Riley brings gang-rape survivor Brenda Tracy to Nebraska

Are there cases of serious misjudgment and cover ups? Yes. But there are also serious cases of witch hunts and miscarriages of justice.

This article lays out examples on both sides. I was actually really surprised to read the details about Chumera, who I assumed to be guilty based on news at the time. And of course there's the duke lacrosse guys.

http://espn.go.com/espn/commentary/news/story?page=munson/100401

We should always strive to (a) improve the male culture, and (b) vigorously prosecute wrong doers, including wealthy or influential ones.

But we shouldn't kill due process in the meantime.

 
Guy Chamberlin said:
cm husker said:
I've read the details. And as I said, frat guys usually get the same punishments.

You can easily argue that the punishments across the board are too lenient (though I'd prefer we not throw due process out with the bath water).

But I have yet to see any case where someone can say, for example, "student A did the same thing Winston did and received a greater punishment because he wasn't an athlete."

If you have that evidence then you can prove special treatment.
Click to expand...
If Joe Frat steals a lobster, hardly anyone on Earth will care.

If Heisman Trophy candidate Jameis Winston steals a lobster, it's news.

That's more a function of the news than the legal system, where the court of public opinion may affect the star athlete more than any criminal charge.

It's still a bit of a stretch to think star athletes don't get special treatment. Any more than believing rich people don't get special treatment.
Click to expand...
I actually think the lobster one is a good example of preferential treatment, but not in terms of anti-punishment/anti-prosecution.

From people I know close to that situation, there was a tacit approval that athletes could help themselves to food - sanctioned shoplifting. It's why he was so brazen in just picking it up and trying to walk out with it. That's wrong in and of itself (and illustrates why the NCAA is kind of a joke), but I don't think he was punished less because he was an athlete (I realize you're not arguing that).

 
cm husker said:
Are there cases of serious misjudgment and cover ups? Yes. But there are also serious cases of witch hunts and miscarriages of justice.

This article lays out examples on both sides. I was actually really surprised to read the details about Chumera, who I assumed to be guilty based on news at the time. And of course there's the duke lacrosse guys.

http://espn.go.com/espn/commentary/news/story?page=munson/100401

We should always strive to (a) improve the male culture, and (b) vigorously prosecute wrong doers, including wealthy or influential ones.

But we shouldn't kill due process in the meantime.
Click to expand...
None of that is the point I was arguing, cm. You suggested that there weren't examples of special treatment out there and that is inaccurate.

I actually agree with you about not killing due process, and I agree with improving the male culture.

But, my overall point still stands - there is a reason people are targeting college campuses, particularly young male athletes, in the fight against sexual assaults.

A poor analogy, but bear with me - "cancer" is a terrible thing, but there are a lot of benefits and causes out there targeting specific types of cancer. All of them are worthy of attention, but just because we donate to one or focus on one does not mean we don't care about the problem of "cancer" itself.

 
I suggested that there isn't systemic preferential treatment in favor of athletes, and for as much as it does happen, wrongful accusations and overzealous prosecutions occur on the other side of the equation.

I don't think we are that far apart, enhance. I was just trying to balance the calls for more punishments with some consideration from the accused' points of view.

Even in this Oregon state case, which sounds awful on a number of levels, I'm not sure anyone should have been punished more than they were based on the actions at the time.

However, there is real value in removing stigmas associated with pressing these accusations, and there's also real value in understanding sometimes accusers become accusers out of embarrassment or to cover up infidelity - it unfortunately does happen and is a big reason why people are skeptical at times.

 
cm husker said:
I'm all for this type of message, but it needs to be distributed much more broadly than to male athletes.

Using football as an example, there are about 250 athletes that go through a program every 4 years. Even if you had 5 of them in trouble during that time, that's a 2% offender rate. I'd bet that's no higher than (and may be lower than) the offending rate of 18-25 year old men in general.

My only point, which isn't to diminish importance of this issue, is that I don't think we should be painting football players as predators - which, unfortunately, is a view held by many.
Click to expand...
On the one hand, if I was a football player who was incapable of committing sexual assault, I might feel a little offended at being singled out on this. They're making the assumption that I need to hear it.

On the other hand... you're not correct on your bet. There have been many, many studies that show that male athletes are much more likely to commit rape than male non-athletes. This isn't just stemming from accusations to the police/trials/all that. There have also been studies which included talks with counselors, where charges weren't brought. (The reason I bring that up is one could argue that athletes are accused more often because their accusers see the potential for more money).

One study I saw showed that 3% of the college population in 1995 was athletes and they committed 19% of the rapes.

Anyway, here's a study. Didn't read the whole thing. It's long. http://www.northeastern.edu/sportinsociety/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/ViolenceByMaleAthletes.pdf

Examining the relationship between group membership and the proclivity for rape supportive attitudes, Boeringer (1999) surveyed 113 fraternity members, 52 athletes, and a control group of 312 males from a larger southwest university. Boeringer found that students who are members of a fraternity or an athletic team were more likely to have attitudes that support rape. The author suggested that hyper - masculine peer influence might reinforce hostile attitudes towards women.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
ColoradoHusk said:
Is it wrong that I think that Brenda Tracey is kinda hot?
Click to expand...
survivor1.gif


 
Glad to see Riley try rectify his part in this. Must be a huge weight off her shoulders. She's an incredible person.

 
I read the article in the Tulsa paper yesterday. I told my wife afterwards that I came away even more impressed by MR and am proud that he is our coach and am proud of the Husker program for taking this step. I hope it can be an example to other programs and I also hope some of those parents of top recruits take notice - it isn't all about reputation on the field but the reputation you build into the student athletes that matter. Take care of these important issues and hopefully the other wins follow. But wins on the fields minus a good reputation mean nothing - ask Baylor how they feel about their football team now.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top