Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Author Topic: Washington & Lee: Openly gay student assaulted and vandalized at W&L  (Read 4311 times)

starbucks

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 23
    • View Profile
Re: Washington & Lee: Openly gay student assaulted and vandalized at W&L
« Reply #30 on: March 30, 2007, 06:07:06 PM »
but I think they may be reacting without all the facts in hand    :-\

Perhaps that is correct; however, a paper should try to get comments from both sides of an issue.  The quotes from either side of the issue do not necessarily reflect the views of the paper or the reporters.  The paper is just reporting what people involved with the issue are saying.  It's up to the reader to determine if one side or the other is overreacting.  If they didn't try to get comments from both sides, then I would understand the bias argument.

Zam

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 3096
    • View Profile
Re: Washington & Lee: Openly gay student assaulted and vandalized at W&L
« Reply #31 on: March 30, 2007, 06:34:50 PM »
but I think they may be reacting without all the facts in hand    :-\

Perhaps that is correct; however, a paper should try to get comments from both sides of an issue.  The quotes from either side of the issue do not necessarily reflect the views of the paper or the reporters.  The paper is just reporting what people involved with the issue are saying.  It's up to the reader to determine if one side or the other is overreacting.  If they didn't try to get comments from both sides, then I would understand the bias argument.

The paper obviously did at least the minimum due diligence required by contacting the school. I think maybe you and PB are not using the same standard and definition of impartiality. I think it would be most fair to say that the story is one-sided, which is possibly or even likely unintentional since the school did not wish to comment at the time the article was published. I obviously think what happened is awful and hope that the administration deals appropriately with the situation, but I maintain that the details remain somewhat unclear.

starbucks

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 23
    • View Profile
Re: Washington & Lee: Openly gay student assaulted and vandalized at W&L
« Reply #32 on: March 30, 2007, 07:40:21 PM »
You used a quote to suggest that the article "is less than impartial." I merely pointed out that the paper sought comments from Washington and Lee; however, Washington and Lee did not wish to respond. So, the paper went with what it had. I don't think, in those circumstances, that it is proper to accuse the paper of having a partial tone. The only other choice they had was not to print the story. I think they made the responsible choice.

You keep telling us what's happened like it's an action play-by-play. It's here in writing; I can see for myself what I and others have typed.

With that in mind, you can re-read your post from this morning to see that you didn't "merely" point out that the article sought opinions from both sides. And, to turn the tables, you've offered no assistance in pointing out where in my post I suggested that they not write the article.

Irrespective of the views, motivations or methods of the author(s), the article is imbalanced and, by their choices of what quotes to report, they have given the article a tone that does not appear to be impartial. That is all.


I stand by my posts.  I don't understand what seems to be bothering you about them.  Because you thought the article had a "less than impartial" tone and because W&L withheld comment, I asked a question, "Are you suggesting that a paper not run a story if one side declines to comment?"  I asked the question because I didn't know what else you thought the paper should do when it requests comments from one side but is rebuffed.  I think it is unfair to attack the paper when it tried to present both sides.  Maybe you did not like some of the quotes in the article and maybe some of the individuals quoted were overreacting, but the paper was reporting what people who are involved with this issue are saying.  It is interesting for the readers to know their views.  I'm not saying I agree with everything they had to say, but I'm interested in hearing their thoughts.  I'm also very interested in hearing what W&L has to say about the issue.  The article would have been better if it contained comments from W&L -- but that's not the paper's fault.  I don't think one can know that the paper was only doing its "minimum due diligence" by contacting W&L.  Who knows, the paper may have reported everything W&L had to say about the issue.  I have nothing further to say about this issue.  Honestly, I did not mean to offend you.   

ANBUDOM

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 236
    • View Profile
Re: Washington & Lee: Openly gay student assaulted and vandalized at W&L
« Reply #33 on: March 30, 2007, 08:31:10 PM »
The reason why the administration is refusing to comment at the moment is because we have procedures in place.  The accused has an opportunity for a fair hearing to present his side of the story.  It would be irresponsible of the university to start commenting on the incident when there are hearings and trials going on.  I believe that we have some sort of trial-type thing going on where university students are randomly chosen and they ultimately render a verdict.  It would be unfair for the administration to influence the opinions of potential jurors before they hear all the facts of the case.  Most of the campus is already somewhat biased due to all the buzz going on but the administration shouldn't make it any worse by running its mouth. 

It's called "Due Process"... we sorta use it in the criminal justice system and last i heard they put something like it in the US constitution... if this whole thing sounds alien to you, maybe you should go look it up before deciding to go to law school
testing testing 1 2 3

oudidntno

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 151
    • View Profile
    • LSN
    • Email
Re: Washington & Lee: Openly gay student assaulted and vandalized at W&L
« Reply #34 on: March 30, 2007, 08:52:28 PM »
The reason why the administration is refusing to comment at the moment is that we have procedures in place.  The accused has an opportunity for a fair hearing and has an opportunity to present his side of the story.  It would be irresponsible for the university to start commenting on the incident when there are hearings and trials going on.  I believe that we have some sort of trial-type thing going on where university students are randomly chosen and they ultimately render a verdict.  It would be unfair for the administration to influence the opinions of potential jurors before they hear all the facts of the case.  Most of the campus is already somewhat biased due to all the buzz going on but the administration shouldn't make it any worse by running its mouth. 

It's called "Due Process"... we sorta use it in the criminal justice system and last i heard they put something like it in the US constitution... if this whole thing sounds alien to you, maybe you should go look it up before deciding to go to law school

I agree.  Actually, if there are two sides to this event, wouldn't those sides be the two students in the fight- the one who is gay and the one who is straight.  Did any paper get a comment from the straight student or any other witnesses besides the two gay students.  No offense, but until more testimony is on hand, I think the gay student could be portraying this fight as a "hate crime" for his own "Get out of Jail Free" card.  I'm not saying that's what happened, I am just saying that could be a scenario as well.  After all, what about being gay automatically means you can't be the antagonist in a fight.  Just like straight people, I know alot of gay people who get "mouthy" when they're drunk and get their rears kicked for it regardless of if they are gay or not.   

ANBUDOM

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 236
    • View Profile
Re: Washington & Lee: Openly gay student assaulted and vandalized at W&L
« Reply #35 on: March 31, 2007, 02:13:05 AM »
ANBUDOM, when I visited last weekend I got the impression that Lexington isn't particularly integrated diversity-wise. There's not so much outright hatred as there is a sort of undercurrent of race or sexual orientation being an issue for a lot of people. I live in Phoenix, which also isn't integrated very well, and I've seen how the resulting undercurrents pull people apart. Being white, straight, and otherwise without much that makes me a target for knuckleheads, I didn't even realize Phoenix was this way until I lived in Sacramento for a year, where they have a very integrated, accepting culture.

I can understand that in a small town made up so much of students that rumors of this incident would spread like wildfire, but I'm wondering, do you experience the lack of integration I sensed and do you think that it has a lot to do with the fact that people tend to be a little on edge there about diversity issues? Does it affect you much?

I generally avoid discussions of race on LSD because the vast majority of LSDers lack the requisite sophistication and intelligence to carry on a meaningful discussion of sensitive issues like this but I feel that your inquiry is articulated very well.  I'm also trying very hard to digress from working on my motion to dismiss so this distraction was desperately needed....

To be perfectly honest, I haven't spent a ton of time off campus so i'm not sure if i can giv eyou a very good picture of life in the town of Lexington outside of campus but I think your assessment is pretty accurate. 
I haven't been the victim of any overt discrimination or racism in Lexington but you do get a few staredowns and an occasional dirty looks.  To address the former, getting stared down doesn't bother me too much because I realize that it's not necessarily because they're racist but it's probably more because they're not accustomed seeing one of my race chillin in their presence.  Before we start accusing of whites doing this, I dare you to send a white dude to certain Asian restaurants in NYC and they will get stared down as well.  The point i'm trying to make is that the "staredowns" cut both ways and it's not necessarily because of racism or discrimination but more like "oh wow i don't get to see many of you around here" and minorities do it just as often as whites. 

However, the dirty looks are troublesome.  It's only happened to me a handful of times but it does happen.  I can't explain the differences between a harmless staredown or a dirty look because you can't really tell the difference unless that sh*t is directed your way.  When I was younger, these dirty looks would bother the hell out of me and i'd become timid and uncomfortable. However, as I grew older, and I developed a thicker skin, I learned to brush this sh*t off and move on.  They can stare all they want but I need to get a JD and a job.  Responding to or getting bothered by bull is really counterproductive.  I'd much rather staple my JD diploma and my first paycheck to their heads rather than crying or whining about it. 

I am NOT trying to say that the LGBT community here is overreacting or that they’re handling this matter in the wrong way.  I will never be able to understand the type of discrimination and hatred that they experience on a daily basis.  I know for a fact that the type of discrimination they go through is infinitely worse than the type of racism that racial minorities go through (our own government won’t even let them get married…) so they’re reaction may be completely reasonable and appropriate.  However, to answer your question directly, yes there is some sort of undercurrent of race and sexual orientation but it’s not as if this exists only in Lexington and it isn’t so bad that you have difficulty functioning.  Also, I can guarantee you that the administration here takes any sort of discrimination VERY seriously and the response you will get from W&L administration is a million times better than the reaction you will get from the outside world. 

In Lexington’s defense, the people here are ridiculously nice.  The second day I got here, a woman actually stopped and said, “Hey you look lost, can I help you to where you’re going?”  The cashiers at the local Walmart love asking you how your day was and they seem to be genuinely interested in how you’re doing.  I can tell you right now that the treatment I get from Lexington locals (minus the few assholes that gave me dirty looks) is infinitely better than the bull I put up with in new york city.  For every incident of discrimination or racism you can list, I can respond with at least 100 more incidents of extreme kindness and friendliness. 

Also, to all you morons that try to flatter yourselves by saying, “Oh we Northerners are so much more tolerant than those damn Southerners,” we’re not any better.  I’m sure it’s mighty convenient you guys to blame the South for all the discrimination that happens in this country but that sh*t happens up north too so stop trying to flatter yourselves on this issue. 
testing testing 1 2 3