Wilcox statement on allegations

13,568 Views | 65 Replies | Last: 5 yr ago by Alkiadt
BearGoggles
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Yogi Bear said:

Rushinbear said:


I think her mental illness led her to listen to people who probably don't have her best interests in mind.
Good. Let's add some mental health shaming into the equation too.
Yogi - are you being sarcastic or trolling?

You are the person who first reported these allegations on two separate Cal bulletin boards. You have actively posted in both places, as have I. You started this discussion - in two places - and are now suggesting that any critical commentary on the merits of the claims is somehow verbodden and out of sorts.

In several places you have suggested that people shouldn't jump to conclusions or speculate. That might be a reasonable position - for someone who hadn't started the discussion in two places. I have no problem that you did that, but don't pretend you are taking a high road. This is a bulletin board the primary purpose of which is speculation and discussion. You started the snowball rolling down the hill.

It is not victim shaming to discuss the specific claims and express doubt about their veracity or point out things that defy common sense. The woman made her mental health an issue. She is bipolar and ACCORDING TO THE WOMAN, recently left school due to that and other mental health issues. It is not unreasonable - or shaming - to suggest that the woman's mental health may have affected her perceptions or actions, including the manner in which she blasted this on facebook.

No one is suggest that if she was in fact mistreated, that she in any way deserved that or caused it. People are suggesting that she may not have been mistreated or at least not to the extent claimed. Is that speculative? Of course.

I'm not in favor of victim shaming. But I haven't seen much of that here or on the other board.


Yogi58
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BearGoggles said:

Yogi Bear said:

Rushinbear said:


I think her mental illness led her to listen to people who probably don't have her best interests in mind.
Good. Let's add some mental health shaming into the equation too.
Yogi - are you being sarcastic or trolling?
You've been long overdue for a nice smackdown, so I'm only too happy to give it to you
Quote:

You are the person who first reported these allegations on two separate Cal bulletin boards.
Oh really? Show us some proof. Go on. I'm waiting.

Quote:

any critical commentary on the merits of the claims is somehow verbodden and out of sorts.
A critical commentary is based on the facts, none of which are known to any of us.

Quote:

You are the person who first reported these allegations on two separate Cal bulletin boards.

Still waiting on that proof. Hurry up now errand boy.
Quote:

The woman made her mental health an issue. She is bipolar and ACCORDING TO THE WOMAN, recently left school due to that and other mental health issues.
She never brought up her mental health issues in her Facebook post. People dug that up by digging around in her social media accounts. So, yet again, wrong (a familiar thing for you).
Quote:

I'm not in favor of victim shaming. But I haven't seen much of that here or on the other board.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/****-shaming

"Examples of ****-shaming include being criticized or punished for violating dress code policies by dressing in perceived sexually provocative ways"

I know you have this thing about wanting to start things with me. Try actually knowing what the **** you're talking about next time.
annarborbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Let me see if I have the new rules correct: It is ok to put uncorroborated charges against various parties up on an open Facebook account that is then picked up on by the national media, but it is impermissable for anyone to comment on the apparent veracity or lack thereof of the person making the charges?
Yogi58
How long do you want to ignore this user?
annarborbear said:

Let me see if I have the new rules correct: It is ok to put uncorroborated charges against various parties up on an open Facebook account that is then picked up on by the national media, but it is impermissable for anyone to comment on the apparent veracity or lack thereof of the person making the charges?
Whether it's OK to put it on Facebook or not, there's no way to keep people from doing it.

As for the other, sure you can do it, but you just make yourself look stupid doing it.
annarborbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Thanks. I will have to write those rules down because I won't be able to remember them due to their absence of logic.
BearGoggles
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Yogi Bear said:

BearGoggles said:

Yogi Bear said:

Rushinbear said:


I think her mental illness led her to listen to people who probably don't have her best interests in mind.
Good. Let's add some mental health shaming into the equation too.
Yogi - are you being sarcastic or trolling?
You've been long overdue for a nice smackdown, so I'm only too happy to give it to you
Quote:

You are the person who first reported these allegations on two separate Cal bulletin boards.
Oh really? Show us some proof. Go on. I'm waiting.

Quote:

any critical commentary on the merits of the claims is somehow verbodden and out of sorts.
A critical commentary is based on the facts, none of which are known to any of us.

Quote:

You are the person who first reported these allegations on two separate Cal bulletin boards.

Still waiting on that proof. Hurry up now errand boy.
Quote:

The woman made her mental health an issue. She is bipolar and ACCORDING TO THE WOMAN, recently left school due to that and other mental health issues.
She never brought up her mental health issues in her Facebook post. People dug that up by digging around in her social media accounts. So, yet again, wrong (a familiar thing for you).
Quote:

I'm not in favor of victim shaming. But I haven't seen much of that here or on the other board.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/****-shaming

"Examples of ****-shaming include being criticized or punished for violating dress code policies by dressing in perceived sexually provocative ways"

I know you have this thing about wanting to start things with me. Try actually knowing what the **** you're talking about next time.
Your proof is the first post on this thread: https://bearinsider.com/forums/2/topics/87626

There is a similar thread started on another competitor website titled: "Somebody accused some other people of acting in an unbecoming way." Per board rules, I can't post a link but you started that thread as well.

She did bring up her mental health in her fb post: The exact words, which you so helpfully quoted in the initial post of the above linked thread:

"I am medically withdrawn from school, seeking intensive therapy and psychiatry for the post traumatic stress syndrome and anxiety that happened from the time I spent working for the Cal Football team. . . . I am still learning to build back my confidence, but have lost months worth of salary from having to quit, plus the therapists and psychiatrists are costing up to $600 an hour. I am now behind a semester in college, so will have to graduate late.. But your mental and physical health do not matter when a revenue sport is involved."

She posted the details of her mental health on an instagram that was open to the public. People aren't supposed to notice that?

I said victim shaming, not **** shaming. So arguably you moved the goal posts because those are not the same thing. But to answer the larger charge, the person who made an issue of what she wore was the woman - in her fb post. I have no idea if there was a dress code policy - but if there was it is not **** shaming to enforce a policy in an employment context that applies across the board. And no one has suggested that the woman deserved harassment or assault because of what she wore - not a single person.

One person on this board did suggest that it was not reasonable for the complaining woman to be upset that she was being ogled when wearing shorts/leggings and other skimpy outfits. Not sure I agree with that, but ironically, the person making those observations was a woman. So stop mansplaining to her. And while you're at it, feel free to stop the vulgarities which add nothing other than a additional insight into your well established anger.

Enjoy your weekend.
NVBear78
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Yogi Bear said:

BearGoggles said:

Yogi Bear said:

Rushinbear said:


I think her mental illness led her to listen to people who probably don't have her best interests in mind.
Good. Let's add some mental health shaming into the equation too.
Yogi - are you being sarcastic or trolling?
You've been long overdue for a nice smackdown, so I'm only too happy to give it to you
Quote:

You are the person who first reported these allegations on two separate Cal bulletin boards.
Oh really? Show us some proof. Go on. I'm waiting.

Quote:

any critical commentary on the merits of the claims is somehow verbodden and out of sorts.
A critical commentary is based on the facts, none of which are known to any of us.

Quote:

You are the person who first reported these allegations on two separate Cal bulletin boards.

Still waiting on that proof. Hurry up now errand boy.
Quote:

The woman made her mental health an issue. She is bipolar and ACCORDING TO THE WOMAN, recently left school due to that and other mental health issues.
She never brought up her mental health issues in her Facebook post. People dug that up by digging around in her social media accounts. So, yet again, wrong (a familiar thing for you).
Quote:

I'm not in favor of victim shaming. But I haven't seen much of that here or on the other board.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/****-shaming

"Examples of ****-shaming include being criticized or punished for violating dress code policies by dressing in perceived sexually provocative ways"

I know you have this thing about wanting to start things with me. Try actually knowing what the **** you're talking about next time.


Edit:self censoring myself. .
GMP
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BearGoggles said:


One person on this board did suggest that it was not reasonable for the complaining woman to be upset that she was being ogled when wearing shorts/leggings and other skimpy outfits. Not sure I agree with that, but ironically, the person making those observations was a woman. So stop mansplaining to her. And while you're at it, feel free to stop the vulgarities which add nothing other than a additional insight into your well established anger.

Enjoy your weekend.


I'm very happy you're a man so that I can tell you that is not mansplaining without being accused of mansplaining.
wifeisafurd
How long do you want to ignore this user?
71Bear said:

Big C said:

Look again at the wording which he carefully repeated:

"As soon as we were first made aware of the allegations this week, we immediately reported... "

That could be interpreted as "the allegations that came out this week", but he might have heard of them and reported them earlier. Maybe.
That is positively "Clintonesque". Congrats, you win the 2019 Bill Clinton Pretzel Logic award.

Bottom line - some people think she is fabricating the story; some people believe she is telling the truth; some people don't know what to think and some people don't give a damn.

Nothing anyone says here is going to change the opinion held by others. This is a classic - if I yell loud enough, my version will become the truth (a good example of what it is like to live in the US in the 21st C).

Nothing Wilcox says, Knowlton says, the accuser says or anyone says means anything at this point. All that matters is the finding of the University Department responsible for investigating the matter. Time will tell who is being honest.
thank you.
wifeisafurd
How long do you want to ignore this user?
annarborbear said:

Let me see if I have the new rules correct: It is ok to put uncorroborated charges against various parties up on an open Facebook account that is then picked up on by the national media, but it is impermissable for anyone to comment on the apparent veracity or lack thereof of the person making the charges?
from an employment law perspective, only the entity doing the investigation comments (otherwise you are retaliating if the claims are true). If the claims are determined to be false, there are civil remedies from those harmed by her Facebook statements. One remedy that may not be available is collecting on damages - she may have next to nothing in assets and become unemployable. The claimant is taking on major risk going public if in fact she is not being truthful. Now standard procedure for employers to conduct interest searches on people when they apply for jobs.
okaydo
How long do you want to ignore this user?

bearister
How long do you want to ignore this user?
okaydo said:





I'm pretty sure that is the definition of a Nothing Burger. The Money Shot would be him saying he is going to fight the investigation tooth and nail. Why did he bother?
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
79 Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Perhaps he did it because it's absolutely the right thing to do.
Bear19
How long do you want to ignore this user?
MoragaBear said:

There were follow-up questions and he was clear that it was reported as soon as he heard about it.
That is how I interpreted the clip. It appears that Wilcox acted immediately, and is publicly fully supporting the investigation. There was no "explanation" of what happened, no defending statements about his staff, no "correcting" the statements in the FB post (other than to make clear Willcox acted immediately upon learning of this) nothing to try to mitigate the seriousness of the situation.

It seems to me that the FB post was aimed at soliciting other women to come forward to bolster her lawsuit. Of course, doesn't make the FB statements incorrect. So far, we've heard only Cornelius' FB charges about the specifics. It will be telling if the lawsuit gains any traction (or not).
RedlessWardrobe
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Yogi Bear said:

annarborbear said:

Let me see if I have the new rules correct: It is ok to put uncorroborated charges against various parties up on an open Facebook account that is then picked up on by the national media, but it is impermissable for anyone to comment on the apparent veracity or lack thereof of the person making the charges?
Whether it's OK to put it on Facebook or not, there's no way to keep people from doing it.

As for the other, sure you can do it, but you just make yourself look stupid doing it.
Cmon Yogi, please give it a rest. If you don't agree with AABear's second point, can't you just simply say you disagree with it instead of having to throw the "stupid" label in there.

And BTW, I agree with AnnArbor's full post, though I don't feel that anyone disagreeing with us is "stupid." Thank you.
Bear19
How long do you want to ignore this user?
RedlessWardrobe said:

Cmon Yogi, please give it a rest.
Agree with this, Yogi. You overstepped with the name calling.
bearister
How long do you want to ignore this user?
RhetoriCal Bear said:

Perhaps he did it because it's absolutely the right thing to do.


After reading the entire story in the Eastbay Times, I retract my statement and second yours.
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
Yogi58
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Yogi Bear said:

NVBear78 said:

The thing I find most fascinating acting in all of these personal attacks is those who do not look at the entirety of both her original message and her social media postings. Some appear to listen to the allegations only but ignore the rest? How do evaluate and assess events and ideas and information?

Of course the investigation must be full and complete but I see many of you making aspersions against Wilcox, Knowlton and Cal based on what?
Please list all those aspersions for us. Then list all the aspersions made against the alleged victim.
Yep. Couldn't come up with a response.
Yogi58
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BearGoggles said:

Yogi Bear said:


Quote:

You are the person who first reported these allegations on two separate Cal bulletin boards.
Oh really? Show us some proof. Go on. I'm waiting.

Yep. Couldn't admit your mistake on who first posted about this on Rivals, could you?
calbear80
How long do you want to ignore this user?
NVBear78 said:

Everyone...I highly recommend that you use your critical thinking and put all the pieces of this together:

  • Look at what you know about Wilcox and Knowlton-both careful, thoughtful, competent and honest people. Raise your hand and state publically here if you believe they would ignore a sexual harassment complaint?
  • The accuser said herself that she was suffering from mental illness including "bi-polar" disorder when leaving school many months ago.
  • At the time she left she had nothing but positive things to say in her own post on facebook about everyone at Cal. Remember this when you consider her allegations are about things that took place while she was at Cal last year, emphasis on LAST YEAR.
  • Multiple BI posters are saying they have information from multiple unofficial sources that the "finstagram" account and post bragging of "hooking up" with a coach in the football offices is in fact hers.
  • In my opinion, Her long and detailed facebook post about the alleged harassment, when looked at objectively raises many more questions than it answers and does not present her in a good light at all.
  • I would argue that while she seeks to damage the University of California and Cal Football in particular she is also doing great harm to herself.
  • She also provides absolutely no proof of any of the more scurrilous complaints while her social media presence provides information that runs 180 degrees counter to her complaints.
  • I do not believe that her facebook postings are being directed by her "legal team". In my experience with sexual harassment type claims the plaintiff will file the lawsuit and then leak it to the press who then go about publishing all of the most inflammatory and prurient details.
  • The defendant of course has their hands tied and is unable to publically defend themselves in most cases just as we see here with the University.


The problem is someone in this condition, in this Politically Correct environment where people are careful to a fault and will not call out truth (or lies) when they see them can do great harm to our University and to our Athletics program if unchecked.

Well said.
SoCalie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sorry guys, I don't mean to nit pick, but I just want to make sure that my earlier posts are not misunderstood. I didn't say that I don't think it's "reasonable for the complaining woman to be upset that she was being ogled when wearing shorts/leggings and other skimpy outfits." If that is the idea that I construed, I apologize. Sometimes, I know what I want to say, and it is clear in my mind but it doesn't always come out the way I intend.

What I meant to say is that (a) when the young lady in question was in a professional setting (in this case at work for the football team), and (b) she was being leered at while wearing a tank top (or clothes that are more revealing than the established dress code/what other coaches/staff/interns are wearing), and (c) if she was uncomfortable being ogled, then (d) she should have made the adjustment to her work wardrobe.

Now, keep in mind, I believe that if other women on the staff/interns were wearing tank tops and leggings, etc., to practice/while working with the team, then she should have been able to do so as well no question in my mind about that. (However, I am of the opinion that coaches/staff/interns should not be wearing tank tops or revealing clothing while working with their teams and that there should be a dress code prohibiting such for men and women - simply as a matter of professionalism for those representing the university. But, that's another topic.)

During one's free time, if someone wants to wear revealing clothing, I have no problem with that at all. Couldn't care less. In fact, good for them! But, as a woman, you know that you are going to attract plenty of comments, be leered at/ogled, etc., if you do so. So, if you do NOT like that type of attention, then you should think about whether or not you want to wear that kind of clothing. Let me be clear, that does NOT mean I think it is ok for men to leer at/ogle women, and make cat calls/perverted comments, etc. I do not. I am just saying that if you are upset by it perhaps choose to wear something less suggestive. Believe it or not, there are plenty of women that love to receive that kind of feedback it makes them feel attractive and boosts their confidence. There are other women that don't like it, and think the men that leer/ogle and/or make comments are gross. But, they won't let that dissuade them from wearing outfits that they like and feel beautiful wearing. I'm just saying that if someone is offended or scared by it (which are very reasonable reactions), they have a choice about what to wear. (Hopefully, this will change one day.)

As far as the young lady's Instagram is concerned, I have never even attempted to look for her account (or any other social media account). I just believe that she should comply with whatever the football team and university have established as appropriate content for the athletes, coaches, staff, and interns for any accounts she has to which the general public has access. Maybe she did so, I have no idea - so this might be a non-issue. I also said that if she received "unwanted feedback" on her social media from players/coaches, then she could have either blocked the specific users, made her accounts private, or removed the specific pictures while she was working for the team.

Those are just my opinions.

I want to make it clear that I believe that it is totally unacceptable if she was harassed in any way and I fully support an investigation no matter what. The comments I made are simply my reactions to/opinions regarding several of the examples she provided in her statement. It is my feeling that, in some of her examples, what she says she felt/thought at the time was quite inconsistent with her behavior at that time. As a result, I believe that she was at some point - engaged in a mutual, consensual relationship that included flirting and hooking up with a coach/es and/or player/s. Keep in mind, I do not believe that justifies any type of harassment she may have endured. I am just saying that it may change some of the dynamics relating to some of the events she describes in her statement. Maybe she has other examples of harassment that were not included in her statement. I just feel that several of the examples she provided raise a lot of questions regarding the accuracy of the events as described.

I also believe that a few of the examples provided made are incredibly inflammatory and dangerous, and are intended to cause the reader to reach conclusions that are unfair, unwarranted and very serious. (i.e. such as suggesting that, for example, some of the players were intentionally trying to get her drunk for nefarious purposes, and that if she hadn't been able to "escape", she would have been raped.)

I should note that, like most women, I have been sexually harassed at work. I have also been sexually assaulted, although in relatively "mild" ways - thank God. More importantly, I work with children and young adults that are victims of sexual abuse, assault, rape, commercial sexual exploitation, and sex trafficking. So, this is a topic that is very near and dear to my heart. It is also why (1) I am very happy that they are investigating the allegations, (2) any potential type of "Jussie Smollett" scenario is very bothersome to me, and (3) I feel it is crucial to protect the identity of anyone being accused - until their guilt has been established - because the ramifications of false accusations (even exaggerations of certain conduct) can be devastating beyond repair.

Anyway, friends, I hope I've been able to clarify my thoughts. Thanks for reading.
Yogi58
How long do you want to ignore this user?
SoCalie said:

I feel it is crucial to protect the identity of anyone being accused - until their guilt has been established because the ramifications of false accusations (even exaggerations of certain conduct) can be devastating beyond repair.
i agree. Unfortunately in the modern day, these things get tried in public. In the case of someone like Harvey Feinstein or Kevin Spacey, the accusations were corroborated by others.

I think it would have been a far smarter move on her part to consult a lawyer first and then not to post about it on Facebook. That she is still doing so much of this in the public eye is not helping her, whatever the truth of the matter is.
BearGoggles
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Yogi Bear said:

SoCalie said:

I feel it is crucial to protect the identity of anyone being accused - until their guilt has been established because the ramifications of false accusations (even exaggerations of certain conduct) can be devastating beyond repair.
i agree. Unfortunately in the modern day, these things get tried in public. In the case of someone like Harvey Feinstein or Kevin Spacey, the accusations were corroborated by others.

I think it would have been a far smarter move on her part to consult a lawyer first and then not to post about it on Facebook. That she is still doing so much of this in the public eye is not helping her, whatever the truth of the matter is.

So you're entitled to evaluate, judge and draw conclusions from her postings and other online statements/actions, but according to you the rest of us aren't supposed to do that. Keep digging.
Yogi58
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BearGoggles said:

Yogi Bear said:

SoCalie said:

I feel it is crucial to protect the identity of anyone being accused - until their guilt has been established because the ramifications of false accusations (even exaggerations of certain conduct) can be devastating beyond repair.
i agree. Unfortunately in the modern day, these things get tried in public. In the case of someone like Harvey Feinstein or Kevin Spacey, the accusations were corroborated by others.

I think it would have been a far smarter move on her part to consult a lawyer first and then not to post about it on Facebook. That she is still doing so much of this in the public eye is not helping her, whatever the truth of the matter is.

So you're entitled to evaluate, judge and draw conclusions from her postings and other online statements/actions, but according to you the rest of us aren't supposed to do that. Keep digging.

I'm not surprised that you haven't yet admitted that I didn't post about the allegations first on Rivals. You must be really smarting from being wrong on that.
BearGoggles
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Yogi Bear said:

BearGoggles said:

Yogi Bear said:

SoCalie said:

I feel it is crucial to protect the identity of anyone being accused - until their guilt has been established because the ramifications of false accusations (even exaggerations of certain conduct) can be devastating beyond repair.
i agree. Unfortunately in the modern day, these things get tried in public. In the case of someone like Harvey Feinstein or Kevin Spacey, the accusations were corroborated by others.

I think it would have been a far smarter move on her part to consult a lawyer first and then not to post about it on Facebook. That she is still doing so much of this in the public eye is not helping her, whatever the truth of the matter is.

So you're entitled to evaluate, judge and draw conclusions from her postings and other online statements/actions, but according to you the rest of us aren't supposed to do that. Keep digging.

I'm not surprised that you haven't yet admitted that I didn't post about the allegations first on Rivals. You must be really smarting from being wrong on that.
Given the beating your taking on here, I'm not surprised that you keep harping on a small point tangential point that attempts to distract from that reality. You know I can't post a link to another board, but you assuredly started the thread I referenced earlier.

If harping on this issue is the best you can do then I guess we know it is, in fact, the best you can do.
Yogi58
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BearGoggles said:

Yogi Bear said:

BearGoggles said:

Yogi Bear said:

SoCalie said:

I feel it is crucial to protect the identity of anyone being accused - until their guilt has been established because the ramifications of false accusations (even exaggerations of certain conduct) can be devastating beyond repair.
i agree. Unfortunately in the modern day, these things get tried in public. In the case of someone like Harvey Feinstein or Kevin Spacey, the accusations were corroborated by others.

I think it would have been a far smarter move on her part to consult a lawyer first and then not to post about it on Facebook. That she is still doing so much of this in the public eye is not helping her, whatever the truth of the matter is.

So you're entitled to evaluate, judge and draw conclusions from her postings and other online statements/actions, but according to you the rest of us aren't supposed to do that. Keep digging.

I'm not surprised that you haven't yet admitted that I didn't post about the allegations first on Rivals. You must be really smarting from being wrong on that.
Given the beating your taking on here
Still can't admit it huh?
BearlyCareAnymore
How long do you want to ignore this user?
SoCalie said:

Sorry guys, I don't mean to nit pick, but I just want to make sure that my earlier posts are not misunderstood. I didn't say that I don't think it's "reasonable for the complaining woman to be upset that she was being ogled when wearing shorts/leggings and other skimpy outfits." If that is the idea that I construed, I apologize. Sometimes, I know what I want to say, and it is clear in my mind but it doesn't always come out the way I intend.

What I meant to say is that (a) when the young lady in question was in a professional setting (in this case at work for the football team), and (b) she was being leered at while wearing a tank top (or clothes that are more revealing than the established dress code/what other coaches/staff/interns are wearing), and (c) if she was uncomfortable being ogled, then (d) she should have made the adjustment to her work wardrobe.

Now, keep in mind, I believe that if other women on the staff/interns were wearing tank tops and leggings, etc., to practice/while working with the team, then she should have been able to do so as well no question in my mind about that. (However, I am of the opinion that coaches/staff/interns should not be wearing tank tops or revealing clothing while working with their teams and that there should be a dress code prohibiting such for men and women - simply as a matter of professionalism for those representing the university. But, that's another topic.)

During one's free time, if someone wants to wear revealing clothing, I have no problem with that at all. Couldn't care less. In fact, good for them! But, as a woman, you know that you are going to attract plenty of comments, be leered at/ogled, etc., if you do so. So, if you do NOT like that type of attention, then you should think about whether or not you want to wear that kind of clothing. Let me be clear, that does NOT mean I think it is ok for men to leer at/ogle women, and make cat calls/perverted comments, etc. I do not. I am just saying that if you are upset by it perhaps choose to wear something less suggestive. Believe it or not, there are plenty of women that love to receive that kind of feedback it makes them feel attractive and boosts their confidence. There are other women that don't like it, and think the men that leer/ogle and/or make comments are gross. But, they won't let that dissuade them from wearing outfits that they like and feel beautiful wearing. I'm just saying that if someone is offended or scared by it (which are very reasonable reactions), they have a choice about what to wear. (Hopefully, this will change one day.)

As far as the young lady's Instagram is concerned, I have never even attempted to look for her account (or any other social media account). I just believe that she should comply with whatever the football team and university have established as appropriate content for the athletes, coaches, staff, and interns for any accounts she has to which the general public has access. Maybe she did so, I have no idea - so this might be a non-issue. I also said that if she received "unwanted feedback" on her social media from players/coaches, then she could have either blocked the specific users, made her accounts private, or removed the specific pictures while she was working for the team.

Those are just my opinions.

I want to make it clear that I believe that it is totally unacceptable if she was harassed in any way and I fully support an investigation no matter what. The comments I made are simply my reactions to/opinions regarding several of the examples she provided in her statement. It is my feeling that, in some of her examples, what she says she felt/thought at the time was quite inconsistent with her behavior at that time. As a result, I believe that she was at some point - engaged in a mutual, consensual relationship that included flirting and hooking up with a coach/es and/or player/s. Keep in mind, I do not believe that justifies any type of harassment she may have endured. I am just saying that it may change some of the dynamics relating to some of the events she describes in her statement. Maybe she has other examples of harassment that were not included in her statement. I just feel that several of the examples she provided raise a lot of questions regarding the accuracy of the events as described.

I also believe that a few of the examples provided made are incredibly inflammatory and dangerous, and are intended to cause the reader to reach conclusions that are unfair, unwarranted and very serious. (i.e. such as suggesting that, for example, some of the players were intentionally trying to get her drunk for nefarious purposes, and that if she hadn't been able to "escape", she would have been raped.)

I should note that, like most women, I have been sexually harassed at work. I have also been sexually assaulted, although in relatively "mild" ways - thank God. More importantly, I work with children and young adults that are victims of sexual abuse, assault, rape, commercial sexual exploitation, and sex trafficking. So, this is a topic that is very near and dear to my heart. It is also why (1) I am very happy that they are investigating the allegations, (2) any potential type of "Jussie Smollett" scenario is very bothersome to me, and (3) I feel it is crucial to protect the identity of anyone being accused - until their guilt has been established - because the ramifications of false accusations (even exaggerations of certain conduct) can be devastating beyond repair.

Anyway, friends, I hope I've been able to clarify my thoughts. Thanks for reading.
SoCalie - thank you for a thoughtful post. I agree with much of it. I agree that proper dress code should be observed. I think the appropriate response to failure to do so is to make the person aware of the dress code and the expectations that they follow it. At the same time, if any harassment is going on possibly related to that dress code violation it should be stopped immediately and in fact my discussion about the dress code violation would be held privately so as not to give the idea that harassment was excused.

I have an area of disagreement with some of what you say not necessarily in the content, but in the timing. Let me explain with an example.

Say I live with my son and near my house is an area I know to be very dangerous. I will tell him that area is very dangerous. Don't walk there. That is giving advice.

Now my son is walking home at 3:00 am and decides to walk right through that area and gets mugged and severely beaten. He recognizes the assailant and reports it to the police. Is this the time for me, or the police, or anyone else to say "why were you walking there?" Is that the time to say "You can walk there, but as a man you know that you are running a risk of being beaten if you do so. So, if you do NOT like to be beaten, then you should think about whether or not you want to walk there. Let me be clear, that does NOT mean I think it is ok for people to beat you. I am just saying that if you are upset by it perhaps choose to walk elsewhere."

I submit that there is no way to do that after the assault that is not shifting blame from the assailant to the victim. Timing shifts the statement from advice to prevent future occurrences to blame for past occurrences. My son in this case may have been very stupid, but he isn't the cause of the situation.

When my daughter goes to college I will advise her:

1. Don't go to parties. Not worth it. Not fair that there is danger there for you, but there is.
2. If you go to parties, don't take food or drink from anyone. Get it yourself from a knows source. Not fair you have to take that precaution, but you do.
3. Don't get drunk. Not fair that you can't do that like others, but it is a real risk. Don't do it.

If, heaven forbid, my daughter is assaulted, I will never ask her "why did you go to that party? Why were you drinking? Why were you wearing that?" I will ask her who did it and where they hell is my baseball bat.

There is a time and a place for the discussion, and it just isn't in the context of something actually happening.

I'd also say that if we spent half as much time teaching boys how to act toward girls as we spend teaching girls how to not attract unwanted behavior from boys, the world would be a much better place. In focusing on girls' behavior, we accept that they are the variable and the bad behavior of men/boys is the constant. It just isn't so.
SoCalie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Oaktown Bear

First, I want to thank you, from my heart, for being such a wonderful supporter of women and victims of harassment, assault, etc. It is an incredibly comforting, reassuring feeling to read your posts, and those by Yogi and GMP (etc.) in which you guys are incredibly fierce in your support for, and defense of, this young lady. I cannot express how much that means to me (not that this is about me), and it truly gives me tremendous hope and faith that we are really moving the "social needle" in (what I consider to be) the right direction. I also could not possibly agree more with your statement about spending much more time "teaching boys how to act toward girls as we spend teaching girls how to not attract unwanted behavior from boys." Thank you! Truly.

I also totally agree with the example you provided regarding the young man walking in an area in which he is likely to be beaten. In fact, this is the argument that women have been making regarding "blaming the victim" for decades. So, I really appreciate the example you provided. I see where you are coming from and will definitely self-reflect on this, as I am always working to minimize any counter transference I may experience.

Here are some distinctions that, in my opinion, differentiate your example from the situation at hand in meaningful ways.
-The young lady in question says that she was very uncomfortable and scared of being sexually harassed and assaulted - despite continuing to go down that same street, time after time. So, let's use your son as the example:
*After being harassed and beaten up while going down the street a few times, he goes down the street again alone, at midnight, while drunk, to meet up with one of the guys that had beaten him up before, because he said he'd help your son with Economics.
*Another time, you're in town to visit your son for the weekend. The first night you are there, your son leaves your hotel room to go 'hang out with' one of the guys that had beaten him up several times already. (and tells you he won't be back that night)

Now, keep in mind, I do not believe that it is the young lady's fault, in any way, if someone harassed or assaulted her. What I take issue with, is that it seems as though she continued to 'go down that street' regularly, and was allegedly harassed and assaulted - time and time again - despite her purported fear/terror of being victimized in that manner from the very beginning. And, she never complained about ANY of the MANY alleged beatings that took place over several months (i.e. at least not to Wilcox, any university official, the police, her parents - or, in some sort of statement on, say, Facebook [even if just for her friends to see], etc.,) until long after the fact.

I am not saying that she wasn't harassed at some point - which is unacceptable if true. However, in my opinion, the fact that she says she continued to go down that same street, and was 'beaten up' repeatedly/each time, calls into question just how "uncomfortable" and "scared" she was prior to, and while, she was going down that street. (i.e. going to the parties, football offices at night, hotel room, etc.) I think it is quite possible that she didn't feel upset, threatened or scared at the time of the various events - but that she may be looking back now (given whatever she has experienced since then) and sees things a bit differently.

-So, let's take the "football party" experience as an example. She insinuates that she went to the party and, at some point, noticed that the guys were intentionally trying to get her drunk, and then she implies that they were doing this so they could take advantage of/rape her, and that she was only able to escape the gang rape because her friends called her an Uber. Not only are these are some extremely serious allegations, but...how could someone possibly attribute responsibility for how much they drank to others (the guys), then claim to know what the guys' intentions were in causing her to drink so much - and what would have happened had she not left the party? These are beyond irresponsible accusations, and, in my opinion, are indicative of the kind of examples/"evidence" she provided in her statement. (Not only regarding the actual events she discusses [such as the midnight football incident and the hotel incident, etc.,] but also about HOW she describes what the coaches were allegedly doing to harass her [i.e. that one coach would follow her around the field during practice, and look at her with "knowing eyes", etc.])

Some people on this board have said that if the young lady lied about her financial status, she may well be lying about other things. Well, I say that if she draws outrageous conclusions in certain situations [such as the party], then maybe she was doing so in more of the situations of which she complains. Add the pattern of very 'unrealistic' behavior described above (vis a vis the feelings she purportedly had at the time) to the mix, and this makes me question the reliability of many of the circumstances/events as she described them in her statement even more.

Again, I fully support the investigation, and think that anyone that harassed - or even touched her in an inappropriate manner - should be held responsible. No question. I also acknowledge that she may have other examples or evidence that are/is quite damning for the players/coaches. But, in my opinion, based on what she said in her statement, this example only makes her look extremely 'unreliable' (for lack of a better term.)

I offered the examples of how/why I believe that her behavior during many of the events she describes was nonsensical/unrealistic NOT to say that any harassment she may have experienced was her fault (i.e. that she brought in on herself), but to explain why, as a whole - under the totality of the circumstances - many of the allegations in her statement seem 'unreliable' to me. Her own behavior that she described in a public statement - that was drafted to support her accusations of harassment was, in several examples, totally inconsistent with the feelings/thoughts she said she had before/at the time of the events. I think that significantly undermines her credibility. Given my feelings about sexual harassment and assault, I am very upset and offended by false accusations in general - as they do a grave disservice to the many individuals who have been, or will be, the actual victims of such attacks. It truly is extremely damaging when this happens, and makes it much harder for people who actually suffer. Furthermore, at the end of the day, it ends up 'assisting' future perpetrators. So, while I don't want ANYONE to ever experience being harassed, I hope her allegations aren't untrue - especially given how far she has gone with them (actually naming people, national public attention, etc.)...not to mention the damage false accusations of this nature can do to people. (companies, teams, universities, etc.) But, then, of course, I hope they are false. It's just an ugly situation all around.

Hope I was able to explain myself in a way that made sense. Sorry for the terribly voluminous post Thank you for reading
NVBear78
How long do you want to ignore this user?
SoCalie said:

Oaktown Bear

First, I want to thank you, from my heart, for being such a wonderful supporter of women and victims of harassment, assault, etc. It is an incredibly comforting, reassuring feeling to read your posts, and those by Yogi and GMP (etc.) in which you guys are incredibly fierce in your support for, and defense of, this young lady. I cannot express how much that means to me (not that this is about me), and it truly gives me tremendous hope and faith that we are really moving the "social needle" in (what I consider to be) the right direction. I also could not possibly agree more with your statement about spending much more time "teaching boys how to act toward girls as we spend teaching girls how to not attract unwanted behavior from boys." Thank you! Truly.

I also totally agree with the example you provided regarding the young man walking in an area in which he is likely to be beaten. In fact, this is the argument that women have been making regarding "blaming the victim" for decades. So, I really appreciate the example you provided. I see where you are coming from and will definitely self-reflect on this, as I am always working to minimize any counter transference I may experience.

Here are some distinctions that, in my opinion, differentiate your example from the situation at hand in meaningful ways.
-The young lady in question says that she was very uncomfortable and scared of being sexually harassed and assaulted despite continuing to go down that same street, time after time. So, let's use your son as the example:
*After being harassed and beaten up going down the street a few times, he goes down the street again alone, at midnight, while drunk, to meet up with one of the guys that beat him up before because he said he'd help your son with Economics.
*Another time, you're in town to visit your son for the weekend. The first night you are there, your son leaves your hotel room to go 'hang out with' one of the guys that had beaten him up a few times already. (and tells you he won't be back that night)

Now, keep in mind, I do not believe that it is the young lady's fault in any way if someone harasses or assaults her. What I take issue with, is that it seems like she continued to 'go down that street' regularly, and was allegedly harassed and assaulted - time and time again despite her purported fear/terror of being victimized in that manner from the very beginning. Then, and then complains about it after the fact.

I am not saying that she wasn't harassed at some point which is unacceptable. However, in my opinion, the fact that she says she continued to go down the street and was 'beaten up' repeatedly, calls into question just how "uncomfortable" and "scared" she was prior to, and while, she was going down the street. (going to the parties, football offices at night, hotel room, etc.) I think it is quite possible that she didn't feel upset, threatened or scared at the time of the various events, but is looking back now (given whatever she has experienced since then) and sees things a bit differently.

-So, let's take the "football party" experience as an example. She insinuates that she went to the party and, at some point, noticed that the guys were intentionally trying to get her drunk, and then she implies that they were doing this so they could take advantage of/assault her, and she was only able to escape assault/rape because her friends called her an Uber. Not only are these are some extremely serious allegations, but how could someone possibly attribute responsibility for how much they drank to others (the guys), then claim to know what the guys' intentions were in causing her to drink so much, and then what would have happened had she not left the party? These are beyond irresponsible accusations and, in my opinion are sort of indicative of the kindof examples/"evidence" she provided in her statement. (Not only the actual events such as the midnight football incident and the hotel incident, but also when she describeswhat the coaches were allegedly doing to harass her i.e. that one coach would follow her aroundthe field during practiceand look at her with "knowingeyes.")

Some people on this board have said that if the young lady lied about her financial status, what else is she lying about? Well, I say that if she draws outrageous conclusions in certain situations [such as the party], then maybe she was doing so in more of the situations of which she complains. Add the pattern of very 'unrealistic' behavior described above (vis a vis the feelings she purportedly had at the time) to the mix, and this makes me question the reliability of many of the circumstances/events as she described them in her statement even more.

Again, I fully support the investigation and think that anyone that harassed or even touched her in an inappropriate manner should be held responsible. No question. I also acknowledge that she may have several other examples or evidence that are/is quite damning for the players/coaches. But, in my opinion, based on what she said in her statement, this example only makes her look'unreliable' (for lack of a better term.)

I offered the many examples of how/why I believe that her behavior during many of the events she describes was nonsensical/unrealistic NOT to say that any harassment she may have experienced was her fault (i.e. that she brought in on herself), but to explain why, as a whole the totality of the circumstances - many of the allegations in her statement seem 'unreliable' to me. Her own behavior that she described in a public statement that was drafted to support her accusations of harassment was, in several examples, totally inconsistent with the feelings/thoughts she said she had before/at the time of the events. I think that significantly undermines her credibility. Given my feelings about sexual harassment and assault, I am very upset and offended by false accusations in general - as they do a grave disservice to the many individuals who have been, or will be, the actual victims of such attacks. It truly is extremely damaging, and makes it much harder for people who actually suffer and, at the end of the day, end up 'assisting' future perpetrators. So, while I don't want ANYONE to ever experience being harassed, I hope her allegations aren't untrue especially given how far she has gone with them (actually naming people [national public attention, etc.) Not to mention the damage false accusations of this nature can do to people. (companies, teams, universities, etc.)

Hope I was able to explain myself in a way that made sense sorry for the terribly voluminous post Thank you for reading


Well said and if you had seen her Finstagram post and her texts with a player it would strongly confirm your assessment.
SoCalie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Thanks NVB! And, that makes me sad. Hopefully, this entire things goes away soon.
Yogi58
How long do you want to ignore this user?
SoCalie said:

It is an incredibly comforting, reassuring feeling to read your posts, and those by Yogi and GMP (etc.) in which you guys are incredibly fierce in your support for, and defense of, this young lady.
You are very kind to say so, but I am not worthy of your praise. I don't think I've been defending the woman at all. My stance is more that nothing good comes of any of us going through her social media accounts and trying to play detective on our own. I do have an uneducated guess of where I think this will ultimately head, but it's not informed by anything other than my sense of where the truth may lie.

There was an attractive pole vaulter at Cal a few years back and posters used to make what I would term as creepy old man comments about how attractive she was. i didn't think that was appropriate at the time and imagined that the woman probably would have preferred to be viewed as an athlete and a student and not as a sex symbol. There's some similarity in what was taking place earlier in the week IMO. At any rate, anything I may have said was probably said better by Oaktown Bear and undoubtedly far more diplomatically.

i do find it interesting that all of the discussion of this topic came to an almost instant grinding halt. I have some guesses as to why that is, but I don't think it means that calmer heads prevailed, though I wish it did.
Alkiadt
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Yogi Bear said:

SoCalie said:

It is an incredibly comforting, reassuring feeling to read your posts, and those by Yogi and GMP (etc.) in which you guys are incredibly fierce in your support for, and defense of, this young lady.
You are very kind to say so, but I am not worthy of your praise. I don't think I've been defending the woman at all. My stance is more that nothing good comes of any of us going through her social media accounts and trying to play detective on our own. I do have an uneducated guess of where I think this will ultimately head, but it's not informed by anything other than my sense of where the truth may lie.

There was an attractive pole vaulter at Cal a few years back and posters used to make what I would term as creepy old man comments about how attractive she was. i didn't think that was appropriate at the time and imagined that the woman probably would have preferred to be viewed as an athlete and a student and not as a sex symbol. There's some similarity in what was taking place earlier in the week IMO. At any rate, anything I may have said was probably said better by Oaktown Bear and undoubtedly far more diplomatically.

i do find it interesting that all of the discussion of this topic came to an almost instant grinding halt. I have some guesses as to why that is, but I don't think it means that calmer heads prevailed, though I wish it did.
Really off topic but that pole vaulter is Ricky Fowler's fiancee now.
Refresh
Page 2 of 2
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.