apparently theres a 30 for 30 coming out called "I Hate Christian Laettner"? They're making a whole 30 for 30 about that?
Just finished Miracles and Men. Might've been the best one they've done.
This one doesn't interest me for some reason.
Yeah, I can see that considering they already did one with Tyson and it was probably their worst 30for30 they've done.
Personally, I'd like to see one on Arturo Gatti or on his battles with Micky Ward. But that's not likely mainstream enough.
HBO could do a great 60-120 minute show on Gatti-Ward.
Saw the OJ Simpson 30 for 30. I remember watching it live, but of course, hardly remembered that all that other stuff was happening on that same day. (Was annoyed at the constant interruptions to the Rockets-Knicks Game 5)
Dang it - must be really dusty in here as I'm watching "The Guru of Go" about the 1990 Loyola Marymount Lions and Hank Gathers
The 30 for 30 episode about the Duke lacrosse trial "Fantastic Lies" is one of their best. They didn't have any of the accused players on camera, but they did interview their parents. It may have actually been better because of it.
The overreaction and rush to judgement by the media was bothersome by itself, but that paled in comparison to the blatant misconduct by the DA and chief investigator.
If you decide to file a complaint, your school must promptly investigate it regardless of whether you report to the police (though a police investigation may very briefly delay the school’s investigation if law enforcement is gathering evidence). A school may not wait for the conclusion of a criminal proceeding and should conclude its own investigation within a semester’s time (the 2011 Office for Civil Rights Title IX guidance proposes 60 days as an appropriate time-frame). The school should use a “preponderance of the evidence” standard to determine the outcome of a complaint, meaning discipline should result if it is more likely than not that discrimination, harassment and/or violence occurred. The final decision should be provided to you and the accused in writing. Both of you have the right to appeal the decision.]
I think the criminal justice system is particularly ill-equipped to handle rape cases in general, and those involving athletes or public figures in particular. It is basically impossible to balance the presumption of innocence for the accused with protection of the victim, since the presumption of innocence inherently undermines the victim's credibility. It is just a no-win situation for criminal justice, IMO.
I think this is often further complicated in acquaintance rape and hook up culture situations where consent is often assumed but not actively given, leading to disparate views on what actually happened (This sounds like the case with the Yale basketball player). I think our societal views on sexual communication, and what we teach kids about sexual communication are partially to blame for creating so many of these situations. I think what most people in our generation learned about sexual consent was the "no means no" trope, which is a horrible approach to consent, IMO, especially from a male point of view with power dynamics between the sexes. I think it is especially dangerous when you couple it with the societal gender role ideas that men are supposed to be assertive, while women are supposed to play hard to get during sexual encounters. All of that adds up to a terribly confusing way to approach consent during a sexual encounter, especially when alcohol is added to the mix. While it might kill some of the excitement, spontaneity, or the thrill of the chase or whatever, I think everyone would be better served by actively discussing what they want from a sexual encounter before it starts (and then respecting that decision by not pushing for more).
But, maybe I'm the schmuck for being too passive and acquiescing.
I think the criminal justice system is particularly ill-equipped to handle rape cases in general, and those involving athletes or public figures in particular. It is basically impossible to balance the presumption of innocence for the accused with protection of the victim, since the presumption of innocence inherently undermines the victim's credibility. It is just a no-win situation for criminal justice, IMO.
I think this is often further complicated in acquaintance rape and hook up culture situations where consent is often assumed but not actively given, leading to disparate views on what actually happened (This sounds like the case with the Yale basketball player). I think our societal views on sexual communication, and what we teach kids about sexual communication are partially to blame for creating so many of these situations. I think what most people in our generation learned about sexual consent was the "no means no" trope, which is a horrible approach to consent, IMO, especially from a male point of view with power dynamics between the sexes. I think it is especially dangerous when you couple it with the societal gender role ideas that men are supposed to be assertive, while women are supposed to play hard to get during sexual encounters. All of that adds up to a terribly confusing way to approach consent during a sexual encounter, especially when alcohol is added to the mix. While it might kill some of the excitement, spontaneity, or the thrill of the chase or whatever, I think everyone would be better served by actively discussing what they want from a sexual encounter before it starts (and then respecting that decision by not pushing for more).
At least you admit it.
I'll head to CJ for advice on how to handle sexual situations right after I run steak preparation by mame.
If the criminal justice system is ill equipped, think about the schools. Title IX is fucking stupid for for forcing colleges and universities to investigate sexual assault claims.
Please tell me how a school is equipped to handle rape investigations and conclude them in 60 days. It is just a no win situation. Discrimination or harassment ok, but violence? No. That should be turned over to the police department and that's it.
NML just rapey as fuck, and that works for him!
A now-somewhat famous soccer player once told me at a party while on a visit - "let her insert you, then she's got no case.
You are doing it the correct way and the fact that you don't have confusion about consent is a product of that communication. That's exactly how I approached sex as well, even if I was told more than once that it was a turn off that I wasn't being ASSERTIVE enough. The thing is that your approach is hardly the norm when it comes to this stuff though, and I'm saying that there are a lot of societal pressures telling men to be more assertive/dominant and just badger women until they give it up. With "no means no" style understanding of consent, they view anything that isn't "no" as consent and that is just rife with potential problems (someone who is passed out can't say no, but that obviously isn't consent).
I agree. Maybe I'm a pussy (ok, I am kind of a pussy), but I've never understood this logic. I've never felt so hard up to bust a nut that I would feel ok with what amounts to bullying and manipulation to get sex. Acting like an ass doesn't make you an alpha, imo.
Dammit TravisDat juxtaposition between taking a stance against bullying/manipulation of women while also using "pussy" as a pejorative term, doe.