341
2/3/2025 - Trump Orders Schools to Ease Sex Assault Rules
(www.thedailybeast.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 03 Feb 2025
341 points (100.0% liked)
Keep Track
865 readers
1 users here now
Keeping Track of the 2nd Trump administration!
One thing Donald Trump and the extreme right were very good at doing is burying the track record of his first presidency from 2017 to 2021.
Keep Track is dedicated to literally keeping track, day by day, of the policy decisions made by the new Trump Administration.
That is not to say we're interested in the crazy things he says or tweets, he clocked over 30,000 lies the last time he was in office, I don't see how it's possible to track all of that. This is about POLICY. Nominees, executive orders, signed laws, and so on.
Subject line format should be {{date}} {{event}} so: "01-20-2025 - Trump is sworn in."
The international date format of 2025-01-20 is also acceptable!
Links should be to verifiable news sources, not social media or blog sites. So no Xitter/Truth/Youtube/Substack/etc. etc.
Project 2025 tracker here!
https://www.project2025.observer/
founded 6 months ago
MODERATORS
Of minors in a court setting. What better way to intimidate children into not coming forward than the idea of being put into a spectacle to relive your horror.
Yeah, imagine putting a 13-year-old girl on the stand, in front of reporters, judges, lawyers, potentially their rapist, and definitely their parents, and having them go blow-by-blow with a lawyer who's already adversarial in nature and out to catch them in a lie, or confuse them, and likely has been doing this work for years.
No, this couldn't possibly be a good reason for kids to shut the fuck up when a teacher or another kid molests them. Being a kid is already hard enough, going through a sexual assault is hard, so let's pile a huge media spectacle (that will likely make it onto everyone at school's social media feeds) on top of all that trauma AND force them to relive it in front of everyone for the express purpose of the defense lawyer trying to catch you in a gotcha.
Not the structure of these things. Presuming as media has been reporting Trump has basically just tossed the Biden changes (which were largely a reinstatement of Obama-era rules and reverting the 2018 Trump changes, barring some of the ones that lawsuits were lost over) and rolled back to the 2018 version, the way it works is more like this:
Most of these are pretty basic fairness and due process things.
I don't think you realize what Title IX guidelines were like under Obama, some of the shit that was allowed or expected. Like the accused having no guidance or representation through the process and in some cases explicitly not being allowed to have a lawyer. Not being allowed to know what evidence was being brought against them or even necessarily exactly what they were accused of until the hearing or very shortly before. Having faculty trained using training materials (which the accused was not allowed to see) that explicitly say that women never ever lie but that men will say whatever they need to, in a system where the margin to be found liable is slightly more likely than not (note I said men and women here and not accused or accuser, because the materials in question were explicitly gendered once the guy accused in one case sued to be allowed to see them). There was a case where a guy accused a girl, and after being informed of the accusation responded by accusing him so his accusation was deemed retaliatory and shut down while hers was allowed to proceed.
Hopefully, this is mostly about colleges. I really don't want to think that minors raping minors is a common issue in the US. ...Somehow, I am afraid to check now.
I am not saying it is ideal, but it is not an unmoderated spectacle either. There generally are protections for underage witnesses and witnesses in general even in courts, which this is not. Between that and just assuming a person is guilty, it is the lesser evil to have them testify.
In addition, the fact prosecutors repeatedly refused to prosecute for false accusations when those came to light clearly shows this policy was never done in good fate. Life destroying consequences for the accused with next to no recourse but no consequences for the accuser when they are caught lying is just ridiculous.
It is not.
You made me think for a moment it was only about K-12 since you left out the "and colleges" part.
Anyway, it is even shittier if they forced minors to face such serious accusations without a lawyer or other adequate representation.
Why are you here? You see people upset about Trump, and your first reaction is "these people are overreacting".
Then people explain to you why it's not an overreaction, and once you actually understand what's happening, you agree?
And yet you continue anyway?
I see you.
When did I say that?
Did I fucking say you said it?
Are you able to read minds? If I didn't say it, why are you assuming that was my reaction.
The word of the day is "implication."
Then you are bead and understanding implications because I did not imply anything of the kind.
You absolutely did, stop backpedaling. Own your ugly.
You just prove my point of so many Americans being too dumb to understand nuance exists.
This is the same kind of dumbass shit we saw defending him during the impeachment. "He didn't literally say the words quid pro quo so you can't claim that's what he was doing".
Smart people do not think this way. They don't need actions to have corresponding exposition to figure out what is going on
Then you are not as smart as you think you are, because you are imagining things that I did not do.
Listen... Nobody here knows who you are. You don't need to save face... Maybe you can take this time to reflect.
There’s no “hopefully” or benefit of the doubt for this guy. He has been proven to be a rapist in court.
Who? Trump? Are you literally incapable of forming two sentences without talking about him?
Your comment reminds me of cars with Lets Go Brandon bumper stickers. Which all started with "impeach, the president and her husband too" bumper stickers during the Clinton administration. That's when people got so delusional. They started putting the opposition on their vehicle and letting them occupy space in their head full time.
And I know that's where you were going with your comment. The problem is in this particular situation you look like the person who is unhinged. The entire purpose of this group is about Trump. Every Post in it will be about Trump. Anybody replying to a post is replying about something Trump did. Any comment someone is replying to will be about Trump. This is like the one place where literally everyone has Trump on their mind because that's the entire reason for existing. So you comment just doesn't work. If someone wasn't thinking about Trump while commenting in here that means they've gotten off topic.
My point is more along these lines: https://lemmy.world/comment/14877800
That people are bashing on a policy that is IMO good or at least not that bad because of who put it in place.
If that was your point you did a horrible job of making it because you didn't address their point at all. You talked about their mindset. That's a complete failure of communication.
It's bad because of what it is, it's gross because of who pushed it. You look like a child rapist apologist bud.
Must be old, because I don't give a shit what I look like to stupid people.
It's pretty fucked up that an accusation on such a level wouldn't even cause you a moments reflection. You're arguing in bad faith, making ad hominem attacks, and really look like a fool. Maybe stop replying to every single comment, show this to a friend you disagree with sometimes, and get their opinion. I reckon you're too cowardly for any of that but it's worth showing the way.
Oh no, watch out, he uses big words! Does that make you feel smart?
While judging arguments based on their speaker?
Which would you rather have: more rapes, or more kids kicked out of school for false allegations?
If this is a hard question, then I hope you gain experiences that make it easier to decide. Learning is important.
Plus, the false allegation thing is kinda bunk. If it happens, then sue them for libel. Since there isn't a lot of that going on, I think it's less of an issue than, ya know, rape.
Anecdotally, I know four rape victims that didn't come forward. I know zero men who were falsely accused. I'm sure I'm not special in this regard.
It's a false dichotomy. There are other ways to prevent rape at schools without throwing away due process.
Yes, because common students routinely have 10s of thousands of $ to pay for lawyers to probably not even get back the same amount.
So you are saying throwing away due process did not even work to make them come forward in the first place, since this was repealed just now.
If there were other ways to prevent rape, they would be there already. So you're clearly wrong.
I agree we should provide free law services to people without money so they can get justice just like the rich people. Let's do that. And we can do that without endangering young girls.
There is no due process being thrown away. These people aren't going to jail. They're being kicked out of school. A school can kick out a child for literally anything that isn't a protected class. Rape allegations seems like a pretty good reason to kick someone out, especially compared to some other reasons people have been kicked out, like protesting.
Ah, my bad. I did not realize a good government healthcare is not possible because it is not already there.
Also a shame safer roads are impossible to build, otherwise they already would have. Or walkable cities. Mass transit.
Yeah, something good not already existing clearly means it is not possible. I will give up any attempt to improve anything at once. /s
Oh, my apologies. Did not know anything that does not put you in jail does not deserve due process. You must be so angry at Luigi and his fans since clearly rejecting insurance claims is also not putting you in jail and does not deserve any due process. It is just financial ruin, same as having student loans without a degree. Not an issue at all. /s
Ah yes, the "things are already bad so we should make them worse" argument. Also, its not even really true.
Seriously, what the fuck are these arguments of yours? You can't possibly believe them yourself. Are you just trying to retroactively come up with arguments for a policy you just insist on believing because the guy who said it had (D) after their name? Just making up arguments for others, without actually using them to shape your own opinions?
Ok, so you agree there aren't things in place to prevent rape. Only that there could one day be. Great. Go do that. The lack of its current existence makes it irrelevant to the conversation. That's my point.
Due process is very very clearly a legal term. Private institutions aren't required to follow anything like it. You need to differentiate between what IS and what you wish were the case.
I don't care who made the rule. Fuck the Democrats. I care that women who are raped are being silenced. It's literally that simple.
Go elect me for office and I will. Until then, there is nothing I can do for you.
What the fuck do you think we are talking about this whole fucking time? Title IX mandates a process schools have to follow. Trumps changes bring it closer to what is considered a due process. The whole fucking conversation is about whether that is a good thing.
It literally IS. You are the one seething that men are now actually granted reasonable due process protections.
How the fuck are they being silenced? It literally requires the opposite, that they testify properly.
I honestly can't make you understand this.
Just because a law says you have to do something doesn't make it due process. Registering your car isn't due process. You don't get due process unless you're in court. This isn't that. There is no court. A "hearing" of school officials isn't due process. There's no sentencing. There's no lawyers. There's no guilty or not guilty. There's a bunch of school admins doing a dance and then picking if you get kicked out.
How are they being silenced? Because anytime you make something harder, more embarrassing, or riskier, people won't do it. This is also not hard to understand.
Again, I can hear it in your words and tone. You WANT this to be true. You want women to be brave enough to always stand up for themselves. You WANT a fair process with legal style standards to impose true justice based on facts. This isn't that. It doesn't get you closer to that. All it does it shut women up by making it harder for them to do the right thing.
So your entire argument is that I am misusing a word, because I am using it in the context of how it is commonly understood vs the legal definition? Yeah, great argument.
I understand that. I don't understand why you believe it is significantly harder or more embarrassing to have one more person (lawyer) in the room and to answer their questions, in addition to already having to tell the story to strangers appointed by the school anyway. It's nearly insignificant difference compared to how much damage false allegations do.
PS: If you want to pointlessly focus on word lawyering.
But I was never trying to talk about legal definition but the common sense right not to be punished by government law/regulation without reason.
Ah, okay. I'm sorry that I assumed you meant the word that you said and couldn't read your mind. I'll keep working on that telepathy, and you keep working on being accurate. One day we'll understand each other.
Now if what you want is fairness, explain to me how the administration on these panels can be unbiased when their salaries and jobs rely on the fact that they're not known as the "rape university". Explain to me how these victims could appeal an unfair judgment made by biased administration.
Our legal process is filled with ways to make sure you get a fair trial, and even then not everyone does. This kangaroo court they're setting up does not have any of those provisions and will not be fair. All it does is dissuade people from reporting.
So your alternative is, let's not even try to have a court with evidence, let's just have one kangoroo decide whose life gets ruined based on their prejudices.
How is that not the current situation already? Also, since when this does not work the other way as well, not wanting to be known as "university that protects rapists"?
Ok good. Almost there.
So both systems (current and previous) are horribly unfair and prone to abuse by the administration. Right? We now agree on that, yes?
If I have to pick between an unfair system with extra rape, or an unfair system with extra kids getting kicked out of school for no reason, I'm picking the one with less rape.
Just because both systems are unfair does not mean one of them is not worse.
If I had to guess, I think we disagree on how much difference does having a lawyer present make. I believe the difference for victims is small. Making a rape victim slightly more uncomfortable compared to the current system and a rapist slightly more likely to go unpunished.
Many rape victims did not speak up even before this, because adding a lawyer is a drop in a bucket compared to everything else.
At the same time, the chance of expelling an innocent person goes down much more if you add the minimum protections of having someone speak up for the accused.
If the only consequence was being kicked out of their current school, I would agree with you. But being kicked out for SA will follow them. What other school will accept them? What employer will want to give a job to someone that they believe probably committed SA?
Sure, if they are a rich kid with a trust fund, expulsion probably does nothing to them anyway. Not having representation is going to screw over people who are vulnerable to begin with much more. People that are already unpopular. That the administration and others already have prejudice against.
But the biggest difference is not even this. Even if it was just a trolley problem with 3 people getting raped on one side and making one innocent person homeless on the other side (which I don't believe is the real ratio), there is an important difference with a hypothetical. That one innocent person sees you pulling the lever. His friends see you pulling the lever. Every person who is worried about being in that place (being falsely accused) sees you pulling the lever.
The number of people who will accept being "sacrificed for the greater good" willingly is miniscule. Best case scenario, most will vote for literal Hitler as long as he promises not to "sacrifice them for the greater good". Worst case scenario, the innocent person on the rails grabs a gun and "takes revenge" on the lever pullers and the society that enabled it.
How many false rape accusations are there compared to unreported rapes?
One in five women have been sexually assaulted. Do you know five women? Have a mom and a couple sisters? At least one has been assaulted.
I disagree with you because I look at the actual numbers.
Except the numbers prove my point. They go unreported before this change was made. There are clearly different reasons why they are not reported. Making the process unfair did not even work. It did not solve the issue.
"Hopefully"? So you don't even know the details of this, and yet you came on here to berate people who understand it more than you and are against it?
Cool.
I did not look up the statistics for this specifically, because I never considered them relevant to this issue. If anything, minors would be even less able to defend themselves from accusations and need a lawyer.