This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
|
|
|
|
by Davidadelong on 06:59 PM March 9th, 2006 EST (#1)
|
|
|
|
|
I can see the guy getting fired, or reprimanded, "I don't know what the message said" but as far as the girl is concerned and the family seeking an attorney for funds for counseling; seems the victim mentality is really helping fuel the court system. Yes, there is a very large discrepency between what a woman gets for innapropriate conduct and what Men get.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Roy on 07:48 PM March 9th, 2006 EST (#2)
|
|
|
|
|
VAWA 2005 as recently passed has beefed up legal definitions of "stalking" that make it a crime to send two or more "unwanted, intimidating" electronic communications.
This would logically include e-mail, chat rooms, web forum replies, I.M., text messaging, podcasting, M2M, etc. etc.
Welcome to THOUGHT CRIME PLANET, gents.
Sexual harrassment will soon be defined as a gender crime that requires no actual physical proximity between the "victim" and the "perpetrator."
Words-on-a-screen will soon get you prosecuted!
You assaulted a never-met, never-seen female by typing words that represent thoughts that were transmitted and (here's the legal quagmire) "accepted and read" by your intended victim.
No actual solicitation of anything remotely sexual in nature is required to meet the criteria for cyber-stalking.
What do you see in this Orwellian-Freidanian future for men?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by LSBeene on 11:01 AM March 10th, 2006 EST (#3)
|
|
|
|
|
In most cases I've seen the teacher is on Admn Leave (PAID) if she is female.
But this guy is OUT immediately. And notice no talk about what a great guy he is, or his feelings, or annything.
It's all about the victim (rightly so).
What utter duplicitousness.
Steven "Watch our backs at home, we'll guard the wall over here. Sleep safe tonight, we're on the job."
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|