ’s article and most comments. In a proper functioning judicial system we have outsourced justice to an impartial judge, who in her/his wisdom decided on a particular punishment for this crime.

    we don’t have a proper functioning judicial system, and we do not have impartial judges. your your blind authortitarianism has been noted.

    The distinctly American process of publicly naming and shaming criminals and victims is barbaric. You guys need to grow up!

    go sit with Barkeron in the stupid-people-corner.

    I only trust the system if it applies to everyone in the same way.

    it doesn’t apply to everyone in the same way; that’s why we don’t trust it.

  394. John Morales says

    sc_mess:

    Ms. Dietrich’s crime is the act of a vindictive child, and I hope that she, at least, will be given the leniency the law demands when children transgress.

    It is the act of a little child to name those who were convicted of a felony sexual abuse against them, and criminal to boot.

    You are despicable.

  395. Pteryxx says

    Oh, and as for this excuse-making characterization:

    two stupid, drunken children

    citation very much fuckin’ needed. Go read Lisak’s research about the typical predator that likes to ensure women and alcohol come together in plausibly excusable situations. I even linked it conveniently upthread.

  396. says

    I’m disappointed by the vigilante justice nature of PZ’s article and most comments. In a proper functioning judicial system we have outsourced justice to an impartial judge, who in her/his wisdom decided on a particular punishment for this crime.

    we don’t have a proper functioning judicial system, and we do not have impartial judges. your your blind authoritarianism has been noted.

    The distinctly American process of publicly naming and shaming criminals and victims is barbaric. You guys need to grow up!

    go sit with Barkeron in the stupid-people-corner.

    I only trust the system if it applies to everyone in the same way.

    it doesn’t apply to everyone in the same way; that’s why we don’t trust it.

    It is a consequence of an overloaded legal system, not a culture that is OK with rape or murder.

    when you have a legal system more interested in putting away drug-offenders (the reason why the system is overburdened) than rapists, you have a legal system influenced by rape culture. d’uh.

    And I’m not going to disclose my home country. There’s no place for infantile “but YOU too!” games here I hope you agree.

    well, since you acknowledge that it’s possible to say “but you too”, I’ll take it as an admission that you’re just being a prejudiced dipshit

    Still. Y’all are okay then with saying these guys are irredeemable?

    letting them forget, and letting them live their lives as if it never happened, would make it nigh impossible to change them enough for redemption. without input, there can be little change.

    we know that making them social pariahs makes it more, not less likely that they’ll commit another outrage in the future.

    no, we actually don’t know that named rapists are more likely to rape again than unnamed rapists. you’re using data for recidivism after jail-time, for criminal activities that can function as an alternative economic activity (because of the difficulties of entering the regular economy with a criminal record). rape is not an economic activity.

    but there is no reason to think that the judge thought the assault was not a big deal

    we have no reason to believe he was somehow exempted from this deeply culturally ingrained belief, especially given the evidence.

    any more than you can say we have a “murder culture” when a murderer strikes a plea bargain.

    when that happens, it’s usually because the victim belonged to an oppressed class, or conversely the murderer belonged to a highly privileged (usually economically) class. Meaning, plea bargains for murder often are part of the matrix of oppression, too.

    I agree it does not ‘feel’ just to only have the name of the victim released.

    it’s not about feelings, asshole. the decision wasn’t just.

    but we must suck up whatever the judge decides

    this is never true, not in an unjust, biased system. which is what we have.

    17-year old drunk driver hits and kills your kid. His lawyer plea bargains, and part of the plea is that no one publicly shames the driver.

    you do know that in that case, the gag order would apply because the parents would have learned the 17-year-old’s name in court, and because they are not the victims?

    Analogy fail.

    Racism has always existed, this is just a tiny part of it right? Well, I doubt it, the owner is white but most of the people I work with are Indian, not white.

    and you don’t think that’s part of a racist systemic failure?
    lol.
    here’s a hint: some folks are more severely affected by racism than others.

    As a recent European immigrant

    as a not-so-recent European immigrant, I’d like to apologize for the existence of such numpkins as neuzelaar.

    Tit-for-tat revenge justice

    no one here is wishing rape on them, you idiot.

    -An absolutist black-and-white world view: the victim is an angel, the aggressors are deranged devils for which no punishment is ever harsh enough.

    since no one wished the death-penalty on them, or even life in prison, you’re obviously incorrect. and your authoritarian trust in the justice system is what’s black-and-white here.

    This mob appears very eager to participate in ‘internet lynching’.

    your careless use of racially tinged language has been duly noted and dismissed as a form of guilt-by-association (or sheer stupidity).

    Load of whining, but not the slightest initiative to structurally change what’s broken with the laws or the judicial system.

    considering that people are talking about the judicial system’s failure, that’s obviously not true

    enabling public lynching

    I pretty much guarantee you these two won’t be murdered by a mob hanging them from a tree.

  397. eurosid says

    @sc_5231bb81bdfea7af1d0864dae088fe46

    Ms. Dietrich committed no crime. There is no rational basis to declare it a crime to talk about her own life.

    And has been pointed out numerous times in this thread, they will hardly have their lives ruined. There are many assholes already waiting for them with open arms and high fives.

    There are even more, like Quidam, who will shrug and say it’s no big thing.

    And still more who say that maybe they were a bit naughty, but that mean old *girl* should just get over it and not make such a fuss. And they even have you waiting for them with milk and cookies because of how badly she has hurt them.

    Go back and read some more about those MRA “cockdrones”. It sounds like you’re seeing a bit of the daylight, but you have a few hundred feet of bullshit you still have to dig through. It took me a long fucking time. Keep at it. If you give a shit, you’ll get there.

  398. says

    let’s see if I can at least get a few sections of the comment I wrote through

    we know that making them social pariahs makes it more, not less likely that they’ll commit another outrage in the future.

    no, we actually don’t know that named rapists are more likely to rape again than unnamed rapists. you’re using data for recidivism after jail-time, for criminal activities that can function as an alternative economic activity (because of the difficulties of entering the regular economy with a criminal record). rape is not an economic activity.

  399. says

    any more than you can say we have a “murder culture” when a murderer strikes a plea bargain.

    when that happens, it’s usually because the victim belonged to an oppressed class, or conversely the murderer belonged to a highly privileged (usually economically) class. Meaning, plea bargains for murder often are part of the matrix of oppression, too.

    17-year old drunk driver hits and kills your kid. His lawyer plea bargains, and part of the plea is that no one publicly shames the driver.

    you do know that in that case, the gag order would apply because the parents would have learned the 17-year-old’s name in court, and because they are not the victims?

    Analogy fail.

    Racism has always existed, this is just a tiny part of it right? Well, I doubt it, the owner is white but most of the people I work with are Indian, not white.

    and you don’t think that’s part of a racist systemic failure?
    lol.
    here’s a hint: some folks are more severely affected by racism than others.

  400. says

    As a recent European immigrant

    as a not-so-recent European immigrant, I’d like to apologize for the existence of such numpkins as neuzelaar.

    Tit-for-tat revenge justice

    no one here is wishing rape on them, you idiot.

    -An absolutist black-and-white world view: the victim is an angel, the aggressors are deranged devils for which no punishment is ever harsh enough.

    since no one wished the death-penalty on them, or even life in prison, you’re obviously incorrect. and your authoritarian trust in the justice system is what’s black-and-white here.

    This mob appears very eager to participate in ‘internet lynching’.

    your careless use of racially tinged language has been duly noted and dismissed as a form of guilt-by-association (or sheer stupidity).

    Load of whining, but not the slightest initiative to structurally change what’s broken with the laws or the judicial system.

    considering that people are talking about the judicial system’s failure, that’s obviously not true

    enabling public lynching

    I pretty much guarantee you these two won’t be murdered by a mob hanging them from a tree.

  401. Pteryxx says

    …Hey, I even missed that one. The two rapists are “stupid, drunken children” who deserve sympathy, but Dietrich is a “vindictive child” who committed a a crime? What, assaulting an unconscious young woman, taking pictures and passing them around amongst friends behind her back ISN’T vindictive? It’s certainly hateful.

  402. says

    I’m disappointed by the vigilante justice nature of PZ’s article and most comments. In a proper functioning judicial system we have outsourced justice to an impartial judge, who in her/his wisdom decided on a particular punishment for this crime.

    we don’t have a proper functioning judicial system, and we do not have impartial judges. your blind authoritarianism has been noted.

  403. DLC says

    I really should stop reading the comments. Not because of you brave people who come forth to tell your story of how you were abused, molested, raped or otherwise victimized, but because of you few complete utter vacuum-headed shitcovered festering boils on the ass of humanity who come here and defend those two worthless shitstains rapists, either directly or by implication.

  404. spamamander, more skeptical-er and rational-er than you says

    Fucking Christ on a pogo stick did I just read that since no dick entered a vagina it’s not fucking rape? And if you don’t feel it, because you’re unconscious, it’s not fucking rape?

    I almost made it through this thread without hitting something…

  405. carlie, who has nice reading comprehension says

    Minor and going back, but:

    There are no black people in my office. Racism has always existed, this is just a tiny part of it right? Well, I doubt it, the owner is white but most of the people I work with are Indian, not white.

    If you’re not in a tiny office and therefore prone to sample size bias, check and see if you’re in or near a sundown town. ‘Cause it just might be racism!

  406. says

    ok. sorry to everyone for the chronological and logical jumble that are my last comments, but I wasn’t able to get the comment through without dismembering it into small bits. there’s probably 4 or 5 versions of it stuck in PZ spam trap now, probably (i hope he doesn’t fish them out, that would look even stupider)

  407. Tony the Parkour Kat [safe and welcome at FtB] says

    neuzalaar:

    Weeding out the spectacular nonsense and ad-hominems among the responses to my post #205 let me home in on the real issue. One of the comments summed it up:

    Please go learn what an ad hominem attack is.
    Being insulted is not an ad hominem.
    I think you’re a moron. I’m not using that in place of an argument.

    But public humiliation or enabling public lynching should not be a punishment for any crime, so not in this case either.

    Once again, you show you don’t know what you’re talking about. There is no lynching going on here. Do you even know what lynching means? Here:

    LYNCH:
    to put to death (as by hanging) by mob action without legal sanction
    http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/lynching?show=0&t=1343182380

    No one, I repeat, NO ONE has called for the rapists to be lynched. They haven’t called for them to be raped. They haven’t called for them to face any violence. What most people are saying is that there is nothing wrong with revealing their names.

  408. Pteryxx says

    If you’re not in a tiny office and therefore prone to sample size bias, check and see if you’re in or near a sundown town. ‘Cause it just might be racism!

    But if you don’t KNOW it’s a sundown town, then there’s no racism! *lalalalalaaaaa*

  409. carlie, who has nice reading comprehension says

    you don’t get to hurt somebody back just because they hurt you, no matter how repulsive the crime.

    Get it through your thick, stupid head – she’s talking about what happened to her. She’s relaying her own experiences. Not her fault that they don’t want to own up to what they did. And there is no equivalency in “hurt somebody back” because they “hurt you” when what’s happened is “filming yourself sexually assaulting an unconscious woman and sending that film to all your friends” on one side and “telling people what happened to you” on the other.

  410. carlie, who has nice reading comprehension says

    Side note:
    Pteryxx – that was you who turned me on to that idea, right? I got the book and read it, and HOLY CRAP THE RACISM. My hometown? Got six separate entries, including instances of racism in the last 15 years or so. But that’s privilege for you: I never even thought about why there were no black people living in my town. Sort of like a particular person here thinking there’s no racism where they work…

  411. Tony the Parkour Kat [safe and welcome at FtB] says

    mouthyb @305:
    I don’t know why I went to that site, but I did and I just have no words for how disgusted I feel. Neuzalaar needs to go to that site and learn what lynching is. Then xe will realize that nothing said here by anyone is close to that vicious act.

  412. sc_5231bb81bdfea7af1d0864dae088fe46 says

    Mythbri: A juvenile is a juvenile is a juvenile. That’s the law, and it’s the law for a reason. If you want to argue that they should be tried as adults, that’s fine–but the judge disagreed.

    Tethys: Could somebody tell Tethys that I read the damn thread, couldn’t breathe right for a few minutes after reading her story, I feel like punching somebody now, and that doesn’t change how the law works and why?

    Daisy: Jesus pusmother, you’re pissed–that’s all well and good, but you should remember who you’re pissed at.

    klatu: I’ve never met either of them, but I can tell you now, I’d have trouble controlling myself around them, too. After what they did, they’re lucky the only extralegal punishment they’re getting is a good, solid ostracism–but that doesn’t make it okay.

    Everyone else: Calm. The hell. Down. I don’t know who you think I am or what website you think I’m from, but I’m not some dumb, misogynist fuckstick. I’m not trying to victim-blame or slut-shame or constructively rape anybody. I’m pointing out a point of law and why we have it.

    Kids do stupid, stupid shit all the time. Sometimes, they commit felonies. I know grownups who are still punching themselves over things they did in their teens–things they’d never do now. For all you know, these kids could have figured out what sickening little dipshits they were and spent the rest of their lives haunted by it–now, all they’ll do is blame the victim.

    That said…

    Pteryxx: That’s a remarkably good point–deterrence is also an important factor. I do understand the rationale for publicly naming and shaming rapists–but that shouldn’t apply to people operating in a diminished capacity due to their age. There’s a reason we have age of consent laws–I know they’re not perfect, and I know the magic-cutoff thing is hard to swallow, but what’s the alternative?

  413. says

    you don’t get to hurt somebody back just because they hurt you, no matter how repulsive the crime.

    1)at the moment that’s in fact the sole basis of the US justice system

    2)aside from that, being allowed to talk about your own rape is not “hurting someone back”, and shaming is an entirely effective social input to create a social change. And if this gag-order had never happened in the first place, the names of these two would have never gone viral in the first place. It’s called the Streisand effect

    meaning, you’re wrong both on a legal and a moral level, as it applies to the current situation (even if your statement, in isolation, is ethically correct)

  414. says

    For all you know, these kids could have figured out what sickening little dipshits they were and spent the rest of their lives haunted by it–now, all they’ll do is blame the victim.

    for all you know, continuing with mild punishments for rapists and letting them forget would make sure rape culture never weakens – now at least we are creating environmental input that makes rape a shameful thing to do, which might lessen the stranglehold rape-culture has on our society just that one wee bit

    given the data, my version of events is more likely.

  415. Tony the Parkour Kat [safe and welcome at FtB] says

    quidam:

    I’m very sorry to hear of your experiences. I’m sure both were traumatic – but I’m guessing the time you were assaulted without your knowledge was easier for you.

    What, did you think we didn’t have enough disgusting vile examples of the dregs of humanity already posting here? You wanted to add your name to the mix??!!
    Go the fuck away.

  416. sc_5231bb81bdfea7af1d0864dae088fe46 says

    Also, Pteryxx: They were seventeen. Do you really think they could be hardened serial predators? I’m not trying to mock, I just can’t believe a kid could set out with the intent to victimize somebody the way it’s been described earlier in the thread.

    And Eurosid: You really think people just accept rapists back into society? It seems like a pretty cut-and-dried sex crime to me–who other than the aforementioned cockdrones aren’t going to condemn it?

  417. mythbri says

    @sc-numbers

    Those two juveniles victimized another juvenile. The judge’s ruling was an over-reach. If they decide to blame their victim for reporting what they did, for pursuing charges, and for making their names public, then that is their moral failing, on top of moral failings galore.

    It is not Dietrich’s responsibility to make sure that they’re in the best possible mindframe for re-habilitation. It is not her responsibility to make sure that the crime they committed on her is buried.

    The focus should be placed on their responsibility for this crime. They were the ones who thought it was a good idea to publicize it first, among their friends. Why do they get to promote their actions but not take public responsibility for them?

  418. John Morales says

    sc_specimen:

    Everyone else: Calm. The hell. Down. I don’t know who you think I am or what website you think I’m from, but I’m not some dumb, misogynist fuckstick. I’m not trying to victim-blame or slut-shame or constructively rape anybody. I’m pointing out a point of law and why we have it.

    Yeah, you claimed it was criminal for a victim to name those who are lawfully-convicted of committing felony sexual abuse against them.

    (Because blaming victims is what calm people do?)

  419. carlie, who has nice reading comprehension says

    I just can’t believe a kid could set out with the intent to victimize somebody the way it’s been described earlier in the thread.

    THEY FILMED IT AND SHOWED IT TO OTHER PEOPLE. That requires the forethought to be ready to film it, doing it with the intent of showing it off later, and then after the fact, instead of being ashamed of what they’d done, being proud of it and showing it off to their friends. And 17 isn’t 5, for chrissakes.

  420. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls says

    Everyone else: Calm. The hell. Down.

    Who the fuck are you rape apologist loser to tell us what to do? I won’t do anything you say, as it is usually the wrong thing to do, being Heinlein’s fool…

    You are the one who needs to calm down, shut the fuck up, and actually listen to what we are saying. But then, based on past history, you are too stoopid and self absorbed to think of others.

  421. mythbri says

    @sc-numbers

    If these two criminals were on the other side of their coming birthdays, you wouldn’t be saying what you’re saying. How diminished is someone’s capacity to understand that sexual assault is WRONG between the age of 17 years, 1 day and 17 years, 364 days? I find it extremely hard to believe that the capacity of two 17-year-olds dramatically increases over the course of one year.

  422. John Morales says

    [meta]

    specimen:

    Also, Pteryxx: They were seventeen. Do you really think they could be hardened serial predators? I’m not trying to mock, I just can’t believe a kid could set out with the intent to victimize somebody the way it’s been described earlier in the thread.

    Such stupidity!

    (You’ve clearly either forgotten what you were like when you were seventeen, or don’t dare revisit that)

  423. ButchKitties says

    Thanks to assholes who will defend rapists by claiming that they only did it because they were “stupid, drunk children,” some men will deliberately get drunk before raping because they know it will help them get away with it. It also encourages some men to see sexualization as an integral part of drinking, which leads to them ignoring “no” cues and interpreting ambiguous cues as “yes”.

  424. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls says

    Any bets on fuckwit SC numbers having come close to or committing severe misogyny in its past? Or has a friend or relative who did so? That is the only way it can be so ignorant, arrogant, and fuckwitted about the giving out names…

  425. Chaos Engineer says

    And we have separate penal systems for children because we want even more badly to salvage them if we can–and letting them move on with only their consciences permanently stained is a very effective way of easing that process.

    I think you’re confusing a couple of different concepts.

    The courts might seal the records of children and young teenagers who commit serious crimes if they’re the product of a bad environment, in hopes that they can be salvaged by putting them into a better environment.

    And the courts might seal the records of older teenagers who commit minor crimes out of youthful exuberance, assuming no one is seriously injured – so this is for crimes like simple drug possession, vandalism, and joyriding.

    But when we’re talking about a sexual assault committed by 17-year-olds, we’d normally expect them to get tried as adults. It’s pretty obvious that the judge screwed up here, so revealing the names of the criminals is just part of the noble American tradition of Civil Disobedience.

    Ms. Dietrich’s crime is the act of a vindictive child

    Now you’re just being silly. Are you going to tell us that Rosa Parks was a vindictive child next? Really, now!

  426. Pteryxx says

    carlie: I think someone else mentioned sundown towns back in February, and I just amplified it on TET with the research I found. Seconding the “holy shit” factor… my grocery store is in a sundown town neighborhood, just a mile or two down the road.

    scmess: I question that the incident described implies any sort of diminished capacity on the part of the offenders. (And on refresh, that they’d need to be “hardened serial predators” at the age of 17.) Seriously, go read the research I linked way back at #125 (or control-F search for Lisak). Sexual assault of unconscious or barely-conscious women at binge-drinking parties with the covert protection of a bunch of complicit friends is a *typical predator scenario*. By college age (for these kids, basically, *now*) it’s an epidemic. This crime is a huge red flag. If these two rapey “children” want to clear their names, the onus is on them to do so. They no longer deserve the presumption of trustworthiness.

  427. John Morales says

    “so-and-so did such-and-such to me”

    specimen: How is stating this criminal, when the claim is truthful?

  428. Tony the Parkour Kat [safe and welcome at FtB] says

    To anyone who has suffered sexual assault, I am truly sorry for what was done to you. It is my hope that educating people (as well as effectively punishing perpetrators) will result in less sexual assault. It is unconscionable that anyone would force themselves on another human being and violate their right to bodily autonomy.

  429. says

    For all you know, these kids could have figured out what sickening little dipshits they were and spent the rest of their lives haunted by it–now, all they’ll do is blame the victim.

    could be, we don’t know. Even studies on the effects of punishment aren’t applicable universally. We would have to ask those guys, so why talk about it? Its useless speculation. What isn’t speculation is what the victim wanted and got out of this case- its disingenuous to act like she demanded castration when she tweeted their names. It is important that victims get outcomes that they find to be favorable.

  430. mythbri says

    @Pteryxx

    By college age (for these kids, basically, *now*) it’s an epidemic. This crime is a huge red flag. If these two rapey “children” want to clear their names, the onus is on them to do so. They no longer deserve the presumption of trustworthiness.

    QFFT.

    College was when I first encountered rape victims and rapists. I had two room-mates that were raped when I was living with them, one on a date and one at a party. There were six of us in the house. The statistic that you hear – one in four, one in six? We had two in six.

    One of my room-mates reported. She was examined, and photographed, and the police took her clothes. He’d made her bleed. He got a year in prison. A few years later, we saw him on the news, because he’d enrolled in massage therapy school and molested several female clients. My room-mate had to rush to the bathroom to vomit.

    My other room-mate never reported. She fell into depression that she hasn’t come out of. I don’t know where she is or how she’s doing.

  431. hieropants says

    Calm. The hell. Down.

    Has anyone ever, in the history of arguments, said “calm down” with the intention of actually calming the other party down rather than with the intention of riling the other party up by accusing them of being baselessly passionate? If you actually wanted to calm your opponent down, wouldn’t it make more sense to project calmness through your own unemotional responses, defusing the situation by not throwing gas on the flames suggesting your opponent is incorrect in feeling his/her/its/their feelings?

    Seriously dude, make your points if you think they’re legitimate but don’t demand that other people only react positively to them.

  432. sc_5231bb81bdfea7af1d0864dae088fe46 says

    Morales: That was seven years ago, to be fair, and even at my present age I never imagined some of the things you guys have been talking about until just this evening. Maybe my opinion of seventeen-year-olds is colored by how stupid everyone around me was when I was that age…

    Mythbri: Like I said, a juvenile is a juvenile. If you think that’s a little crazy, consider this… if she’d been a year older, she’d be on trial for raping them. Sexual contact with a minor is a crime no matter whether you consent. I’m beginning to see how fucked up our legal system is on this count, but it is what it is.

    Also, sorry about the weird login–this is Jonathan, the FNG who only found out what rape culture is in another Pharyngula comments section a month or two ago. Be gentle.

  433. Pteryxx says

    also, scmess: These kids took pictures of the sexual assault and spread them among their friends as bragging? They just TAUGHT any other interested parties how it’s done.

  434. ButchKitties says

    There was a study we read in the Victimology class I recently took (I’d link but i only have a hard copy). First the subjects were asked if they thought a man was more likely to commit sexual assault if he’d been drinking. Then they were read a variety of scenarios and asked whether the scenarios described rape. This was done twice: once while the subjects were sober and once while drunk. Respondents who answered yes to the first question were less likely to identify the non consensual scenarios as rape (especially during the drunk session) than those who had answered no.

  435. carlie, who has nice reading comprehension says

    Maybe my opinion of seventeen-year-olds is colored by how stupid everyone around me was when I was that age…

    Here’s the thing – what you saw as “stupid” was what the women around you saw as real threats. Because “stupid” doesn’t excuse rape.

    who only found out what rape culture is in another Pharyngula comments section a month or two ago. Be gentle.

    Rule 1: do not make a fucking rape joke, especially in the middle of a thread about rape, and more especially in the middle of a thread where you’ve been taking the rapists’ side of things.

  436. says

    I just can’t believe a kid could set out with the intent to victimize somebody the way it’s been described earlier in the thread.

    you’re painfully naive and/or have never been within hearing distance of a gaggle of fratboys

  437. sc_5231bb81bdfea7af1d0864dae088fe46 says

    Chaos: Now, there’s another good point–you could say it was the right thing to do, given what fuckwads the defendants were and how this particular crime is made worse by silence in a lot of cases.

    Heirophant: I swear to the Sacred Goony-Bird, I actually want people to stop shouting insults at me and acting like I’m the one who raped somebody. I’m not trying to rile anyone up. I’m just… bad at this.

  438. klatu says

    @Jadehawk

    rape is not an economic activity

    The only time I ever heard (what is by any other word) rape classified as an economic activity was a quote in a documentary about forced prostitution in WW2 Germany.

    Found it on google video.

    Quote from around 00:12:10

    Der verkehr mit den Polinnen in den Bordellen wurde nicht als ein gesellschaftlicher, der nach dem Erlaß des Führers verboten ist, angesehen. Die Beziehnungen der Dirnen zu den wechselnden Besuchern (mitunter 20 – 30 am Tage) sind sachlich-wirtschaftlicher Art.

    Translation by me

    The intercourse with the Polish [women and girls] in these brothels was not seen as a social one, which was prohibited as per the Führer’s decree. The relationships of the girls with the various visitors (occasionally 20 – 30 a day) are of a material-economic nature.

    Not necessarily relevant, but also not an analogy anyone ought to make lightly. Because shit like that did happen.

  439. says

    You really think people just accept rapists back into society?

    of course. because they do*. it’s child rapists who don’t get accepted back

    *caveat for the fact that criminals in general don’t easily get accepted back, because of their records. but since these guys are in juvie court, the criminal record won’t follow them around forever, IIRC

  440. eurosid says

    @sc-numbers

    Since you’re too lazy to read the thread, I’ll quote part of the excellent post skeptifem made @24o

    What I do know for sure is that having people know you are a rapist isn’t The Worst Punishment Evar like people are making it out to be. Mike Tyson is a convicted fucking rapist, and he was on the view last week. He still gets parts in movies. Roman Polanski got to accept his academy award for his films via satelite instead of in person (the horror). Accused rapists like Kobe Bryant (whose attorneys decided to shame the victim out of court, while calling her a shameless gold digger and using her name in violation of shield laws) got all kinds of corporate sponsorship ads after the trial. No one gives a fuck about rape.

    So, yeah, I do think they’re welcomed back in to society. Because that is what happens. ALL THE GODDAM TIME. That’s what rape culture is. It’s the constant message that rape is no big deal.

  441. sc_5231bb81bdfea7af1d0864dae088fe46 says

    Carlie: …


    God, do I just not read what I type? I’m sorry, I didn’t mean to… mother of god. I was invoking regular old violence in the sense of the beating I’m taking here, and it didn’t occur to me… I’m sorry. Really.

  442. Tony the Parkour Kat [safe and welcome at FtB] says

    FFS!

    Ms. Dietrich’s crime is the act of a vindictive child, and I hope that she, at least, will be given the leniency the law demands when children transgress.

    Do the rape apologists and MRA’s have an inter-office memo sent out whenever topics like rape come up?
    You people crawl out of the woodwork to minimize the sexual assaults of others.
    Ms. Dietrich committed NO crime.
    Fuck the fuck off.

  443. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls says

    f she’d been a year older, she’d be on trial for raping them.

    Citation needed, as the circumstances state otherwise, and you know that. Stoopid is as stoopid says without fact checking. Besides, in almost all states you aren’t committing statutory rape unless there is more than a year to two of age difference. What a loser if you don’t understand such simple facts….

  444. Pteryxx says

    scJonathan: Because you, and other basically decent people, *can’t* imagine it, guys like this go right on victimizing. You have to remember that somebody *is doing all that raping* when one in six women have been raped. Heck, look at the rape stats in college alone. It’s not just a half-dozen extremely busy rapists out there.

    Start here: http://www.rainn.org/statistics/

    and if the link works, here:

    http://pharyngula.wikia.com/wiki/Feminist_link_roundup#Prevalence_and_effects_of_rape_and_sexual_assault

  445. mythbri says

    @sc-numbers

    I think that this:

    if she’d been a year older, she’d be on trial for raping them. Sexual contact with a minor is a crime no matter whether you consent.

    Is pretty ridiculous. Here is a link to Kentucky sexual assault laws:

    http://kyasap.brinkster.net/Portals/0/pdfs/Kentucky%20criminal%20law%20chart%200407.pdf

    Here are the parts that would be relevant to your hypothetical, if two 17-year-olds had assaulted an 18-year-old:

    Unlawful transaction with a minor, 1st degree:

    Knowingly induces, assists, or causes and
    -A minor to engage in illegal sexual activity, or in illegal controlled substance activity other than activity involving marijuana
    -Except those offenses involving minors in KRS 531
    & 529.030

    Are you saying that being drunk and unconscious would have been considered “cause for a minor to engage in illegal sexual activity”?