HS football hazing involving rape outraged community

[Geilinor]

They need to be locked up like animals, and their parents punished too.

What a barbaric notion. Rather than attempt to reach these people and make them understand the fault of their actions, you'd rather lock them away and pretend they don't exist. It's fucking pathetic.

Punishing people for rape is pathetic?

[Ethel mermania]

What a barbaric notion. Rather than attempt to reach these people and make them understand the fault of their actions, you'd rather lock them away and pretend they don't exist. It's fucking pathetic.

Punishing people for rape is pathetic?

the boys were not raped.

now a fair question would be

Punishing people for sexual assault is pathetic? and obviously i believe jail time is deserved.


edit wtf happened to my original post "casualty" i never wrote

[The Serbian Empire]

Expel the perps... and cancel all sporting events until hazing can be assured to not happen again.

[The Grey Wolf]

they should face criminal consequences. Anyone involved in acts of sexual molestation should face a lifetime behind bars (or at least 30 years). The human body is sacrosanct and sexual violation is completely unacceptable. Completely unacceptable.

Totally makes sense to throw people behind bars for life (or thirty years or any other arbitrary number you cook up on the spot) because of the "sacredness" of the body, instead of, you know, the trauma caused to the person being violated.

they should face criminal consequences. Anyone involved in acts of sexual molestation should face a lifetime behind bars (or at least 30 years). The human body is sacrosanct and sexual violation is completely unacceptable. Completely unacceptable.

That's not a terribly practical method of dealing with things. Sex criminals actually have a relatively low recidivism rate, lots of them can be rehabilitated.

I know people get really excited about throwing the book at people, but going gung-ho for the prison industrial complex really isn't a very good answer for most crimes. Violent crimes, sex crimes, property crimes... not really that different in the end. You do want to punish, but a minimum sentence of 30 years is probably excessive for any general category of crime. This is especially the case when perpetrators are minors.

^ Sums it up about right.

[Anglo-California]

Two years ago, when I was a sophomore, like 6 kids were expelled from my school (they were JV football players and in my grade) after sexually harassing a girl, and not a word was spoken. In fact, the school was very hush-hush about the whole thing, but everyone knew those kids were gone.

[Imperializt Russia]

Punishing people for rape is pathetic?

the boys were not raped.

One of them was.
"Digital rape" is a thing.

[Ethel mermania]

the boys were not raped.

One of them was.
"Digital rape" is a thing.

Nope, diminishes the meaning of the term "rape". But that is a topic for another thread.

[Imperializt Russia]

One of them was.
"Digital rape" is a thing.

Nope, diminishes the meaning of the term "rape". But that is a topic for another thread.

It absolutely does not.
Under the current definition of "rape", men cannot be raped except by other men. This hugely skews perception of rape and is, in my opinion, a far greater "diminishing" of the "meaning" than the realisation that unwanted penetration of an orifice by anything is rape.

[Ethel mermania]

Nope, diminishes the meaning of the term "rape". But that is a topic for another thread.

It absolutely does not.
Under the current definition of "rape", men cannot be raped except by other men. This hugely skews perception of rape and is, in my opinion, a far greater "diminishing" of the "meaning" than the realisation that unwanted penetration of an orifice by anything is rape.

There is a difference between injecting a cock that can inject precious bodily fluids, and subjec the victim to pregnacy and or disease, and a finger.

[United Marxist Nations]

It absolutely does not.
Under the current definition of "rape", men cannot be raped except by other men. This hugely skews perception of rape and is, in my opinion, a far greater "diminishing" of the "meaning" than the realisation that unwanted penetration of an orifice by anything is rape.

There is a difference between injecting a cock that can inject precious bodily fluids, and subjec the victim to pregnacy and or disease, and a finger.

It says that, after putting the finger in the rectum, they put it in the person's mouth.

[Imperializt Russia]

It absolutely does not.
Under the current definition of "rape", men cannot be raped except by other men. This hugely skews perception of rape and is, in my opinion, a far greater "diminishing" of the "meaning" than the realisation that unwanted penetration of an orifice by anything is rape.

There is a difference between injecting a cock that can inject precious bodily fluids, and subjec the victim to pregnacy and or disease, and a finger.

Both are a grievous violation of one's bodily sovereignty.