Hot Stove: UNC Basketball

[Peppers49]

Is it considered sexual assault if the sex was consensual but the filming wasn't?

I believe if it were sexual assault he would not be on the team now. But maybe I read it wrong.

Apparently it’s not legally considered SA, so I probably shouldn’t have worded it that way.

Regardless, my take is that playing for a prestigious D1 basketball program is very much a privilege, not a right. To me, what this guy did warrants getting kicked off the team permanently. Not saying he shouldn’t get a second chance at some point, but if we’re going to preach all the sanctimonious stuff about Carolina family and having higher standards, this feels like a situation where you draw the line in the stand and tell him to go find his second chance somewhere else.

Also, while the PR angle shouldn’t be the primary concern when someone has experienced real trauma, this is still very much a black eye story at a time when the athletic department really doesn’t need more bad publicity.

 

[superrific]

Based on my understanding of what happened, that statute would not apply, but it seems that NCGS 14-202(f) would.

Statute says:

Any person who, for the purpose of arousing or gratifying the sexual desire of any person, secretly or surreptitiously uses or installs in a room any device that can be used to create a photographic image with the intent to capture the image of another without their consent shall be guilty of a Class I felony.

That would depend, I think, on what "arousing or gratifying the sexual desire" means. It does not seem to apply to "conquest" videos or photos. None of the sections in that statute would seem to apply to that. Probably should.

 

[superrific]

I completely disagree. HD can definitely give support, to the level that ZH feels it, without also keeping him on the team, and allowing ZH all of the benefits and privileges of a UNC basketball player. And, I think you not understanding the severity of his actions is clouding your thoughts on this.

There you go again with your assumptions about people. Just because I disagree with you about the punishment doesn't mean I don't understand the severity. You're just going in circles if you conflate those two distinctions.

 

[BluHevn]

Would High still be at UNC if he wasn't on the basketball team?

 

[Calheel]

Would High still be at UNC if he wasn't on the basketball team?

I believe so. He received a one semester suspension. At the time, it was not clear whether the team would let him come back (likely wanted to see how he responded to the punishment). So the university's punishment was less severe than the basketball punishment (semester vs. year).

I suspect this is the type of situation that has happened many, many times in the past for regular students (think frat bros) and that a semester suspension is likely typical. If anything, being on the basketball team made him more of a target.

 

[stankeylegjones]

There you go again with your assumptions about people. Just because I disagree with you about the punishment doesn't mean I don't understand the severity. You're just going in circles if you conflate those two distinctions.

Super, you were posting earlier today to the effect that it isn't that big of a deal. Hence others asking if you were feeling okay, because it seemed far afield from the stance we'd expect you to take on such a serious offense.

Given that you did not address my point, I will assume that you agree with it.

 

[superrific]

Super, you were posting earlier today to the effect that it isn't that big of a deal.

Could you point me to that? I don't remember saying it, and I don't see it on the thread.

I mean, it's not as big a deal as rape. That's uncontroversial, right? I contrasted this with rape, which isn't the same thing as saying it's not a big deal.

 

[Calheel]

Super, you were posting earlier today to the effect that it isn't that big of a deal. Hence others asking if you were feeling okay, because it seemed far afield from the stance we'd expect you to take on such a serious offense.

Given that you did not address my point, I will assume that you agree with it.

I recall Super saying that a 19 yr old kid may not think it is a big deal, as opposed to what super personally believes.

 

[superrific]

Are you really arguing that a reasonable 20 year old man doesn't know that it's wrong to record himself committing a sexual act with another person without that person's permission?

What. The. Fuck?

I don't know what reasonable 20 year old men do or don't know. I'm not 20. All I have is an anecdote or two.

That's why I trust HD on this. I think he has a better finger on the situation.

I'm certainly willing to be convinced otherwise with evidence. I suspect, though, that the lawyers and doctors and professionals here are more involved in their kids' lives, especially on this issue, than average. It seems everyone is speaking out of gut instinct here, and our guts are self-selected.

It's worth noting also that he was at prep school in AZ. I bet anything that there's a lot of bad stuff under the surface at prep schools. Wouldn't surprise me at all if there were classmates in his class doing that. I don't know what they do or do not understand.

 

[stankeylegjones]

Could you point me to that? I don't remember saying it, and I don't see it on the thread.

I mean, it's not as big a deal as rape. That's uncontroversial, right? I contrasted this with rape, which isn't the same thing as saying it's not a big deal.

Your nonchalantness of the seriousness of this crime started a few pages back, continuing from that original post that I quoted. I mean fuck, you were questioning if a person of ZH's age would even know it's wrong to do. Of course he would, just like everyone else...because it's a serious offense. If you're denying that was your intention then you were either not being serious in those posts, or now. Hence my original question: Seriously?

I'm beginning to think, and hope, that you are just fucking around today, and looking for arguments. Surely you are not being serious with your stance on this.

 

[stankeylegjones]

I don't know what reasonable 20 year old men do or don't know. I'm not 20. All I have is an anecdote or two.

That's why I trust HD on this. I think he has a better finger on the situation.

I'm certainly willing to be convinced otherwise with evidence. I suspect, though, that the lawyers and doctors and professionals here are more involved in their kids' lives, especially on this issue, than average. It seems everyone is speaking out of gut instinct here, and our guts are self-selected.

It's worth noting also that he was at prep school in AZ. I bet anything that there's a lot of bad stuff under the surface at prep schools. Wouldn't surprise me at all if there were classmates in his class doing that. I don't know what they do or do not understand.

Yep. You are definitely not being serious today. You are too intelligent and too empathic for this to be your true stance.

 

[UNCatTech]

Apparently it’s not legally considered SA, so I probably shouldn’t have worded it that way.

Regardless, my take is that playing for a prestigious D1 basketball program is very much a privilege, not a right. To me, what this guy did warrants getting kicked off the team permanently. Not saying he shouldn’t get a second chance at some point, but if we’re going to preach all the sanctimonious stuff about Carolina family and having higher standards, this feels like a situation where you draw the line in the stand and tell him to go find his second chance somewhere else.

Also, while the PR angle shouldn’t be the primary concern when someone has experienced real trauma, this is still very much a black eye story at a time when the athletic department really doesn’t need more bad publicity.

I agree. My question was purely for understanding. I am surprised he is allowed to play.

 

[superrific]

Your nonchalantness of the seriousness of this crime started a few pages back, continuing from that original post that I quoted. I mean fuck, you were questioning if a person of ZH's age would even know it's wrong to do. Of course he would, just like everyone else...because it's a serious offense. If you're denying that was your intention then you were either not being serious in those posts, or now. Hence my original question: Seriously?

I didn't mean that he wouldn't know it was wrong; I meant that he might not have known it was wrong. I'm not going to get in a row about this about this since my stance is ultimately "trust HD" which is a lousy stance for argument's sake.

I am being empathetic. Empathy is a two-way street, right? You can be empathetic for the victim and the for the perpetrator at the same time, right? Kid who's 19 years old, brain less developed than an adult, maybe has fetal alcohol syndrome or some lead exposure -- he takes a gun to a bar and shoots during a verbal argument. He killed the guy; he's a murderer; the victim is dead -- all of those things are true. It can also be a tragedy for the young man, who ends up with a life sentence because of a stupid, rash decision that he made impulsively and it all went to hell.

Anyway, I think the disconnect here is that I'm just not that confident in my understanding of a generation of people who have lived virtually their whole lives in the smart phone age. Videos aren't special to them the way they are to anyone who grew up without smart phones or digital cameras with video features. They watch short 10 second videos for entertainment, a lot of them full of cringe content. I don't know what it's like to experience the world that way.

And maybe I'm totally wrong. I don't care if I am. I have no reason to be an expert on the social mores of teenagers today (and no he didn't merely violate a more, obviously; but the more is relevant for assessing background context). I'm also someone who is reluctant to rush to judgment of people. That's why I think HD and the staff will/did handle it properly.

 

[stankeylegjones]

I didn't mean that he wouldn't know it was wrong; I meant that he might not have known it was wrong. I'm not going to get in a row about this about this since my stance is ultimately "trust HD" which is a lousy stance for argument's sake.

I am being empathetic. Empathy is a two-way street, right? You can be empathetic for the victim and the for the perpetrator at the same time, right? Kid who's 19 years old, brain less developed than an adult, maybe has fetal alcohol syndrome or some lead exposure -- he takes a gun to a bar and shoots during a verbal argument. He killed the guy; he's a murderer; the victim is dead -- all of those things are true. It can also be a tragedy for the young man, who ends up with a life sentence because of a stupid, rash decision that he made impulsively and it all went to hell.

Anyway, I think the disconnect here is that I'm just not that confident in my understanding of a generation of people who have lived virtually their whole lives in the smart phone age. Videos aren't special to them the way they are to anyone who grew up without smart phones or digital cameras with video features. They watch short 10 second videos for entertainment, a lot of them full of cringe content. I don't know what it's like to experience the world that way.

And maybe I'm totally wrong. I don't care if I am. I have no reason to be an expert on the social mores of teenagers today (and no he didn't merely violate a more, obviously; but the more is relevant for assessing background context). I'm also someone who is reluctant to rush to judgment of people. That's why I think HD and the staff will/did handle it properly.

Damn Super, you had me for a minute there. I was pretty certain that you were just goofing around, having fun at the expense of us, but I wasn't totally certain. Then this post from you, where you admit that you don't know all of the details of the situation, then go on to say that you think that HD/staff handled this properly. Clearly not a conclusion you'd make short of a full understanding of everything.

I must admit, it took me longer than usual to comprehend, without doubt, what you were up to with your posts on this topic. I'd like to say that I'm under-the-weather and operating on cold meds, but alas, I'm healthy...just getting older. Enjoy your weekend!

 

[SnoopRob]

I don't know what reasonable 20 year old men do or don't know. I'm not 20. All I have is an anecdote or two.

That's why I trust HD on this. I think he has a better finger on the situation.

I'm certainly willing to be convinced otherwise with evidence. I suspect, though, that the lawyers and doctors and professionals here are more involved in their kids' lives, especially on this issue, than average. It seems everyone is speaking out of gut instinct here, and our guts are self-selected.

It's worth noting also that he was at prep school in AZ. I bet anything that there's a lot of bad stuff under the surface at prep schools. Wouldn't surprise me at all if there were classmates in his class doing that. I don't know what they do or do not understand.

Carolina does sexual assault prevention training as part of orientation, although athletes have their own specific orientation system. Here's the relevant section from the Carolina athlete orientation website...

Prior to the start of the fall semester, Athletics holds Heel Camp which all student-athletes attend. During Heel Camp, student-athletes receive information from individuals and departments that will work with them throughout the year (ie Nutrition, ASPSA, Honor System, Strength & Conditioning) and additional topics are covered including scooter safety and sexual assault prevention training.

Academic Processes for Student-Athletes

apsa.unc.edu

I can absolutely guarantee you that this training covers consent and taking/sending/receiving video/pictures.

 

[kidryancorn]

Super has a nice run of ice cold takes, and continues to double down.

As for ZH incredibly disappointing he was allowed the privileges of an athlete while suspended from school. Those defending would likely have their pitchforks out if this was dook, State, etc.

 

[superrific]

Then this post from you, where you admit that you don't know all of the details of the situation, then go on to say that you think that HD/staff handled this properly.

I most certainly did not say that I think HD handled it properly. I said that I trust HD and the staff to handle it properly. Those aren't the same things. For instance, I also trusted (implicitly) that our head coach wouldn't hurl basketballs in anger at our best player; alas, Doh did not live up to that trust.

HD might have messed this up completely. I don't know. I just trust that he will do the right thing on this issue. that might be misplaced, but it's my best judgment as of now.

Edit: I did inadvertently write something that can be readily interpreted as saying HD handled it properly. I didn't intend that meaning.

 

[stankeylegjones]

I most certainly did not say that I think HD handled it properly. I said that I trust HD and the staff to handle it properly. Those aren't the same things. For instance, I also trusted (implicitly) that our head coach wouldn't hurl basketballs in anger at our best player; alas, Doh did not live up to that trust.

HD might have messed this up completely. I don't know. I just trust that he will do the right thing on this issue. that might be misplaced, but it's my best judgment as of now.

"That's why I think HD and the staff will/did handle it properly."

 

[superrific]

Carolina does sexual assault prevention training as part of orientation, although athletes have their own specific orientation system. Here's the relevant section from the Carolina athlete orientation website...

Prior to the start of the fall semester, Athletics holds Heel Camp which all student-athletes attend. During Heel Camp, student-athletes receive information from individuals and departments that will work with them throughout the year (ie Nutrition, ASPSA, Honor System, Strength & Conditioning) and additional topics are covered including scooter safety and sexual assault prevention training.

Academic Processes for Student-Athletes

apsa.unc.edu

I can absolutely guarantee you that this training covers consent and taking/sending/receiving video/pictures.

This is a good point. I hadn't really thought about that training, because from what I understand, those orientations are often blown off and generally not taken seriously. But that is a choice one makes, and the student who blows off the sexual assault prevention training can't then later claim ignorance. That said:

1. That blurb does not give me a lot of confidence that the issues are properly addressed. Apparently the most important thing is to receive information about various people or departments who will help them improve their athletic performance. Also, they talk about some other stuff, like scooter safety and sexual assault.

The idea that scooter safety is put on the same level as sex assault training -- I mean, I hope that's just inartful writing on the web page. If the Heel Camp is really putting approximately the same emphasis on those two topics, then heads should roll and not ZH's. I mean, they can't do that, right? That can't be reality, right?

2. I asked my son about this and he gave me a surprising answer: it's not uncommon for guys to film their sex encounters because they think it will help them defend against rape allegations. One of the fraternities apparently has a camera system installed to record like 5 different rooms for this purpose. I asked my son if he told anyone about it. He said he didn't because he didn't know it for sure; he heard it from one of the guys on his rocket team who was in the frat. [incidental note: he's going to the Mojave desert on Sunday for two weeks as they finish constructing their rocket and launch it into outer space. Wild]

This sounds too real to me, and if so it triggers for me a longstanding frustration with sexual assault trainings and what have you. They do not need to be complicated. I remember hearing about one training for freshmen when I was teaching. The hypo was something like, "woman is drunk; woman agrees to have sex; while dude is putting on his condom, woman passes out; can the dude still proceed."

If it was up to me, these trainings would be radically streamlined. There's only one principle that anyone needs: if you are not 100% sure that your "partner" actively wants to be having sex, then don't. She's pretty drunk and she's stumbling around and is she able to consent-- fuck that. Are you 100% sure she wants to have sex? That she's not just drunk? Then don't. What if she strips naked, talks about riding a guy cowgirl and as he's putting on his condom, she says maybe we should wait until tomorrow? Fuck that. Are you 100% sure she wants to? Then don't.

3. Let me go further. Any training about "consent" given to a bunch of horny teenage dudes is likely to be interpreted by some of them as a roadmap. Teaching them not to cross the line of consent is also implicitly teaching that it's OK to push close to that line. As long as she consents, it's OK -- that's a lesson for a 30 year old (and perhaps dubious in that context). Not a lesson for a college freshman. The slogan shouldn't be "no means no" (which I'm not criticizing; it comes from an era when sadly that lesson was needed because Hollywood seemed committed for so long to the opposite); it should be "only if you're SURE."

So if athletes are recording their sex encounters for fear of being accused of rape, that strikes me as an indictment of the whole system. If you're worried that she might report you, don't fuck her and record it. Tell her to leave. Get to know her better. Explore her sexuality as something more than being a receptacle for yours.

This is going way beyond ZH's situation. It's a pet peeve of mine, you might say.

 

[superrific]

"That's why I think HD and the staff will/did handle it properly."

All right, sloppy language on my part. I wrote that as "will" and then added the did after realizing that most of the handling was probably already done. I didn't appreciate that would change the meaning of the sentence.

To be clear: I don't have any basis for approving the decision. I am relying on trust.