Jump to content

Hef3

Member
  • Content Count

    66
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

74 Excellent

About Hef3

  • Rank
    Lets Hug It Out

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://
  • AIM
    BigB00ted
  • ICQ
    151713458

Profile Information

  • School
    University of Oregon
  • Biography
    I live in the shadows, which is why I have this icky pale skin.
  • Location
    Eugene, OR
  • Interests
    Stealing Christmas.
  • Occupation
    Evil.
  1. I don't think a playoff will happen for three reasons: 1) It's probably more lucrative in terms of TV cash, alumni/fan ticketing, and travel expenses for a team to lose in the Sugar Bowl than to lose in the first round of the playoffs. I understand they could potentially rack up a 3 games and a whole bunch of cash in the process, but that means that four of the teams that would have received big pay-outs in the BCS system would end up making less money. 2) It's probably easier for the league to finance bowls with big title sponsors than to piece out the playoffs individually. 3) It devalues all of the other bowls, and makes the title sponsorship deals for those bowls less lucrative in the process. In a world with a playoff, would they retain the small bowls, or would they have an NIT style second playoff for all of the others? You know that all of the non-BCS conferences aren't going to be happy about their systems getting nerfed. That said, go Utes. My Ducks keep losing and the rents' alma mater keeps winning.
  2. Hef3

    Resolved (Movie)

    I've been out of the activity for a minute, but I think this was a balanced look at the national debate scene. I think it shows circuit debaters who are into policy-making as sympathetic by following Highland Park, and I think by profiling LBJ they showed that there are flaws in the activity. It didn't profile every sort of team that participates in debate in this country, but it does accurately portray those two teams. Y'know, folks don't watch "Hoop Dreams" to learn X's and O's. It wasn't seeking to explain debate to those who might want to pick it up, it was focused on communicating the culture of debate, and from that angle I think it was a success. I watched the film yesterday with a friend who knew nothing about the activity, and I think afterwards he better understood what my life was like in High School. Cheers to those who worked on it.
  3. holy shit. a. empirical is spelled incorrectly. b. i think this assumes a really terrible hierarchy of knowledge. are you too busy to talk about this?
  4. Hef3

    [Deleted]

    QFA. I think this argument has started going in circles, and we've totally hijacked the thread from the supreme court discussion. I think we only disagree about the above, and I think it's hard to reason that much either way without a better understanding of the war on child porn and how it's going (something I admittedly have little experience with). Might I suggest another thread for a larger discussion of "thought crimes," maybe in non-debate debates?
  5. Hef3

    [Deleted]

    First, I think you need to manage some perspective before you start labeling the work I do worthless. I'm pretty offended by your tone, and I while I don't think your intention was to insult me, I think you need to examine the way you discuss topics like this with people who are invested in them. I obviously haven't earned your respect, but I think I deserve it. Second, I don't work in law enforcement. I work in sexual assault support and prevention. I help those who have already gone through it, and I teach young folks why they shouldn't do it. I'm not actively looking for the folks who do this stuff, because that's not my job. Third, the reason that we're having trouble with the problem has nothing to do with the desire of law enforcement to shut down providers. It has to do with the scope of the problem. Every parent in this country has the potential to create child pornography, and most porn is created by small producers who are shrouded in anonymity. There have been a handful of successful cases where police have tracked down children through their appearance in child porn and rescued them, but offenders in general are great at covering their tracks. Many crimes against children are perpetrated in other countries, and thus require huge amounts of resources in order to coordinate arrests and extradition. The internet is a powerful shield for those who wish to abuse it, and if folks are smart enough to make money off this stuff their probably smart enough to not get caught. The question then is what we would gain from our sources? IP addresses? We can get those through undercover work. Individual contacts? If we can't get them through undercover work or other snooping, it's going to be hard to get them anyways. Mug-shots of the purveyors? Most consumers have no idea who the real person behind the pornography would be. Lets bring this full circle then. Fox Sans Socks put all of my thoughts about "thought crime" together quite coherently, so I won't rehash. Your argument hinges on actual possession producing no harm, and Fox Sans Socks shows how the production process is inherently bad and that the user supports it. I'll go further though and argue that the government has decided that child pornography, like cocaine or heroin, degrades the individuals who use it to the detriment of society. I'd argue that consuming child porn is about power, and that it builds on the tendencies that lead to outward violence. I understand that this is a grey area, and that the government should have checks against this type of social control. However, I think it's in the abiding public interest to keep individuals off of porn. Lastly, I think that using child porn is using the child, that the act itself is violence. Using the image of child for sexual gratification is exploitative and nonconsensual, and shouldn't be allowed by law. If there were pictures of me taken against my consent, I'd consider each time they were used to be an individual violation that bears culpability for the user.
  6. Hef3

    [Deleted]

    I think viewing child pornography is harmful to individuals and society, but I think a discussion on porn is outside the scope of this thread. However, I think a supply side solution to this problem is the wrong idea. Like I said, we punish people for buying and possessing stolen property. It's not that having a stolen sofa is inherently harmful to folks, but the way it came into someone's possession is. The market drives crime, and I think both the consumers and suppliers need to be held responsible for child porn.
  7. Wing's a nice guy. I grew up in Salt Lake City, and as a non-LDS kid I have an idea of what it's like to be disrespected by folks who don't share my religious views. I agree that there a great many evils that are propagated by organized religion, and that the political/economic structure of Western faiths has something to do with that. I also think that there are individuals who use their religious affiliation to cover up their hate for others, and then use the power of their organizations to spread that hate. As someone who was coached/judged by Wing throughout high school, I'll vouch for him and say he's not one of those people. He's a rational guy with an interest in truth, and he lives his values. That's someone I can get along with. Y'know who I can't stand though? Someone who's values, regardless of their origins, guide them to hate well-meaning people. I mean, I'm not sure if I believe in God or not. Does that mean that you're not sure if you hate me or not? This idea really frustrates me.
  8. Hef3

    [Deleted]

    Good point. 85% of survivors report knowing the person who assaulted them, at least by name. Most assault happens during daytime hours in the victims own home. This being the case, I'm ALL ABOUT empowering children. A good portion of the work I do is teaching boundaries to middle school students. We used to present to elementary kids, but a particular foundation decided to stop offering that grant. Kids aren't listened to most of the time, and it's assumed that they are lying or at least distorting the truth. So the kid needs two messages, that the touching is not ok, and that their boundaries matter.
  9. Hef3

    [Deleted]

    I mean, I actually am an expert on the issue (work for Sexual Assault Support Services, degree in Women's and Gender Studies, four years of peer-theatre based sexual assault prevention, four years of secondary prevention volunteering/work, professional level training in the dynamics of sexual assault, soon to be trained in victim/survivor advocacy). Besides, the local news called me one: http://www.kval.com/news/11726251.html I don't use that to trump what ya'll are saying, but it seemed like that authority was being questione a whole bunch in this thread and I think I know something about this stuff. A few responses. The "Perpetrators Cannot Be Rehabilitated," folks. I think it's bullshit to say that perpetrators don't choose to sexually assault people. Sexual assault is about power, not about sex, and in very few cases is assault an issue of compulsion. What's difficult is that the small number of perpetrators who end up in prison are those who are the closest to addiction that we can find. Most perpetrators however are able to continue sexually assaulting people because they're very controlled. They select targets that are vulnerable, accessible, and less credible than they are, and they systematically execute abuse in such a way that makes them invisible to the system. Intervention is successful with most of these men (I say men, because men perpetrate around 90% of all assaults). They can make rational choices, and lead successful non-violent lives. This is not to say that they should not be punished. They, in my mind deserve prison time as restitution towards survivors and society. To say that there is no way to fix the problem though is to absolve us of societal responsibility, which I can't accept. If a person is acting uncontrollably they aren't functioning on the same level as everyone else, and they need treatment, not punishment. The "Punish Em' More!" folks: Again, I think it would be better to get more perpetrators in prisons for medium terms rather than having torture or something else available. While 1 in 3 women and 1 in 5 men will experience an attempted or completed sexual assault in their lifetime, only around 5% of men will ever attempt this sort of crime. That means that we aren't holding perpetrators accountable, and we aren't believing the survivors who report to us. This is the real problem. Perpetrators don't sexually assault people in order to be sent to prison, so they're very good at getting away with it. We need to change the way the system works before anything else. Also, about child pornography. If an individual cannot consent to the pictures that are taken of them, then it's sexual assault. It is a violation, and survivors report high levels of trauma from being exposed to and being part of child porn. This means that both the suppliers and the consumers should be punished. Purchasing illegal goods is illegal, as the market drives crime. Exploitation of any kind without consent should not be tolerated. I'll keep responding to the thread, but if ya'll have any questions about resources or what have you, feel free to email me at anthonycarrgreen@gmail.com
  10. Hef3

    [Deleted]

    I don't support the death penalty anyways, but I'm strongly against using the death penalty in sexual assault cases. I work for Sexual Assault Support Services in Eugene, Oregon, and the biggest problem I see with the justice system is the astonishingly low conviction rate. We have thousands of support clients seek treatment from us each year in Lane County, and yet we only get 30 felony sexual assault convictions. Upping the penalties for sexual assault will have the opposite effect we want it to. It will drive down the conviction rate because of gun shy juries, and it will only serve to create harsher penalties for those few cases that go the whole course (where, like in all other violent crime cases, we'll see a disproportionate number of lower class people of color). It's not a deterrent. We'd much rather have a larger number of perpetrators put away for five to ten, and so would most sexual assault survivors.
  11. I have trouble calling the nineties players "old school". Maybe I just remember watching Stockton and Malone playing too vividly to consider it ancient history. How do folks like Wilt Chamberlain and Dr. J fit into all of this. Further, I think my best starting line up of players today would be: (PG)Steve Nash, (SG)Dwayne Wade/Gilbert Arenas (can't choose), (SF) Kevin Garnett, (PF) Dirk Nowitski, ©Amare Stoudamire.
  12. Hef3

    Porn

    IVF makes survival possible. Even if rape leads to survival, I fail to see why it would be "good". PS: I'm not cool with the way "whore" and "faggot" have been used so far in this thread. I think it's possible to have a conversation about this topic without marginalizing different sexual communities.
  13. I kinda doubt that perpetrators use porn as a subsitute for rape. Rape is about power, not sexual gratification, and thus there is little chance that watching little movies of (somewhat) consensual sexual acts would really contribute to this decline. The most vulnerable populations for sexual assault are children, the mentally alter-abled, and the elderly, all populations not traditionally considered sexually desirable. Further, I think that you'ed find that most perpetrators use porn or other voyeuristic activities in the lead up to an assault. What is responsible for the decline in reported rapes? Well, I think it would be useful to address when the spike in reported rates first occurred, in the 60s and 70s, and then when the steady decline began, the 80s and 90s. Radical feminism has been on the defensive since the backlash in the late 70s, and I think changing attitudes about feminism and survivors rights on a national scale have limited the voices of women with regards to sexual assault.
  14. I was a furry with them on their co-headline/backing tour with Beck, and I was at Coachella when they first deployed the bubble out onto the top of the crowd. They never dissapoint. Oh, and Wayne is the nicest man in this universe, and probably several others.
×
×
  • Create New...