SivaGanesha

Yes but it is certainly giving them permission to drive once they get their licenses. The message re drinking is a bit easier to send because kids in driver's ed are usually about 15-16--old enough to drive but well short of the drinking age (21). The focus in driver's ed shouldn't be on teaching them to drink responsibly--it should be on teaching them to drive responsibly. The message re drinking in driver's ed should be that drinking at all at that age is illegal but the penalties will get worse still if you drink and drive (not just driving drunk--driving with even small amounts of BAC is a DUI at that age). In sex ed you need to be teaching people how to approach sex responsibly. High school students--especially towards the end of high school--are either at or are approaching the age of consent. It is not like drinking where it can be brushed off as "well it is illegal anyways at your age"--for seniors in high school sex is either already legal or soon will be. Parts of sex ed--the parts about pregnancy, STD's, and birth control--are basically just a biology lesson. That is the easy part of the conversation--although still probably awkward for a lot of parents. But if you want to teach kids what rape is--and have it be a real educational experience as opposed to just citing slogans like "no means no"--you need to have a detailed conversation with kids about exactly what consent is. You can't do that unless you give examples of both when "no means no" and when yes does, in fact, mean yes. If you just say "no means no" without teaching young people to correctly identify situations in which consent has, in fact, been given it will just come across as an anti-sex message which isn't likely to be persuasive. For younger kids--those who are well below the age of consent--a message that it is illegal at that age (they are too young to legally consent and sex should only be when both partners consent) and will be putting either themselves or their partners at great legal risk should also be conveyed. But when someone is at or near the age of consent you do need to start talking about how to approach it responsibly. You also need to teach kids who may be below the age of consent--or possibly have partners below the age of consent--exactly what the laws are on consent in their jurisdiction. That includes not only describing the situations in which sex is illegal but also the situations when it is legal. If you don't do that the message won't be credible. For example, some jurisdictions have a general age of consent of 18 but make a "close in age" exception for 14 or 16 year olds--meaning that it is legal to have sex at a lower age with peers of about the same age. Those details have to be conveyed in sex ed even if the result may be that some 14 or 16 year olds feel empowered to have sex (consenting, of course) with peers because it is now legal. Sometimes certain acts are legal for the younger group while others (like full intercourse) are not. Again--those details have to be conveyed. "It's hard to have fun at 4-way unless your whole team gets down to the ground safely to do it again!"--Northern California Skydiving League re USPA Safety Day, March 8, 2014

People talk about how guns are useful in self defense. But how come in all of these mass shooting scenarios--of which Orlando is the latest and most deadly but hardly the first--there never seems to be a case where the gunman is stopped by someone else (except law enforcement) with a gun? We never seem to hear the following scenario: a gunman opened fire in a public place. He killed two people, but an armed civilian member of the NRA standing nearby stopped the carnage by shooting him dead. Had it not been for the quick action of this armed citizen, the death toll would surely have been far higher. If guns are so useful for self defense, how come this alternative scenario never seems to play out? These gunmen often end up getting shot dead, but usually only by either the police or by their own hands. "It's hard to have fun at 4-way unless your whole team gets down to the ground safely to do it again!"--Northern California Skydiving League re USPA Safety Day, March 8, 2014

This part I DO agree with. But the reason why that education may not be happening in a lot of cases isn't because of a rape culture. It is because too often adults are uncomfortable discussing sexual matters with their teenage children. They don't like to even think about the idea of their kids having sex at all so they aren't willing to entertain the idea of their kids seeking consent before having sex. The problem isn't that parents are pro-rape. The problem is that parents are anti-sex. If you have a school assembly before a prom where you tell kids that sex must be only with the consent of one's partner, then you are tacitly giving permission to the kids to have sex if they DO have the consent of a willing partner. What parent wants to hear that their daughters or sons are exposed to such a message? That's the problem. To teach kids the difference between rape and sex you need to be willing to talk about both rape and sex. Too many parents and other adults are uncomfortable having such a conversation with kids. "It's hard to have fun at 4-way unless your whole team gets down to the ground safely to do it again!"--Northern California Skydiving League re USPA Safety Day, March 8, 2014

What precisely has he been allowed to keep that the courts had the power to take away? Whether he leaves jail in 6 months or 8 years he will leave jail with nothing. "It's hard to have fun at 4-way unless your whole team gets down to the ground safely to do it again!"--Northern California Skydiving League re USPA Safety Day, March 8, 2014

Can you provide a link to an example of another judge condemning this decision? I'm not saying you are wrong but I need to see an example because I would be VERY surprised to see a judge commenting on a case in another courtroom that is still before the courts--as this case is because the conviction has been appealed. One of the reasons why I've formed the opinion that I've formed in this case is because the legal system seems to largely feel that the judge's decision--although disappointing--was lawful and made after proper consideration of the facts involved. If the legal system is generally supporting the judge's right to do what he did, then the correct remedy isn't to remove the judge but to toughen up the laws. If the judge's decision was so far out of line that even other sitting judges are abandoning the usual protocol and speaking out against him, then that might change my own opinion. But I'd need to see a link to such an example. So far I haven't seen what you are referring to. "It's hard to have fun at 4-way unless your whole team gets down to the ground safely to do it again!"--Northern California Skydiving League re USPA Safety Day, March 8, 2014

What positive options is Justin Trudeau offering for Canada's angry young men? I respect his feminist viewpoint. But what does he offer for Canada's angry young MEN? The only positive suggestion you mentioned is to compete in sports. That has some value but only a small, small number will ever become professional athletes. What other options are available? "It's hard to have fun at 4-way unless your whole team gets down to the ground safely to do it again!"--Northern California Skydiving League re USPA Safety Day, March 8, 2014

Thank you for drawing my attention to the Bloomingdale's and Budweiser ads. I had not previously been aware of those ads so I've learned something from your post. But the quick cultural response to those ads appears to have been one of quick rejection. I'm still having trouble seeing where the rape culture is here. I remain deeply disturbed by the public treatment of the judge here. It seems to me that just as it is inappropriate to disrespect a greenie on dz.com it is inappropriate to disrespect a judge in the larger society. He's been told by a jury of his peers what rape is. And he still doesn't get it. I'm not sure what form of education would work. As for what I myself believe I actually do favor harsh punishment. I had thought lifetime sex offender would be sufficient punishment. If others disagree I am willing to listen. I am completely willing to consider harsher punishments. But disrespecting a judge in his own courtroom--as happened this week with the prospective jurors who refused to serve under Judge Persky--is definitely beyond the pale. You can disrespect ME--I am neither a judge nor a greenie--but disrespecting the right of a judge to lay down the law in his own courtroom is way out of line. "It's hard to have fun at 4-way unless your whole team gets down to the ground safely to do it again!"--Northern California Skydiving League re USPA Safety Day, March 8, 2014

Where is the "benefit of the doubt"? Isn't the act equally evil regardless of whether it was a terrorist act in support of ISIS or a hate crime targeting gays and lesbians? I suspect it was a little of both. We seem to be dealing with a new generation of terrorists who weren't necessarily trained abroad and don't necessarily have close daily ties to ISIS--but who are nevertheless sympathetic to ISIS. I suspect this terrorist was sympathetic to ISIS but also brought a lot of his own personal hatreds to the crime as well. "It's hard to have fun at 4-way unless your whole team gets down to the ground safely to do it again!"--Northern California Skydiving League re USPA Safety Day, March 8, 2014

It's been unanimous in this thread. The support for Turner has been pretty rare. Yes there are a few examples--his parents, a few of his old friends, and a few rare comments online from strangers. I personally have only seen one such comment anywhere--from someone who questioned whether she consented. So I must concede that Turner enjoys very small, very isolated pockets of support. But compare Turner's miniscule support with the million-plus signatures attacking not only Turner but the judge and I find it very hard to use the term "rape culture". I've just read this list. Many of these examples are things that I recall as being common during my youth but have become rare these days as the general societal attitudes have changed. But I wanted to focus on one thing in particular on this list that I think is especially unhelpful in stopping rape as it currently exists (and remember--I'm not denying that rape still exists and is tragic--I deny only that there is a "rape culture" supporting it): 15. Sexual assault prevention education programs that focus on women being told to take measures to prevent rape instead of men being told not to rape. Telling men not to rape would work if there were indeed a "rape culture" supporting rapists because you need to change that culture. In fact I think this advice HAS worked in the past and is a big part of the reason why there is no longer a "rape culture"--and this is also why, although any rape is tragic and is one too many, rates of sexual assault have in fact been dropping over the years. This is not good advice, however, for stopping rape as it currently exists in 2016. Telling Brock Turner not to rape would not have helped because he did not believe that he is a rapist. He STILL does not believe that he is a rapist. If you read his so-called apology you will see that it is even more offensive than his father's statement. Brock Turner apologizes repeatedly and profusely--but ONLY for drinking too much and engaging in "sexually promiscuous" behavior. He still sees himself only as a heavy drinker and a "sexually promiscuous" guy--not as a rapist. Telling a guy like that not to rape just isn't going to help IMHO. And if it is also unacceptable to focus on programs helping women to prevent rape because that is seen as "victim blaming"--well that is why I find that above piece of advice really unhelpful in actually stopping rape as it currently exists. "It's hard to have fun at 4-way unless your whole team gets down to the ground safely to do it again!"--Northern California Skydiving League re USPA Safety Day, March 8, 2014

Of course you are right in the sense I was simply stating my own opinion and the State of California does disagree. I personally consider the lifetime sex offender registration to be by far--it isn't even close--the more serious punishment. It is far more serious than even an 8 year prison term. If I were charged (fairly or unfairly) with a crime and were given a choice between sex offender registration and 8 years of incarceration (but no registration afterwards), the decision would be a no brainer for me: I'd pick the straight sentence of 8 years without the registration. My decision would be even easier if I were still 20 years old and could look forward to being released while still relatively young. My understanding is that defense attorneys are aware that the sex offender registration, not the prison term, is the real punishment in such cases and try to negotiate plea bargains that don't require sex offender registration. If I had to guess (we may never know for sure), I'd guess that the reason why the Turner case went to trial (most cases are settled in plea bargains) is that the defense wanted a plea bargain with prison time but no sex offender registration afterwards--and the prosecution wouldn't do it. The paperwork--excerpts of which at least have been posted online--that the judge considered in agreeing to a sentence of lifetime sex offender registration but with minimal jail time clearly shows that the probation officer considered the sex offender registration to be a very serious punishment. The judge was apparently persuaded by this argument. One can disagree with the actual sentence but the intent behind the sentence wasn't to go easy on a rapist--it was to punish him harshly. There is no culture of support for this guy. I don't know if you are familiar with the Karla Homolka case in Canada a number of years ago--a Canadian woman who participated with her husband in many rapes and at least three rape-murders. The public was rightfully outraged that she got only 12 years but they should have been even more outraged that she was able to negotiate a plea bargain that allowed her to avoid sex offender registration after release. Without the sex offender registration, she is now allowed to mix and mingle at school events despite having participated in multiple rape-murders of schoolgirls. That is the real outrage--not just the length of her sentence. But all that is only my own opinion. I am not disputing that others have the right to a different opinion. I am not really interested in debating exactly how harsh his penalty should be--I am simply taking note of the fact that people disagree on that as they always will. What I AM interested in debating is whether--when everyone agrees that Turner should be punished and the only question is exactly how harshly--we can call it a rape culture. "It's hard to have fun at 4-way unless your whole team gets down to the ground safely to do it again!"--Northern California Skydiving League re USPA Safety Day, March 8, 2014

No one--except for those close to the perp like the father and a few friends--is dismissing that. No one. That is why I say there is no "rape culture" involved in this case. Outside of a tiny inner circle surrounding the perp, there is unanimous support of the victim and condemnation of the rapist. The culture is virtually unanimously anti-rape. He scarred this woman for life. Everyone agrees with that. That is why I say a punishment branding him for life--namely the sex offender registration--actually fits the crime very well. I can't speak for AndyBoyd but I would see the sex offender registration requirement as something the probation officer and the judge may have felt was sufficient punishment with just a little jail time added on. People are free to disagree and many, many apparently do but there is no justification for taking the judge's job away. The judge is generally respected, a former prosecutor specifically of sex offenders, and not generally seen as soft on crime. He is not one to wink at rape culture. Incidentally the term "rape culture" appears to come from a 1976 feminist film of the same name. I am old enough to remember 1976 and, yes, attitudes were very different then. Rape culture was very real in 1976. If the same incident had happened in 1976, the cultural response would have been very different. His frat brothers would probably have cheered him on, cruel jokes would have been told about the victim, and if she'd dared to press charges, the charges would have been laughed off as "boys will be boys" and the judge would have wished him well in the Olympics. Plus the victim would have been blamed because of her own drinking whereas today her passing out is--correctly--understood to mean she is no longer able to consent. But it is now 40 years later and cultural attitudes towards sexual assault are very different. There are still many individual rapists and even one rape is one too many. But there is no cultural support for rape these days. Some people are using language--"rape culture"--that fit the world of 40 or 50 years ago but no longer fits. This attack--and others like it--needs to be understood as act of a vile solitary rapist--not as something society is somehow supporting because society has been unanimous in condemning it. I am also not against feminism. Feminism still has a huge role to play in 2016. But it needs to address the imbalances in gender relations as they exist today in 2016, not as existed back in 1976. This attack, for example, took place in the heart of Silicon Valley and the hi tech industry remains incredibly male dominated. In fact it has probably become even more male dominated in the last 30-40 years. Feminist thinking has a big role to play in helping us to understand why. But sometimes feminist language seems to describe the world as it existed 40 years ago and no longer quite fits the current situation. "It's hard to have fun at 4-way unless your whole team gets down to the ground safely to do it again!"--Northern California Skydiving League re USPA Safety Day, March 8, 2014

And then --at least in this case --after figuring out what he had to lose they took away everything he could possibly lose. Everything of value in his life was taken from him. And the rapist deserved that absolutely. But the idea that society's response here is somehow insufficient is also absolutely abhorrent. Even the prosecutor agreed that the judge's sentence on the jail term was--although disappointing --absolutely legal. And I see that I'm going to be screwed--at least in your eyes--no matter what I say regarding the victim. If I don't focus on her then I'm accused of ignoring her. If I do I'm accused of blaming. Neither response is fair to me. I do not claim to know how common "rape culture" is in general. I claim only that culturally we did right by this particular victim. The victim herself said she didn't want the defendant to rot in prison. The probation officer apparently interpreted this to mean a desire for a shorter sentence than perhaps she intended. But there was no wilful attempt to do wrong by the victim. "It's hard to have fun at 4-way unless your whole team gets down to the ground safely to do it again!"--Northern California Skydiving League re USPA Safety Day, March 8, 2014

Regarding the victim, I'll admit that I hadn't read her full impact statement until now, though I'd read excerpts. I have now read it in full. In it she notes that this case should have been an opportunity to: "send a strong cultural message that sexual assault is against the law regardless of social class." I feel that such a cultural signal has indeed been sent here. That's why I'm a bit outraged myself. I feel that the cultural signal being requested has indeed been sent and yet there are still calls to lynch the judge and everyone Turner ever knew. (I guess they can't lynch Turner himself because he is currently incarcerated however briefly.) Something about that doesn't sit right with me. Turner has been punished in multiple ways for life. Some are specific to his social status: a lifetime ban from Stanford and swimming. The lifetime sex offender registry is a more general penalty that applies to sex offenders of all social groups. Yes the jail part of the sentence turned out to be less than she hoped for. But the overall message being sent here is clearly that what he did is against the law. It is hard for me to see how it could be interpreted any other way. I was disturbed to read though that even after she regained consciousness the victim was forced to submit to medical treatment it is not clear she consented to. "It's hard to have fun at 4-way unless your whole team gets down to the ground safely to do it again!"--Northern California Skydiving League re USPA Safety Day, March 8, 2014

As I said before, Tyson didn't lose everything: he got to keep his main potential tool (his boxing) for rebuilding his life. Turner has lost everything AND has to register as a sex offender for life. A strong argument can certainly be made that he should have been punished even more severely but I'm having trouble with the idea that he has been treated so leniently that someone (like the judge) needs to lose their job over it. "It's hard to have fun at 4-way unless your whole team gets down to the ground safely to do it again!"--Northern California Skydiving League re USPA Safety Day, March 8, 2014

I won't dispute that having a good attorney helps. The attorney here did seem to manage to find a loophole in the law which allowed Turner to bypass what would have ordinarily been at least a 2 year minimum sentence for his crimes--hence the low jail component to the sentence. I won't dispute that sometimes money talks but rapists seem increasingly reviled by rich and poor alike. This case also shows the limits to what a good attorney can do too, though. It is my understanding that in such cases, an attorney--understanding the profound limitations that sex offender registration involves--will try to negotiate a plea bargain where the person agrees to serve some prison time on a non-sex crime so they avoid sex offender registration when they get out. Turner's attorneys apparently weren't able to negotiate such a plea bargain showing--again--that there is no sympathy for rapists when the evidence is strong. "It's hard to have fun at 4-way unless your whole team gets down to the ground safely to do it again!"--Northern California Skydiving League re USPA Safety Day, March 8, 2014

I would compare Turner more with Mike Tyson. Tyson--also convicted of a sex crime--served more time in prison than Turner will but was also allowed to resume his boxing career after his prison term. Turner will--at least as I understand it--never again be able to swim competitively again. I would argue that Turner has been punished more harshly than Tyson despite the fact that the jail component of his punishment is a bit lighter. And Turner deserves to be punished harshly. I'm just having a hard time seeing where this "rape culture" that is supposedly supporting him comes in. "It's hard to have fun at 4-way unless your whole team gets down to the ground safely to do it again!"--Northern California Skydiving League re USPA Safety Day, March 8, 2014

He got a life sentence--a life sentence requiring to register, for life, as a sex offender. Some people seem very fixated on the prison component of his sentence and they aren't seeing the full picture. Time spent incarcerated is only one component of the sentencing process. You need to look at the whole picture. The incarceration part of this sentence was fairly lenient but the sex offender registration part is not so lenient--the overall message being sent to this lowlife is that society takes an extremely dim view of his actions. Some people--not everyone to be sure--seem to be under the impression that a lifetime of sex offender registration is somehow just a slap on the wrist. It is not. Turner will never again be a completely free man even if his time physically behind bars is shorter than some would like. And he does not deserve to be a free man. But the idea that the judge was somehow winking at this behavior by a fellow Stanford athlete is not an accurate depiction of the sentence he received. "It's hard to have fun at 4-way unless your whole team gets down to the ground safely to do it again!"--Northern California Skydiving League re USPA Safety Day, March 8, 2014

The more people say "fuck that guy" the more it proves my point. This guy has essentially zero cultural support outside of a tiny circle of family and close friends. This guy is a solitary, cowardly rapist who enjoys no support whatsoever from the wider culture. This wasn't a "The Accused" type scenario where he attacked a woman in front of a cheering crowd of frat brothers. No--he attacked this woman in an isolated area of the campus where he thought he wouldn't be seen because he knew--despite his claims to be drunk himself--that what he was doing was shameful and he was ashamed to be seen doing what he was doing. I'm just not seeing where there was a "rape culture" that supported this guy. "It's hard to have fun at 4-way unless your whole team gets down to the ground safely to do it again!"--Northern California Skydiving League re USPA Safety Day, March 8, 2014

I agree with the outrage against the father and also agree that the victim's statement was well written/spoken and extremely eloquent. I mainly feel that the outrage against the judge is what is very misplaced here. Judges normally are expected to work within the sentencing guidelines as presented by probation officers who recommend a particular sentence. Occasionally an argument can be made for "upward departure" and maybe the judge should have exercised such discretion in this case--but I don't feel he deserves to lose his job simply for following the recommendation of the probation officer. Instead he should learn from the anger and perhaps go with harsher penalties in the future. For Brock Turner I'd agree with a harsher penalty. For the judge I feel losing his job is too harsh a penalty. "It's hard to have fun at 4-way unless your whole team gets down to the ground safely to do it again!"--Northern California Skydiving League re USPA Safety Day, March 8, 2014

He was never at risk for those penalties because his actions didn't meet the legal definition of rape in California. He has been punished based on the crime he was actually convicted of. You can argue that he should have been punished more harshly but arguing that he hasn't been punished at all isn't a defensible position IMHO. "It's hard to have fun at 4-way unless your whole team gets down to the ground safely to do it again!"--Northern California Skydiving League re USPA Safety Day, March 8, 2014

A highly publicized sexual assault on the Stanford campus has been in the news recently. A student, Brock Turner, assaulted a woman who was not a student but was a guest at a frat party and there has been outrage that he got just six months in jail: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/brock-turner-judge-aaron-persky_us_57567e21e4b0ca5c7b4fee75 Many commentators are referring to this as an example of "rape culture": http://www.pri.org/stories/2016-06-08/disappointed-not-surprised-stanford-and-american-rape-culture I'm struggling to see where the "rape culture" is in this case. Yes, the judge might have handed down a harsher punishment in the jail/prison component of the sentence and reasonable people can certainly criticize the judge for that. But absolutely nothing about the cultural response to this case suggests that there is anything remotely acceptable about rape. Quite the contrary the cultural response has been unanimously to condemn Turner's act as the vile act that it was: Two fellow students passing by immediately intervened physically to stop the act. Authorities were called and Turner was physically restrained until he could be arrested. Stanford within a few days permanently barred Turner from campus and would have formally expelled him had he not first withdrew--and he deserved to be kicked out of Stanford. Turner is permanently barred from swimming competitively ever again--nor does he deserve to ever swim competitively again. Charges were pressed and a jury convicted Turner--as he deserved. Turner faces a lifetime of registration as a sex offender and many career options will be permanently closed to him as a result--and he deserves such a punishment. And--yes--the judge may have been a bit too lenient when it came to the jail part of the punishment and people may be right in criticizing the judge for not imposing a multi-year term of imprisonment. But even a six month sentence is a cultural rebuke. We don't send people to jail even for six months unless we want to send the message that their behavior is culturally unacceptable. And the general cultural response has been that the judge's sentence was too lenient. This sex offender has definitely been punished and he deserves to be. But I'm not seeing where the "rape culture" comes into play here. Nothing about the cultural response to his attack--starting with the passersby who immediately intervened to stop the attack--would seem to send a message other than that rape is a vile, unacceptable act that has no place in a civilized culture. I do not deny that there have been disturbing reports in the news in recent years of sexual assaults where things have played out in a different way--where people have cheered attackers on, recorded videos of the attacks, and posted those videos on the web in an apparent celebration of the assault. I do not deny that in such cases "rape culture" may have come into play. But none of that dynamic seems to be in play in the Turner case. Society acted very firmly to stop Turner from the get go. What am I missing here? Where is the "rape culture" that is said to have supported Turner's actions? To me this case should be held up as an example of the right way to stop a rapist--not as an example of "rape culture". Again--what am I missing? "It's hard to have fun at 4-way unless your whole team gets down to the ground safely to do it again!"--Northern California Skydiving League re USPA Safety Day, March 8, 2014

"It's hard to have fun at 4-way unless your whole team gets down to the ground safely to do it again!"--Northern California Skydiving League re USPA Safety Day, March 8, 2014

Was just curious how folks feel about Isabel Peron. She was the president of Argentina and was deposed 40 years ago today. She was the first female president of any country in the Western hemisphere. Our current president Mr. Obama is currently on a state visit to Argentina. She got her political start by supporting her husband's presidency--just like a current candidate here in America. Don't get me wrong--I love Evita--but Isabel Peron is a more controversial figure. "It's hard to have fun at 4-way unless your whole team gets down to the ground safely to do it again!"--Northern California Skydiving League re USPA Safety Day, March 8, 2014

Belgium is hurting today because of Hillary's decision to support the Iraq war. Nor do I think Donald would be any better. I will be looking beyond the frontrunners when it comes to whom to support in the primaries. "It's hard to have fun at 4-way unless your whole team gets down to the ground safely to do it again!"--Northern California Skydiving League re USPA Safety Day, March 8, 2014

Yes this is what I was looking to find out--thanks. I recall that I was asked to sign something committing to this at the caucus in 2012--but I don't remember the exact wording and I couldn't find it on either party's website. Plus additionally I believe there is some kind of a party declaration that must be signed for the primary too but I couldn't find that either on any of the websites. Because one doesn't register in advance in WA for a specific party it is a bit harder to know in WA than in some states how a 'Democrat' or 'Republican' is defined. As I understand it, on the GOP side the caucus process still decides who the people will be to serve as delegates but they have to pledge to vote in accordance with the primary results. Because the primary is now after the GOP state convention (by a few days) I wonder if some delegates will balk at honoring those primary results if the results are not to their liking. I could definitely see the system as it has turned out producing at least a few faithless delegates on the GOP side. "It's hard to have fun at 4-way unless your whole team gets down to the ground safely to do it again!"--Northern California Skydiving League re USPA Safety Day, March 8, 2014