Fortunately I just have a history of violence violence.
Shouldn't they ban anyone who has a history of sexual violence? Seems logical.
I live less than an hour away from Bloomington and I am CONSTANTLY reading articles of sexual assaults at IU not to mention all the high profile stuff.
Finally, a reason not run around acting all rapey.
The ban only applies to participating/playing on the school athletic teams. It does not affect someone's ability to attend as a student.
I live in Bloomington. Somebody was raped four doors down from where I live during the fall student rush. Crazy shit going on here.
For many athletes, it's the same thing. No sports, no education.
Damn, I wonder if it was him who got raped. You should ask him.
Me too, and on Blu-ray.
Also Bloomington here. Yeah, it can be rapey as fuck around here. Statistically I know we're not the worst campus in the country, but bad stuff happens at the frat houses all the time, and everyone knows a lot doesn't get reported. It's not just the frat houses, either. Shit happens constantly in the student housing neighborhoods.
The business school breeds rape culture. Bros come from all over the country to be trained in the arts of entitlement.
EDIT: lmao bro brigade out in force
“any prospective student-athlete — whether a transfer student, incoming freshman, or other status ...
So, you're good to go once you're already a student there. /s
Meanwhile, since most new students anyway are 18ish, their records would be sealed because they were juveniles for the most part, yes?
This seems more like a "feel good" rule rather than one that will make a meaningful impact.
That's always been the problem with rape, there just wasn't any downsides. That and , except for the victims, it's a completely victimless crime.
or has been found responsible for sexual violence by a formal institutional disciplinary action at any previous collegiate or secondary school
So I agree with the spirit, and even most of the letter of what they are trying to do, but this is a problem.
Many of these collegiate "courts" don't require a single shred of any kind of evidence, whatsoever. You get no lawyer.
It creates a situation where you can effectively expel someone on a whim. They have no serious possibility of defense. I have personally seen this happen.
Holding someone accountable for their actions is just, but destroying someone's ability to go to college without so much as a police report is ridiculous.
Yea..finally they have a good reasons not to do that?
Why does all this stuff about rape and colleges always seem to be an internal matter? Isn't it a crime and one that police should get involved in?
Sort by controversial.
So ban sex offenders from studying? No, I think that is an overreaction. Look think of it this way to ban sex offenders from this kind of education will 1) not prevent sexual assault to the students at the campus. 2) means that the individual with a history of sex offences are unable to seek education or the careers they want. This will only create a viscious cycle of poverty, imprisonment and may provide a stressor for further assaults.
Yes of course they should be punished, imprisoned more harshly than what we see with some rich athlete with rich parents and rich lawyers. I haven't been sexually assaulted myself but I know others who have, it is far too common in our shitty world, In Fact we all know people who have.
It is also likely what Indiana university is doing is for publicity, to stop public persecution of their institution. This is not a solution to solving sexual assualts of their students but a reactionary policy which shouldn't be extended to all students. Think for example all the first time offenders who don't assault anyone until they are already students.
This is a terrible solution, it is a heavy handed reactionary policy, which although perhaps currently nessecary for student athletes, if only to save face and perhaps make female (and male) students feel safer. What is needed is a wider systemic institutional change, support should be offered to victims and previous offenders to prevent recidivism, people should be educated on sex and sex crimes, most importantly some way of teaching empathy for other human beings is needed. And perhaps some rich asshole needs to learn they wil be punished severely! This ban won't solve anything, just the university is unwilling to change due to its numerous institutional, social and political biases.
well shit dude my older brother goes to IU
Am I the only one left that thinks the Law should take care of Law-breaking, and employer/university/whatever should mind their own damn business?
These arguments are always framed in a way that makes them un-critique-able. "YOU don't want students with sexual violence history in Universities do you, you monster?"
Where does the line get drawn?
Can a university ban you if you have a drunk driving record? If you are a cigarette smoker? If you have an underage drinking smudge on your record can schools and employers wreck your entire future? Marijuana possession?
Are we only to be judged by past actions? Mind you, at this university level, we are talking about 18 year old kids.
I strongly believe university/work-place discrimination like this should only be allowed in instances where the infraction directly disrupts the position. Convicted of a rape charge while enrolled at a University? You're gone. Missed work because you spent last night in jail in a drunk tank? Bye bye.
This is a very thin line that leads to arbitrary discrimination, concocted by some person in power or board of directors, which can be quantified by loose criminal or loose moral interpretations.
I mean, just think about the basic absurdity of this premise.
"University actively seeks to ban incoming athletes who may potentially be sex criminals." ..... huh?! If someone commits a crime, they get caught and charged and processed by the court of law. What the fuck is a University doing trying to be some pre-cognitive police force like this is the Minority Report movie?
It's bizarre it's either pretend like nothing happened or some kangaroo court.
Which is stupid. People make mistakes and getting an education is a good thing.
It would be much better to use the prison and justice system to punish and leave education to educate. These post justice system punishments by the state are unconstitutional. Now if s private university wants to do that then go ahead.
Unlike rape, murder removes the victim. Ending all of their future problems.
Being under 18 does not mean your records are sealed. Your records can be sealed if you are over 18 or 5 years out from case close (only in some cases), or if the crime is considered "less serious", which sexual violence is not, or if you were 13 or younger when the crime was committed. Additionally if you were tried as an adult, as many convicted of sex crimes are, you cannot have your records sealed. That of course does not even touch the sex offender's registry. Even with these criteria you have to find a judge willing to seal the records, which many are not. Being only 17/18 while applying, and given the time it takes to get records sealed means that while applying to schools or being recruited it is incredibly unlikely they would have them sealed.
The article also discusses using previous school sanctions from secondary or undergrad as criteria, even though those are not criminal convictions. That means a title IX conviction with minor punishment can block someone from transferring.
For a list of "serious offenses" you can see welfare code 707 (b).
Records being sealed often does not mean nobody can find out about them. If you are a recruited athlete and the administration does some research and calls previous institutions there is a solid chance people will remember the incident or it will be online, in which case you will have to answer some hard questions.
Yes definetly a joke friend. Of course, murder is not okay.
All of your post could easily apply to any violent criminal. Ex-cons have difficulty obtaining jobs, getting into colleges (most applications ask about your criminal history), and often have difficulty reintegrating into society. So I very much hope your stance also applies to people who commit murder, other forms of assault or battery, kidnapping, robbery, etc. There's no reason to view a sex offense as lesser than other violent crimes and sexual offenders as more deserving of the opportunities that are routinely denied other ex-cons.
When you commit a violent offense, you sacrifice some of your freedoms and opportunities. I am supportive of social programs for offenders (of all types - not only sex offenders), but we also have a rampant sexual violence issue in America and I would favor attempts to protect the victims and change cultural perceptions over attempts to protect convicted offenders at this point in our history. Let convicted offenders obtain degrees via a non-campus environment (eg online).
But all that aside, does anyone else think we should make abortions mandatory?
In a big thread on a controversial topic? No thanks.
And I just have a history of sexual sexuality.
You beat me to the punch, here.
By all means, ban those who've been convicted in a proper court of law, and do so without a second thought.
Some schools, though, run little more than kangaroo courts, and DEFINITELY should not be taken at their word as to the history of a given individual.
Due Process is a thing for a damn good reason. NOBODY should EVER be deprived of it.
Can a university ban you if you have a drunk driving record?
If you are a cigarette smoker?
If you have an underage drinking smudge on your record can schools and employers wreck your entire future?
They can prevent you from attending their school or hiring you.
Schools can put almost anything they want in their codes of conduct and expel students for violating it. At many schools it is illegal to have sex at all, even consensually. It is actually quite likely to get expelled from a school for doing something that is completely legal.
I graduated a couple years ago, but one thing that always stuck in my mind was how many "Report Rape Anonymously" posters were in some of the bathrooms in the more social dorms (Central and North). Not a lot of Universities display those types of posters in their restrooms. Is that even an effective place to display that?
I just have a historical history. Pretty much all the stuff I've done happened in the past.
People don't rape because they're sexually repressed, even your grandmother knows that.
"I shoulda killed you back in Philly." DAAYUM
reactionary policy, they had several high profile rape cases involving athletes
I lived in Btown for 10 years. IU is a wonderful school that has a lot of piece of shit humans on campus. It's really unfortunate but the student culture there is full of entitlement, no worry for possible consequences and total disregard on how their actions can hurt others.
I wish there was a more pleasant IU story that was bringing btown redditors together!!!
Is everybody gettin raped around there?
Do we have to hide the kids and the wife?
I go to a super liberal city school (roughly 8k students). They're on the inside of every Men's stall (can't speak for women's restrooms). I think the point is that you can read it and take the information down without someone seeing you, so if you're embarrassed it's not an issue.
it's a completely victimless crime.
Like stealing cable!
Good news! the football team wants violence violence!
No redemption allowed?
For me personally, someone who has committed a sexual assault would be something I would have a hard time allowing around me either. But regular assault?
when i was there, a girl was expelled for shooting porn in her dorm room. according to the school newspaper, her dad made her sit and watch it with him.
Age-old parenting trick.
"Oh, you want to make porn? Well, we're going to sit here and watch your whole porno until you don't want to make porn anymore."
350 comments isn't exactly big for a default. When it hits like 1000+ comments is when controversial truly ascends to its final form
There's a push to get men involved in assault prevention too. A lot of guys feel it's not their place to intervene and act. Putting posters up can acclimate them to the fact that they can do something if they know something.
After this year's performance, I don't think our basketball program is in a position to be picky on new student athletes.
This idea makes me uncomfortable. Any kind of violence is wrong. Especially sexual assault and rape. I'm not condoning that at all. Yet, once someone serves the punishment our justice systems sees fit and gets help (maybe therapy?) should they have no options to repair their life?
You'd have to be a sick individual to rape someone, shouldn't they be helped? I'm sure this will be downvoted to hell, but try to see through emotion here. When someone is not okay mentally, shouldn't they be helped? It's not black and white. My ex was raped, and I still can't rationalize those emotions. It was a kid we were both friends with, and just the thought of him makes my blood boil.
Shit like this is so hard to know what's right.
The thought of some high-school girl having a student-athlete's balls (his future life) literally in her hands I find more than a little chilling.
More chilling, apparently, than the actual fact that college sports programs are known for sourcing sexual assault on campus. Girls are paying the school for the life opportunity to develop scholarship and professional skills. They're not paying to attend the school to be rape bait to entertain athletes. The school has a responsibility to admit students who can maintain honesty and who have a history of non-violence toward others.
Also, if a guy comes into the school with a history of conflicted relationships, that's not a promising trait for a team. Schools are entitled to screen for character and maturity and athletes don't have the right to demand a place on a team.
In the 80s and 90s, athletics weren't the primary financial driver of the university. Looked around Bloomington lately? Athletics are the number one spending priority, because athletics are the lever that gets alumni to donate.
Greek Life cases are featured in the media at least twice a month
Don't worry, the long-term effects won't show up until well after we're no longer legally liable.
Because people are innocent until proven guilty. These Kangaroo courts on college campuses should not be determing guilt in these situations.
Watching this from the UK, this is something that's always confused me. Surely a rape or sexual assault is a straight up criminal matter, why do universities get any say in how cases are handled?
I know US colleges often have campus police, but do they have some kind of control over those police?
"YOU don't want students with sexual violence history in Universities do you, you monster?"
yes, actually, I absolutely do. After whatever punishment they've been through for their crime, they need to be rehabilitated to society. all this policy does, is not allow them to be visible public representatives of that institute, which is acceptable.
But a business hiring someone or a school accepting someone IS their own damn business.
If someone got into trouble with the law for stealing from a previous employer fairly recently, I'm sure as shit not gonna hire them. Sorry you fucked up, but you're also a goddamn risk and I'm not letting you near our livelihood.
I'm not sure if we're in a joke thread right now, but any severe trauma can have ripple effects* to close friends and family, the workplace, etc.
So do they have to be convicted of something in a court of law? Or can any accusation ruin their career?
I think people with histories of sexual violence shouldn't be able to live in the dorms, but should be able to attend a college as a commuter.
Well he won't need it anymore considering his time has already come.
that's an understandable emotional reaction, hell, it was mine at first, before I reminded myself that justice includes rehabilitation.
these convicted hypotheticals, have presumably done their punishment, if they're going to uni. they should be allowed to return to society, and live a law-abiding, comfortable, safe life, just like the rest of us.
some precautions are appropriate, I won't deny it, but the harsher you make life for those who've been convicted, after their convictions, all you end up doing is increasing recidivism rates.
with all this in mind, this ban actually is still appropriate, as the Uni has said they simply do not want convicted criminals of this nature to represent them in a public sporting manner.
That's just a way to avoid due process. State schools are not private businesses. They shouldn't be able to just throw someone out without due process.
Shouldn't they ban anyone who has a history of sexual violence?
My worry would be that 'history of sexual violence' equals 'accusation of sexual violence' - i.e. a single, unfounded or unproven accusation = 'history'.
Which could effectively end any career aspirations for a rising high-school athlete at one of the nation's premier basketball colleges.
The thought of some high-school girl having a student-athlete's balls (his future life) literally in her hands I find more than a little chilling.
And lest someone accuse me of being a sports-nut apologist, I have close to zero interest in sports, my viewing confined primarily to the Super Bowl, maaybe a Final Four game or two or three, and the Kentucky Derby.
But hey! - such announcement makes for a good public relations statement, and warms the cockles of certain kinds of peoples hearts.
This is one of those things I already assumed every university did.
Really? With all the cover ups that go on all across America in professional, college, and even high school sports?
Why can't they get an education? There are online resources and, if convicted, prison education programs. To say offenders need to be able to play college ball or their life is diminished is just the sort of justification that allows these athletes to commit crimes and escape real punishment. Offenders should have to make a few sacrifices. Many of their victims are unable to stay in school or need years of therapy. Assaults can cause a change in life plans for victims, too.
Especially for humans
Would you agree murder only victimizes one person?
I'm a guy, so I'm not sure about the women's, but I presume they had them too
I feel like people who have had a sexual assault or any regular assault for that matter on them shouldn't be able to live on campus.
For everyone's safety.
you might think that, on reaction, but no, because justice isn't about indefinite punishment, it's about making a better society for everyone.
this hypothetical student has been convicted of a terrible crime, has done their punishment, and now it's up to us to make sure they rehabilitates back into society.
if you say, make it hard to get work, or an education, or live a comfortable life, after the punishment designed as a detterent, then what you are doing it making thes hypothetical person isolated, alienated, hated, and desperate.
this is not a good thing.
if you want to reduce harm, you should allow them to become educated, and get work, and live life in a peaceful comfortable manner for the rest of it, though you can certainly take all the discretionary steps you like, such as not letting them become representatives of your establishment(like their athletes are).
or a dead guy's watch!
This is one of those things I already assumed every university did. I guess I was wrong.
That's reasonable, IF it's based on actual history of sexual violence, aka due process in the legal system.
If it's based on "our student court of women's studies majors list of jock rapists", then it's not so reasonable.
ahahah wait what
About time. Criminals shouldn't be protected because they toss around a ball or hit someone on grass with pads.
It does not prevent them from studying. The policy prevents them from playing in a college team.
There's a rampant sexual violence issue in America?
I could have sworn violent assaults of all kinds (including sexual) were at all time historic lows....
I 100% agree with this, it's a stereotype at best. But as a Kelley student I also think some of the most entitled and douchey kids come from Kelley. Truth is somewhere in the middle.
It creates a situation where you can effectively expel someone on a whim.
They already can for the most part, practically if not theoretically; accusing someone of sexual misconduct has to be one of the most publicly embarrassing and messy ways to do it too.
Feel free to check out the second paragraph of a 3 paragraph article.
Little 5 is coming up this weekend. Don't worry friends, we'll see plenty of stories about rape soon.
A lot of the cases you see in the media have no ability to be tried in criminal courts because it's a he-said/she-said, situation with no hard evidence to convict anyone. Doesn't mean that it didn't happen, but schools feel obligated to do something when the authorities won't, right or wrong.
That's one of the biggest misconceptions. A lot if sexual assault is not the loud screaming and violent affair that it's portrayed as. It's a young person slowly being boxed in over time and their options to leave quietly erode away. After a time, it might just be them and the perpetrator, because there was no prior trigger moment for them to make the leap to a loud and dramatic response, and now it's too late.
People are often terrified of the consequences of reacting loudly, because it is so easy for people to say they were just acting crazy or doing it for attention, they can just walk away.
That's why these posters exist, to normalize stepping in before things go too far.
But bruh, mah swim times....
I mean, they often do. Not a whole lot of murderers getting acceptance letters to universities I imagine.
But, the real argument is that university campuses don't have a problem with other violent crimes like they do with sexual assault and rape. It's about fixing the biggest problems first.
I mean it it still does, but it used to too.
I strongly agree. We need to seperate the act from the actor. Yes many acts are bad, but vilifying people likely who commit an act out of ignorance,social conditiojing, emotionally issues...Etc
We can all sit around and say "I would have acted differently", but we ignore that it is a very real possibility that none of us can actually act differently.
A friend of mine once was sexually active with this one girl he liked. They sexted all summer, she gave him multiple hickeys, the whole deal. But when he came back the next semester, she asked him if he wanted to hang out, he said yes, and then she publicly humiliated him in front of all of her friends in a public space saying that he had raped her.
This really bothers me. If that word alone is enough to destroy someone's life without any evidence, that's not a good policy. I'm so glad she didn't take it any farther than destroying several of his friendships.
I am happily married with a masters degree.
This absolves the frat bro rape culture how? lol
Yeah, no, we're not going to look the other way. Frat culture is a problem.
Good. Being a college athlete is a privilege, not a right. Keep your shit together and your nose clean, or don't expect that privilege to be extended to you no matter how fast you can run or how far you can throw. There will always be someone just as good who hasn't committed a sex crime who can take that spot.
Don't forget to husband!
As someone once threatened with a false rape report I agree.
The parent comment was saying that they should ban anyone, implying that they wanted the school to ban sexual assault perpetrators from campus entirely.
Specifically, this policy would affect “any prospective student-athlete — whether a transfer student, incoming freshman, or other status — who has been convicted of or pled guilty or no contest to a felony involving sexual violence...
Okay, no problem there; the courts have come to an evidence-based conclusion. My contention is with this:
...or has been found responsible for sexual violence by a formal institutional disciplinary action at any previous collegiate or secondary school (excluding limited discipline applied by a sports team or temporary disciplinary action during an investigation).”
Universities should not have their hands in this kind of business, nor should they be passing judgments from a position of non-authority. If a crime has been committed, the determination of guilt should be put into the hands of the police and the courts. In the best of cases, a university tribunal ejects a student, but justice is still not done because the police aren't involved. That rapist will rape again. And in the worst of cases, someone is "convicted" on spurious evidence, denied the right to due process and legal representation, and in many cases, presumed guilty until they can establish their innocence. A student named Thomas Klocke just took his own life when he was put through one of these kangaroo courts, in which he wasn't even permitted to interact with the witnesses they demanded he supply (he was barred from the class where the incident was alleged to take place).
Please stop processing criminal cases through college courts. It's inappropriate and damaging to people rights and the actual process of seeking real justice.
Yeah, it looks like there are a lot of sexually repressed individuals there who once they make it to campus act out their repressions. Then again, interesting the fascination of Bloomington with the sexual topics. Reminds me of the old lady that called the police because the neighbor was masturbating publicly. The cops looked from her window and told the lady "hey, we can only see his face from here, what are you talking about?" And the old lady goes "oh, get on top of the table and you will see".
I graduated a couple years ago too and the thing that always stuck with me was the time I was taking a shit in the second floor bathroom in Sycamore Hall and I saw that someone had written on the wall "Toy Story 3 was an OK movie."
Please stop saying this.
I think you're confused about who are the victims of sexual violence. Not to defend this schools decision, but I find it funny that as soon as someone mentions sexual assault people immediately jump to false accusations as if there is a significant number of cases. Of course there will be false cases, which is horrible, but schools must do what they can to protect as many students as they can. Why are we so quick to throw out all concern for actual victims of sexual violence?
Born and raised in btown. The crime rate has increased the past few years, and heroine use is on the rise (it's common to find needles on the side of the road and in downtown parks.) The crime rate skyrocketed after the Indianapolis Superbowl a few years back after a ton of homeless people from Indianapolis were bussed down to try and clear up the streets in Indy for the bowl. More harassment, a couple stabbings, just a much less civil homeless population. It didn't used to be that way, they mostly used to be mild mannered hippies that played music and made art, but I guess being homeless in the city was a much different game. Despite all that, Bloomington really is an incredible place, I haven't been to many places like it and it's not an unsafe place so long as you're responsible. It also has one of the most beautiful campuses I've ever seen.
By and large you are right. I just feel like codifying the behavior could lead to even more of it.
It basically creates a stratified environment where women can effectively ruin your life if they decide they want to; they don't even have to file a police report.
I mean if I was in college these days I honestly would have to do some calculus as to whether interacting with women is even worth it, when years of work and your future career can be flushed by any woman who cares to bother.
Denying someone the ability to play college sports isn't denying them access bettering their life or getting them help.
I don't know how IU is now but back in the old days (80's-90's) the athletes were kept on a very short leash by the coaches, I'm hoping this policy is a return or an extension of this ideology.
...And the coaching staff...
...and the clergy...
Well yeah, I'm sorry but I don't feel like living next to someone who willingly chose to rape a woman/man.
Their team, their choice. If it was my team I wouldn't want any sex offenders (real sex offenders) on my team either. Would you?
I guess if it was the women's restroom?
Kind of misleading, though, you don't really get to be anonymous if you want anything serious to happen.
And my axe.
Well there goes the basketball,track and football departments...
Won't someone think of the rapists?
The law should. Rape is a serious crime. Violent non-sexual crime would be tried in a real court. If the murderer did the time, then there's no reason to deny them an education apart from a misguided sense of punishment for their crime. Even murderers can turn their life around. Alcohol plays a large role, but saying it's all due to alcohol is a bit of a strawman argument.
Ok I just acknowledged those people in my comment, but it's not even an argument that there are far more real victims of real sexual violence than there are victims of false allegations. Most rape cases aren't even reported. Is a school supposed to ignore rape victims to protect a few athletes who have false accusations against them? What do you mean "people like me"? People who actually empathize with rape victims? Sorry I haven't taken the red pill and I don't hate women and equate rape victims with liars.
Business school exists to groom the children of the rich for a life of being rich.
I took a couple of management classes while I was at IU. Nothing but folksy seminar "wisdom" backed up by no data to speak of. It was more about indoctrination into a (predominantly right-leaning) culture than anything.
Incarceration does not reduce recidivism. Stats show this. Especially with sexual offenders. Treatment programs are the way to go and here up in CSC, after going through the rehabilitation process, it's only at roughly 13% that they are likely to commit crime again and only 10% of that is sexually related. 36% is due to other criminal activity. Moreover, because someone has a criminal past, doesn't mean that they haven't changed. I'm not advocating for them- I'm stating that if you were to deny education to others based on their backgrounds, it goes into dangerous waters. Slippery slope. However I do agree that having them banned from school teams is fair.
Sexually assaulting someone is considered just "fucking up" or "making a mistake"? I hate it when people refer to violent, deliberate acts using those words. SA is a choice, not a mishap.