GangRaped at Homecoming

[Lil-Mac]

Originally Posted by menace

In the outcry that seems prevalent here, a few things may have slipped our minds.

We here are all over 18, most of us much older. We know a lot about sex. furthermore, we know this was rape because the news says so.

The witnesses had none of this. They were mostly teenagers, about the age of the victim. I don't know how sex-ed is handled in California, but considering how conservative the US is, I'm not sure these boys got proper education on what a rape really is.

Sure if she was screaming and kicking the whole time, it would be pretty obvious, but was this the case? She could of been drunk (like laws ever stop people from doing anything!) and in no shape to defend herself.

We know there was serious injuries incurred, but when? At the start or the end of the ordeal? It's entirely conceivable that she was mauled by the last rapist, when she regained enough sobriety to do something to anger him, like biting or scratching him.

Considering all that, were the witnesses really able to distinguish between a 'girl being raped' and a 'drunken slut getting nailed' ?

Besides that, another thing to consider is that in such a situation, anyone would help a friend, many would help an acquaintance, few would do so for a stranger, but how many would help someone they despised/hated? Nowhere does it say the victim was a nice person.

Yes, someone should have done something, and all those that got involved should have the book thrown at them, but we shouldn't be so quick to judge the bystanders as the worse scum on the planet without having all the facts.

I hope I am not the only person seeing red over this post. I almost threw my damn laptop against the wall. Biggest bunch of politically correct leftist claptrap I've read in a long time.

Since when do highschool kids not know what a rape looks like... hell elementary school kids know what rape is. Werent properly educated in sex-ed.. are you f'in for real?? Cant tell the difference between a gangrape and getting nailed?? You're kidding right, this is a god-damned joke post right. Absolutly unf'in believable.

[dashrendar44]

Another victim of the Bystander Effect. Truely a shame, and frankly the people that simply stood and watched are just as guilty as the guys that raped her both morally and likely legally, assuming that California has a Good Samaritan law.

[Renegade]

"Nowhere does it say the victim was a nice person."

My initial response was this was posted by a troll but have now come to the conclusion that the poster is simply an idiot.

Originally Posted by menace

In the outcry that seems prevalent here, a few things may have slipped our minds.

We here are all over 18, most of us much older. We know a lot about sex. furthermore, we know this was rape because the news says so.

The witnesses had none of this. They were mostly teenagers, about the age of the victim. I don't know how sex-ed is handled in California, but considering how conservative the US is, I'm not sure these boys got proper education on what a rape really is.

Sure if she was screaming and kicking the whole time, it would be pretty obvious, but was this the case? She could of been drunk (like laws ever stop people from doing anything!) and in no shape to defend herself.

We know there was serious injuries incurred, but when? At the start or the end of the ordeal? It's entirely conceivable that she was mauled by the last rapist, when she regained enough sobriety to do something to anger him, like biting or scratching him.

Considering all that, were the witnesses really able to distinguish between a 'girl being raped' and a 'drunken slut getting nailed' ?

Besides that, another thing to consider is that in such a situation, anyone would help a friend, many would help an acquaintance, few would do so for a stranger, but how many would help someone they despised/hated? Nowhere does it say the victim was a nice person.

Yes, someone should have done something, and all those that got involved should have the book thrown at them, but we shouldn't be so quick to judge the bystanders as the worse scum on the planet without having all the facts.

[pervipete]

No Lil-mac, you are not the only person seeing red, in fact I was waiting for one of the women to jump in, but here goes.

Menace, a couple of things.

Now, I don't know how much of this post is you looking for the good in these 'people', your attitude or just that English is not your first language, but...

I hope to god that if I was in the situation of witnessing a crime like this, I would do all I could to stop it, bring the bastards to justice, and help the victim, regardless of whether I knew or liked the person being attacked.

As far as I am concerned, whether or not the victim was a nice person should not come into it, neithe, does her age. I would feel this way if she was under or over the age of consent.

And if anyone feels different, then maybe they are the person I thought they were...

[Jaded]

Hey Menace, while all we here may all be over 18, the victim was not. She was a 15 year old girl at her homecoming dance. Something she should have come away from with pleasant memories of friendship and fun. Instead she will have years of therapy for the trauma of being raped by a bunch of people while others just stood around and watched. We know this was rape, because the girl was 15 and as such a minor unable to give consent.

This goes beyond "sex-ed", this goes to pure right and wrong. I do not care how drunk a girl gets, at no point in my thoughts does the concept "Huh, she is too fucked up to say no, so I guess that is a yes to me...and to him...and to this other guy too.

Also you comments about her sobering up enough to "anger him" once again you are implying that it was ok to beat her when she realized what was happening and resisted. This "blame the victim" BS is why I think you just need to back up and keep your mouth shut as well, because you are also judging the situation when you know nothing at all about it.

[Fae]

I'd call it in for my worst enemy. Whether she was a nice person has nothing to do with it. Also, unlike a lot of people in the conversation. I grew up really close to there. I know the school and the neighborhood.

There are aspects of mob mentality that probably came into play there but there is also aspects of gang mentality that came into play. Some of the quotes I've been hearing from other kids around there are "boys there aren't taught to respect girls" and a lot about the "no snitching" mindset that's a big problems with the gangs in the Richmond and Oakland area.

Other responses to Menace. "I don't know how sex-ed is handled in California, but considering how conservative the US is, I'm not sure these boys got proper education on what a rape really is." Actually California is has a lot more sex ed than a lot of other states. Even beyond sex ed, it's pretty well taught that rape is anything after the word "no" and intoxication doesn't stop it from being rape. Also a lot of the participants were not just teenagers, they've listed people up to age 21 being arrested.

Personally I'd nail any participant or watcher who encouraged the event to the wall if I could. I keep thinking of friends who went to school there, of visiting that school when I was 15 (the same age as that girl) for a school event. This is more than a little close to home for me.

[MADDOGMCMANAMAN]

I read this and was reminded of a conversation i was having on here with Chi ages ago (at least i think it was her) when she said that there was a study or something done with a little child all alone in a public place and crying (or something like that) and it was done to see how many people would try and help and the study found that only around40% of people would stop to see why a child was crying and the rest just carried on walking by.

Nobody really gives a fuck about each other anymore, its fucking sad.

In regards to the story, it is despicable that people stood by and watched they are fucking pussies and words cannot do justice to their cowardice.

[menace]

Originally Posted by Lil-Mac

I hope I am not the only person seeing red over this post. I almost threw my damn laptop against the wall. Biggest bunch of politically correct leftist claptrap I've read in a long time.

Since when do highschool kids not know what a rape looks like... hell elementary school kids know what rape is. Werent properly educated in sex-ed.. are you f'in for real?? Cant tell the difference between a gangrape and getting nailed?? You're kidding right, this is a god-damned joke post right. Absolutly unf'in believable.

You might want to take the blood out of your eyes and read what I wrote again. And for the record, I'm not leftist.

Just because you and I can tell the difference doesn't mean everyone else can. Have you actually talked to any of the witnesses and ? I'm gonna guess no, but that apparently doesn't prevent you from knowing exactly what they were thinking.

Are you by any chance psychic?

[menace]

Originally Posted by Renegade

"Nowhere does it say the victim was a nice person."

My initial response was this was posted by a troll but have now come to the conclusion that the poster is simply an idiot.

I agree. Thinking I could get people to take a step back and think was pretty idiotic of me.

[menace]

Originally Posted by pervipete

No Lil-mac, you are not the only person seeing red, in fact I was waiting for one of the women to jump in, but here goes.

Menace, a couple of things.

Now, I don't know how much of this post is you looking for the good in these 'people', your attitude or just that English is not your first language, but...

I hope to god that if I was in the situation of witnessing a crime like this, I would do all I could to stop it, bring the bastards to justice, and help the victim, regardless of whether I knew or liked the person being attacked.

As far as I am concerned, whether or not the victim was a nice person should not come into it, neithe, does her age. I would feel this way if she was under or over the age of consent.

And if anyone feels different, then maybe they are the person I thought they were...

It's number one. What they did was horrible, but does this make them horrible people that don't give a crap about anyone else? Maybe, maybe not.

Do you really mean what you say about helping someone you hate or do you only think that you would do it? We all like to think of ourselves as good people, but do we really live up to our self image?

Anyone is a hero on talk, but when when the chips really fall, few put their money where their mouth is.

[Sternenlied]

Well, menace I am no position to make the call if you actually are an idiot or not - which is, by the way, unimportant in this case.

You have to admit however your post wasn't exactly neutral but rather presumptuous and offensive, something you must have realized (if not while writing, at least by now).

I understand what you were trying to do (assuming your intentions were honest) but I can most certainly see why people might be angered by it as well.

Maybe everyone should take a step back, think and consider the others' opinion(s) without too much emotional involvement.

[menace]

Originally Posted by Jaded

Hey Menace, while all we here may all be over 18, the victim was not. She was a 15 year old girl at her homecoming dance. Something she should have come away from with pleasant memories of friendship and fun. Instead she will have years of therapy for the trauma of being raped by a bunch of people while others just stood around and watched. We know this was rape, because the girl was 15 and as such a minor unable to give consent.

I agree completely, but my point wasn't about the age of the victim or the rapists in the first place, but that of the bystanders.

This goes beyond "sex-ed", this goes to pure right and wrong. I do not care how drunk a girl gets, at no point in my thoughts does the concept "Huh, she is too fucked up to say no, so I guess that is a yes to me...and to him...and to this other guy too.

You and me both. But of how many others besides the two of us? Everyone? Definitely not. A vast majority? Maybe, but I'm skeptical.

A

lso you comments about her sobering up enough to "anger him" once again you are implying that it was ok to beat her when she realized what was happening and resisted. This "blame the victim" BS is why I think you just need to back up and keep your mouth shut as well, because you are also judging the situation when you know nothing at all about it.

Again, you missed the point. I never argued about weather the beating was justified or not (for the record, no it was not!), simply that it might not have occurred until just before the police turned up and was therefore not witnessed by most of the bystanders.

[menace]

Originally Posted by Sternenlied

Well, menace I am no position to make the call if you actually are an idiot or not - which is, by the way, unimportant in this case.

You have to admit however your post wasn't exactly neutral but rather presumptuous and offensive, something you must have realized (if not while writing, at least by now).

I'm sorry, but I have to disagree. My post can be seen as presumptuous only if you ignore all the maybes and question marks in it.
I was aware that voicing a different opinion would be controversial, but I hardly see anything I wrote as offensive. I was in fact taking extra care not to sound offensive.

What I was seeing was a lot of people who 'knew' exactly what happened and why. Now that I thought was presumptuous, even if everything in the article was taken at face value.

I understand what you were trying to do (assuming your intentions were honest) but I can most certainly see why people might be angered by it as well.

Well, I do not. I can definitely see why people would disagree, but getting angry about it?

Maybe it's me. Maybe I'm insensitive to others. I don't know... But half the times I speak my mind, someone gets pissed off.

Maybe everyone should take a step back, think and consider the others' opinion(s) without too much emotional involvement.

I just tried it. Apparently, without success.

[menace]

Originally Posted by Fae

I'd call it in for my worst enemy. Whether she was a nice person has nothing to do with it. Also, unlike a lot of people in the conversation. I grew up really close to there. I know the school and the neighborhood.

There are aspects of mob mentality that probably came into play there but there is also aspects of gang mentality that came into play. Some of the quotes I've been hearing from other kids around there are "boys there aren't taught to respect girls" and a lot about the "no snitching" mindset that's a big problems with the gangs in the Richmond and Oakland area.

Other responses to Menace. "I don't know how sex-ed is handled in California, but considering how conservative the US is, I'm not sure these boys got proper education on what a rape really is." Actually California is has a lot more sex ed than a lot of other states. Even beyond sex ed, it's pretty well taught that rape is anything after the word "no" and intoxication doesn't stop it from being rape. Also a lot of the participants were not just teenagers, they've listed people up to age 21 being arrested.

Personally I'd nail any participant or watcher who encouraged the event to the wall if I could. I keep thinking of friends who went to school there, of visiting that school when I was 15 (the same age as that girl) for a school event. This is more than a little close to home for me.

Now this is the kind of responses I was hoping for!

I can understand how unsettling this must be for you. If something like that hit close to home, I'd be upset too.

But strangely enough, what you say is slightly reassuring. I never considered the possibility this was gang territory. Knowing that, the 'I don't give a crap' attitude is even less a factor in people not intervening, and fear is the more likely reason.

I think anyone cheering on the perpetrators can actually be charged, minor or not.

[Lil-Mac]

Originally Posted by menace

I'm sorry, but I have to disagree. My post can be seen as presumptuous only if you ignore all the maybes and question marks in it.

Questions and maybe's such as the ones you raised are nothing more than thinly disguised attempts to interject a point of view, cloud an issue or raise controversy. It's a basic writer's trick taught in journalism 101. I know it and see it for what it is, most people here see it for what it is, and if you had a shred of human compassion you would acknowledge it and apoligize. We'll have to see if that happens.

Originally Posted by menace

I was aware that voicing a different opinion would be controversial, but I hardly see anything I wrote as offensive. I was in fact taking extra care not to sound offensive.

See the above statement about compassion as to why you dont see what you wrote as offensive. As to your differing opinion, you have every right to post a different opinion. You even have the right to post an opinion that shreds the basic tenents of right and wrong. We however have the right to call you on it.

Originally Posted by menace

What I was seeing was a lot of people who 'knew' exactly what happened and why. Now that I thought was presumptuous, even if everything in the article was taken at face value.

Menace, we do know exactly what happened.. A young girl was gangraped and beaten to within an inch of her life. The facts of the case are pretty much crystal on that point. Anything else is of secondary importance, if that.

As to why, why is any girl raped? Maybe they were ugly and couldnt get dates (fact because the pictures of the adults that attacked her have been released). Maybe they wanted to cop an easy nut, maybe they are just little gangbanger pussies and thats how they prove their manhood? The why's are endless, and unimportant. What counts, what matters are the actions. The actions of those that attacked her(the count is now up from 4 to 10 by the way) as well as the actions of those that stood by, watched and did nothing.

Originally Posted by Menace

Well, I do not. I can definitely see why people would disagree, but getting angry about it?

Maybe it's me. Maybe I'm insensitive to others. I don't know... But half the times I speak my mind, someone gets pissed off.

I just tried it. Apparently, without success.

So you dont take the article at face value... exactly which part? The part where she got raped? Perhaps the part where she was beaten? Maybe the part where people stood and watched? I am really curious, which part exactly do you think didnt happen?

What about the reports and articles that have been released since, what about the arrests, what about the statements from school officials that a horrible event took place on their watch, against someone they were supposed to protect and that they failed utterly? I guess you dont take any of that at face value either.

As to anger, we have every right to be angry. We have the right, the moral obligation even, to be angered by the fact that this happened at all. We have the right to be angry at her attackers, at those that stood by and did nothing. And we even have the right to be angry with you and your opinions.

As far as you being insensitive to others goes. I would say that you have aptly displayed that already.

Some of what you have said since your original post seems to refute, or at least diminish, the impression left by that post. However, some seems to reinforce it as well. To be honest I cant quite get a grip on where you are coming from here. Perhaps you are just trying to stir things up, if so, you've succeeded.

[Sternenlied]

Originally Posted by menace

I'm sorry, but I have to disagree. My post can be seen as presumptuous only if you ignore all the maybes and question marks in it.
I was aware that voicing a different opinion would be controversial, but I hardly see anything I wrote as offensive. I was in fact taking extra care not to sound offensive. (...)

Well, I still assume you didn't write anything offensive based on the sole purpose of being offensive to begin with.
However a person expecting to "piss someone off" (by their own perception) might actually start stating opinions with exactly that in mind, leading to an intended "insensitivity". Especially when you believe to know in advance what you're about to say will be "provocative".

Now, to explain (not to attack mind you everyone who might [un-]intentionally mistake my meaning):

It is presumptuous (eventuelly even offensive) to generally assume so many people at once lack the capability of telling the difference between an attack and a consensual act because their education might not have told them the difference by now - also by assuming the US American educational system (as well as the pupils) are that stupid.
I went to Catholic School for Girls - and thus had no sex-ed at all - but in modern times of media covering almost everything there is no way that many people had no idea whatsoever.

If she actually was not defending herself - eventually due to a state of intoxication - still every member of society who is not Amish (refering to general media again) should be able to tell something off is taking place.

Nobody at all at least expressing concern to the club owners, others, even the police because every single one lacked the knowledge and/or understanding to realize this? I can certainly see why so many people might take offense to such a statement.

Of course stating the possibility the victim might have been physically beaten at the end of the attack by her last assailant but putting a question mark behind it doesn't make it any more presumptuous than everybody else's posts.
It is a possibility of course but what is the probability of someone being completely unconscious for the entire duration of such an attack only to come about and fight for the last attacker?
It doesn't matter - exactly. In this case (see above) the impression of a regular sex act couldn't have been given.

Your distinction between a) "a girl being raped" and b) "a drunk slut being nailed" is highly offensive. I'll assume this wasn't your intent but reducing the possibilities to a drunk teenager (calling her a slut doesn't make it any less offensive but then again - maybe that's your education) and a rape victim is not just offensive but repulsive.

It is certainly true that many studies have shown people aren't very inclined to help a stranger when there might be danger for their own personal safety. Why would that be an excuse however? Simply because people don't like to help a stranger doesn't make not doing so when someone is being attacked accceptable in any way. Why would that have to be considered?

Why would it have to say anywhere the victim was a nice person? Why even bring that up when you do not want to imply she might have deserved it or at least to imply she might not have deserved people coming to her help? What is it you're saying? Only nice people we know deserve help?
Do you really not see why some members might be offended or angered by such a statement?

Like I said in the first place - I do appreciate people who actually try to bring a neutral and more differentiated point of view into a discussion, highlighting some possibilities that might have been forgotten.
The way you did it however was misguided - that's where you failed and that's why you failed.

If you indeed "piss people off" half the time you voice your opinion you might want to think about that. Individuality and standing up for one's mind is sound, important even, but sometimes it's not the entire world who is wrong and we might have to reevaluate our ways.

[pervipete]

Originally Posted by menace

Do you really mean what you say about helping someone you hate or do you only think that you would do it? We all like to think of ourselves as good people, but do we really live up to our self image?

Anyone is a hero on talk, but when when the chips really fall, few put their money where their mouth is.

I think you are the one who needs to re-read others posts, not Lil-Mac, I said

I hope to god that if I was in the situation of witnessing a crime like this, I would do all I could to stop it, bring the bastards to justice, and help the victim, regardless of whether I knew or liked the person being attacked.

This was not to say that I would, but that I hope I would have the balls to do this.

A little known fact about me, about 20 years ago I went as a witness against my manager in a sexual harrasment case, this cost me, I lost freinds and had to find a new job over it, and do you know what, I would do the same thing tomorrow if I had too.

[pervipete]

Now, with out knowing how savage the initial attack was, I can see that a possibiity exists for the first rape to be seen as boy fucking his girlfriend, of course its about a one in a hundred, but I will concede that.

What I can't see is that, unless the girl got up and implicitly said something along the lines of "ok boys, who's next?" how the next ten assualts could be seen as anything other than rape.

[menace]

Originally Posted by pervipete

I think you are the one who needs to re-read others posts, not Lil-Mac, I said



This was not to say that I would, but that I hope I would have the balls to do this.

Oh, missed that, sorry. In my defense, I had a lot of reading to do.

[menace]

Originally Posted by Lil-Mac

Questions and maybe's such as the ones you raised are nothing more than thinly disguised attempts to interject a point of view, cloud an issue or raise controversy. It's a basic writer's trick taught in journalism 101. I know it and see it for what it is, most people here see it for what it is, and if you had a shred of human compassion you would acknowledge it and apoligize. We'll have to see if that happens.

That's what you see. What I see is questions everyone should ask themselves before passing judgment. You obviously are from the school of thought that hangs everyone immediately and ascertains the blame later.

See the above statement about compassion as to why you dont see what you wrote as offensive. As to your differing opinion, you have every right to post a different opinion. You even have the right to post an opinion that shreds the basic tenents of right and wrong. We however have the right to call you on it.

OK, but would you mind putting down the tomahawk and losing the swear words while you're at it?

Menace, we do know exactly what happened.. A young girl was gangraped and beaten to within an inch of her life. The facts of the case are pretty much crystal on that point. Anything else is of secondary importance, if that.

As to why, why is any girl raped? Maybe they were ugly and couldnt get dates (fact because the pictures of the adults that attacked her have been released). Maybe they wanted to cop an easy nut, maybe they are just little gangbanger pussies and thats how they prove their manhood? The why's are endless, and unimportant. What counts, what matters are the actions. The actions of those that attacked her(the count is now up from 4 to 10 by the way) as well as the actions of those that stood by, watched and did nothing.

I don't care about the attackers. They did what they did because they are self serving assholes who are going to have them drilled inside, hopefully.

What I'm discussing is the very thing that made this event news worthy in the first place and what the focus of the discussion was on before the bashfest started: the bystanders.

Everyone was playing the same fiddle of how insensitive those people were, how no one in the society gives a crap and that's why it's all going to hell. While that most probably holds true for some witnesses, it doesn't necessarily hold true for all of them.

So you dont take the article at face value... exactly which part? The part where she got raped? Perhaps the part where she was beaten? Maybe the part where people stood and watched? I am really curious, which part exactly do you think didnt happen?

What about the reports and articles that have been released since, what about the arrests, what about the statements from school officials that a horrible event took place on their watch, against someone they were supposed to protect and that they failed utterly? I guess you dont take any of that at face value either.

I never saw or read any of those reports since I don't live in America.
I only had the one linked here, plus the feed from the members. For all I knew at the start, the club in question might not even exist! Reporters lie quite often, you know, and that's hardly a new phenomenon.

As to anger, we have every right to be angry. We have the right, the moral obligation even, to be angered by the fact that this happened at all. We have the right to be angry at her attackers, at those that stood by and did nothing. And we even have the right to be angry with you and your opinions.

As far as you being insensitive to others goes. I would say that you have aptly displayed that already.

Some of what you have said since your original post seems to refute, or at least diminish, the impression left by that post. However, some seems to reinforce it as well. To be honest I cant quite get a grip on where you are coming from here. Perhaps you are just trying to stir things up, if so, you've succeeded.