Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - rwd5035

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 131
« on: Today at 01:04 PM »
"To prove that sexual assault/rape isn't an issue on college campuses I'm going to hold up a situation littered with prosecutorial misconduct and evidence tampering to prove my point." KC

Men never feel trapped? Men never feel pressure? Enough of this feminist BS.

I don't know if you know this but men are generally stronger than women. It's not a feminist viewpoint to acknowledge that women are in different sexual situations than men are. I just want to reiterate, the only 1 in 5 statistic that I have seen is women who have been sexually assaulted/raped and were subjected to an attempted sexual assault/rape. The 1 in 5 statistic, as far as I'm aware, is NOT saying that these women have been sexually assaulted or raped. It also includes attempted in there as well. Now, maybe the stats are off, maybe it's as off as you say it is, but if you want to challenge it, then do some research or better yet, find one that says it's false.

But to accuse me of not thinking independently and just going along with the norm, when you are holding an outdated viewpoint on sex is nothing short of astounding. It'd be like having a conversation with someone who thinks that concussions aren't a big deal and saying that head trauma isn't an issue for football players.

Using your views, you were probably with the 200+ faculty at Duke who convicted the Duke lacrosse players. Judge, jury, executioner maybe for you, not for me.


I like that quote.  Next time I'm accused of not being PC enough, I'm going to break that out.

It was really spectacular.

Damn feminist liberal climatology professors just ruining this country with their stats and research!

Aren't they the worst, trying to get people to think about some of the largest issues on college campuses today and can talk about climate change as well?

« on: Today at 07:17 AM »
ou're telling me 4,000 are sexually assaulted in their 4 years there? Get serious, man.

I never said that. Though, I think anyone that thinks sexual assault isn't an issue on college campuses is living in a delusional world. Oddly, your stance comes after Obama supports a stand up to sexual assault/rape campaign. I'm sure if it was a Republican, you'd be saying something entirely different.

Hey, I've slept with women and regretted it afterwards. Did they rape me? Quite manufactured. Totally ridiculous.

No, that's not rape. It's about consenting at the time the events occurred. BTW, congratulations on having sex.

Have guys slept with women and never called them back? Of course. But that ain't rape.

No one said it was.

What do you mean a woman doesn't consent but goes along with it anyway? That is consent, unless she's drugged or drunk.

No, it's not. Which is where your misconception derives entirely from. College women especially can feel trapped in situations where men are expecting sex and don't consent and still have sex anyway. That's not consent. I don't think it's necessarily rape, I'm not sure what offense that exactly is but to think it's consent is 100% crazy.

Why don't we have 1 in 5 sexual assaults in the general population? Ever think of that? I mean, are campuses raping environments?

I'm not sure. The 1 in 5 statistic that I have seen is those who experience sexual assault/rape and experienced an attempt of sexual assault/rape. It's not 1 in 5 women have been raped, so no, approximately 4k women currently at PSU probably have not been raped and/or experienced an actual sexual assault.

The biggest problem for college campuses is reporting, given the ages of the parties involved, trying to learn how to live and what is acceptable and unacceptable behavior. Stop being an extremist and going so far to one side that makes you look completely insane.

To look at college campuses and not acknowledge that there is a problem of sexual assault/rape is completely bewildering to me though.

OT / Re: OT: Big Ten football
« on: Today at 07:00 AM »
Usually, the risk of actually making a bet on an such a matter will show how much you actually believe what you are saying.  It doesn't even have to be a big wager, just something to signify that you are willing to back up what you say.  I would be willing to use a gift card to BWW or Quaker Steak and Lube, or anything like that.

Maybe I'll bet, maybe I won't. There's no benefit for either of us to throw a bet down September 22 for a game that's happening on November 8.

Besides, it's not even that I think we can't win, it's more so that Indiana doesn't suck. Let's not forget, this team beat us by 20 last season. To think they suck, especially after going into #19 Missouri and winning, is incredibly naive.

And as an aside, why would I ever want to bet on Penn State to lose? What's in it for me? I don't give a **** about gift cards or $20.

OT / Re: Football: UMass thread
« on: Today at 06:56 AM »
I don't think we're THAT good, but I don't think we suck either.  You could pretty much say that about most of the B10 this year.  I still don't think Rutgers is a great looking squad, but they were giving us all kinds of trouble so I expect most of the league to play us pretty competitively as well.

Exactly how I feel. Indiana and Maryland will give us tough games, even though I omitted the Terps from my post.

OT / Re: Football: UMass thread
« on: Yesterday at 08:05 PM »
So I see 7-5 at worst, 11-1 at best, but would require several real upsets. I think 8-4 or 9-3 is likely. That would be pretty exciting if you ask me.

I think 8-4 or 9-3 is most likely right now. We still have some decent teams left on the schedule. We'll lose to Ohio State and Michigan State imo, Michigan in the Big House will be interesting and Indiana is going to pose some problems. I would think we should win every other game on the schedule though.

We will beat Indiana and Maryland, period.  They suck.  I'll take bets on those games.

You may want to slow down on the betting. Since you thought PSU covering 3.5 points against Rutgers was a lock and we'd beat them by at least 3 TDs (and you were wrong on all counts apart from PSU winning).

OT / Re: OT: Big Ten football
« on: Yesterday at 08:02 PM »
Hey let's give some love to Indiana, winning at the SEC East Champion, Missouri, yesterday and Missouri was ranked #19.

I tried in the UMass thread. Skeeza thinks they suck though.

Of course he does, but remember, we have a GOOD chance of going undefeated.

Penn State Basketball / Re: Recruiting
« on: Yesterday at 08:01 PM »
Alex Kline ‏@TheRecruitScoop  43s
2015 Gonzaga (DC) PG Bryant Crawford has verbally committed to Wake Forest.

OT / Re: OT: Big Ten football
« on: Yesterday at 06:37 PM »
Hey let's give some love to Indiana, winning at the SEC East Champion, Missouri, yesterday and Missouri was ranked #19.

OT / Re: Football: Rutgers thread
« on: Yesterday at 06:36 PM »
I always want Rutgers to lose. But as I said before, I am probably in the minority.

« on: Yesterday at 12:57 PM »
For those who believe in stats, like the 97% of climate scientists, the 1 in 5 rapes of women on college campuses must have you concerned, if not terrified. If you are parents of college bound daughters, there is a solution. Parents of boys as well, as apparently, their sons become rapists when they go to college. But boys don't matter, so let's stick to girls. Finally, there's a solution.


Yes, sexual assault/rape is a big problem on college campuses. I don't know how any sane individual could say otherwise. Now, I don't think there's an uptick in violent rapes, like the 1 in 5 number suggests (because when I think rape, I think of a man forcing a woman down and forcing himself upon her). What that number includes, I believe, is things like date rape, drunken sex and times where a woman doesn't consent but goes along with it anyway, and other things of that nature that I have not included.

To suggest that it isn't a problem though or that it's manufactured out of nothing is quite bewildering to me though, which is what I think you are doing, but you've done so inarticulately.

OT / Re: Football: UMass thread
« on: Yesterday at 12:50 PM »
Watched the game at a local bar where I ended up meeting a JMU fan who was in town for the Nova/JMU game. Was interesting to hear him talk so much about FCS and he really thought Franklin was a good hire for us. Always interesting to hear other perspectives.

OT / Re: Upsets everywhere, college football edition
« on: Yesterday at 10:52 AM »
Maybe not an upset but wow, East Carolina 70 North Carolina 41.

IU upsets # 18 Missouri on the road after losing on the road last week to Bowling Green!

East Carolina converted a 3rd and 28 in that game….on the ground.

OT / Re: Football: Rutgers thread
« on: September 20, 2014, 09:37 AM »
Made that "joke"?  How is that a joke?  Isn't a joke, by definition, funny?  I don't see the humor.

Just because you don't see the joke as funny, doesn't mean it's not a joke. Some people like more offensive humor, I'm one of those people and have laughed at far worse jokes than that, which you wouldn't.

Penn State Basketball / Re: Recruiting
« on: September 19, 2014, 05:00 PM »
Alex Kline ‏@TheRecruitScoop  1m
Penn State has offered 2017 Westtown (PA) big man Mohammed Bamba, per his coach.

Penn State Basketball / Re: Recruiting
« on: September 19, 2014, 11:53 AM »

Alston is a very important player for our future. I would say he seems likely for Temple just given his father's history but coming up on our HC week, staying with Garner (old AAU teammate), and Reaves and Zemgulis to be there signals our intent and how much we want him. Hopefully he feels that love and decides to come here. If not, we'll move on and find someone else but Alston is a player we need, he ticks a lot of the boxes of types of players that we need on this team.

OT / Re: PSU Football Rival?
« on: September 18, 2014, 11:09 PM »
No one is saying Rutgers is permanently going to be bad but the idea that they are going to blossom is one I can't really agree with. Maybe Rutgers can be a top 20 football team in 5 years, I would highly doubt it, especially since we have such a great presence in their recruiting area and any of the big profiled players leave the state don't play at Rutgers.

And their basketball program is a mess right now. Certainly will take a long time to cleanup a school's program that doesn't really have much going for it at present, just like their football.

I'm sure there will be times when Rutgers is good at some of the revenue sports but I wouldn't be at all surprised if they are just a sort of football version of Indiana and a newer basketball version of us.

Penn State Basketball / Re: Recruiting
« on: September 18, 2014, 02:32 PM »
I've been digging a lot of the 15 class but haven't really done much research on 16.  Who are the Philly/DC kids we're targeting the most right now?

247 is always a good resource for things like this.

We just had Cowan on campus, DeAndre Hunter has an unofficial visit with us scheduled for the 23rd (he'd be a great get and I can keep a lookout for news on him since I'm in Bryn Mawr), there isn't much news on Nazeer Bostick atm though we are the last school to have him on campus according to his 247 page (which may not be fully updated). I'm not sure about other targets but AJ Wilson seems another candidate since he was here over the summer.

OT / Re: PSU Football Rival?
« on: September 18, 2014, 02:13 PM »
Pitt hates us, we hate Pitt.  It's been that way for decades.

They are definitely a rival, it's just hard to call someone that though when we haven't played them since 2000. Maybe the 16-19 games will rejuvenate it.

I will always remember a conversation I had with my dad though when I was around 12 and was thinking about college.

Me: "Dad, what would you do if I decided to go to Pitt?"
Dad: "You will never see a dime from me while you are at school."
Me: "What about Penn State?"
Dad: "I will help you with what I can."

Made my decision pretty easy. Think he might know the answer to this question. :)

....Though what if he was trying to get me to go to Pitt so he could save money and retire earlier?  :o

OT / Re: Football: Rutgers thread
« on: September 17, 2014, 05:37 PM »
What is "unfair" about it?

If that is his scheduling philosophy, then so be it.  It seems that YOU are the one putting a negative spin on it.

I, for one, think that if you want a shot at a National Championship, then a very weak OOC is the way to go.  I actually think its smart.  I don't see it as unfair.  That's the label others put on it because it doesn't correspond to what their own scheduling philosophy may be.

All I am doing it pointing out what he has done in the past.  Is that wrong?  Usually, what people do to make themselves successful is what they will continue to do at their next stop.  If a weak schedule can take a vandy program from pathetic to respectible, then what do you think would be his philosophy to take a team from respectible to the next level?

Vandy inflated their win total by beating cremepuffs.  As you can see here, people don't see the cremepuffs that Vandy played, they see the 8 win seasons.

Penn State can inflate their record by beating cremepuffs.  Over time, people will not see the cremepuffs, they will see Penn State with back-to-back(-to-back?) 10 win seasons..., being elite.

I think it works.  Obviously, seeing what Franklin did at Vandy, he thinks it works.  To say that it is 'unfair' is each person's own opinion.

Because someone who has coached three games for us is being projected to schedule one way and one way only by you and he will not ever deviate from that. If you think that's fair, then I think you lack perspective.

For someone who has talked so much about James Franklin's scheduling practices and to talk about it in a tone that is so disparaging, to not be bothered by it or critical of it seems extremely backwards to me. But to each their own.

I don't know how I painted it in a negative light, all I said was wait and see what the schedule is, if anyone did it was you.

« on: September 17, 2014, 05:29 PM »
New evidence, but no new offense.  How can they increase the penatly?

Probably because there's something out there backing them up. That would be my guess. I would imagine there is a possibility that new evidence which could show greater culpability or seriousness of the original offense could allow an employer to further suspend a union employee for the same offense, but I would need to do some research on that to confirm it because as I said before, I don't know the FLSA and its subsequent case history.

OT / Re: PSU Football Rival?
« on: September 17, 2014, 05:23 PM »
I voted for Nebraska. A school with pedigree with no natural rival. I think we could get a lot out of this.

There's nothing to gain from Rutgers.

OT / Re: Football: Rutgers thread
« on: September 17, 2014, 05:20 PM »
They were supposed to play Arkansas State IIRC, but then decided to change it to Oregon State since they were available then. Probably one of the reasons why that schedule is so weak has to do with being ineligible for the BCS / CFP.

IIRC, ESPN came to both Oregon State and us and asked us to play since there were very little games on that day and ESPN needed the viewers. We accepted and went on to dismantle them.

OT / Re: Football: Rutgers thread
« on: September 17, 2014, 05:04 PM »
I really don't think we should be projecting James Franklin's scheduling practices at Vandy as a way to guarantee we'll schedule this way, this only way while he's our head coach. Rebuilding a program from the bottom is far different than us. How about we, yanno, WAIT AND SEE before we go complaining about the OOC schedule when Franklin has had very little say in it.

BTW - Probably playing LSU in 2020, Va Tech and West Virginia, Virginia will be back soon, there was rumors that we were in negotiations with Miami iirc though I don't think anything has come to that yet.

Franklin has had very little opportunity to schedule yet and people are projecting what he'll do based on three years at a bottom SEC program. I think that's a bit unfair.

« on: September 17, 2014, 11:49 AM »
And for the third time I've mentioned it, the NFL is saying that this is new evidence and deserves to increase his suspension. That's what the NFL is saying. It's clear you disagree, which is fine. I don't think it's cut and dry though.

OT / Re: Football: Rutgers thread
« on: September 17, 2014, 11:47 AM »
I'd be surprised at a significant number of Temple voters. Rutgers would make more sense.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 131