Much as Brock Turner deserves every ounce of scorn that’s coming his way, I can’t really get behind the internet shaming of the ancilliary characters who came out in support of him - especially the ones who have been outed as supporting him based on statements they made before he was convicted.
Leslie Rassmussen, for instance, is clearly dumb as a stone, but mostly because she obviously still believes, deep in her heart of hearts, that the events of the evening include the victim voluntarily getting it on with Brock, and consenting while still conscious. Not because she thinks that collaring a random near-unconscious woman, shoving her behind a dumpster, beating her and sticking pine needles inside of her is an ok thing to do. I wouldn’t want to make a friend of anyone so bloody stupid, but I’d be willing to go see a band she was in - I’m sure I’ve seen bands plenty of times before that had band members just as idiotic as she is.
I may be wrong but I think the statements by the dad and the friend were sent to the judge after he was convicted, they were pleas for leniency in the actual sentencing.
I can certainly get behind the shaming of the ideas expressed in the letters of support. It’s good for people to think about why the views expressed in the letters are reprehensible. But the friend in particular is getting more attention focused on her than she probably deserves.
And as much as I think the sentence was horribly inadequate for the severity of the crime, I can’t get behind the recall effort of the judge. Judges should not be subject to following public opinion. Issues like this sentence should be addressed by the judicial ethics commission, not recall petitions and mob mentality. This says it better than I can.
Does anyone have a read on where Stanford University has been in all of this? I have a vague sense that they expelled Brock and barred him from campus, but at what point (assuming that’s true) did they do so? Obviously once he was convicted it was appropriate to do that, but it was probably not appropriate at the first hint of an accusation. I’d be curious to know when they took steps, and with what information in hand.
I marvel that this asshole was accepted to Stanford in the first place. What with their current level of popularity, they are deluged with applications and have made the application process rather tiresome - I forget the details now but there are something like 3 or 4 extra essays one has to write, including the infamous “roommate letter” (and boy would I love to see what Brock wrote for that).
You would think that, with all that one has to share in order to apply, there would have been at least some indication in Brock’s application that he is an entitled brat. But if you are a good enough swimmer, maybe that doesn’t matter?
As for identifying an entitled brat during the admissions process - good luck with that. I have done admissions work (graduate level) and even with the full file, essays, letters and an interview I would still be surprised by the behavior of some candidates after they became students.
I know you are right about the difficulty of identifying an entitled brat just from admissions files. No one is going to write an essay saying, “I’m a callous jerk, reject me now.” It’s just that Stanford (understandably) has a particularly thorough process. I know it’s not the case, but it’s tempting to think that with the benefit of 20-20 hindsight, if we could read all of his essays we would find something to seize upon as evidence of his true nature.
Because there is no reasonable doubt that, had this person been a black man, had he not been privileged first by his wealth, then by his skin color (which is almost certainly a factor in his wealth), that the headline would not be “Stanford Swimmer gets 6 months”. Rather, it probably would have been something like “Thug Rapist gets 14 years”.
I think the color and privilege of the rapist is being mentioned because if he was black or hispanic, he wouldn’t have gotten 6 months (3 months with good behaviour). The defendant here got a break because of his diminished capacity (he was drunk). A drunk black dude raping a woman behind a dumpster is not likely to get the same sort of consideration for his diminished capacity.
Do all college admissions require essays nowadays?
I had jock preferences back in the day in the 80’s–including Ivy and service academy sports interests, as in personal letters from head coaches. But, I was also a National Merit Semi-Finalist and I had the SAT scores. I don’t remember ever being asked to write an essay for my application. Although, I only applied to a school I was guaranteed to get into. Basically, because they were the number one ranked school in my sport of preference.
I’m curious who looked at this swimmer closely enough for him to get into Stanford–a very respectable school.
The anonymous woman who wrote the letter really can write. I hope she gets a gig out of this somehow! I’m so curious to know if she already makes her living writing.
One thing that nags at me, though, doesn’t have to do with this exact case so much (since his running away tends to indicate that he knew he was doing something wrong–and the witnesses said she was totally limp). But part of her statement said that he thought “she liked it” because she was allegedly rubbing his back or whatever. So what happens in a case where the woman is not unconscious, but blacks out and doesn’t remember consenting to sex?
In case there is anyone who was less of a drunkard than I was in my college years and doesn’t understand the distinction: people can (at least I sure could–not sure if this happens to everyone) get drunk to a degree that causes amnesia the next day about a portion of the night, but does not cause unconsciousness. A few times I heard multiple reliable accounts of things I did and said over a good couple hours between when I could last remember and when I actually passed out. (In one humorous case, I apparently kept saying to a girl in my friend group, “I totally respect your intelligence, Tracy”; and after the umpteenth time, our friend Dave said “yes, I think you’ve made that abundantly clear”.
So if a young woman wakes up at a frathouse, say, in a complete stranger’s bed, and can tell she’s had sex–but the last thing she can remember is sitting on the couch downstairs drinking Long Island teas–how does she know if she passed out there and then was dragged upstairs to be raped, or if she just doesn’t remember making out with the guy and then voluntarily going up to his room to have sex with him?
ETA: If the answer is to declare that drunk people are not competent to consent to sex, I can see the logic…however, that throws a grenade into the social order for a huge swath of the population, especially those in their late teens and early twenties.
For applicants to the Class of 2020, Stanford required the Common App[lication] plus a host of additional essays. The Common App gave a choice of 5 questions, with a minimum response of 250 words. I won’t repeat all five, but the first one was: Some students have a background, identity, interest, or talent that is so meaningful they believe their application would be incomplete without it. If this sounds like you, then please share your story.
The additional questions required by Stanford were:
[ul]
[li]Name your favorite books, authors, films, and/or artists. (50 word limit)[/li]
[li]What newspapers, magazines, and/or websites do you enjoy? (50 word limit)[/li]
[li]What is the most significant challenge that society faces today? (50 word limit)[/li]
[li]How did you spend your last two summers? (50 word limit)[/li]
[li]What were your favorite events (e.g., performances, exhibits, competitions, conferences, etc.) in recent years? (50 word limit)[/li]
[li]What historical moment or event do you wish you could have witnessed? (50 word limit)[/li]
[li]What five words best describe you?[/li][li]Stanford students possess an intellectual vitality. Reflect on an idea or experience that has been important to your intellectual development. (250 word limit)[/li]
[li]Virtually all of Stanford’s undergraduates live on campus. Write a note to your future roommate that reveals something about you or that will help your roommate – and us – know you better. (250 word limit)[/li]
[li]What matters to you, and why? (100 to 250 words)[/li][/ul]
Most schools these days require either the Common App, or if they don’t participate they require something roughtly similar. Selective and highly selective schools usually have a couple of additional questions beyond the Common App.
Stanford is a special case - at the moment they have the lowest acceptance rate in the country (around 4 percent) and it is something of a vicious cycle - the lower the acceptance rate, the greater the cachet. The greater the cachet, the more kids who want to attend and the higher the number of applicants. The higher the number of applicants, the lower the acceptance rate. And so on.
While Stanford benefits from the prestige associated with having the lowest acceptance rate in the country, they also recognize that things are somewhat out of control, or so I assume. I believe the extra hoops you have to jump through to apply are in recognition of that. They welcome the fact that they are seen as an incredibly desirable place to attend college, but at the same time they weed out a lot of inappropriate applicants by making it somewhat hard to apply.
Of course, if an applicant is a stellar athlete with a strong academic record, I have no idea if schools like Stanford spend time scrutinizing the essay questions or not. One gets the sense that Brock could have written pretty much anything in his essays and he still would have gotten in.
One more time. It. Does. Not. Matter. if a person gave consent while drunk. A drunk person can’t give consent. It’s entirely possible to do things while intoxicated that seem voluntary, but alcohol and/or drugs impede judgment such that anything can seem like a good idea, whether it’s signing a contract, driving a car, or having sex. The law recognizes this and considers most actions committed under the influence to be invalid under civil law (such as invalidating a contract signed while drunk) or punishable under criminal law (such as being arrested for DUI). Therefore, it doesn’t matter if someone appears to voluntarily having sexual relations and they’re drunk, they’re not giving consent. The alcohol and/or drugs are doing the consenting for them. See how that works?
That said, if you’re drinking that much, it may be a good idea to knock it off before you do something stupid that ruins your life, such as driving drunk or raping someone.