Frat Made To Apologize Over Anti-Sexual Assault Banners

[ThatOtherGirl]

Hahahahaha... Yeah those scum! Their banners were fucking ugly! How dare they not splurge out and make a nice fancy banner as paid for by mutual collection and designed by an art student, what a bunch of fakers, obviously trying to pathetically cover up for their past misdeeds! Dunno about you but students being lazy and doing the bare minimum wasn't unusual in my uni experience, no real malice involved.

Poor kids, hanged up a banner and now they assumed to be repenting for their past sins if the attitude here is any representation. For all we know this is a frat of super neckbeards who never party or go out and never talk to the opposite sex xD I mean, since we are all throwing around fanfics....

Splurge? It's a fraternity. There are going to be dozens of members. It costs $20 to have a small vinyl banner printed, $40 for a large one. The could have each contributed a dollar and they would have had enough for several. That is "splurging?". 1 dollar? And I literally meant spending 5 minutes on design. Again, they are a fucking fraternity. Chances are there is going to be at least one guy who knows how to use Photoshop and can put black text on a white background, and if there is not they can find someone who is willing to do it easy. Instead they got a can of spray paint and some old sheets.

Being lazy and doing the bare minimum is exactly the problem. They didn't care enough to put any time, money, effort, or thought into their act of solidarity. That shows how little they care. The absolute minimum they can get away with.

 

[Something Amyss]

Where do you get this from?

First, it was multiple frats. Second, there are pictures of the banners both in this article and others. Third, the IFC's own words seems to indicate there are rape victims on campus. Do you have any good reason to believe, as it was put below, that this one college has been such a rare unicorn to not have any instances?

But for everything else, there's google. My grown-up keyboard died today, and I have to type on this little child-size one until Monday or drive two hours to guarantee a big one. I'm not particularly interested in doing the legwork on rather easily verified information. Especially when some of it is literally from the OP.

Poor kids, hanged up a banner and now they assumed to be repenting for their past sins if the attitude here is any representation.

Can you list some examples? For all your talk about fanfic, your claims seem to not represent what's actually being said.

Sure. Of course, for all we know, the complaints weren't made by feminist students either.

There was an opinion piece by a Freshman who is a declared feminist who said it wasn't enough. Also, an editorial by someone who might or might not be a feminist. Of course, I had to do more research than the article in the OP apparently did to find that....

And by "more," I mean "any."

Just so we're clear, because very little being complained about is actually, you know, true.

Also, she's absolutely right that this isn't enough. And honestly, good on the IFC for deciding the same.

That shows how little they care. The absolute minimum they can get away with.

In fairness, this is America. We love putting ribbons on cars and waving flags and doing anything else to show how much we care without actually doing anything.

http://dailynorthwestern.com/2016/05/02/campus/following-banner-controversy-interfraternity-council-plans-to-implement-four-year-sexual-assault-education-program/

It appears that at least some of those who did the complaining did so under the belief (justified or not) that sexual assaults had occurred in that frat[....]

I'm actually not sure where you're getting that. The only wording I see speaks to fraternities in general, IFC is not an individual frat, multiple houses were involved, and all this is right in your own link. Now, googling the individual frats for instances of alleged sexual assault will indicate that at the very least, some of the sign hangers have been accused and that does offer a potential additional context which I have referenced, but these aren't the complaints we can document. What we have to work with are far more tempered.

Interfraternity councils and the like are somewhat common on campuses and are generally govern over a large body of fraternities. I mean, I think that's reasonably inferred from the name alone. Is this the problem? Do people think the IFC is a single house? If so, I hope that I've cleared at least that up.

But the baffling thing is I'm clearing up so many things referenced even in the completely biased-from-a-right-wing-trash-site-that-editorialised-and-did-no-apparent-research article. The one that misled with a headline it immediately partially corrected. And I'm not singling you out, it's just stream of consciousness.

 

[Naldan]

Where do you get this from?

First, it was multiple frats. Second, there are pictures of the banners both in this article and others. Third, the IFC's own words seems to indicate there are rape victims on campus. Do you have any good reason to believe, as it was put below, that this one college has been such a rare unicorn to not have any instances?

But for everything else, there's google. My grown-up keyboard died today, and I have to type on this little child-size one until Monday or drive two hours to guarantee a big one. I'm not particularly interested in doing the legwork on rather easily verified information. Especially when some of it is literally from the OP.

I had written quite the text here, but it seems that I lack the knowledge about the structure of US universities, or at least I did so until now. So just let me say two things.

First: I'm sorry.

Second: A lot of the direct statements in the OP article and the link to the article on the Daily Northwestern are full of "could have" "Might be" and that this is the basis upon some are offended on behalf of others. That's also just as much as you could know if you don't have other sources.

I found a report of that campus that said that there were 3 rapes reported in the previous year to that report. And yes, I did expect less. But it seem to me, especially after the following;

?To display a banner (saying) that ?We support survivors? is really something you have to earn by actually walking the walk,? said Baker, the former Associated Student Government senator for four sexual health and assault-related groups. ?The idea of displaying a banner like that in front of a house where people have been assaulted before seems really in poor taste to me.?

that there is a lot of speculation and assumption not only in this thread but also on campus. Am I not allowed to hang banners from my house because there might have been somebody raped? Should I leave my political party because there were and, statistically , are rapists in order to be deemed sensitive enough to protest against rape?

 

[lacktheknack]

That'll learn 'em... I guess.

Ugh. And people wonder why I'm trying to get the hell off this continent.

 

[Erttheking]

People jump to conclusions based on article that doesn't have all of the information. In short, business as usual around here.

 

[Tilly]

So why were they made to take the banners down and apologize [http://www.nationalreview.com/article/435044/campus-sexual-assault-fraternity-in-trouble-for-being-anti-assault] for it?

Because the radical feminist groups have massive influence on campus and they need to maintain the appearance of having an enemy to fight in order to justify their continued existence and employment.

The department of justice data suggests it's not "1 in 4 women", as they like to claim, but actually about 1 in 500 women who're raped on college campuses (http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=5176) and that it's been falling for the last 20 years.

If they actually admitted this, they're worried that there'll start be people asking "Do we really need women's studies?". "Why do we need a sexual equality administrator?"

In conclusion. It's a racket. An incredibly obvious one that I'm surprised has lasted this long.

 

[Something Amyss]

Am I not allowed to hang banners from my house because there might have been somebody raped?

This will likely be my last response on the matter. I don't find such a comparison, which has no relation to the topic at hand, to be productive.

You are not a fraternity. You have not agreed to abide by external rules and policies as per such a fraternity. This has nothing to do with what you do with your own property.

At the same time, while you reserve the right to do what you will within the law, anyone else has the right to call it a dick move, say it's not helpful, and even to ask you to take it down. None of these infringe on your rights, unless your country is incredibly out of the norm, and none of them count as "not allowed."

Now, there are actual gated communities in the US, and I think they're stupid, but once you agree to their terms, you run into a position where the homeowner's association can actually tell you to take down such a banner. You are, effectively, "not allowed" because you have previously agreed to abide by the ruling of the homeowner's association or face the penalties.

This latter example is more in line with the frat instance here. The fraternities are part of the IFC and have agreed to follow its policies. The IFC determined of its own volition to both discourage such banners and to start a sexual assault awareness program. They were not forced. Like, once you dial back the outrage, I'm really having trouble seeing the issue. Should the fratnernities be immune from criticism? Doesn't that actually violate someone's rights?

Should I leave my political party because there were and, statistically , are rapists in order to be deemed sensitive enough to protest against rape?

Depends on many factors, including how serious you actually are about instances of sexual assault. I know people who won't give up on a church after decades of systematically demonstrable coverups that assisted kiddie fiddlers. I think it's reprehensible, but I have no power to stop them.

On the flip side there, should I not be allowed to say it's reprehensible to support an organisation that sheltered widespread molestation of children?

But part of the problem is you phrased the question in such a way as to downplay the issue here.

I found a report of that campus that said that there were 3 rapes reported in the previous year to that report.

I found three by this time last year just by following the links in other articles.

The first hit I got on a sexual assault search was that the college had had four reports of sexual assault in 9 days. Searching only a little harder yielded me this [http://dailynorthwestern.com/2015/09/29/campus/northwestern-student-survey-reports-widespread-sexual-misconduct/], where students indicate the frequency of both sexual assault and frequency of reporting it. 9% reported sexual intercourse without consent.

But most importantly, the bit where this was voluntary and the IFC indicates there's a problem should really be the end of it. And it seems like the only way to make this story outrageous is to fabricate things (which is what this whole outrage appears to be based on) so...I don't see much point in continuing.

 

[Something Amyss]

That'll learn 'em... I guess.

Ugh. And people wonder why I'm trying to get the hell off this continent.

I honestly hope that accepting uncritically the shitty and dishonest "journalism" presented here isn't really your reason. I mean, it's your life, but it seems like a bad reason.

Oh, and it did show them. And that's why they voluntarily took steps to address sexual assault. Are we really worse off for that?

 

[The Bucket]

Eh, these kind of seemingly cut and paste wrong/right stories with only 1 source tend to be more complicated than they first appear

 

[lacktheknack]

That'll learn 'em... I guess.

Ugh. And people wonder why I'm trying to get the hell off this continent.

I honestly hope that accepting uncritically the shitty and dishonest "journalism" presented here isn't really your reason. I mean, it's your life, but it seems like a bad reason.

Oh, and it did show them. And that's why they voluntarily took steps to address sexual assault. Are we really worse off for that?

No. The fact that the story went this way, with this sort of reaction, is the reason I want off this continent.

I react badly to mass snark and hostility.

 

[shrekfan246]

When you post from a self-professed conservative news site that editorialises within its own content, and adds context (feminists! It was feminists!), it might be time to evaluate the validity and neutrality of the complaint.

Don't you know by now that everything can be blamed on those damn libruls and feminsits!?!

OT: I'm not even sure how I'm supposed to react to threads like this anymore. "Ignore it" seems to be the best option, since 10 times out of 10 it winds up to just being more complaining about feminists without even actually paying attention to anything that actual feminists do.

 

[Naldan]

Am I not allowed to hang banners from my house because there might have been somebody raped?

You are not a fraternity. You have not agreed to abide by external rules and policies as per such a fraternity. This has nothing to do with what you do with your own property.

Are covering up sexual assaults rules of those frats!?

And then:

Should I leave my political party because there were and, statistically , are rapists in order to be deemed sensitive enough to protest against rape?

Depends on many factors, including how serious you actually are about instances of sexual assault. I know people who won't give up on a church after decades of systematically demonstrable coverups that assisted kiddie fiddlers.

[/quote]

What the fuck. In your comparison, frats are covering up sexual assaults systematically? What is going on in the US?

And that's seriously close-minded to compare a secular political party with a religious organisation. It seems like you have zero knowledge about both, churches and parties.

On the flip side there, should I not be allowed to say it's reprehensible to support an organisation that sheltered widespread molestation of children?

It is, and you know it (!!!), a big difference if somebody is part of an organization and rapes people independently or if the organization assists with this. Are you really saying that this is supported by frats? Systematically?

But part of the problem is you phrased the question in such a way as to downplay the issue here.

No. Part of the problem is that you downplay the issue that is accusing people of maybe, statistically, supposedly having done something that has not been proven. You lump all frats together. You throw in everyone living there and just being a member. You implicate that everybody there knows what everybody there does and is participating by not leaving the frat. We can disagree, which I would agree on. But this mindset of yours, because it damages innocents and justice severely, is appaling.

I found a report of that campus that said that there were 3 rapes reported in the previous year to that report.

I found three by this time last year just by following the links in other articles.

The first hit I got on a sexual assault search was that the college had had four reports of sexual assault in 9 days. Searching only a little harder yielded me this [http://dailynorthwestern.com/2015/09/29/campus/northwestern-student-survey-reports-widespread-sexual-misconduct/], where students indicate the frequency of both sexual assault and frequency of reporting it. 9% reported sexual intercourse without consent.

But most importantly, the bit where this was voluntary and the IFC indicates there's a problem should really be the end of it. And it seems like the only way to make this story outrageous is to fabricate things (which is what this whole outrage appears to be based on) so...I don't see much point in continuing.

I'm not outraged, it was only the answers you gave here in this thread that made me respond. I know you mean this in general. But I'm sorry; when I see people trying to convince others of gross generalization, it's getting me. Yes, other people here are accusing all feminists of doing something horrible. But you're communicating here that people are guilty in some form or another by association. Which is big. Would you vote for Democrats? Because then, by your logic, you associate with mass murderers through atomic bombing. Would you say Obama does that? Would you say that everyone in that frat does associate with those people?

I don't expect an answer, as you announced to not respond.

 

[ObsidianJones_v1legacy]

Splurge? It's a fraternity. There are going to be dozens of members. It costs $20 to have a small vinyl banner printed, $40 for a large one. The could have each contributed a dollar and they would have had enough for several. That is "splurging?". 1 dollar? And I literally meant spending 5 minutes on design. Again, they are a fucking fraternity. Chances are there is going to be at least one guy who knows how to use Photoshop and can put black text on a white background, and if there is not they can find someone who is willing to do it easy. Instead they got a can of spray paint and some old sheets.

Being lazy and doing the bare minimum is exactly the problem. They didn't care enough to put any time, money, effort, or thought into their act of solidarity. That shows how little they care. The absolute minimum they can get away with.

Oddly enough, I always assumed that the actual problem was pretending that these incidents of sexual assault do not exist.

Shoddily done as they were, an effort was made. Which actually is phenomenal. Something got through. And instead of running with it and helping to increase the message to something that could be something more unifying and galvanizing, what some of these frat brothers might see is a slap in the face.

Personally, I'm of the mind that something done by hand means more than something purchased. Something purchased, a C.E.O. could have ordered absently. Like those messages of "Thank you for Shopping at Walmart, we Appreciate you". I don't feel like someone actually cares about my well being. I think it's a empty platitude designed to sucker me in.

I'm the kind of guy who likes a cake baked by hand by someone who cares about me instead of an order from Cost-Co. When I'm trying to let someone know I care, I physically go to where ever I'm needed and put my own hands into the problem. Instead of throwing around a few bucks and hiring someone to do it. When someone is picked up by a loved one in the airport, I'm sure they are more touched than someone who just sent an uber.

The issue is there's no bare Minimum. They didn't have to do it. At all. It wasn't something demanded by the college. For whatever reason, this frat chose to voice a message. They should be getting "Hey, we really appreciate what you're doing. Let's work together to expand this message in the future." instead of "Not enough, you deserve all the slack you're getting".

 

[Something Amyss]

Right. There is no mention of this in the article, aside from a quick (and seemingly unrelated) note on what is considered stereotypical frat behavior. The article focuses on a frat house trying to contribute to a good and necessary cause - and being told off for it.

Right, the article was a shitty and inflamatory piece by a right-wing publication that just wanted to scream ERMAGERD FEMINSTS. So what?

Now, what good is a four-year anti-sexual-assault program if it gets kicked off in this manner? Remember, every form of positive change starts with increased public awareness of the issue in question!

And public awareness has been increased. What's the problem? Like, I seriously don't get it.

Banners, as ThatOtherGirl sort of got at, tend to make people feel better but little else. They're an empty gesture. The IFC actually wasn't doing anything else. And that's been the status quo for a long time.

I think they may even be counter-productive, as people see them and think that something's actually being done when it isn't.

However: You do seem to know more about the matter than can be gleaned from the article, and if what you're saying is true, then I will readily concede that this was indeed the right thing for the faculty to do.

Looking at Northwestern's IFC makes it seem incredibly unlikely this was a staff decision. The offices I looked into for the IFC are all student-run. The President was a Sophomore last year, meaning he probably hasn't graduated. Such a decision appears to not have been spearheaded by faculty in any meaningful sense. I should also note that the President of the IFC is or was (I could probably find that detail, but have already done more work than I care to) of Men Against Rape and Sexual assault (MARS). It is perhaps understandable, then, that he might actually take criticism of the fraternities seriously of his own accord. I'm inclined to believe the IFC behaved in a voluntary way because they actually care about rape and sexual assault issues, as opposed to the people who are just complaining about feminists or freeze peach.

This appears to be a student-led action.

Almost 100% of the knowledge I've gleaned is through targeted Google searches. It's simple research, which I resorted to primarily because the original article linked here is simply awful. I've had to do it both for college and professionally, but nothing I've done here relies on any sort of insider tricks. or special skills.

What we're left with is two different stories: one from the National Review, and one from the IFC itself. I can't possibly disprove a feminist conspiracy, but neither do I have any reason to believe a third party's chain of events over that of the IFC.

And when this is one of the things NR decided to complain about:

When, nationally, fraternity men disproportionately commit sexual misconduct, hanging banners is not enough.

and they bury it behind two links, I think they know how terrible their case is.

Don't you know by now that everything can be blamed on those damn libruls and feminsits!?!

And bears. Don't forget the bears.

 

[shrekfan246]

Don't you know by now that everything can be blamed on those damn libruls and feminsits!?!

And bears. Don't forget the bears.

Curse you, Bongo-Kazooples!

I always knew they would take everything we loved in life.

 

[Something Amyss]

It at least makes more sense.

It does. It also isn't true. The Dean very likely had no input on the matter. The frats didn't get in trouble, there was no punishment and they weren't forced to apologised. The IFC appears to actually be concerned with the safety of students and issues of rape and sexual assault, which would be backed by their ties to multiple anti-rape/assault programs. When opinion and editorial pieces were published critical of the banners, they seem to have said "good point" and voluntarily changed their policies.

Isn't this a good thing? I think it's a good thing.

In all seriousness, the dude probably has it right.

I'd say probably not. Even the article in the OP has been quietly edited twice to talk back some of its bullshit.

 

[Neurotic Void Melody]

Don't you know by now that everything can be blamed on those damn libruls and feminsits!?!

And bears. Don't forget the bears.

Hey, man...i heard that! And, yes...maybe, just maybe bears are big soft targets that can take many blames without so much as a tickle. But we have feelings too! Feelings of intense hunger. Rage. Sleepiness. Sleepy rage. And, erm...ambivalence? Also guilt and boredom. Why am i listing bear emotions? This madness has to end!

 

[DudeistBelieve]

Where do you get this from?

First, it was multiple frats. Second, there are pictures of the banners both in this article and others. Third, the IFC's own words seems to indicate there are rape victims on campus. Do you have any good reason to believe, as it was put below, that this one college has been such a rare unicorn to not have any instances?

But for everything else, there's google. My grown-up keyboard died today, and I have to type on this little child-size one until Monday or drive two hours to guarantee a big one. I'm not particularly interested in doing the legwork on rather easily verified information. Especially when some of it is literally from the OP.

I had written quite the text here, but it seems that I lack the knowledge about the structure of US universities, or at least I did so until now. So just let me say two things.

First: I'm sorry.

Second: A lot of the direct statements in the OP article and the link to the article on the Daily Northwestern are full of "could have" "Might be" and that this is the basis upon some are offended on behalf of others. That's also just as much as you could know if you don't have other sources.

I found a report of that campus that said that there were 3 rapes reported in the previous year to that report. And yes, I did expect less. But it seem to me, especially after the following;

?To display a banner (saying) that ?We support survivors? is really something you have to earn by actually walking the walk,? said Baker, the former Associated Student Government senator for four sexual health and assault-related groups. ?The idea of displaying a banner like that in front of a house where people have been assaulted before seems really in poor taste to me.?

that there is a lot of speculation and assumption not only in this thread but also on campus. Am I not allowed to hang banners from my house because there might have been somebody raped? Should I leave my political party because there were and, statistically , are rapists in order to be deemed sensitive enough to protest against rape?

From your house?

Knowing this country, it's either against the town laws or against the homeowners association. ya can't even have a 6 foot high fence where I live without getting a summons.

fact of the matter is, if you're building is part of college campus life it falls under the juristiction of the college and whatever "Free speech" there is subjugated by their rules, same with nearly everything else.

Don't you know by now that everything can be blamed on those damn libruls and feminsits!?!

And bears. Don't forget the bears.

Hey, man...i heard that! And, yes...maybe, just maybe bears are big soft targets that can take many blames without so much as a tickle. But we have feelings too! Feelings of intense hunger. Rage. Sleepiness. Sleepy rage. And, erm...ambivalence? Also guilt and boredom. Why am i listing bear emotions? This madness has to end!

No. Fuck bears.

Don't you know that the moment you step outside your home the chances of you getting mauled by a bear sky rocket?

 

[chadachada123]

All I see from a lot of these responses is the word "alleged." How does one harbor ALLEGED rapists? Why is there this notion that a person who is accused of a crime should simply be kicked out of their fraternity?

The whole thing seems a bit silly. If there were members of the fraternity that were actively interfering with police work, that's one thing, but if a person is merely alleged then of course a fraternity with dignity isn't going to strip him of his rank all willy-nilly.

 

[Neurotic Void Melody]

Don't you know by now that everything can be blamed on those damn libruls and feminsits!?!

And bears. Don't forget the bears.

Hey, man...i heard that! And, yes...maybe, just maybe bears are big soft targets that can take many blames without so much as a tickle. But we have feelings too! Feelings of intense hunger. Rage. Sleepiness. Sleepy rage. And, erm...ambivalence? Also guilt and boredom. Why am i listing bear emotions? This madness has to end!

No. Fuck bears.

Don't you know that the moment you step outside your home the chances of you getting mauled by a bear sky rocket?

A bear sky rocket? Sounds like some serious equipment i am missing out on here. Also, i would recommend not trying to fuck them, that may be why they are trying to maul you.