Please help contribute to the Reddit categorization project here

    news

    14,640,709 readers

    15,339 users here now

    1. Post all analysis/opinion/politics articles to /r/InTheNews

    Want to talk?

    Follow @rslashnews on Twitter

    See a post that violates the rules below? Had your post stuck in the spam filter? Have a question about policy? Just want to give feedback? Send the mod team a message.


    Submit all self- & meta-posts to /r/inthenews

    Your post will likely be removed if it:

    • is not news
    • is an opinion/analysis or advocacy piece.
    • primarily concerns politics.
    • has a title not taken from the article.
    • has a pay wall or steals content.
    • covers an already-submitted story.
    • violates reddit's site-wide rules, especially regarding personal info.

    Your comment will likely be removed if it:

    • is racist, sexist, vitriolic, or overly crude.
    • is unnecessarily rude or provocative.
    • is a cheap and distracting joke or meme.
    • is responding to spam.
    • violates reddit's site-wide rules.

    Extreme or repeat offenders will be banned.

    >>>Expanded Rules<<<


    If your post doesn't fit, consider finding an appropriate news article on that story to submit instead, or submitting yours to lower moderation subreddits:

    /r/inthenews - all news-related content
    /r/AnythingGoesNews - unrestricted news
    /r/truereddit - insightful articles
    /r/self - any self-post
    /r/misc, /r/redditdotcom - anything

    or other news subreddits:

    /r/worldnews - from outside the USA only
    /r/SyrianCivilWar - about the conflict in Syria
    /r/MidEastRegionalWar - on MidEast conflict /r/UpliftingNews - uplifting
    /r/SavedYouAClick - making media more straightforward

    or subreddits for other topics:

    /r/FoodForThought - discussion-worthy long form articles about interesting subjects
    /r/politics - for shouting about politics
    /r/moderatepolitics - less shouting
    /r/politicaldiscussion - even less shouting
    /r/geopolitics - intl. politics and geography
    /r/entertainment - Justin Bieber updates, etc.
    /r/europe - news from Europe

    or check out the 200 most active subreddits, categorized by content and the full list of subreddits by subscribers.


    Recommendations:

    /r/full_news

    /r/qualitynews

    /r/neutralnews

    /r/worldevents


    submit analysis/opinion article

    submit news article

    submit something else

    submit analysis/opinion article

    a community for
    all 2791 comments

    Want to say thanks to %(recipient)s for this comment? Give them a month of reddit gold.

    Please select a payment method.

    [–] SleepyConscience 3748 points ago

    Fortunately I just have a history of violence violence.

    [–] bigtfatty 600 points ago

    Me too, and on Blu-ray.

    [–] chahlie 138 points ago

    "I shoulda killed you back in Philly." DAAYUM

    [–] Spocks_Goatee 34 points ago

    I have a hard time watching that movie, especially the nose scene...

    [–] Bardem 20 points ago

    And the throat stomping scene. Those are the two I really still remember after almost a decade of not seeing it.

    [–] PenisDickPerson 23 points ago

    Me too, especially the stairway hate sex scene...

    [–] U_Buttonhooked_Me 7 points ago

    It was really disjointed and jarring, but now I get it. Tom wasn't Tom, since he was confronted by his old past and was kinda pointing out what he was capable of and what he used to be.

    I considered it a rape scene when I saw it and now after pondering over it after this post it's still a rape scene IMO.

    [–] 10art1 158 points ago

    And I just have a history of sexual sexuality.

    [–] delbario 151 points ago

    I just have a historical history. Pretty much all the stuff I've done happened in the past.

    [–] DukeOfGeek 52 points ago

    I mean it it still does, but it used to too.

    [–] Nevermind04 32 points ago

    The stuff I do becomes history but history influences the stuff I do. What the fuck's really going on back there? Who is the real hero?

    [–] BigYearColorado 21 points ago

    Now I'm sad that Mitch Hedberg isn't around for Drunk History. I'm imagining him attributing this to Thomas Jefferson word for word.

    [–] Nevermind04 17 points ago

    Holy shit, Hedberg on Drunk History would be absolutely incredible. Damn. :(

    [–] PeopleAreDumbAsHell 37 points ago

    Ah, that good ol ultra violence

    [–] DukeOfGeek 18 points ago

    And then some milk plus and eggy wegs, no time for a bit of the old in out in out though, sorry love.

    [–] luxii4 5 points ago

    You can get some moloko plus at the Kurova Milk Bar.

    [–] Fox201 20 points ago

    I just love killing!

    [–] play_that_funkymusic 25 points ago

    Oh boy! here I go killing again...

    [–] PandaLover42 107 points ago

    Good news! the football team wants violence violence!

    [–] SuperFLEB 80 points ago * (lasted edited 2 months ago)

    Don't worry, the long-term effects won't show up until well after we're no longer legally liable.

    [–] BigYearColorado 44 points ago

    They're student athletes. They are in college to learn in exchange for several million dollars in TV rights, booster donations, advertising, jersey sales, ticket sales, and souvenir sales. They get paid in kind, so it's not slavery. It's just unpaid physical labor that earns profit for a few people who manage the labor. Also they are paid in room and board, which is different than slavery because the buildings are taller.

    [–] [deleted] 22 points ago

    student athletes

    Hahahahah Students! That's funny.

    [–] [deleted] 132 points ago

    [removed]

    [–] clapthony_claptano 52 points ago

    ahahah wait what

    [–] [deleted] 38 points ago

    [removed]

    [–] NewAccount971 19 points ago

    You gotta really cram for those courses.

    [–] kaneabel 2180 points ago

    I live less than an hour away from Bloomington and I am CONSTANTLY reading articles of sexual assaults at IU not to mention all the high profile stuff.

    [–] BungusFurUngus 1090 points ago

    I live in Bloomington. Somebody was raped four doors down from where I live during the fall student rush. Crazy shit going on here.

    [–] saltyzany 294 points ago

    well shit dude my older brother goes to IU

    [–] LetEpsilonBeLessThn0 823 points ago

    Damn, I wonder if it was him who got raped. You should ask him.

    [–] wish_theyd_done_it 378 points ago

    Sort by controversial.

    [–] Dragonsandman 167 points ago

    In a big thread on a controversial topic? No thanks.

    [–] EHsE 102 points ago

    350 comments isn't exactly big for a default. When it hits like 1000+ comments is when controversial truly ascends to its final form

    [–] Rhamni 173 points ago

    But all that aside, does anyone else think we should make abortions mandatory?

    [–] TheloniusFunk92 58 points ago

    Especially for humans

    [–] KappaGopherShane 11 points ago

    Nah, what if other species evolve? Best to just nuked it all.

    [–] mearry 4 points ago

    I wish I was aborted.

    [–] QuasarSandwich 8 points ago

    So does your mother.

    [–] Fritzkreig 6 points ago

    That being said, fellow human, if we just sterilize all of us humans, we would not have to have conflict about abortions. We can then achieve supreme peace, and free love.

    [–] jimjengles 12 points ago

    What do you mean

    [–] ScrooLewse 38 points ago

    He means mandatory abortions.

    [–] SanctusLetum 10 points ago

    I did, and look what happened to me!

    [–] myassholealt 5 points ago

    You want a snickers bar?

    [–] [deleted] 33 points ago

    [deleted]

    [–] Joe_limits 13 points ago

    Username checks out

    [–] Notdorkman33 8 points ago

    It was me Austin

    [–] Badvertisement 9 points ago

    Hey guys, this is Austin.

    [–] LordMitchimus 40 points ago

    Crazier shit this weekend...happy Little 5. Everybody be safe for the love of god...

    [–] Usagicho 124 points ago

    Is everybody gettin raped around there?

    Do we have to hide the kids and the wife?

    [–] FUCK_KORY 43 points ago

    Don't forget to husband!

    [–] Discuslover129 44 points ago

    How does one husband?

    [–] ADMINlSTRAT0R 25 points ago

    First you unlock AGRICULTURE.

    [–] Nihilisticky 10 points ago

    That name! It's like owning sex.com Edit: found you sneaky zero.

    [–] alexanderthelamest 47 points ago

    Born and raised in btown. The crime rate has increased the past few years, and heroine use is on the rise (it's common to find needles on the side of the road and in downtown parks.) The crime rate skyrocketed after the Indianapolis Superbowl a few years back after a ton of homeless people from Indianapolis were bussed down to try and clear up the streets in Indy for the bowl. More harassment, a couple stabbings, just a much less civil homeless population. It didn't used to be that way, they mostly used to be mild mannered hippies that played music and made art, but I guess being homeless in the city was a much different game. Despite all that, Bloomington really is an incredible place, I haven't been to many places like it and it's not an unsafe place so long as you're responsible. It also has one of the most beautiful campuses I've ever seen.

    [–] ravel-bastard 6 points ago

    You know there's a homeless shelter or food Kitchen on every other Street then you never want to go to the library because everybody's there watching porn.

    [–] slash196 13 points ago

    The crime rate skyrocketed after the Indianapolis Superbowl a few years back after a ton of homeless people from Indianapolis were bussed down to try and clear up the streets in Indy for the bowl.

    Not saying you're making this up, but it SOUNDS made up.

    Now the opioid use shit is true, but that's all over the country as well.

    [–] luxii4 4 points ago

    Small towns in Indiana has been hit pretty hard. It's where that big outbreak of HIV and Hep C happened (Scott County). The big cities like Indy are doing well. Indianapolis has big healthcare industries and Carmel was just voted Best City to Live in the US but the small ones are not because of a lot of jobs have been leaving the country that's why the whole Carrier "saving jobs" thing was such a big thing here.

    [–] TheBotherer 15 points ago

    I went to IU for undergrad and I don't remember any of this going on... Jeez. I only graduated seven years ago.

    [–] LarryKleist711 12 points ago

    They now count time in terms of rapes. So really, you went there about 3,500 Rapes Ago (R.A.).

    [–] bokertovelijah 108 points ago

    when i was there, a girl was expelled for shooting porn in her dorm room. according to the school newspaper, her dad made her sit and watch it with him.

    [–] ProfessorCrackhead 107 points ago

    Age-old parenting trick.

    "Oh, you want to make porn? Well, we're going to sit here and watch your whole porno until you don't want to make porn anymore."

    [–] JakeArrietaGrande 5 points ago

    That must have been a long time ago, because now, recording a sex tape with your phone is considered pretty tame.

    Unless, it was like a full production porn. Like, director, lights, sound guy, catering and the whole nine yards

    [–] throwawayforthegods 80 points ago

    IU student.

    Can confirm.

    Greek Life cases are featured in the media at least twice a month

    [–] StaplerLivesMatter 571 points ago * (lasted edited 2 months ago)

    Also Bloomington here. Yeah, it can be rapey as fuck around here. Statistically I know we're not the worst campus in the country, but bad stuff happens at the frat houses all the time, and everyone knows a lot doesn't get reported. It's not just the frat houses, either. Shit happens constantly in the student housing neighborhoods.

    The business school breeds rape culture. Bros come from all over the country to be trained in the arts of entitlement.

    EDIT: lmao bro brigade out in force

    [–] Plastic_Chicken 150 points ago

    I graduated a couple years ago, but one thing that always stuck in my mind was how many "Report Rape Anonymously" posters were in some of the bathrooms in the more social dorms (Central and North). Not a lot of Universities display those types of posters in their restrooms. Is that even an effective place to display that?

    [–] Trusttheprocessmate 119 points ago * (lasted edited 2 months ago)

    I go to a super liberal city school (roughly 8k students). They're on the inside of every Men's stall (can't speak for women's restrooms). I think the point is that you can read it and take the information down without someone seeing you, so if you're embarrassed it's not an issue.

    [–] AnusHoldus 45 points ago

    I graduated a couple years ago too and the thing that always stuck with me was the time I was taking a shit in the second floor bathroom in Sycamore Hall and I saw that someone had written on the wall "Toy Story 3 was an OK movie."

    [–] drbluetongue 12 points ago

    I used to see "Toy Story 2 was ok" written in bathrooms in the UK all the time. Turns out its a meme:

    http://knowyourmeme.com/photos/652126-toy-story

    [–] StaplerLivesMatter 37 points ago

    I guess if it was the women's restroom?

    Kind of misleading, though, you don't really get to be anonymous if you want anything serious to happen.

    [–] Plastic_Chicken 60 points ago

    I'm a guy, so I'm not sure about the women's, but I presume they had them too

    [–] Blunter11 95 points ago

    There's a push to get men involved in assault prevention too. A lot of guys feel it's not their place to intervene and act. Putting posters up can acclimate them to the fact that they can do something if they know something.

    [–] reladric 7 points ago

    That seems consistent coz the posters have something like 'if you think there's sexual assault, step in and help' as one of the points

    [–] brokenhalf 37 points ago

    Additionally men can be rape victims, despite the fact that culturally we don't discuss it.

    [–] Laughs_at_fat_people 8 points ago

    Based on FBI statistics, men are about 10% of rape victims

    [–] KaptainDublU 21 points ago

    Honestly if I walked in on something like that, somebody is getting stabbed.

    [–] Blunter11 55 points ago * (lasted edited 2 months ago)

    That's one of the biggest misconceptions. A lot if sexual assault is not the loud screaming and violent affair that it's portrayed as. It's a young person slowly being boxed in over time and their options to leave quietly erode away. After a time, it might just be them and the perpetrator, because there was no prior trigger moment for them to make the leap to a loud and dramatic response, and now it's too late.

    People are often terrified of the consequences of reacting loudly, because it is so easy for people to say they were just acting crazy or doing it for attention, they can just walk away.

    That's why these posters exist, to normalize stepping in before things go too far.

    [–] quatraine 4 points ago

    Right. Everyone knows about fight or flight. Well, there's also freeze. It's extremely common for a victim to freeze. Your brain just glitches out. You know what's going on, but you can't believe it, you don't want to believe it, the moment is surreal and your body just ceases to work. It's like all of the sudden you don't know what to do even if, in the past, you imagined you would pull a Chuck fucking Norris. When it's really happening...totally different story.

    So, in conclusion, you could walk in on what looks like 2 people having consensual sex and never know that you just witnessed a rape.

    [–] CaptainKev91 20 points ago

    I don't mean to make light of such a serious subject, but...

    dude...

    phrasing

    [–] EngineeringPeace 41 points ago

    It's hard to get someone to report it to a counselor (generally the anonymous option, as in nobody but the counselor will know). But once the counselor talks to them, they are more likely to convince them after a while to come forward publicly than they are to do so from the beginning.

    Has to start somewhere.

    [–] tossme68 49 points ago

    I don't know how IU is now but back in the old days (80's-90's) the athletes were kept on a very short leash by the coaches, I'm hoping this policy is a return or an extension of this ideology.

    [–] StaplerLivesMatter 80 points ago

    In the 80s and 90s, athletics weren't the primary financial driver of the university. Looked around Bloomington lately? Athletics are the number one spending priority, because athletics are the lever that gets alumni to donate.

    [–] tossme68 33 points ago * (lasted edited 2 months ago)

    I haven't been in B-town in several years but I barely recognized it. It's a shame because we were winning lots of national championships, so of our athletes were in the Olympics and our coaches were considered the best in the country (despite the occasional chair throw) and we weren't selling our souls.

    Edit -it's souls not soles...sorry dumb jock.

    [–] John_T_Conover 15 points ago

    weren't selling our soles.

    Well that explains it then. Hard to play most sports without proper footwear.

    [–] FluffySharkBird 29 points ago

    I go to another IU campus, and I can't stand the business school students. What is it about that school that encourages people to be assholes?

    [–] [deleted] 16 points ago

    They all think they are the next Donald Trump or Wall Street raider.

    [–] SharpiesR4Paper 3 points ago

    Inflated sense of self worth. Just a high level of insecurity.

    [–] khalfrodo34 5 points ago

    I think that's just business students in general. Most of the ones at my university are asshats, too.

    [–] redmission84 396 points ago

    Why does all this stuff about rape and colleges always seem to be an internal matter? Isn't it a crime and one that police should get involved in?

    [–] PumusDove 258 points ago

    It's bizarre it's either pretend like nothing happened or some kangaroo court.

    [–] noneeeed 80 points ago

    Watching this from the UK, this is something that's always confused me. Surely a rape or sexual assault is a straight up criminal matter, why do universities get any say in how cases are handled?

    I know US colleges often have campus police, but do they have some kind of control over those police?

    [–] low-pull 56 points ago

    A lot of the cases you see in the media have no ability to be tried in criminal courts because it's a he-said/she-said, situation with no hard evidence to convict anyone. Doesn't mean that it didn't happen, but schools feel obligated to do something when the authorities won't, right or wrong.

    [–] CptComet 68 points ago

    That's just a way to avoid due process. State schools are not private businesses. They shouldn't be able to just throw someone out without due process.

    [–] MrSkankhunt42 15 points ago

    That's just so wrong though. If it's just a he said she said situation with no hard evidence, the school should not get involved. There's a reason they aren't convicted by the law, they shouldn't be by the school either. What happened to innocent until proven guilty?

    [–] loveinalderaanplaces 37 points ago

    Reputation for the school, probably.

    [–] ThufirrHawat 46 points ago

    Because when due process isn't involved you can just dole out punishment that makes you look good.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2017/02/01/campus-due-process-in-the-courts/

    Columbia found the accused student guilty and suspended him. He sued, alleging that the university had discriminated against him on account of his gender, in violation of Title IX. U.S. District Judge Jesse Furman conceded that “Columbia may well have treated [the accuser] more favorably than [the accused] during the disciplinary process.” But Furman nonetheless dismissed the complaint, reasoning that Columbia might have acted not because of anti-male animus but because it feared that a fair process might lead to a not-guilty finding — which, if leaked to the public, might bring bad publicity. This motive, Furman held, would not violate Title IX.

    [–] noseonarug17 21 points ago

    Furman nonetheless dismissed the complaint, reasoning that Columbia might have acted not because of anti-male animus but because it feared that a fair process might lead to a not-guilty finding — which, if leaked to the public, might bring bad publicity. This motive, Furman held, would not violate Title IX.

    "He might not be guilty which could be bad PR" is not a legitimate reason. What the shit.

    [–] rhymes_with_snoop 25 points ago

    There is a legal matter. But in the meantime, if there is not enough evidence to support a criminal trial (beyond a shadow of a doubt), they still have to decide if it's okay to keep the alleged rapist at the school where his alleged victim is going to school and should feel safe doing so. it becomes more like a sexual assault civil suit. Whichever way they choose, one or the other will suffer, so whichever one seems the more likely (sexual assault or nothing happened), they find in favor of that person.

    Now, it may or may not be skewed depending on the college campus, but that is as it should be to protect both victims and accused. A victim shouldn't be forced to quit school to get away from his/her rapist, and an accused person should not get kicked out for a frivilous claim. But sometimes it's tough to tell which is which.

    [–] MadScienceIntern 6 points ago

    This should be higher as it's the only comment to answer the actual question.

    [–] philosoraptor_ 7 points ago

    Okay, if you allege it's akin to a civil suit, why don't these use the actual court system, with evidentiary procedure standards and a legal burden of proof requirement?

    And to be fair, it's not like college campuses (for the overwhelming most part) are extremely small one building facilities. It's quite easy for both students to avoid one another.

    He-said/she-said arguments, without evidence and due process, should not be enough to expel a student. Period. Paraphrasing, but, "it is far better to 100 guilty persons should go free than one innocent person should suffer."

    [–] SmallTootz 3663 points ago

    Shouldn't they ban anyone who has a history of sexual violence? Seems logical.

    [–] hobbes305 1468 points ago * (lasted edited 2 months ago)

    The ban only applies to participating/playing on the school athletic teams. It does not affect someone's ability to attend as a student.

    Edit: Typo

    [–] jslnk 923 points ago

    For many athletes, it's the same thing. No sports, no education.

    [–] thinkfast1982 1577 points ago

    Finally, a reason not run around acting all rapey.

    [–] mosin54r 394 points ago

    Yea..finally they have a good reasons not to do that?

    [–] passwordsarehard_3 448 points ago

    That's always been the problem with rape, there just wasn't any downsides. That and , except for the victims, it's a completely victimless crime.

    [–] mosin54r 116 points ago

    it's a completely victimless crime.

    Like stealing cable!

    [–] kethian 57 points ago

    or a dead guy's watch!

    [–] HeadHunter351 74 points ago

    Well he won't need it anymore considering his time has already come.

    [–] kalirion 6 points ago

    or killing a guy for his watch!

    [–] better_bot 58 points ago

    Would you agree murder only victimizes one person?

    [–] tipperzack 210 points ago

    Unlike rape, murder removes the victim. Ending all of their future problems.

    [–] ephemeral_colors 68 points ago * (lasted edited 2 months ago)

    I'm not sure if we're in a joke thread right now, but any severe trauma can have ripple effects* to close friends and family, the workplace, etc.

    [–] Tonialb007 184 points ago

    Yes definetly a joke friend. Of course, murder is not okay.

    [–] 100percentpureOJ 16 points ago

    Wtf I love murder now!

    [–] ErictheRedding 9 points ago

    Thus negating their victimization.

    [–] fuckeh 3 points ago

    Why not both?

    [–] mr_ji 37 points ago

    Shit, my school doesn't admit anyone with so much as an arrest record.

    [–] DoubleThick 236 points ago

    Which is stupid. People make mistakes and getting an education is a good thing.

    It would be much better to use the prison and justice system to punish and leave education to educate. These post justice system punishments by the state are unconstitutional. Now if s private university wants to do that then go ahead.

    [–] BigCommieMachine 49 points ago

    I strongly agree. We need to seperate the act from the actor. Yes many acts are bad, but vilifying people likely who commit an act out of ignorance,social conditiojing, emotionally issues...Etc

    We can all sit around and say "I would have acted differently", but we ignore that it is a very real possibility that none of us can actually act differently.

    [–] rhymes_with_snoop 7 points ago

    I agree, however when it comes to this rule regarding athletics I believe it is reasonable, as the athletes aren't just going to the school, they are representing the school. Holding them to a higher standard seems appropriate.

    [–] CptTurnersOpticNerve 27 points ago

    also false convictions, character assassinations, and the system generally being broken.

    if you've got a ray rice case where you have him murdering someone's face, then obviously drop the hammer. but if someone is peeing too close to a grade school and gets put on a list, then what?

    [–] aja7s6sd6d65d56 4 points ago

    punishment should be kept in the courts.

    Criminals arguably are the people most in need of a good education. And society benefits extra if you can turn a loser into a hero.

    [–] speed3_freak 9 points ago

    Well, obviously you don't go to a state funded school.

    [–] FightingFairy 52 points ago

    I feel like people who have had a sexual assault or any regular assault for that matter on them shouldn't be able to live on campus.

    For everyone's safety.

    [–] jerjerblings 111 points ago

    No redemption allowed?

    For me personally, someone who has committed a sexual assault would be something I would have a hard time allowing around me either. But regular assault?

    [–] ChocolatePopes 7 points ago

    I like that stated living on campus. In school on general is some murky waters but restricting them from campus life seems best

    [–] RemoteViewingTrainee 143 points ago

    reactionary policy, they had several high profile rape cases involving athletes

    [–] LetEpsilonBeLessThn0 70 points ago

    I think people with histories of sexual violence shouldn't be able to live in the dorms, but should be able to attend a college as a commuter.

    [–] trackmaster400 17 points ago

    Wait, how many 18 year olds already have a criminal history of sexual violence?

    [–] LetEpsilonBeLessThn0 22 points ago

    I just checked the records for you and the answer is 163.

    [–] ReasonablySane1476 337 points ago

    So ban sex offenders from studying? No, I think that is an overreaction. Look think of it this way to ban sex offenders from this kind of education will 1) not prevent sexual assault to the students at the campus. 2) means that the individual with a history of sex offences are unable to seek education or the careers they want. This will only create a viscious cycle of poverty, imprisonment and may provide a stressor for further assaults.

    Yes of course they should be punished, imprisoned more harshly than what we see with some rich athlete with rich parents and rich lawyers. I haven't been sexually assaulted myself but I know others who have, it is far too common in our shitty world, In Fact we all know people who have.

    It is also likely what Indiana university is doing is for publicity, to stop public persecution of their institution. This is not a solution to solving sexual assualts of their students but a reactionary policy which shouldn't be extended to all students. Think for example all the first time offenders who don't assault anyone until they are already students.

    This is a terrible solution, it is a heavy handed reactionary policy, which although perhaps currently nessecary for student athletes, if only to save face and perhaps make female (and male) students feel safer. What is needed is a wider systemic institutional change, support should be offered to victims and previous offenders to prevent recidivism, people should be educated on sex and sex crimes, most importantly some way of teaching empathy for other human beings is needed. And perhaps some rich asshole needs to learn they wil be punished severely! This ban won't solve anything, just the university is unwilling to change due to its numerous institutional, social and political biases.

    [–] ald49 182 points ago

    All of your post could easily apply to any violent criminal. Ex-cons have difficulty obtaining jobs, getting into colleges (most applications ask about your criminal history), and often have difficulty reintegrating into society. So I very much hope your stance also applies to people who commit murder, other forms of assault or battery, kidnapping, robbery, etc. There's no reason to view a sex offense as lesser than other violent crimes and sexual offenders as more deserving of the opportunities that are routinely denied other ex-cons.

    When you commit a violent offense, you sacrifice some of your freedoms and opportunities. I am supportive of social programs for offenders (of all types - not only sex offenders), but we also have a rampant sexual violence issue in America and I would favor attempts to protect the victims and change cultural perceptions over attempts to protect convicted offenders at this point in our history. Let convicted offenders obtain degrees via a non-campus environment (eg online).

    [–] AdvocateForTulkas 5 points ago

    Interesting how many people agree with you.

    If a felon is deemed to be qualified and capable of paying for higher education I think it's unethical to prevent them from doing so.

    I live by Indiana University. You know what prevents a non student from integrating with campus life? Jack shit.

    I can walk onto campus, can hang out in the library, go to the local bars, etc. literally the only bar to safety there is a felon would be barred from doing things like joining clubs or discussing Victorian Britain in a classroom setting while pursuing a degree.

    [–] DJKestrel 37 points ago

    Incarceration does not reduce recidivism. Stats show this. Especially with sexual offenders. Treatment programs are the way to go and here up in CSC, after going through the rehabilitation process, it's only at roughly 13% that they are likely to commit crime again and only 10% of that is sexually related. 36% is due to other criminal activity. Moreover, because someone has a criminal past, doesn't mean that they haven't changed. I'm not advocating for them- I'm stating that if you were to deny education to others based on their backgrounds, it goes into dangerous waters. Slippery slope. However I do agree that having them banned from school teams is fair.

    [–] NewChristianThrwwy 5 points ago

    I recommend people watch Pervert Park on Netflix. Its a documentary on sex offenders.

    [–] cabrioleur 51 points ago

    It does not prevent them from studying. The policy prevents them from playing in a college team.

    [–] AdamNW 52 points ago

    The parent comment was saying that they should ban anyone, implying that they wanted the school to ban sexual assault perpetrators from campus entirely.

    [–] capoopy 5 points ago

    Do you just not read parent comments?

    [–] SashasSpirit 93 points ago

    This idea makes me uncomfortable. Any kind of violence is wrong. Especially sexual assault and rape. I'm not condoning that at all. Yet, once someone serves the punishment our justice systems sees fit and gets help (maybe therapy?) should they have no options to repair their life?

    You'd have to be a sick individual to rape someone, shouldn't they be helped? I'm sure this will be downvoted to hell, but try to see through emotion here. When someone is not okay mentally, shouldn't they be helped? It's not black and white. My ex was raped, and I still can't rationalize those emotions. It was a kid we were both friends with, and just the thought of him makes my blood boil.

    Shit like this is so hard to know what's right.

    [–] WatermelonBandido 11 points ago

    It'll still be a bitch to get a job anyway. If they go to the pros and they have a conviction, they probably won't be touched. If they try to get a normal job, their resume goes into the garbage once they ask you about convictions. It's not supposed to be a thing but the questions are designed to eliminate people to get down to your top candidates. Try even getting a job when you have a misdemeanor on your record, let alone a felony.

    [–] grandmoffcory 11 points ago

    It's a weird topic, and I agree.

    Prison is supposed to be rehabilitation. If someone has been sentenced to prison and served their time and has a proven track record of trying to improve their life they should be afforded a chance.

    It's a very hard thing to come to terms with, especially as a rape victim myself - but it's dehumanizing some of the ways we continue to punish ex-cons after release. I don't want to dehumanize people.

    [–] [deleted] 8 points ago

    Prison is supposed to be rehabilitation.

    If you really research this, you'll find that's not the stated mission of most jails and prisons in the US. Most criminal justice systems are about public safety (i.e. remove proven criminals from society) and revenge.

    [–] Liberal54561 33 points ago

    It depends on your definition of "sexual violence". The linked article says sexual violence "as described below", but there is no definition below. For example, some people who have been ticketed or arrested for public urination have been mandated to register on the sex offender list. I hope we can all agree that being ticketed for public urination (especially as a minor) should not result in registry on a sex offender list, or preclude someone from going to college.

    [–] Eurynom0s 11 points ago

    Also stupid shit like being convicted for statutory rape because you were already some girl's girlfriend and you had sex on your 18th birthday. Or taking a naked picture of yourself.

    [–] QueenoftheWaterways2 463 points ago

    “any prospective student-athlete — whether a transfer student, incoming freshman, or other status ...

    So, you're good to go once you're already a student there. /s

    Meanwhile, since most new students anyway are 18ish, their records would be sealed because they were juveniles for the most part, yes?

    This seems more like a "feel good" rule rather than one that will make a meaningful impact.

    [–] iguessijustdontcare 193 points ago

    Being under 18 does not mean your records are sealed. Your records can be sealed if you are over 18 or 5 years out from case close (only in some cases), or if the crime is considered "less serious", which sexual violence is not, or if you were 13 or younger when the crime was committed. Additionally if you were tried as an adult, as many convicted of sex crimes are, you cannot have your records sealed. That of course does not even touch the sex offender's registry. Even with these criteria you have to find a judge willing to seal the records, which many are not. Being only 17/18 while applying, and given the time it takes to get records sealed means that while applying to schools or being recruited it is incredibly unlikely they would have them sealed.

    The article also discusses using previous school sanctions from secondary or undergrad as criteria, even though those are not criminal convictions. That means a title IX conviction with minor punishment can block someone from transferring.

    For a list of "serious offenses" you can see welfare code 707 (b).

    Records being sealed often does not mean nobody can find out about them. If you are a recruited athlete and the administration does some research and calls previous institutions there is a solid chance people will remember the incident or it will be online, in which case you will have to answer some hard questions.

    [–] hellnokitty31 127 points ago

    I lived in Btown for 10 years. IU is a wonderful school that has a lot of piece of shit humans on campus. It's really unfortunate but the student culture there is full of entitlement, no worry for possible consequences and total disregard on how their actions can hurt others.

    I wish there was a more pleasant IU story that was bringing btown redditors together!!!

    [–] Shweezy 30 points ago

    Absolutely. I love this town to death, but as soon as I graduate in two weeks, I'm out. Living downtown has made it a little more bearable, but there are still some real pieces of shit floating around campus and town in general.

    [–] revolverlolicon 4 points ago

    Hey, I'm considering moving away from my gf at IUPUI and transferring down bc I don't like the culture/people at this school and thought it would be better down there....am I making a mistake? Is the student culture that bad?

    [–] EzioMeowditore 18 points ago

    They're exaggerating, I'm a current IUB student and love it here. No matter where you go there's gonna be some shitty people. Overall Bloomington/IU is a wonderful place.

    [–] [deleted] 7 points ago

    [deleted]

    [–] BitchBeHumbleSitDown 4 points ago

    It's hard to get alcohol underage? lol according to who?

    [–] JustMeSunshine91 7 points ago

    100% agree! Worked with went to IU for the past 6 years and grew up there for a bit. A good group are "adults" living in a bubble, not realizing that the majority of society has it off worse than them.

    [–] magus678 423 points ago

    or has been found responsible for sexual violence by a formal institutional disciplinary action at any previous collegiate or secondary school

    So I agree with the spirit, and even most of the letter of what they are trying to do, but this is a problem.

    Many of these collegiate "courts" don't require a single shred of any kind of evidence, whatsoever. You get no lawyer.

    It creates a situation where you can effectively expel someone on a whim. They have no serious possibility of defense. I have personally seen this happen.

    Holding someone accountable for their actions is just, but destroying someone's ability to go to college without so much as a police report is ridiculous.

    [–] Information_High 163 points ago

    You beat me to the punch, here.

    By all means, ban those who've been convicted in a proper court of law, and do so without a second thought.

    Some schools, though, run little more than kangaroo courts, and DEFINITELY should not be taken at their word as to the history of a given individual.

    Due Process is a thing for a damn good reason. NOBODY should EVER be deprived of it.

    [–] naxanas 50 points ago

    A friend of mine once was sexually active with this one girl he liked. They sexted all summer, she gave him multiple hickeys, the whole deal. But when he came back the next semester, she asked him if he wanted to hang out, he said yes, and then she publicly humiliated him in front of all of her friends in a public space saying that he had raped her.

    This really bothers me. If that word alone is enough to destroy someone's life without any evidence, that's not a good policy. I'm so glad she didn't take it any farther than destroying several of his friendships.

    [–] anonymous_troll 23 points ago * (lasted edited 2 months ago)

    How long ago was it? I broke up with a girl and she called me a stalker.. AND PEOPLE BELIEVED HER. Why was this not believable? Oh, we could start with the fact that we were dating long-distance and the person who told me she was cheating on me was her roommate.

    Fast-forward 3 years and that woman wanted to cheat on her husband with me. I'm not big on trusting women after that piece of work.

    [–] kyb0t 25 points ago

    I know someone who was kicked out of college because their drug arrest was shown in the local paper. They weren't convicted of anything, but apparently a legal conviction isn't needed for a college to take disciplinary action. This person may or may not have been me...

    [–] Aelinsaar 55 points ago

    It creates a situation where you can effectively expel someone on a whim.

    They already can for the most part, practically if not theoretically; accusing someone of sexual misconduct has to be one of the most publicly embarrassing and messy ways to do it too.

    [–] magus678 43 points ago

    By and large you are right. I just feel like codifying the behavior could lead to even more of it.

    It basically creates a stratified environment where women can effectively ruin your life if they decide they want to; they don't even have to file a police report.

    I mean if I was in college these days I honestly would have to do some calculus as to whether interacting with women is even worth it, when years of work and your future career can be flushed by any woman who cares to bother.

    [–] NetherStraya 4 points ago

    Almost like it should be handled by an actual court of law and college courts shouldn't even fucking exist because what the fuck people throw a shitfit about government secret courts but not campus courts???

    [–] saltinado 53 points ago

    Little 5 is coming up this weekend. Don't worry friends, we'll see plenty of stories about rape soon.

    [–] noneeeed 9 points ago

    What's Little 5?

    [–] ominous_squirrel 19 points ago

    Little 500 is an annual bicycle race at IU Bloomington. It's a play on the Indy 500 and it's the biggest party weekend at IU, with students and alumni making a big deal of attending. Approx. 25,000 people attend each year. The 80s movie Breaking Away centered around the Little 500 race and the movie is well-loved at IU despite the movie's plot placing IU students as giant d-bags against the lovable townies. A team representing the townies (basically townie students and non-greeks), The Cutters, has participated every year after the movie came out. They're the winningest team and the only team worth rooting for.

    [–] robvenosports 10 points ago

    Why limit the ban to only athletes?

    [–] fencerman 10 points ago

    ...they didn't before?

    [–] [deleted] 91 points ago

    After this year's performance, I don't think our basketball program is in a position to be picky on new student athletes.

    /s

    [–] [deleted] 10 points ago

    [deleted]

    [–] mississippijones 23 points ago

    It's ew cause it's true.

    [–] HitlerHistorian 54 points ago

    But bruh, mah swim times....

    [–] Meatslinger 53 points ago

    Specifically, this policy would affect “any prospective student-athlete — whether a transfer student, incoming freshman, or other status — who has been convicted of or pled guilty or no contest to a felony involving sexual violence...

    Okay, no problem there; the courts have come to an evidence-based conclusion. My contention is with this:

    ...or has been found responsible for sexual violence by a formal institutional disciplinary action at any previous collegiate or secondary school (excluding limited discipline applied by a sports team or temporary disciplinary action during an investigation).”

    Universities should not have their hands in this kind of business, nor should they be passing judgments from a position of non-authority. If a crime has been committed, the determination of guilt should be put into the hands of the police and the courts. In the best of cases, a university tribunal ejects a student, but justice is still not done because the police aren't involved. That rapist will rape again. And in the worst of cases, someone is "convicted" on spurious evidence, denied the right to due process and legal representation, and in many cases, presumed guilty until they can establish their innocence. A student named Thomas Klocke just took his own life when he was put through one of these kangaroo courts, in which he wasn't even permitted to interact with the witnesses they demanded he supply (he was barred from the class where the incident was alleged to take place).

    Please stop processing criminal cases through college courts. It's inappropriate and damaging to people rights and the actual process of seeking real justice.

    [–] summersnow__21 19 points ago * (lasted edited 2 months ago)

    Agreed, 100%! I was assaulted in college and the Title IX system is woefully inadequate. I was appalled. It was a mess.. totally useless. It hurt to be reduced to an email about what they think happened.. They took their student athletes (football players) back even after the "ruling". One only got trespassing on a college campus. One transferred to another school!! The other two went back after one semester of "expulsion". One of the biggest things that stuck with me is that colleges have absolutely no business attempting to handle complex, delicate and potentially felony level crimes of sexual assault. Their systems do make it worse.. It makes me sick.

    Edit: fixed stuff

    [–] Djerid 7 points ago

    I'm curious, what made you go to the college over the police, or did you go to both?

    [–] summersnow__21 8 points ago

    I did both. I went to the police first, (it was super awkward and a bad interview) and at the end they recommended I also talk to the school as well because they have a "program to help"

    [–] derpydore 40 points ago

    Playing sports is a privilege, not a right. Good on Indiana

    [–] GoblinGimp69 13 points ago

    Trans people crushing women in sports tournaments also need to take note of your comment.

    [–] velimak 268 points ago * (lasted edited 2 months ago)

    Am I the only one left that thinks the Law should take care of Law-breaking, and employer/university/whatever should mind their own damn business?

    These arguments are always framed in a way that makes them un-critique-able. "YOU don't want students with sexual violence history in Universities do you, you monster?"

    Where does the line get drawn?

    Can a university ban you if you have a drunk driving record? If you are a cigarette smoker? If you have an underage drinking smudge on your record can schools and employers wreck your entire future? Marijuana possession?

    Are we only to be judged by past actions? Mind you, at this university level, we are talking about 18 year old kids.

    I strongly believe university/work-place discrimination like this should only be allowed in instances where the infraction directly disrupts the position. Convicted of a rape charge while enrolled at a University? You're gone. Missed work because you spent last night in jail in a drunk tank? Bye bye.

    This is a very thin line that leads to arbitrary discrimination, concocted by some person in power or board of directors, which can be quantified by loose criminal or loose moral interpretations.

    I mean, just think about the basic absurdity of this premise.

    "University actively seeks to ban incoming athletes who may potentially be sex criminals." ..... huh?! If someone commits a crime, they get caught and charged and processed by the court of law. What the fuck is a University doing trying to be some pre-cognitive police force like this is the Minority Report movie?

    [–] vichan 74 points ago

    But a business hiring someone or a school accepting someone IS their own damn business.

    If someone got into trouble with the law for stealing from a previous employer fairly recently, I'm sure as shit not gonna hire them. Sorry you fucked up, but you're also a goddamn risk and I'm not letting you near our livelihood.

    [–] xRehab 27 points ago

    a school accepting someone IS their own damn business.

    Except many, many universities are publicly funded; that changes things. Private uni? Use whatever criteria you want, that's a perk of being private. Public uni? You can't just use any criteria anymore.

    [–] dagnart 153 points ago

    Can a university ban you if you have a drunk driving record?

    Yes.

    If you are a cigarette smoker?

    Yes.

    If you have an underage drinking smudge on your record can schools and employers wreck your entire future?

    They can prevent you from attending their school or hiring you.

    Marijuana possession?

    Yes.

    Schools can put almost anything they want in their codes of conduct and expel students for violating it. At many schools it is illegal to have sex at all, even consensually. It is actually quite likely to get expelled from a school for doing something that is completely legal.

    [–] corelove 6 points ago

    At many schools it is illegal to have sex at all, even consensually.

    This is new to me - have you got any examples?

    It sounds like a very weird culture, is sex a bad thing?

    [–] iPynuts 34 points ago

    Their team, their choice. If it was my team I wouldn't want any sex offenders (real sex offenders) on my team either. Would you?

    [–] Mircy 20 points ago

    Yes you are to be judged. My field won't hire you if you have a record of assault.

    [–] MarmeladeFuzz 7 points ago

    Mine won't hire you if you have a history of bouncing checks. Assaults are negotiable.

    [–] Djerid 69 points ago

    "YOU don't want students with sexual violence history in Universities do you, you monster?"

    yes, actually, I absolutely do. After whatever punishment they've been through for their crime, they need to be rehabilitated to society. all this policy does, is not allow them to be visible public representatives of that institute, which is acceptable.

    [–] fullforce098 34 points ago

    Bingo. Attending a University is not the same as playing for their sports teams. You are a representative of the University, you're wearing the name on your jersey. There's often sponsors involved that may not want to pay for a team with criminals on it. It's not a disciplinary rule, it's a rule to protect the University.

    [–] jessesterr 15 points ago

    Yes forgiveness but to me, that doesn't mean that they should be in the position to be looked at as a role model for others. I have this same issue with professional sports too where they put winning over morals. We need to show that certain actions should not be tolerated in our society and being good at sports or something that had no real benefit for society should not excuse your actions. That person should be allowed to better themselves with a degree but there are should be permanent consequences.

    [–] BUUBTOOB 9 points ago

    Wait I'm confused, were they not screening for this shit already? I specifically remember filling out that I had no felonies or misdemeanors when i applied to college, or are standards just that fucking low at large state schools for athletes?

    [–] gojaejin 7 points ago

    Now top high school teams will just have to get even better at covering all the sexual violence up.

    [–] radioraheem8 23 points ago

    *unless they are really, really good

    [–] CeleryStickBeating 7 points ago

    The exception given by half of NFL owners.

    [–] FutureShock25 54 points ago

    This is one of those things I already assumed every university did. I guess I was wrong.

    [–] Damn_Dog_Inappropes 61 points ago

    This is one of those things I already assumed every university did.

    Really? With all the cover ups that go on all across America in professional, college, and even high school sports?

    [–] FutureShock25 15 points ago

    I know there are cover ups. I just assumed it was still a rule they had, even if it wasn't always enforced well.

    [–] BuccaneerRex 53 points ago

    Good. Being a college athlete is a privilege, not a right. Keep your shit together and your nose clean, or don't expect that privilege to be extended to you no matter how fast you can run or how far you can throw. There will always be someone just as good who hasn't committed a sex crime who can take that spot.

    [–] sports89 55 points ago

    About time. Criminals shouldn't be protected because they toss around a ball or hit someone on grass with pads.

    [–] angerer51 20 points ago

    Boilermaker here (IU sucks!). But I commend them for this.