i second this. This is a complete waste of resources. This is a situation that needed to be handled by the school and the parents. Bullies beating up the geeks everyday (i've seen some nasty bruises in my time), doesn't even get a "shame on you", and here is this guy getting arrested for non-physical offensive statements...EcksTeaSea said:This is the stupidest thing in the world. Arresting someone for things they posted? What a great use of money and time. Since when is talking trash about people a serious offense? I am amazed that they actually arrested him, I should be in jail as well then.
Actually that is a crime. Look it up. Ranking/nick naming ANYONE (which is a personal opinion). Then posting and/or passing out his personal opinion, (in a public forum) that will directly impact how others are perceived publicly. THAT IS SLANDER and goes against a person's civil liberties. This situation would be NO DIFFERENT if he had said "Jews" or "Blacks". But I guess since it's about "Women" it's ok, then?Father Time said:Ranking girls based on how hot they are (which is subjective) is not slander or any kind of crime.Hive Mind said:The student printed th list out and handed it out to everyone in the school, before then parading around shouting sexist remarks. He committed slander. A crime.O maestre said:i see no crime here... what the hell happened to freedom of speach the internet has so much more bile than this hormonal teenagers insignificant list. ridiculous...
The first requirement for something to be slander is that it not be opinion. This fails that test instantly.
I never said girls like assholes, I put that in quotes to show that it is what people say. Girls normally like guys with confidence, assholes usually show a lot of confidence, therefore people assume that when the girl likes the confident asshole, they like the asshole part of him rather than the confidence part.zeldagirl said:I'm sorry, but your entire post is made up of a lot of relationship myths. Some girls like assholes, others (I would say almost all that I know) don't. Some guys like women who don't "sleep around." Guess what - others DO! Some men don't have this archaic notion that women have to be pure, untouched virgins in order to want to date them/fall in love with them/marry them/etc. These concepts are not the only precursors to attraction, and they aren't necessarily make-or-break qualities, either.
Yeah.... that's still SlanderFather Time said:Offensive nicknames are not slander. Slander is kinda hard to prosecute. If he gave everyone exaggerated nicknames then it'd be hard to get slander on him. He could always claim "I thought she was a bisexual"RivFader86 said:It is slander "a malicious, false, and defamatory statement or report" it's not like he "just" rated their looks he made assumptions about their sex life and even gave them offensive nicknames....plus you can't just go "in my opinion" and say whatever you like.Father Time said:Saying your opinion about someone is not slander.RivFader86 said:Consent is the key word...without it it's just slander and you can/hopefully will be sued for it,bringer of illumination said:Really? He was arrested for THAT?
I don't know how things work in America, but here in Denmark a list that's on a basic level kinda like what he did is complied for every student, in every graduating highschool class, It's called a "Blue Book" And the students make them for poking fun at their fellow class mates.
Now unlike a Blue Book, these girls didn't consent to being in this list and the contents are a bit more insulting than what would normally be put in a blue book, but arresting him? Fucking really?
RivFader86 said:posting this online is no different from spreading rumors like this in real life.
And he probably was arrested for his protection, there are a LOT of pissed of parents/boy friends/brothers/cousins/uncles and girls out there, so that's why they took him into custody not because he is dangerous or a flight risk.
This is the first time I've ever heard of someone being arrested for their protection I doubt that it ever actually happens.
Yeah.... that's still SlanderFather Time said:Offensive nicknames are not slander. Slander is kinda hard to prosecute. If he gave everyone exaggerated nicknames then it'd be hard to get slander on him. He could always claim "I thought she was a bisexual"RivFader86 said:It is slander "a malicious, false, and defamatory statement or report" it's not like he "just" rated their looks he made assumptions about their sex life and even gave them offensive nicknames....plus you can't just go "in my opinion" and say whatever you like.Father Time said:Saying your opinion about someone is not slander.RivFader86 said:Consent is the key word...without it it's just slander and you can/hopefully will be sued for it,bringer of illumination said:Really? He was arrested for THAT?
I don't know how things work in America, but here in Denmark a list that's on a basic level kinda like what he did is complied for every student, in every graduating highschool class, It's called a "Blue Book" And the students make them for poking fun at their fellow class mates.
Now unlike a Blue Book, these girls didn't consent to being in this list and the contents are a bit more insulting than what would normally be put in a blue book, but arresting him? Fucking really?
This is the first time I've ever heard of someone being arrested for their protection I doubt that it ever actually happens.RivFader86 said:posting this online is no different from spreading rumors like this in real life.
And he probably was arrested for his protection, there are a LOT of pissed of parents/boy friends/brothers/cousins/uncles and girls out there, so that's why they took him into custody not because he is dangerous or a flight risk.
I don't buy it. You say that the entire system is designed out of a hatred for or fear of femininity, but there are stigmas against women who are perceived to be too masculine, as well. How does this fit into your model?zeldagirl said:I love the use of 'irrational women' in the first sentence - excellently done, bolstering your argument by trying to belittle an identity, or the idea that women could be upset and being treated in such a manner. Truly, well done.PhiMed said:I love how irrational women state that "slut = a woman who enjoys sex", and "men who fuck whatever moves are invariably praised".
Neither of these statements are true.
High school society is not life. If you convince yourself that it is, you'll be a very sad individual later on. If you're called a slut once you're out of high school, who gives a shit? You can choose to never see that person again if that's what you want.
Being called a slut in high school is still not oppression, though. It's just another name people use to cut people down. There are loads of names people use that are related to things a person cannot help. I'm not going to spend too much time getting upset about a name that is actually related to a person's behavior. If a woman is labelled a slut in high school, it doesn't mean she "enjoys sex". It means she either had sex with more men than was deemed appropriate by the group, or she had sex with someone with a big mouth. That sucks that these actions resulted in ridicule, but perhaps that girl should be a little more selective about who she lets in her pants. Plenty of women "enjoy sex" with a limited number of discrete partners. Suggesting that the only way a woman can enjoy sex is by having sex with numerous loud-mouthed partners strikes me as a little icky, not to mention stupid.
Trust me, guys who attempt to nail anything that moves are only (if ever) praised in their teens. After that, it's perceived as gross, a sign of a lack of self-control, similar to getting blackout drunk at every single party one attends. Additionally, guys have other things which reduce their societal standing. Guys are constantly berated about things that women don't have to worry about, such as backing down from a fight, being physically weak, and getting yelled at by a woman in public. These things aren't signs of shame for women. In fact, they often illicit sympathy from their friends. For men, though, these are sources of fodder for ridicule. That's a double standard, too, but you don't see people carrying a flag for that.
High school is part of real life - it's a precursor to the real world. As someone who is a graduate student who works as a student advisor for a living, I see behaviors in college students that reflect those in high school. Not only reflect, but magnify the problem - you can try to say this stuff doesn't exist out of high school - I can tell you outright, that's blatantly wrong. It's not only manifested in a college setting too, but in the professional work sphere as well. High school is essentially a microcosm, a small representation of the larger world. Maybe I won't see those high schoolers who called me a slut any more, but you had better believe that if they grow up through high school thinking that behavior is okay, they won't have any responsibility to stop when they advance to college and beyond. Never mind the fact that as a professional, I see these behaviors, including the use of the word slut, in a professional setting far too often - it's not just a 'high school problem'.
There are so many things that rub me the wrong way about this post, I don't even know where to begin. Because I'm short on time, I'm going to pick out this statement:
"It means she either had sex with more men than was deemed appropriate by the group, or she had sex with someone with a big mouth. That sucks that these actions resulted in ridicule, but perhaps that girl should be a little more selective about who she lets in her pants."
Do you not see the inherent unfairness in this statement? It's is the woman's fault. SHE should be more selective, SHE should know better. Men do not get comments like this. You say boys are only glorified for this behavior "only in their teens" but believe me, I have seen experiences to the contrary. It's glorified in media and in our society. It's rampant at the college level (both undergrad and grad, so you're talking an age range of 18-26).
Let's run with your high school example. A girl has sex, once, with a guy. That guy tells a whole group of people. The likelihood that she will be insulted, and he will not, is what I mean by 'oppression.' The institutional mores of our society put her down for engaging in what is at its core an *equal* behavior with him. That is wrong, and, despite others ideas to the contrary, oppressive. She is being made less for engaging in the same behavior as her male counterpart. She is the only one being insulted and having her identity be made less for it.
And I don't like double standards, period. They shouldn't exist. And no where in my post did I imply they should. I think the machoism and bro mentality that exists is wrong, and I think it's unfair that men are expected to be hypermasculine.
BUT let's look at that problem. The hypermasculine problem, the problem where men are expected to not back down, being physically weak, and my favorite example, being yelled at by a woman. What's at the core of all this? Why do men have a problem with these things? Because they are being made less masculine. And what is less masculine? The feminine. You even used it in your example - men being ridiculed for being yelled at by a woman. Essentially, what's being implied is that men should not be yelled at by a woman - that they should be *greater* than a woman.
This is just another perpetuation of an oppressive attitude towards women. It causes men shame to be less-than a woman. Therefore, to be yelled at a woman is to be weak. And weakness is not supposed to be associated with men, it's supposed to be associated with women. Do you not see how that philosophy is oppressive - how it's inherent in our society as well?
I'm sorry, I realize this post is a little long winded, and I'm afraid I've not been as clear as I can be (I'm on a combination of pain-killers plus downright mad at what I'm reading in this topic). I'll clarify further for you if you wish, though perhaps it might be best to PM me for that. I guess my main point for this part of my response is, yes double standards exist, but unfortunately they exist because of sexism and a fear of femininity.
Father Time said:Sorry to just jump in.RivFader86 said:Offensive nicknames are not slander. Slander is kinda hard to prosecute. If he gave everyone exaggerated nicknames then it'd be hard to get slander on him. He could always claim "I thought she was a bisexual"
He could totally claim that, but there is a fair chance that just wouldn't fly. Without the actual list I can't really say whether or not he's boned on this one, but it has a lot to do with how he presented the names. If he did it in a definite fashion then he's probably in hot water.
And even if this fails on a criminal level, if the parents decide to take him up under tort law and pursue civil cases, he will be in serious trouble. No matter how you present this kinda stuff, the instant he began to assign nicknames and ratings to the girls without consent, he went straight into defamation to character and damage to reputation zone. And the only absolute defence to that is truth, so unless the lad can prove the girl was bisexual and that he knew it at the time of writing, he is doomed.
AnteGravity said:This pretty much demonstrates why Feminism is still strongly needed in Western society. Treating young girls like grades of meat and rating them on their sexual characteristics like it was the only thing they would ever be worth is so grotesquely abhorrent.
It definitely warrants legal action. This idiot caused a great deal of grievous mental and emotional anguish on so many of these girls publicly. That kind of behavior can not be condoned by any authority that hopes to remain credible.
Seriously, this is just stupid. High schoolers will be high schoolers, in a few months most of those girls will look back on this list and laugh, and in years, probably remember it fondly through rose-colored glasses. This kid, however, is going to have his life fucked for something that seems fresh out of an American Pie sequel.Zer0Saber said:Going to juvi for calling people names on facebook, when did peoples spines dissolve.
In that case I apologize, but it looked like YOU were saying "girls like assholes."Legion said:I never said girls like assholes, I put that in quotes to show that it is what people say. Girls normally like guys with confidence, assholes usually show a lot of confidence, therefore people assume that when the girl likes the confident asshole, they like the asshole part of him rather than the confidence part.zeldagirl said:I'm sorry, but your entire post is made up of a lot of relationship myths. Some girls like assholes, others (I would say almost all that I know) don't. Some guys like women who don't "sleep around." Guess what - others DO! Some men don't have this archaic notion that women have to be pure, untouched virgins in order to want to date them/fall in love with them/marry them/etc. These concepts are not the only precursors to attraction, and they aren't necessarily make-or-break qualities, either.
Guys don't like women who sleep around, as it is entirely illogical, both from a rational perspective and an evolutionary one. Guys may like women with sexual experience, but that is not the same thing at all. If a guy is attracted to a woman who sleeps around, it is because they think she will put out, not because they actually like her as a person. She is seen as an easy lay.
No, a lot of guys don't have this notion that they have to be "pure", and I am not suggesting that a girl must be so in order to be attractive. Somebody who doesn't care who they sleep with on the other hand is seen to lack standards and self respect. Obviously this isn't necessarily the case, they may just like casual sex, but that doesn't bode well for someone who is looking for a committed relationship because they will assume that the person isn't likely to be faithful. Again, this isn't necessarily true, but it isn't far-fetched.