From: 01sybok@ac.dal.ca
Newsgroups: soc.college,talk.rape,soc.women
Subject: Re: fraternities
Date: 16 Apr 92 23:15:51 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada

In article <1992Apr14.022348.11641@panix.com>, eck@panix.com (Mark Eckenwiler) writes:
> In <1992Apr13.185451.3008@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>, sag0798@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu stated:
>>thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu (Ted Frank) writes:
>>
>>>I'm not so sure it's dishonest to say "fraternities."  Do fraternity
>>>members haze, or do fraternities? 
>>				    One could say it's the member, but
>>>having the institution there certainly makes a difference. 
>>
>>How does being in an organization make a difference?  Going on your thinking,
>>if one of these rapists was also a member of Students for Environmental 
>>Concerns, you would say that this organization rapes.
> 
> Is this what passes for thinking among undergrads these days?
> 
> Your attempt at analogy is hopelessly inapt.  Ted has *repeatedly*
> made the factual observation that rapes occur in conjunction with frat
> activities (viz. drinking), and frequently on frat premises.  Neither
> Ted nor anyone else is claiming that your hypothetical environmental
> group is culpable, unless your analogy also assumes that members of
> the SEC rape guests in their offices and/or organize drinking events
> designed to get everyone trashed (and laid, by force or otherwise).
> 
> Of course, if that's what you meant, why, yes, those evil Greens are
> bad as an organization as well as individually.
> 
> 
> 
>>>Would you
>>>say that the Klan lynched blacks, or that Klan members lynched blacks?
>>>It's a minor semantical point, I suppose, much on the level of "Guns
>>>don't kill people, people kill people (but the guns sure help a lot)."
>>
>>This is entirely different since fraternities were not organized to rape 
>>women as guns were made to kill.
> 
> It doesn't dispose of the question to say that frats are not designed
> expressly to rape.  (Some might contend that they *are*, but let's
> assume for argument's sake that they're not.)  Frats are no less
> undesirable if they simply create conditions in which we (and they)
> know rape is a likely consequence.
> 
> Since Ted has posted extensive evidence that frats create rape
> conditions, whether deliberately or with indifference, exactly what
> relevance attaches to your reply?
> 
> 
>>>But they're speculations on the conservative side.  The problem is
>>>almost certainly much worse than either of us realize.  There are several
>>>reasons why fraternity members are less likely to be convicted of rape:
>>
>>>(1) The rape is more likely to be an acquaintence rape.
>>>(2) The rapist is going to have high credibility: the "white college
>>>    boy" factor.
>>
>>This is pretty discriminatory.  You also are assuming that all fraternities 
>>only allow "white" college men to join and/or only "white" fraternity members
>>are accused of rape.
> 
> No, you twit; note Ted's use of quote marks, often indicative in the
> English language of colloquial, non-literal description.  The point is
> that college rowdies get away with murder on account of their status
> as university students. (*)  When they're middle class, well dressed,
> educated, and/or backed by an influential body of frat alums, the
> institutional and social factors in the criminal system weigh even
> more strongly against prosecution and conviction.  The St. John's rape
> case here in NYC recently is only the latest example of this historic
> fact. 
> 
> * (See George Ade's "The Fable of the Copper and the Jovial
> Undergrads", from _Fables in Slang_, for an account from the 19th
> century of this venerable tradition: "MORAL: Always select the Right
> Sort of Parents before you start in to be Rough.")
> 
> 
>>>    if the case comes to court, and D.A's....
>>>    above and below, are just not going to risk their success rate
>>>    in criminal trials to bring up an unpopular case that's almost a
>>>    sure loser
>>
>>If this is true, the D.A. should not be in office.  If there is a possibility
>>that there was a violation of a law, they should prosecute to determine if a 
>>law was broken.
> 
> DAs are elected officials, subject to the whim of the same people who
> serve on juries and acquit rapists for the reasons cited above.
> 
> 
>>>(3) The rape victim is likely to have low credibility:
>>>	(a) She'll more likely than not have been drinking.
>>
>>This may be true.
>>
>>>	(b) She'll have arrived unescorted to a late-night party.
>>
>>What does this have to do with the credibility of the victim?
> 
> Defense attorneys will argue, and juries will infer, that she wanted
> to get laid.  Of course, acquittals on that ground often ignore the
> issue of whether she actually *consented* to relations with the
> defendant(s) in particular.  
> 
> To draw an analogy your tiny mind can grasp: I may be hungry when I
> walk into a restaurant; that doesn't license the restaurateur to force
> feed me (and charge me for) the entree he wants to get rid of, whether
> I want it or not.
> 
> 
> 
>>>And when the rape
>>>victim does come forward, she finds herself blamed by the campus press,
>>>and harassed by the Greek system.  It's stunning how often this
>>>scenario is repeated from campus to campus. 
>>
>>Just how often IS this scenerio repeated from campus to campus?
>>
>>With all due respect to the seriousness concerning rape and sexual assult, and
>>after reading what TED has to say, I conclude that Ted has the knowledge to 
>>do little else than tell stories and dream up rape scenerios in his head.
> 
> With all respect my foot.  Your willful disregard of the facts that
> Ted has offered on several occasions indicates that you're the one
> dreaming up "scenerios" (Hint: those quote marks indicate disdain
> here.  Tricky buggers, ain't they?) to suit your oafish
> preconceptions.
> 
> -- 
> When the Persians have an important decision to make, the leaders discuss it
> when drunk. They revisit their decision when sober, and adopt it only if they
> reach that same conclusion again.  Conversely, any decisions made in sobriety
> are reconsidered in drink. {Herodotus, bk. 1}   eck@panix.com  Mark Eckenwiler