@zen67636@goonbrew The guys were on drugs also. Some of them were more high/drunk than she was. Why isn't she liable for engaging in sexual activity with several people who were intoxicated?
Kids today wonโt believe this but at the height of the GWOT the US media had everyone believing that China was doing a literal genocide on Muslims because the CCP wouldnโt let the Uighurs traffic NATO dope from Afghanistan into Xinjiang. They literally called it a genocide!
I wonder what the Venn Diagram looks like of people who took the allegations against Platner at face value but are skeptical of the allegations against the "Cornell 7?"
The thing I find striking about the Cornell discourse (on the "feminist" side so to speak) is that the woman is presumed to be completely passive while everything these drunk and high frat guys do is presumed to be conscious and intentional. They are "plying" the woman with drink & drugs to coerce her into sex, or "advertising" a woman supposedly available for rape to fellow frat members in a group chat. A very drunk guy typing "free pu*** upstairs" in the chat could be making a crude drunken joke. (Or "advertising" what he sees as a willing woman.)
The woman, OTOH, is depicted as, at the most, passively and drunkenly acquiescing in what's being done to her -- despite her statement that, for instance, she went along with the threesome because she was excited by the idea of the two guys being gay with each other.
Tbh, I read this account and I see a bunch of people being drunken idiots.
Also: several people have brought up the fact that "Jane Doe" is underage for alcohol (19 or 20). How old were the guys? (Newell is Class of '27 so probably a sophomore in '24 -- likely also 19 or 20.) And what about the fact that "Jane Doe" had already been drinking alcohol on her own before coming to the party? Why are we suddenly being strict about underage drinking only when it's men offering alcohol to a woman?
If the idea is that men need to protect grown women from making bad decisions, gee, how is that different from that fundie creep who thinks husbands should monitor their wives' social media use?