Football scandal in NJ

46 replies
  • OFF TOPIC
  • |
So did you hear about the football scandal here in NJ?

7 Sayreville football players charged in hazing, sexual assault of teammates (Exclusive) | NJ.com

Did this sort of stuff happen in the 70s/80s too?

Very sad.
  • Profile picture of the author WalkingCarpet
    Banned
    Team sports have always had this sorta thing since the beginning of time.
    These poor sods were unlucky enough to get caught.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9587830].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author kenmichaels
      Originally Posted by WalkingCarpet View Post

      Team sports have always had this sorta thing since the beginning of time.
      These poor sods were unlucky enough to get caught.
      wow – did you really just say that?
      Signature

      Selling Ain't for Sissies!
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9587842].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
        Originally Posted by kenmichaels View Post

        wow - did you really just say that?
        He apparently didn't actually read the article.

        If this had happened at any of the high schools I was familiar with back in the day, the police wouldn't have known a thing about it until they started finding bodies.


        Paul
        Signature
        .
        Stop by Paul's Pub - my little hangout on Facebook.

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9587858].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author BigFrank
          Banned
          I was particularly amused (for lack of a more appropriate word) at the mob of parents screaming at the school board for cancelling the season and asking when the next election was so they could all be voted out of their positions.

          Football - the most sacred and revered religion in America, where anything, including my son shoving his feces-slathered fingers down another player's throat, is perfectly acceptable, as long as my kid gets to start on Saturday.

          Sick!

          Cheers. - Frank
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9587872].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Kay King
            I agree - but we've made football so sacred that not playing is the worst possible thing that can happen. After all - every high school player imagines himself on a pro team and many parents believe the fantasy, too.

            My sons were heavy into sports in high school and they told me stories of "class actions" - which was pranking/teasing younger team members. Some of the pranks bordered on mean - but they were not sexual and the kids I knew would have had a "ewwww" reaction to that kind of harrassment.

            I don't understand how it was possible for kids to "howl and turn off the lights" (I assume in the locker room) and then spend time molesting/torturing other players. Where were the coaches/asst coaches/staff/parents?
            Signature
            Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9587929].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author BigFrank
              Banned
              Originally Posted by Kay King View Post

              After all - every high school player imagines himself on a pro team and many parents believe the fantasy, too.
              Yeah, well I fantasized that I'd be a porn star. Ask me how that worked out for me? :-)

              My parents were quite disappointed, too.

              Cheers. - Frank
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9587952].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Dennis Gaskill
            It's not just football. There were four high school wrestlers here a few years ago who hazed another wrestler - not to the same degree as in this article, but too close to it to be considered a normal high school ritual - that caused quite an uproar. The coach was fired, lawsuits were filed, and the boys spent time behind bars.
            Signature

            Just when you think you've got it all figured out, someone changes the rules.

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9588010].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author BigFrank
              Banned
              Originally Posted by Dennis Gaskill View Post

              The coach was fired, lawsuits were filed, and the boys spent time behind bars.
              Right - when it's wrestling, people get fired and go to jail. When it's football, people just want to know what you're problem is? If you can't handle a little hazing, how do you expect to ever develop into a championship caliber player?

              We'll so who gets fired and who goes to jail over this. I can tell you now, if you'd like. I'm going with 'absolutely no one.'

              Cheers. - Frank
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9588032].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author kenmichaels
    Originally Posted by barbling View Post

    Did this sort of stuff happen in the 70s/80s too?

    Very sad.
    We beat the crap out of each other - in and out of the locker rooms.

    No sex anything, unless you consider calling each other homo's and faggot
    and things of that nature sexual. When I was in high school that was about the
    worse thing you could say to a guy on the team - so of course that's what
    we all called each other.
    Signature

    Selling Ain't for Sissies!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9587836].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Kurt
    The perps should be prosecuted for rape.

    However, let's not paint all football teams and coaches with the same brush. When I was in school, I needed help due to family issues. Two different football coaches at different schools helped me way beyond the "call of duty" and to this day, they both have a very big spot in my heart. A good coach is often the best thing in many young kids' lives.

    And while we're at it, if we're going to condem football because of hazing, let's also include colleges and the military. It isn't as if those two institutions have never crossed the line when it comes to hazing.

    A big problem is society always focuses on what's wrong, instead of the good. Some folks really should research "JJ Watt", but he's just not as provactive as most of the national headlines.
    Signature
    Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
    Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9588028].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author BigFrank
      Banned
      Originally Posted by Kurt View Post

      A big problem is society always focuses on what's wrong, instead of the good. Some folks really should research "JJ Watt", but he's just not as provactive as most of the national headlines.
      There are many good coaches. That said, you should not get special recognition for doing your job the way you're supposed to do it. That comes with the territory.

      The cretins need to be highlighted and ridiculed. That's OUR job!

      Cheers. - Frank
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9588051].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Kurt
        Originally Posted by BigFrank View Post

        There are many good coaches. That said, you should not get special recognition for doing your job the way you're supposed to do it. That comes with the territory.

        The cretins need to be highlighted and ridiculed. That's OUR job!

        Cheers. - Frank
        If you are refering to my post, I clearly wrote that the two coaches went way beyond the call of duty. That means they did things that are not part of their job description.

        And no, the "cretins" don't need to be ridiculed, they need to be prosecuted for rape.
        Signature
        Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
        Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9588070].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author BigFrank
          Banned
          Originally Posted by Kurt View Post

          If you are refering to my post, I clearly wrote that the two coaches went way beyond the call of duty. That means they did things that are not part of their job description.
          Duly noted, but still something that all 'coaches' should aspire to, rather than doing the bare minimum of the job description.
          And no, the "cretins" don't need to be ridiculed, they need to be prosecuted for rape.
          Being called out and ridiculed are the first steps in a what should be a long process.

          Cheers. - Frank
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9588081].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
            I think total ostracism is more effective than ridicule. The entire community should simply refuse to have anything to do with the kids who did this stuff. (That's on top of the appropriate legal ramifications.)

            Shun them so thoroughly that anyone who was even remotely involved in the attacks has no choice but to move somewhere distant to have a hope of a normal life.

            And cancel next year's football season for the school, too. Make it clear to the staff at all the high schools in the state that just not watching closely enough to prevent this could lose the whole school the privilege of competing.

            Reverse the payoff. Instead of being the "big men on campus," the sociopaths who do this crap would become pariahs.

            Want to end it? That would do the job.


            Paul
            Signature
            .
            Stop by Paul's Pub - my little hangout on Facebook.

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9588114].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author BigFrank
              Banned
              Originally Posted by Paul Myers View Post

              I think total ostracism is more effective than ridicule.
              That's the word I was looking for. lol Sorry - I'm in the middle of a live radio show that I engineer and I'm trying to do 10 things at once. Not concentrating - on my post or the show. :-(

              Yes, ostracized is the most accurate term. Thanks for the help.

              Cheers. - Frank
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9588122].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author Kay King
                I fully agree with no season and no football at ALL for those who did this.

                However, I don't agree with the calls today to try the boys as adults and put them on the sex offenders registry.

                I think coaches and parents needed to pay attention - and didn't. I would slap these kids hard and take footbal away from them completely. However, I would not try to ruin their entire lives over this. I think that goes too far and is vindictive without adding any benefit.
                Signature
                Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9588288].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author Kurt
                  Originally Posted by Kay King View Post

                  I fully agree with no season and no football at ALL for those who did this.

                  However, I don't agree with the calls today to try the boys as adults and put them on the sex offenders registry.

                  I think coaches and parents needed to pay attention - and didn't. I would slap these kids hard and take footbal away from them completely. However, I would not try to ruin their entire lives over this. I think that goes too far and is vindictive without adding any benefit.
                  And I think putting a finger up someone's butt and lifting them off the ground, then putting the finger in their mouth is going too far and is without any "benefit".

                  Let them have their day in court. If some/all of them are found not guilty, let them go. But just because it was a case of "hazing" should't give anyone a get out of jail free card.

                  If someone doesn't want to be classified as a sex offender, then don't rape or sexually assault someone else. If you can't do the time, don't do the crime.
                  Signature
                  Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
                  Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9588343].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author sbucciarel
                  Banned
                  Originally Posted by Kay King View Post

                  I fully agree with no season and no football at ALL for those who did this.

                  However, I don't agree with the calls today to try the boys as adults and put them on the sex offenders registry.

                  I think coaches and parents needed to pay attention - and didn't. I would slap these kids hard and take footbal away from them completely. However, I would not try to ruin their entire lives over this. I think that goes too far and is vindictive without adding any benefit.
                  Slap them for sexual assault? It wouldn't bother me to see them go away for a long time. We are not ruining their miserable lives. They are doing that and ruining others as well. I have no sympathy for criminals, whether they're sports heroes or not.
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9588443].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author Kay King
                    No, not slap them only.

                    I've read every account of this story (that wasn't totally sensationalized) and I think there's something people aren't considering....how boys often think.

                    Should they play football again in HS - no way. Should they be placed on a registry of sex offenders for LIFE at age 15-17? I don't think so.

                    Here's why:

                    This is rightly being interpreted as 'sexual assault' but I'm not sure that's how the bully boys thought of it.

                    Listen to any boy playing macho - whether in grade school or high school - and you'll hear more a## jokes and Sh** jokes and Butt jokes than you ever wanted to hear. Jokes about "butts" make boys laugh and there is little they can think of that is "dirtier" than sh**.

                    What I'm saying is the sexual component is there under the law and in OUR opinions - I'm not sure the acts were meant as sexual as much as being degrading.

                    I think instead of passing judgement and handing out sentences - we need to find out why a group of boys thought this was ok - why adults were not nearby or paying attention - and how pervasive this behavior is in this school and in school sports programs.
                    Signature
                    Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9588506].message }}
                    • Profile picture of the author sbucciarel
                      Banned
                      Originally Posted by Kay King View Post

                      No, not slap them only.

                      I've read every account of this story (that wasn't totally sensationalized) and I think there's something people aren't considering....how boys often think.

                      Should they play football again in HS - no way. Should they be placed on a registry of sex offenders for LIFE at age 15-17? I don't think so.

                      Here's why:

                      This is rightly being interpreted as 'sexual assault' but I'm not sure that's how the bully boys thought of it.

                      Listen to any boy playing macho - whether in grade school or high school - and you'll hear more a## jokes and Sh** jokes and Butt jokes than you ever wanted to hear. Jokes about "butts" make boys laugh and there is little they can think of that is "dirtier" than sh**.

                      What I'm saying is the sexual component is there under the law and in OUR opinions - I'm not sure the acts were meant as sexual as much as being degrading.

                      I think instead of passing judgement and handing out sentences - we need to find out why a group of boys thought this was ok - why adults were not nearby or paying attention - and how pervasive this behavior is in this school and in school sports programs.
                      I completely disagree. To characterize this type of behavior as some sort of fascination with fart or butt jokes type of thing is trivializing it to say the least. I personally don't believe that argument for a moment, but if their intent was to degrade rather than assault sexually, it makes not one bit of difference to me. They did what they did. They aren't reported to severely retarded, so I'm sure they are aware of exactly what they did and what is wrong with that. If not, they soon will be.

                      It was flat out aggressive sexual assault. There's really no other way to characterize it and they deserve the full punishment that anyone else would get under the law, including having to register as a sex offender.
                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9588551].message }}
                      • Profile picture of the author Kay King
                        They did what they did.
                        I don't know what they did - and neither does anyone else UNTIL it's proven. It's too easy to slap on the "sexual" label - this may be a different type of stupid. Yes, there is a sexual component - but I'm not sure it's the only component or even a driving force behind this totally unacceptable behavior. There is an element of bullying here that is disturbing.

                        I'm not going to argue it further - I don't know the full story but will be interesting to see how this case is handled.
                        Signature
                        Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
                        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9588755].message }}
                        • Profile picture of the author sbucciarel
                          Banned
                          Originally Posted by Kay King View Post

                          I don't know what they did - and neither does anyone else UNTIL it's proven. It's too easy to slap on the "sexual" label - this may be a different type of stupid. Yes, there is a sexual component - but I'm not sure it's the only component or even a driving force behind this totally unacceptable behavior. There is an element of bullying here that is disturbing.

                          I'm not going to argue it further - I don't know the full story but will be interesting to see how this case is handled.
                          Ok ... go that route if you want. I feel better that these people in NJ with knowledge of the case feel that it is a horrible, disgusting crime worthy of the same kind of punishment that any sexual offender would get.

                          Sayreville football hazing charges: What N.J. lawmakers are saying | NJ.com
                          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9588758].message }}
                          • Profile picture of the author Kay King
                            It isn't a "route" - that's the point. I think it's horrible and disgusting - I agree with that. I'm not sure it's as simple as "sex abuse" though that is definitely a result of the activity.

                            I want to know MORE about stories like this - I want to know what makes otherwise good kids do something so cruel and stupid. I want to know if this is a new activity or if it's been going on for a long time and never addressed.

                            I want to know why kids thought this was acceptable - and why other kids didn't speak up against it. I want to know why some were targeted while others weren't...and whether adults knew and looked the other way.
                            Signature
                            Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
                            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9588764].message }}
                            • Profile picture of the author sbucciarel
                              Banned
                              Originally Posted by Kay King View Post

                              It isn't a "route" - that's the point. I think it's horrible and disgusting - I agree with that. I'm not sure it's as simple as "sex abuse" though that is definitely a result of the activity.

                              I want to know MORE about stories like this - I want to know what makes otherwise good kids do something so cruel and stupid. I want to know if this is a new activity or if it's been going on for a long time and never addressed.

                              I want to know why kids thought this was acceptable - and why other kids didn't speak up against it. I want to know why some were targeted while others weren't...and whether adults knew and looked the other way.
                              That's where we differ. I'm assuming that they are guilty as charged and if that turns out to be the case, I don't care one iota what they were thinking and I don't for a minute assume that they were otherwise good kids. I don't think good kids do things like this. As far as the crime and the punishment goes, it doesn't matter to me if they thought it was acceptable or why other kids didn't speak up or how they chose their victims or whether adults knew (although that will be relevant to their careers and possible charges against them).

                              I have a son too. He wasn't a sports fan or jock. He's a geek. I have never heard of this type of behavior before in high school kids. There's always been bullying, but this is beyond what I've ever heard of high school kids doing in the name of hazing. Really extreme behavior.
                              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9588773].message }}
                              • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
                                Kay,
                                I want to know what makes otherwise good kids do something so cruel and stupid.
                                I think it's rather a leap to assume that.

                                There are things that happen which can be explained (not excused, but at least explained) by situations that just escalate. If what happened bears any resemblance to what was reported in that story, though, this ended up being exactly what the attackers intended it to be. Repeatedly.

                                As Suzanne said, "otherwise good kids" do not set out to do something like this.

                                Looking for sociological causes is useful if this is a common or trending thing. It may be an isolated instance, in which case it's just some sick creeps who need removed from society.

                                Curiosity about that aspect of it is a good thing. It shouldn't have anything to do with the consequences to the attackers, though. It certainly won't make things any easier on the victims.

                                Thinking about it like a jock prank or hazing gone bad is a mistake. This takes a whole other kind of mind.


                                Paul
                                Signature
                                .
                                Stop by Paul's Pub - my little hangout on Facebook.

                                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9589210].message }}
                                • Profile picture of the author BigFrank
                                  Banned
                                  Originally Posted by Paul Myers View Post

                                  Thinking about it like a jock prank or hazing gone bad is a mistake. This takes a whole other kind of mind.
                                  I believe that's true but it is important to realize that peer-pressure, especially at that age and in such an uber-testosterone fueled environment is a prime motivator for all types of ugly behavior.

                                  I would like to think that possibly one or more of those kids cried themselves to sleep after the first episode, but by the same token, I would not be surprised to discover that more than one developed an unhealthy thirst for sadism after their first taste.

                                  Cheers. - Frank
                                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9589635].message }}
                                  • Profile picture of the author Kay King
                                    Thanks, Frank, you explained better than I was doing.

                                    For every cruel and insensitive kid of the "jock" persuasion....there are impressionable kids who go along to get along. THOSE are the kids I'm thinking of.

                                    For the few who were holding kids down and abusing them, there were kids watching/knowing who knew better but did nothing and said nothing. Those are the good kids acting bad....and those are the ones you can reach.

                                    I raised two sons - both were jocks. I have 3 grandsons - one each in middle school, high school and college...two are jocks while the other is heavily into non-school and extreme sports.

                                    Oddly, not one of them played football. They didn't like football - but we have hockey, lacrosse, tennis, golf, diving, skiing, snowboarding, swimming, track and field, baseball, basketball....everything BUT football!

                                    I know the jock mentality of high school kids. To boys that age, your butt and your balls are fair game. If you told those same bullies this was "sexual" they'd be embarrassed and argue that it isn't. Political correctness notwithstanding, nothing is as shocking to a HS jock today as being labeled as sexual toward another male.

                                    The sexual component gets news coverage and outrage - but it's the cruelty that is the real story. It's the lack of concern for someone on your team and the attitude that you can do whatever you please and get by. This is pure bully behavior carried to extremes.

                                    I hope other schools take this story and make changes if needed. Teams should not have so much privacy they can get by with this behavior on school property. One grandson has been on traveling hockey teams for 6 years - and those kids don't spend time alone in locker rooms. There is always a coach, asst coach or parent close by. It's part of the planning for the team and considered a safety measure.
                                    Signature
                                    Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
                                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9589748].message }}
                                    • Profile picture of the author sbucciarel
                                      Banned
                                      Originally Posted by Kay King View Post

                                      Teams should not have so much privacy they can get by with this behavior on school property. One grandson has been on traveling hockey teams for 6 years - and those kids don't spend time alone in locker rooms. There is always a coach, asst coach or parent close by. It's part of the planning for the team and considered a safety measure.
                                      All throughout my high school years, having to go to the locker room and take a shower and dress after gym, there was not a single adult there to supervise. There was really no reason to have one there to supervise. If teenage girls can't handle taking a shower and getting dressed without adult supervision, something's wrong. I see no reason why that would be any different for boys.

                                      These aren't ordinary boys that are capable of this kind of crime. I think that all seven of the ones charged do require a great deal of supervision from here on out ... the kind of supervision that being locked up provides. If their parents can't provide them with enough of a moral compass to discriminate between right and wrong, relatively harmless pranks and sexual assault, then it's time for someone else to take over their supervision.

                                      It always boggles my mind about the bystanders who didn't actually participate, but said nothing. There's a lot of that going on. That not one of them had enough guts to report this behavior is sad comment on the way these parents are raising their children. The difference between right and wrong is just good Parenting 101 in my book, whether the kids are jocks or not. Jocks don't get to play by different rules than the rest of us do.
                                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9589789].message }}
                                      • Profile picture of the author kenmichaels
                                        Originally Posted by sbucciarel View Post

                                        All throughout my high school years, having to go to the locker room and take a shower and dress after gym, there was not a single adult there to supervise. There was really no reason to have one there to supervise. If teenage girls can't handle taking a shower and getting dressed without adult supervision, something's wrong. I see no reason why that would be any different for boys.
                                        .
                                        The boys locker room had a pretty large window into it from the coaches office.

                                        Never saw him actually look through it - except when he was knocking on it
                                        and calling someone into his office. Which usually meant something bad.
                                        Signature

                                        Selling Ain't for Sissies!
                                        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9589811].message }}
                                      • Profile picture of the author whateverpedia
                                        Originally Posted by sbucciarel View Post

                                        It always boggles my mind about the bystanders who didn't actually participate, but said nothing.
                                        Fear of retribution probably played a huge part in them not commenting.

                                        If the perps would do something like that to innocent kids, the bystanders could only imagine what would happen to someone who they actually held a grudge against.
                                        Signature
                                        Why do garden gnomes smell so bad?
                                        So that blind people can hate them as well.
                                        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9589853].message }}
                                        • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
                                          Kay,

                                          You understand the male jock mentality to exactly the extent that I understand what it's like to be pregnant.

                                          I assure you... to the victims, this is every bit as much a sexual assault as male rape of a female. It is homosexual assault, regardless of how you - or the perpetrators - may choose to rationalize that component away.

                                          As with many such attacks, it's not about sex from the attacker's perspective. It's about using sex as a way to humiliate a victim and provide the attacker with a feeling of power, or to satisfy some sadistic urge.

                                          As far as the onlookers... I haven't been talking about anyone but the actual participants. The cowards who stood by and let it happen are already experiencing a shame they will probably never escape. There's nothing the legal system can do to them that's worse than what they'll do to themselves.

                                          Could one or more of the people who held the victims' legs and arms have been giving in to peer pressure? Possibly, but even peer pressure has limits. And if that was involved, do you really think getting away with it wouldn't have made them more likely to do so in the future, in similar or more extreme ways?

                                          Maybe they wouldn't, but it'd be reckless to assume that. It's possible that the other students would have shown fear of them, which would lead to feelings of power and make them prone to repeating the abusive tendency. Of course, if the other students just treated them like scum and weren't afraid, that would create other possible results. Not all of them positive, but with a greater overall potential for reducing the odds of a repeat.

                                          The problem I see is with how they're punished. If you put them in juvenile facilities, you may just be inviting them to do equally bad things to other young people who aren't able to defend themselves. If you put them in adult facilities, they're going to be subjected to the same attacks, and worse, and learn to be even more vicious when they get out. Assuming they survive to see the streets again.


                                          Paul
                                          Signature
                                          .
                                          Stop by Paul's Pub - my little hangout on Facebook.

                                          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9590294].message }}
                                    • Profile picture of the author kenmichaels
                                      Originally Posted by Kay King View Post


                                      I know the jock mentality of high school kids. To boys that age, your butt and your balls are fair game. .
                                      When did that happen?

                                      Not in my day. Maybe a rat tail on the butt - that was it.

                                      Maybe I am just old now - but that just seems weird, if that is how it is now.
                                      Signature

                                      Selling Ain't for Sissies!
                                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9589815].message }}
                                    • Profile picture of the author Kurt
                                      Originally Posted by Kay King View Post


                                      I know the jock mentality of high school kids. To boys that age, your butt and your balls are fair game. If you told those same bullies this was "sexual" they'd be embarrassed and argue that it isn't. Political correctness notwithstanding, nothing is as shocking to a HS jock today as being labeled as sexual toward another male.

                                      .
                                      This may be the most ignorant statement I've read in quite a while. I played four sports in school and you telling me that my butt and balls were fair game is utter BS. You don't get to make the decision about me or my body.

                                      I promise that if anyone crossed this line with me it would be the time they would have to prove they could kick my ass.

                                      Kay's attitude is the same as when a woman is raped that she was asking for it because of what she was wearing. Unbelievable.
                                      Signature
                                      Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
                                      Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.
                                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9597638].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
                  Kay,
                  However, I don't agree with the calls today to try the boys as adults and put them on the sex offenders registry.
                  Would your response be the same if the victims were 14 and 15 year old girls?


                  Paul
                  Signature
                  .
                  Stop by Paul's Pub - my little hangout on Facebook.

                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9588507].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author Kay King
                    You mean girls do this to other girls? That would be the only way it would compare.

                    I'm not condoning this - I think it's horrible. But I also think all the facts and stories need to come out - serious questions need to be directed at the coaches, parents, other players who didn't report this abuse. Previous year players need to add their stories. I think it's important to know whether this is a half dozen bad/macho/cruel seniors or a long running practice on this sports team.

                    I'd shut down the program - and charge these boys. My only argument was that I'm not sure this rises to the level of "sexual predator registry". That, to me, is too easy - we need to know WHY this culture of abuse/violence exists in our high school kids.
                    Signature
                    Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9588524].message }}
                    • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
                      Kay,

                      No. I mean if the same boys did it to young girls. The impact on the victims is the same, no matter which gender they are.

                      A couple more points...

                      Those same jokes were common when I was in high school. As I said, this sort of thing back then would likely have lead to beatings severe enough to put someone in intensive care, if not outright murders. Anyone who would have used the "boys will be boys" line to excuse it would have risked beatings of their own.

                      And the parents would have rightly been at the top of the suspect lists.

                      The fact that you don't think there was a sexual motive is irrelevant. Rape isn't a crime with a sexual motive in most cases, either.


                      Paul
                      Signature
                      .
                      Stop by Paul's Pub - my little hangout on Facebook.

                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9588530].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author hardraysnight
    and i thought aaron cruden had it bad
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9595384].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Kay King
      The problem I see is with how they're punished. If you put them in juvenile facilities, you may just be inviting them to do equally bad things to other young people who aren't able to defend themselves. If you put them in adult facilities, they're going to be subjected to the same attacks, and worse, and learn to be even more vicious when they get out. Assuming they survive to see the streets again.
      That's my argument in the end. If the juvenile system is too easy - we need to make it tougher.

      We have a juvenile system that pretty much says you can't punish a person as an adult once he reaches adult age IF his crime was committed as a kid.

      Then we take those kids and charge them as adults so they don't get a light sentence? That's wrong.
      Signature
      Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9595829].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author sbucciarel
        Banned
        Originally Posted by Kay King View Post

        That's my argument in the end. If the juvenile system is too easy - we need to make it tougher.

        We have a juvenile system that pretty much says you can't punish a person as an adult once he reaches adult age IF his crime was committed as a kid.

        Then we take those kids and charge them as adults so they don't get a light sentence? That's wrong.
        In PA, if you're a cold blooded murderer, who happens to be 10 years old, you don't go to juvenile court. You get tried as an adult. There is no juvenile provision for murder.

        10-year-old boy charged with murder in killing of 90-year-old woman - The Washington Post

        For these budding little rapists, I wouldn't object to it being tried in juvenile if they are actually incarcerated for five years, and the rest of the juvenile population is protected from them. The prosecutor has 30 days to decide whether or not he will push for them being charged as adults. I personally don't care much what happens to them as long as it's bad.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9595848].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author HeySal
    Penetration without consent is rape - I don't care who is doing the penetrating, who they are penetrating, or what the hell their reasoning is. The victim has had their body violated and taken over. That's rape. You don't ask the perpetrator what his idea of what he was doing was to find out how to classify that crime. Most men, when convicted of rape, will say everything under the sun about the victim "wanting" it - they rarely think of the crime as rape even if they held a knife or a gun to the victim's head while they are raping them.

    I was from a frat town - they hazed the hell out of each other.......but they never raped anyone (as a group anyway).

    What the whole event boils down to is a pack mentality with kids in the power pack being psychopaths - not a drop of empathy. They got into a position that drew "star" status from the community and used it to entertain themselves committing brutal acts against people they saw themselves being better than - seeing themselves as in ownership of. I'm betting their parents were also of position where favors were bestowed on them because of social status.

    If left unchecked, these little packs of psychopaths can become very dangerous dangerous groups of sociopaths. Any time a group displays a lack of empathy, you have very dangerous potential brewing. Look at ISIS. They call themselves a religion yet they will eat their own young for the power they have. They mow down anyone and everyone in their way without a thought. Brutality is actually rewarded. These kids are the equivalent of Nazi Brown Shirts. How do you think they got that way? Does it matter when they are torturing for their own fun. It only matters at that point that they are stopped.

    These kids were the fascists of their high school - they had the power and decided to use it to hurt other people. How did they get that way? Really? Look around. Who do you see that's in power that's hurting people and does it with no regrets........simply because they can?

    I agree with Paul - one of the deepest hitting responses to these kids would be ostracizing them. It might put enough shock through them to build some empathy. If that empathy can't be created - we are looking at life long terrorists.
    Signature

    Sal
    When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
    Beyond the Path

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9596704].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
    Sal,

    If they are true sociopaths, you can't make them feel empathy. Ostracism is potentially useful because it could make them think twice before doing anything like that again. Raise the price and some folks won't do it.

    Of course, some will just move and take advantage of their new environment to do things more intelligently. Meaning: "Don't get caught."

    These are the kinds of things that make me think we need special ways to handle this sort of attacker, if they turn out to be true sociopaths. It may be that they should simply be locked up and never allowed to be free again once they've stepped over that line. But that has its own ethical problems. I'm not sure there's a good answer to this one.


    Paul
    Signature
    .
    Stop by Paul's Pub - my little hangout on Facebook.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9596765].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author HeySal
      Originally Posted by Paul Myers View Post

      Sal,

      If they are true sociopaths, you can't make them feel empathy. Ostracism is potentially useful because it could make them think twice before doing anything like that again. Raise the price and some folks won't do it.

      Of course, some will just move and take advantage of their new environment to do things more intelligently. Meaning: "Don't get caught."

      These are the kinds of things that make me think we need special ways to handle this sort of attacker, if they turn out to be true sociopaths. It may be that they should simply be locked up and never allowed to be free again once they've stepped over that line. But that has its own ethical problems. I'm not sure there's a good answer to this one.


      Paul
      That is true. If they are psychotic they may be at a level that empathy can be installed that was missing not because of brain construction - but because of environmental lack of conditioning elements (why I surmised that the parents were in positions that gave them excess social entitlements). If they are at some levels of psychosis, though - they will be more likely to lean toward sociopathy if this is the way they are behaving now. And that is NOT curable. That's brain construction (hardwiring) and there's nothing you can do about it.

      As far as I'm concerned.....we can't afford to let them into society. We're seeing more and more psychotics every day. Whether toxins in our food and environment are creating these brain anomolies, or whether they are being socially bred - we can no longer afford to have them around. Is someone who will be dangerous to others if released into society really something we can consider to be "human"? If a dog is mentally ill and bites someone, we put the dog down.

      We have groups of psychotics taking over whole countries now and the whole world is just taking the attitude they just need to be eliminated from the planet. I'm kinda on that side myself these days. We have too many of these aberrations around - and with humans being pack animals......they form groups.

      I say see if they are rehabitable (environmentally determined can be, brain hardwiring problem, not) then do so rapidly - if not, put them down. If you release one and they harm another person they need to be put down immediately. We can't afford to "house" sociopaths - we can't afford to let them breed, either. A hard-wiring problem should at least be dealt with immediate sterilizing if people insist on caging them as some sort of humane alternative to euthanasia. That's a genetic problem that can cause exponential growth in numbers of sociopaths. Unfortunately - they don't lose their "pack" instinct in the altered hard-wiring and will band with others of the same hard-wiring.

      Scientists say we're splitting into two separate species. If sociopathic hard-wiring is part of that split.........we're screwed hard unless we do something about it.
      Signature

      Sal
      When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
      Beyond the Path

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9596903].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
        Sal,

        We need to be very careful about how we look at these situations. Especially so before we start suggesting policy.

        Roughly 2% of humans are born immune to the effects of oxytocin, which means they'll never really be able to connect emotionally with others the way the rest of us can. That number appears to be consistent globally, as far as I've read. In the US, about 4% of the population are true sociopaths. That one seems to vary by country and culture.

        I don't know the exact overlap between the two groups, but it's got to be significant. Whatever it is, big chunks of that total never become dangerous or violent.

        We need to be careful about labeling people based on differences of neural structures and brain chemistry and suggesting social policy based on them. Even in casual conversation about things like this, appropriate qualifiers need to be included.

        Some of the most responsible people I know are self-acknowledged sociopaths who have concluded that a stable society is in their best interests. They're unlikely to do anything violent except in self-defense.

        They tend to be very interesting and intelligent. They don't have the illusions many of us have about the motivations of others. They see what's really there. And, if they consider you a friend and you ask, they'll tell you 100% unvarnished truth as they see it.

        Most of use are significantly different from the norm in some ways. For a lot of those differences there just aren't emotionally charged labels like sociopath.

        I rather suspect the risk from drunk drivers is larger than from people who don't feel the same kind of empathy neurotypicals do.


        Paul
        Signature
        .
        Stop by Paul's Pub - my little hangout on Facebook.

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9597535].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author sbucciarel
          Banned
          Originally Posted by Paul Myers View Post

          They tend to be very interesting and intelligent. They don't have the illusions many of us have about the motivations of others. They see what's really there. And, if they consider you a friend and you ask, they'll tell you 100% unvarnished truth as they see it.Paul
          I agree that there are plenty of sociopaths who are not violent or even criminal in any way and are intelligent and interesting.

          But I do wonder if they do actually think of anyone as a friend, and is their definition of friendship the same as most other people have. Do they have empathy for someone they consider a friend or is it more that they just enjoy their company at times.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9597575].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
            Suzanne,

            Consider the way people use the word "friend." Do you think we all have the same meaning for it?

            Is it always like my offline definition, which is a pretty high bar? Or is it often more like the Facebook definition? Something in the middle?

            I know that sociopaths can form friendships that are very important to them, and that are every bit as real and meaningful as anyone else's. It could be that they're exactly the same, except without the empathy that comes into play a lot less than we'd like to think.

            There's always a sense I get when this discussion comes up that "typicals" assume that sociopathy is, by itself, somehow a sign of inferiority, or something "wrong." That's a thing to be very aware of, as it's incorrect and potentially dangerous to innocent people.

            It scares the hell out of people, but that's not a good reason to judge.


            Paul
            Signature
            .
            Stop by Paul's Pub - my little hangout on Facebook.

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9597605].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author sbucciarel
              Banned
              Originally Posted by Paul Myers View Post

              I know that sociopaths can form friendships that are very important to them, and that are every bit as real and meaningful as anyone else's. It could be that they're exactly the same, except without the empathy that comes into play a lot less than we'd like to think.

              There's always a sense I get when this discussion comes up that "typicals" assume that sociopathy is, by itself, somehow a sign of inferiority, or something "wrong." That's a thing tobe very aware of, as it's incorrect and potentially dangerous to innocent people.

              It scares the hell out of people, but that's not a good reason to judge.

              Paul
              I was reading a good book from a psychologist about sociopaths and there was one story in there ... a mother had a son who she knew was a sociopath. Not a criminal in any way. Just willing to bend any and all social conventions with sense of guilt whatsoever. He asked a woman to marry him because it was financially advantageous to marry her. His mother asked him ... "is that really fair to xxxx for you to marry her?" He said, "she'll never know what hit her."

              They are so very good at mimicking normal social behavior, that many don't know what hit them. I'm still fascinated by the sociopath that we allowed to live in our house and who I liked a lot. He did have to go to jail for stealing so much money and stuff from us and burning down stuff, but I was dumbfounded by all that. Would have never guessed it for a minute. He fits the stereotype that a lot of people think of when they think of sociopaths, because he is a criminal.

              In the book was also examples of highly intelligent CEOs and Wall St. bankers who were also sociopaths, but not criminals. They were similar to the Wall Street Wolf except that they avoided crossing legal lines.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9597641].message }}

Trending Topics