Last year, Rolling Stone reported a shocking story about the epidemic of rape on college campuses, and specifically at the University of Virginia -- one of 86 schools under federal investigation for its mishandling of rapes and sexual assaults on campus. The story focused on the alleged gang rape of a woman named Jackie at the Phi Kappa Psi fraternity. Naturally, because the story was freaking horrific, "legitimate" rape is very rare, and most so-called rape victims are lying, the media immediately called bullcrap on the report and devoted several weeks and a million column inches to proving the story was false, because
It was written by Hunter S Thompson and it was the only thing that explained Muskie's behavior, though the good doctor did insert enough clues that he was, you know, totally fucking making it up, that it didn't really gain any national traction, that is, get believed by one single person who read it.
Not to mention how easy it is, given the plasticity of memory, especially in the cases of trauma, to make the victim sound confused and contradictory. Which rape defenders know all too well.
Agreed. It's a matter of faith at this point, but the likelihoods are either her mental condition made her unreliable unbeknownst even to her, or she falsified details to protect herself from people she still felt terrorized by. Assuming it to have some kernel of truth (or even merely some belief by this woman that imagined horrors are real), they have re-vicitimized a person who was already suffering. Printing a tale with verifiable falsehoods greased the wheels for casting aspersions upon literally every other assault victim who has a story to tell. I don't think it would be exaggerating to say Rolling Stone raped a lot of people.
It was written by Hunter S Thompson and it was the only thing that explained Muskie's behavior, though the good doctor did insert enough clues that he was, you know, totally fucking making it up, that it didn't really gain any national traction, that is, get believed by one single person who read it.
Oh, no. I've taken it as gospel truth for the last 43 years. Thank you for clearing that up.
Not to mention how easy it is, given the plasticity of memory, especially in the cases of trauma, to make the victim sound confused and contradictory. Which rape defenders know all too well.
Dr Hook and the Medicine Show?
Oh, sorry, thought you meant "cover".
Agreed. It's a matter of faith at this point, but the likelihoods are either her mental condition made her unreliable unbeknownst even to her, or she falsified details to protect herself from people she still felt terrorized by. Assuming it to have some kernel of truth (or even merely some belief by this woman that imagined horrors are real), they have re-vicitimized a person who was already suffering. Printing a tale with verifiable falsehoods greased the wheels for casting aspersions upon literally every other assault victim who has a story to tell. I don't think it would be exaggerating to say Rolling Stone raped a lot of people.
Rogaine? Was he swigging it right out of the bottle? Very sad. What some folks will do for a little hair!
Bitch set them up
Unqualified. First Rule of Fox Club: Never even pretend to admit to being 'wrong'.
When does Erdely start working for Fox News?
Thank dog we have an excuse to avoid making any changes to our perfect system.
You know what else is in the cupboard of the Rolling Stoned?
L'Wren Scott?
There are going to be a lot of injustices covered over in this Fox/GOP era. But it will be very good times for Christiany pizza store GoFundme queens.
I wonder if the "one person lied about it, so all such stories are false" theorem transfers to Benghazi?
Ha, ha, no, I don't really wonder about it.
Big Graphix bongs from the late '60's?
A Rolling Stone gathers no credibility.