Happenstance Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 Cheerleader's protest after assault was not 'frivolous' Two, four, six, eight, who do we appreciate? Sex offenders, apparently. The US supreme court decided this week that if someone assaults you and you refuse to cheer for him at a basketball game, the school district is justified in suspending you from the squad. HS was 16 at the time she complained she was raped in 2008. Her attacker was charged with sexual assault, but after a plea deal, admitted misdemeanour assault and got a princely sentence of no time served. She was told to keep a low profile at school to avoid attracting attention, because obviously when high-school students are assaulted, the appropriate response from the school district is to tell them to hide while their perpetrators enjoy accolades. HS, with the support of her family, told the school district to get stuffed, and was put to the test in 2009 when she attended a basketball game as a member of the cheerleading squad and was ordered to cheer for her attacker. Understandably, HS refused, since the only reasonable cheer for someone you claim has assaulted you is one of the Bronx variety, which wasn't part of the routine. Instead, she chose to stand silent through the cheer for Rakheem Bolton's free throw, folding her arms across her chest instead of shaking the pompoms. For speaking, as it were, her mind, HS was suspended from the cheerleading team, but the victim who staunchly "didn't want to encourage anything he was doing" chose to take the case to court, rather than accept her suspension. The initial court ruled against her, an appellate court upheld that decision, and the supreme court refused to hear the matter (it exercised its right to silence and did not comment on the refusal). The result? A student exercising her free-speech rights has been ordered to pay a penalty to the school district, on the grounds that her original suit was a "frivolous lawsuit". Taking the district to court for suspending her because she didn't want to cheer her attacker is "frivolous". Yes, really; victims are now supposed to pay compensation for being inconveniently vocal (or strategically non-vocal) instead of quietly fading into the background. In this case, the crowd was so angry that HS refused to cheer that there was, allegedly, a "disruption in the stands". Heaven forbid! Disgracefully, the appellate court determined that because cheerleaders act as the mouthpieces for their schools, the school can order them to do anything, and may suspend or expel them from their teams for refusing to participate in acts they find unconscionable. Evidently high-school students are not allowed to have ethics, let alone act on them. I wonder if schools plan on issuing a disclaimer to new cheerleaders, warning them that in the event of their assaults by popular members of sports teams, they may be compelled to cheer for them at games. Perhaps they can come up with some good rhyming chants: what goes with "rape kit", again? Perhaps "rape receipt"? School sports are serious business in the US, especially in Texas, where this case took place. Rape is not such a serious business. And free speech for students? Also not serious business. First the school told her to shut up and hide, then when she did shut up, it punished her. It's almost like a girl has no way to win when she's thrown into the deep end of the victim blaming pool. An act of protest is not "frivolous", as this court ruled, and I can think of many better things HS could do with $45,000 (£27,300) – like pay for a college education to become an attorney to ensure that rape culture doesn't get the last laugh in this case. http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/may/05/us-supreme-court-cheerleader Amazing how a school and then court can get things just so backwards Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dwarf Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 I'm just glad I wasn't born there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shorty Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 Yeah I read about this on reddit a while ago. Scares the crap out of me. You can download a few movies and get fined £20,000. Pull a prank and get 8 years jail time. But rape when you're in a Texas sports team? Just a perk of the job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ipaul Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 Fucking outrageous on so many levels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramar Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 Texas, says it all really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReZourceman Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 I fucking hate shit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan_Dare Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 Absolutely unbelievable. That society still acts this way with rape is just...It just leaves you hollow, it really does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The fish Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 Fuck Texas. I mean, seriously, fuck it. Preferably with nuclear weapons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happenstance Posted June 22, 2011 Author Share Posted June 22, 2011 So not only does the cheerleader get raped, messed about by her school and the courts but then nuked as well??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emasher Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 Honestly, I don't think we know enough about the original case to make any judgement here. Unfortunately there's a growing trend of females claiming that either males rapped them, or that consensual sex was rape. We don't know the details of the case, so how can we know that the sentence the male student received wasn't just. I'm not saying it was, I'm just saying we don't know enough to determine that it wasn't. As far as the situation with the school goes however, if the female student in question isn't actually going to participate in the activities that she's supposed to as part of the squad, perhaps she shouldn't have become part of the squad in the first place. You wouldn't take a job knowing that someone you hated worked there and then refuse to work shifts where you might have to work with them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happenstance Posted June 22, 2011 Author Share Posted June 22, 2011 There hasnt been any judgement on the male here, even though he did admit to "misdemeanour assault". This is about the treatment the girl got afterwards from the school and then the courts. If the guy was ruled to be in the wrong then at no point should she have been treated in the fashion that she was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flameboy Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 Where's mad monkey to say that its a conspiracy and she probably deserved it?! On a more serious note from the sounds of things of that report, its no brainer that is fucked, really where the hell is the world going these days? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heroicjanitor Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 (edited) I agree with Emasher, was it proved that he did it? If it was then I hope he would have been imprisoned, but he wasn't. Which could be due not taking it seriously. I don't know, not enough information here. He did do it :/ Bastards. I always think there must be something more to it when people get away with stuff like this... ALSO from the title I thought this was the sequel to a certain horror movie :p Edited June 22, 2011 by heroicjanitor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happenstance Posted June 22, 2011 Author Share Posted June 22, 2011 If the initial court hearing was in her favour (and it was) and he plea bargained down to misdemeanour assault then yes we should assume he did it. Thats still not the point though anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jayseven Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 So I'm the only one who came in here hoping there was a video? KIDDING. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Peeps Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 So backwards it's unreal. What are these people thinking? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoogleViper Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 I think suspending a cheerleader for refusing to chair is a reasonable course of action. The school didn't rape her, so she should cheer for the school. If not then don't join the squad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EddieColeslaw Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 Honestly, I don't think we know enough about the original case to make any judgement here. Unfortunately there's a growing trend of females claiming that either males rapped them, or that consensual sex was rape. We don't know the details of the case, so how can we know that the sentence the male student received wasn't just. I'm not saying it was, I'm just saying we don't know enough to determine that it wasn't. As far as the situation with the school goes however, if the female student in question isn't actually going to participate in the activities that she's supposed to as part of the squad, perhaps she shouldn't have become part of the squad in the first place. You wouldn't take a job knowing that someone you hated worked there and then refuse to work shifts where you might have to work with them. I didn't any further research on this article/the situation, but imo if men/whoever get blamed for rape that didn't actually happen, then it signals failure and incompetence of any police/court involved. You (ok, not YOU specifically ) can't just start assuming that all rape cases are lies and work from that. It's a crime. Comparing working with someone you simply don't like, with working alongside someone who raped you isn't a fair comparison :/ I think suspending a cheerleader for refusing to chair is a reasonable course of action. The school didn't rape her, so she should cheer for the school. If not then don't join the squad. No way, suspension is too harsh. The next time is expulsion! Or maybe they're stricter/that's what the standards are like in Texas, idk. Detention seems more suitable for a cheerleader who refused to cheer. I think your point is right BUT in this case, by suspending her, they're not only punishing her as a cheerleader, but saying that they don't care about her as a person or a student, and that sports > everything, and what kind of a message is that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoogleViper Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 No way, suspension is too harsh. The next time is expulsion! She only got suspended from the cheerleading squad, not from school. I think that's perfectly fair. The school can't have a cheerleader who won't cheer. I think the penalty fine is harsh, but that has nothing to do with rape, the fine would be harsh regardless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EddieColeslaw Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 She only got suspended from the cheerleading squad, not from school. I think that's perfectly fair. The school can't have a cheerleader who won't cheer. I missed that part...ok, I do think that's fair. And she might as well not be on the squad if there's a chance that will have to cheer again for the perpetrator in the future. I still feel like something is off though. Again, if the guy really did commit rape did not serve time and is allowed to play basketball games, this signals that the justice system is at fault. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dannyboy-the-Dane Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 Absolutely fucking ridiculous. They should give her a medal for refusing to cheer for a bastard like that. Everything in this case is just wrong on so many levels. Seriously, fuck Texas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoogleViper Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 I missed that part...ok, I do think that's fair. And she might as well not be on the squad if there's a chance that will have to cheer again for the perpetrator in the future. I still feel like something is off though. Again, if the guy really did commit rape did not serve time and is allowed to play basketball games, this signals that the justice system is at fault. But why is everyone automatically assuming he did commit rape? He didn't get convicted for rape, yet based on a few lines of biased text people on the other side of the world are automatically assuming his guilt. This really does echo the feelings of our society. For most crimes we take the stance of "innocent until proven guilty". But when cries of rape or child abuse is shouted people automatically assume that the man is guilty. People here know nothing of either of these two people yet they feel qualified to judge that he is a rapist. It's ridiculous. People's lives have been ruined from false cries of rape and abuse. Absolutely fucking ridiculous. They should give her a medal for refusing to cheer for a bastard like that. Everything in this case is just wrong on so many levels. Seriously, fuck Texas. You know for a fact that he is a bastard? You know for absolute certain, without a shadow of a doubt, that this person who lives thousands of miles away, have never met and never even heard of until 2 minutes ago, that he's definitely a rapist? Well done you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dannyboy-the-Dane Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 (edited) But why is everyone automatically assuming he did commit rape? He didn't get convicted for rape, yet based on a few lines of biased text people on the other side of the world are automatically assuming his guilt. This really does echo the feelings of our society. For most crimes we take the stance of "innocent until proven guilty". But when cries of rape or child abuse is shouted people automatically assume that the man is guilty. People here know nothing of either of these two people yet they feel qualified to judge that he is a rapist. It's ridiculous. People's lives have been ruined from false cries of rape and abuse. You know for a fact that he is a bastard? You know for absolute certain, without a shadow of a doubt, that this person who lives thousands of miles away, have never met and never even heard of until 2 minutes ago, that he's definitely a rapist? Well done you. Look up hyperbole, mate. Of course I have no clue what actually happened, but excuse me for having low expectations, the circumstances taken into account. Why would she refuse to cheer for him is this was just an act? Edited June 22, 2011 by Dannyboy-the-Dane Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nolan Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 Fucking Texas....Fucking Texas. That's all we need to know to not be surprised in the least. I think suspending a cheerleader for refusing to chair is a reasonable course of action. The school didn't rape her, so she should cheer for the school. If not then don't join the squad. I won't say it's unreasonable but I don't agree with it, not enough that I'd get up in arms that she was suspended (suspensions are temporary anyways) from the squad. The thing is though, it sounds as if she cheered for the team as a whole until it was a cheer specifically for him when he made a free throw. That's when she didn't cheer, meaning she was still cheering for the school up to that point. But why is everyone automatically assuming he did commit rape? He didn't get convicted for rape, yet based on a few lines of biased text people on the other side of the world are automatically assuming his guilt. This really does echo the feelings of our society. For most crimes we take the stance of "innocent until proven guilty". But when cries of rape or child abuse is shouted people automatically assume that the man is guilty. People here know nothing of either of these two people yet they feel qualified to judge that he is a rapist. It's ridiculous. People's lives have been ruined from false cries of rape and abuse. Wait...you believe that drivel? Our law system barely works by that principal. guilty until proven innocent is fits more cases now a days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EddieColeslaw Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 But why is everyone automatically assuming he did commit rape? He didn't get convicted for rape, yet based on a few lines of biased text people on the other side of the world are automatically assuming his guilt. This really does echo the feelings of our society. For most crimes we take the stance of "innocent until proven guilty". But when cries of rape or child abuse is shouted people automatically assume that the man is guilty. People here know nothing of either of these two people yet they feel qualified to judge that he is a rapist. It's ridiculous. People's lives have been ruined from false cries of rape and abuse. But: "(quoted from article) Her attacker was charged with sexual assault, but after a plea deal, admitted misdemeanour assault and got a princely sentence of no time served." Number of people's lives ruined from rape VS number of people whose lives were ruined by being falsely accused of rape? (Not a statement, merely wondering aloud while being too lazy to do extensive research for accurate numbers.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts