"This is happening in broad daylight with hundreds of people seeing and hearing what is happening and they are more concerned about spilling their beer than somebody being raped," [said Bay County Sheriff Frank McKeithen].
April 11, 2015
"'She isn't going to know,' one man is reportedly heard saying in the video..."
"Not once does someone say something or try to help the woman, and the incident was never reported...."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
44 comments:
What a terrible way to lose one's virginity. Sex, drugs and rock and roll is only innocent ecstatic play among beach sunbathers.
Thanks for posting this.
Traditional chivalry seems to have been weakened among the youth.
What's expected is no longer expected, while still being expected.
The usual suspects!!
Not white and prestigious enough. Rolling Stone wouldn't dare write about this, because it doesn't fit the hipster, progressive narrative they want to project across America.
Hold the front page: girl raped ... for real! Now to find out which frat at which college hosted this event.
@traditional guy
There are a few assumptions in your comment that may not correspond to reality. "virginity" "innocent ecstatic play" and "sunbathers." Other than that, the story's accurate.
Any onlooker they can identify, male or female doesn't matter, needs to be charged with aiding and abetting and prosecuted. Make this a spring break they'll never forget as long as they have to put down that they were arrested and charged on their employment applications.
I'm surprised to note the Race of the perps. Very unexpected behavior from two gentlemen of that ethnicity.
Is this common?
This is the real rape that college students engage in, this is not he-said she-said back in the dorm.
This is actual rape and it happens at just about every one of these Spring Break events, and it is often perpetrated by non-students who have traveled hundreds of miles to particpate.
This is happening in broad daylight with hundreds of people seeing and hearing what is happening and [no one does anything to help]
If we want to understand how this could happen, perhaps it is because these hundreds of people have been raised in a hyper-sexualized culture, where everyone is seen to be sexually active, sex is even seen as everyone's number one priority (to the extent that employers are expected to subsidize a person's sex life), "girls gone wild" videos are rampant, and even sex in public is normative. In such an environment, it is not inconceivable that people would think this was a consensual activity. Yes, these people's failure to intervene is disgusting, but blame modern culture as much as them.
Back in the day when sex was a bit more serious, when people were encouraged to wait until marriage, and when there was at least in the law a presumption of chastity, if this were to happen then, hundreds of people would have stopped it long before it got very far.
OK, so, someone sees inappropriate sexual activity going on in his presence and he says "stop it." Then he is punished by the government for doing so.
Then some other people see inappropriate sexual activity going on in their presence and they do nothing. Then they are criticized too.
Unmentioned is the fact that there are two "spring breaks" one white and one black.
It is not well known and very rarely covered by media.
Williams reminded O’Reilly of Freaknik, the annual celebration of black violence and anarchy that got so bad that even the Chocolate City of Atlanta had to pull the welcome mat. Then he mentioned Urban Beach Week in Miami Beach -- only reporters call it anything but Black Beach Week -- and how that was a celebration of chaos and violence as well.
It's been demonstrated that help is much less likely to come from a large crowd of people than a sparse number, so there's that.
I figure feminists won't have anything to say about this incident. Protected classes are protected. Duh. Find me a white man to condemn please.
Stomach churning.
Who videotaped?
Actually someone did tell them to stop, but it was a religious cabdriver and he was hauled to court.
Ok, the burden of guilt falls on the two rapists, and there's plenty more to share with the onlookers. But doesn't the girl who passed out in a crowd of low lifes deserve a teeny, weenie smidgen of blame?.....,Is there a depth of stupidity that diminishes victimhood status?
why exactly do people video themselves committing horrible crimes?
She said she was drugged.
I wonder if this will get the same quantity/quality of coverage by feminist rape-culture focused tweeters and bloggers. If not, why not? Is it because they do not care as much about rape culture when the victim is (apparently) not white?
Back in the day when sex was a bit more serious
When exactly is "back in the day"? 50 years ago? 100? During the Victorian era?
How were the onlookers supposed to know she was being raped?
The article isn't very clear. At one point she says she didn't report it because she didn't remember enough of it. That leads me to believe she remembers some of it.
I don't trust our media to give us accurate and complete information, so, I'm skeptical of this story. A couple of black males rape someone (do we know the ethnicity of the girl?) And the focus of the story is on the crowd, why?
Here is what I think. Raped girl got drunk. She is young so she doesn't yet realize that alcohol is a powerful drug. When she gets plastered, she thinks, someone drugged me. What she doesn't realize is that she drugged herself. Like most drunk people, she was probably still moving and had eyes opened and closed at varying points. Not a lot different than someone in the throws if passion.
If I were partying on a beach and saw some people having a sex party in broad daylight, I wouldn't assume it was rape. I'd assume it was disgusting behavior and a precursor to the fall of our civilization. I would have looked away and moved on.
I mean, who rapes a girl in broad day light in a crowd?
I have a feeling these men didn't even think they were raping her.
But the article helpfully adds the line that "reportedly" some guy is heard saying she isn't going to know.
Oh well then, we have all the facts we need.
"If it feels good, do it. Do it if it's what you feel."
Freder is right, the culture is no different today that it was in 1975, or 1950, or 1925. It's all just right-wing delusion that respect for women has dropped.
How were the onlookers supposed to know she was being raped?
So, public sex is completely OK with you, so long as it's consensual? The onlookers didn't have to get even so far as "rape." Then again, if the kid is basically passed out, "rape" does rather spring to mind.
I'd assume it was disgusting behavior and a precursor to the fall of our civilization. . . . I have a feeling these men didn't even think they were raping her.
Someone made a video and then sent it around. Why? Because they thought that others would be entertained, that they would fist-bump these guys and say "way to go." In other words, because they didn't think it was rape, they thought it was socially acceptable behavior.
See? Even now we have a couple of people here trying to depict this sexually deviant behavior as normative.
Blogger Michelle Dulak Thomson said...
How were the onlookers supposed to know she was being raped?
So, public sex is completely OK with you, so long as it's consensual? The onlookers didn't have to get even so far as "rape." Then again, if the kid is basically passed out, "rape" does rather spring to mind.
Public sex is not OK with me.
Which is why I won't go to areas where a bunch of college kids are drinking heavily and taking their clothes off.
Is that where Freaknik went?
Freder Frederson: "When exactly is "back in the day"? 50 years ago? 100? During the Victorian era?"
Yes, yes and yes.
Did you have a point?
Mark's complete assertion was this: "Back in the day when sex was a bit more serious, when people were encouraged to wait until marriage, and when there was at least in the law a presumption of chastity, if this were to happen then, hundreds of people would have stopped it long before it got very far."
I don't think you could make a serious argument that "back in the day" there would not have been a much stronger impulse on those around such an event to step in to stop it.
Also, it doesn't change the story too much, but ... it might. The article (and one other I googled to check) is pretty vague about what happened. Are we actually talking about what we think we're talking about with "gang rape"?
I see that the perp is charged with sexual battery. Maybe in Florida that's what they call penetrative rape. Or maybe all that happened is all that is described in the story: A hand in her genital area, which would still be battery even if that's all it was.
Do we all think that there was intercourse and the story is just too circumspect to mention it? Or is it that illegal non-consensual fondling happened and people are equating that with rape? Because there does seem to be a trend of upscaling accusations these days.
This might also factor into the alleged indifference of the crowd. None of this is to be construed as condoning even a lesser act, but I wonder if anyone else suspected that the term "rape" was being used possibly a little imprecisely.
Emil Blatz: "Is that where Freaknik went?"
Looks like it's at least one of the places it went.
When I lived in the Atlanta area not that long ago there were some freaknik activities in particular parts of town where many shop owners would simply close up during those periods.
Of course, the cries of racism from our lefties were heard loud and clear when the shopholders closed up.
Per usual.
I, too, got the impression from the article that the act in question was groping, not intercourse. Is groping and fondling legally considered rape?
Is groping and fondling legally considered rape?
"Back in the day" when words actually meant something, rape was by definition vaginal penetration, however slight, by a penis. That meant that only a woman could be raped and only a man could commit it. Today of course, they tell us that a man can be raped. They also tell us that a person with a penis can be a woman.
So, can groping and fondling be rape? Sure, why the hell not. They are just making it up as they go along anyway.
Florida state laws currently include rape under the offense of "sexual battery." The relevant statutes no longer give a separate legal definition for rape.
But the story is not clear, regardless.
Yes, yes and yes.
Did you have a point?
Yes I do. "Back in the day" wasn't as moral and wonderful as you seem to think. Although we may have been more circumspect about sex, we sure as hell did a lot of depraved things in public
FF writes;
Yes I do. "Back in the day" wasn't as moral and wonderful as you seem to think. Although we may have been more circumspect about sex, we sure as hell did a lot of depraved things in public
Ah yes, they used to do all sorts of terrible things in public. They had duels, public hangings, people were just terrible, therefore, there was never a back in the day.
Progressive thinking on display.
Oh wait....
Although we may have been more circumspect about sex
So, he kinda/sorta does understand.
Liberals, forever playing stupid.
ISTR the reporter Lara Logan was sexually assaulted by a mob of hundreds in Tahrir Square. The initial usage was IIRC "rape" but subsequently it seems to have been a group grope. Not to minimize because several years and surgeries later she still is not whole.
We must respect all cultures, including rape culture.
Freder: "Yes I do. "Back in the day" wasn't as moral and wonderful as you seem to think."
LOL
That creaking sound you just heard was the goal posts being moved....alot.
Hey dummy, I never said that "back in the day" was moral and wonderful.
Idiot.
I simply noted the obvious: more folks would have stepped in to stop a public rape "back in the day".
Unknown: "Not to minimize because several years and surgeries later she still is not whole."
That could not have been a rape or even a violent group grope since it happened in a nation where the citizens are almost uniformly members of the one left-wing coddled religion.
You'd better stay "unknown" because those kinds of comments could easily be construed as anti-muslim and there is almost no bigger thought-crime on the left than that.
But Drago: Freder does so much better arguing against his own recasting of our points. How can you take that away from him???
If anyone needs proof we are animals with large brains...look no further.
Post a Comment