Home
Articles
Photos
Interviews
Forums
New posts
Search forums
Georgia Tech Recruiting
Dashboard
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Chat
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
General Topics
The Swarm Lounge
Ga legislator wants Bud Peterson fired
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="RLR" data-source="post: 214165" data-attributes="member: 486"><p>(1) well said NE Stinger. I don't know much about the history or fully understand the dynamics. i didn't mean to overstate my knowledge. this story just didn't pass the sniff test & i saw a trend of people succumbing to what this appears to be - an attack for an ulterior purpose. However, on facebook, I did see some well written responses from young alumni and current students. Not responses like mine that attacked this story with the same douchebaggery with which it was written. But well reasoned, thoughtful, forceful but fair assessments of the situation. And they written from people across political spectrums, race, and gender.</p><p></p><p>(2) Whiskey Clear - I think everyone agrees that these situations should be taken with the utmost seriousness, respect for due process, and pursuit of justice. I did read the details of these cases, well, at least two of them. I think it's fair to say that both were really tough cases. This is an extremely difficult topic to have a meaningful conversation on. based on my experience as a male student & mandatory title IX training - as a society, we've punted on having a difficult discussion & decided to say rape is rape. this extends beyond GT. Look at our state. maybe 8 years ago there was that black teenager from atlanta who was 17 and received consensual oral sex from a 15 year old. He received a 10 year mandatory sentence. Until 2003, homosexual sex was a criminal offense in Georgia (although not enforced since the 80s). The last meaningful public conversation we had in this state was probably during that one election cycle where republican congressional candidates claimed that you can't get pregnant if raped.</p><p></p><p>But then again, look at GT. we're making huge strides in in increasing our female student ratio - which is the most meaningful initiative to close the STEM gender gap. But, that rape-bait email a few years ago from the GT frat didn't help our image. Let me be clear, i don't think that email should have been leaked or taken literally in any sense. But that's not how the public at large reacted to it. I hate that this is true, but the optics do matter.</p><p></p><p>Where does that leave GT? How do we handle the tough cases where the law & morality isn't clear. where someone has to win and someone has to lose. Where the main source of evidence is the victim. It's noble to say that the person should be innocent unless clearly guilty. I'm not even arguing against you there. Although, I would ask you to concede that such a stance would result in some cases of serious injustice (as would convicting an innocent person). It's a tradeoff, there's no golden solution here. But, my main point is, that's not the conversation we are having. I don't think that this congressmen's media blitz accurately reflects President Peterson's involvement or GT's discretion in the due process procedural elements of this case. GT's discretion in these types of hearings is very limited. Ehrhart was playing off people's ignorance towards the reality of the situation, victimizing male students, and vilifying President Peterson. But for what purpose? To what end? If the public isn't mature enough to engage meaningfully in this debate, if there's no action that can be corrected, then why are we having a superficial conversation about such a serious topic?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="RLR, post: 214165, member: 486"] (1) well said NE Stinger. I don't know much about the history or fully understand the dynamics. i didn't mean to overstate my knowledge. this story just didn't pass the sniff test & i saw a trend of people succumbing to what this appears to be - an attack for an ulterior purpose. However, on facebook, I did see some well written responses from young alumni and current students. Not responses like mine that attacked this story with the same douchebaggery with which it was written. But well reasoned, thoughtful, forceful but fair assessments of the situation. And they written from people across political spectrums, race, and gender. (2) Whiskey Clear - I think everyone agrees that these situations should be taken with the utmost seriousness, respect for due process, and pursuit of justice. I did read the details of these cases, well, at least two of them. I think it's fair to say that both were really tough cases. This is an extremely difficult topic to have a meaningful conversation on. based on my experience as a male student & mandatory title IX training - as a society, we've punted on having a difficult discussion & decided to say rape is rape. this extends beyond GT. Look at our state. maybe 8 years ago there was that black teenager from atlanta who was 17 and received consensual oral sex from a 15 year old. He received a 10 year mandatory sentence. Until 2003, homosexual sex was a criminal offense in Georgia (although not enforced since the 80s). The last meaningful public conversation we had in this state was probably during that one election cycle where republican congressional candidates claimed that you can't get pregnant if raped. But then again, look at GT. we're making huge strides in in increasing our female student ratio - which is the most meaningful initiative to close the STEM gender gap. But, that rape-bait email a few years ago from the GT frat didn't help our image. Let me be clear, i don't think that email should have been leaked or taken literally in any sense. But that's not how the public at large reacted to it. I hate that this is true, but the optics do matter. Where does that leave GT? How do we handle the tough cases where the law & morality isn't clear. where someone has to win and someone has to lose. Where the main source of evidence is the victim. It's noble to say that the person should be innocent unless clearly guilty. I'm not even arguing against you there. Although, I would ask you to concede that such a stance would result in some cases of serious injustice (as would convicting an innocent person). It's a tradeoff, there's no golden solution here. But, my main point is, that's not the conversation we are having. I don't think that this congressmen's media blitz accurately reflects President Peterson's involvement or GT's discretion in the due process procedural elements of this case. GT's discretion in these types of hearings is very limited. Ehrhart was playing off people's ignorance towards the reality of the situation, victimizing male students, and vilifying President Peterson. But for what purpose? To what end? If the public isn't mature enough to engage meaningfully in this debate, if there's no action that can be corrected, then why are we having a superficial conversation about such a serious topic? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
What jersey number did Justin Thomas wear?
Post reply
Home
Forums
General Topics
The Swarm Lounge
Ga legislator wants Bud Peterson fired
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top