614
submitted 1 week ago by silence7@slrpnk.net to c/news@lemmy.world

If you want to stop this kind of thing from happening, it means speaking up when folks around you express hate for other subgroups, whether that is sexual, racial, or religious.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] YarHarSuperstar@lemmy.world 18 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

Did you read the article or even the quote? The sentence where it says that begins by saying that's the reason this fucking garbage went to prison.

[-] Karjalan@lemmy.world 8 points 6 days ago

Yes I did in fact, did you? Please explain where it says they were convicted of rape?

I'm not defending them. What they did was rape, but unless they're convicted, specifically of rape, you won't find articles saying that.

[-] Supervivens@lemmy.world 9 points 6 days ago

If someone… goes to prison for sex with someone underage… that is by definition… STATUTORY RAPE

[-] sem 4 points 6 days ago

I'm not defending them, but could you walk through your though process here?

Obviously /s ... what are these questions

[-] YarHarSuperstar@lemmy.world 7 points 6 days ago

I see your point, not a big enough distinction for me but I know what you mean.

[-] PM_Your_Nudes_Please@lemmy.world 5 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

It says he was convicted of sexual assault. Depending on the state’s laws, that could be different from rape. Even if we colloquially would call it rape, that may not be the legal definition. So any news reporters would potentially be opening themselves to libel lawsuits if they use the word “rape” instead of “sexual assault”. Because again, he wasn’t explicitly convicted of rape.

Hell, that’s what got Trump off of a rape charge, because the state he was sued in had a very narrow legal definition of the word “rape”. The definition required penis-in-vagina sex. He “only” (ugh) groped and fingered the victim, so the state’s narrow definition didn’t consider it to be rape. Even if we would colloquially call it rape, that’s not what the state’s legal system determined it to be.

In Trump’s case, the judge later had to clarify that using the word “rape” is socially acceptable for what he did, because it would be what most people would consider rape, even if it’s not what the state has on the books. But the judge only did that because Trump is a public figure who was threatening to sue any news orgs that called it rape. This random rapist wouldn’t get that same kind of clarification from a judge, because their story wouldn’t be likely to hit national news for weeks.

[-] acockworkorange@mander.xyz 1 points 5 days ago

“He went to prison for sexually assaulting…”

It’s not hard.

[-] PM_Your_Nudes_Please@lemmy.world 1 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

Goodwin was sentenced to 10 years in prison in 2015 for 1st degree criminal sexual act and 1st degree sexual abuse, according to state prison records… The victims were a 7-year-old boy and a 9-year-old girl, according to the state sex offender’s registry.

I’d argue that the article went a step farther and listed the exact crimes he was found guilty of. Your version leaves some ambiguity in regards to the nature of the sexual assault, (first degree, second degree, aggravated or not, misdemeanor vs felony, etc) whereas “first degree sexual abuse” and “first degree criminal sexual act” are terms that anyone can google and find the legal definition for. The article was even more specific than your example, and yet you’re still complaining that they didn’t say he sexually assaulted someone?

[-] acockworkorange@mander.xyz 2 points 5 days ago

I thought we were criticizing the first wording chosen by the journalist, not the corrected version.

this post was submitted on 15 Feb 2025
614 points (100.0% liked)

News

25269 readers
3862 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS