Now, from the "things that piss me off" files..

When the whole "Duke lacrosse player rape" scandal first broke, I didn't pay it a whole lot of attention. I really didn't want to hear yet another story about athletes with overblown egos and sex drives taking advantage of people. I figured it was just the same old, same old, as awful as that is to say about an event that could damage a lot of lives. But, today, I found an article on Slate (MSN's online magazine) that really just pissed me off. http://www.slate.com/id/2148546 There's the link.

So, apparently the evidence that there actually was no rape is mounting. There was no DNA found in or on the victim from any of the three guys that were accused. There was no bruising or physical signs of force. Her main injuries consisted of "nonbleeding scrapes" on her knees. Her stories are incredibly inconsistent, listing as many as 5 and as few as 0 rapists. She described all of them as chubby, when at least one of them was very thin.

And the worse thing, there was a police officer that was kind of known for being quite hard on Duke students, who was helping throughout the case. When she gave descriptions initially of her attackers, she described them all as chubby. But then, later when this police officer wrote descriptions, they matched the three defendants perfectly. Coincidence?? Hmmm...

Anyway, you can read the details in the article, and read about how the New York Times botched this whole thing. My point is that it really makes me mad to hear about women fabricating stories about being raped. For what reasons she did this, I have no idea. Attention? Money? Mental illness? I don't know. But, everytime this crap happens, it makes it that much harder for actual sexual assault victims. It perpetuates the stereotype of the mentally ill attention craved woman telling lies. Grrr....

So, in other news, I went to the most pointless lecture in the history of lectures this morning. I had biology this morning at 8 a.m. My only motivation for going was that I suck at science and that if I didn't go, I would miss valuable course content that I might need for the test. How's this for valuable course content..(remember that this is a BIOLOGY class)..we spent the entire hour discussing the differences between science, religion, and philosophy (which my professor apparently thinks is a complete waste of time). Then we discussed how there can be fundamentalists in all three of these domains, or magesteria (that word is the one thing I learned in class today). And then within the last 5 minutes of class, she FINALLY got around to discussing the scientific method (which, if you can remember, was taught in like the 7th grade..). Now, I like my professor. She's funny. She has a really dry sense of humor. I don't necessarily agree with everything she says, but at least she says what she thinks and means what she says. And, discussing the differences between religion, science and philosophy is definately an interesting conversation. BUT...we were supposed to be learning about BIOLOGY!!!!! We didn't talk about species or cells or genus or ANYTHING LIKE THAT!!! And now, because I was so determined to get up at 8 so I could learn about biology, I have forever to wait around until my next class. Grr...

And now, there's a woman sitting across the hall with a poster that says "Is there a Creator?" Oh lord. I'm sure she wants to get into a discussion about evolution v. creationism. As my professor said this morning "How can you not believe in a theory that's been established with empirical evidence over hundreds of years?" Science and religion don't mix. You can believe or not believe in God. You can believe or not believe that God created the earth. You can believe or not believe in a lot of things. You can't not believe in gravity. It doesn't matter if you don't believe in gravity, it's still holding you to the ground. Whatever. Apparently, I'm angry and ranty today.

I promise soon my opinions of Gnarls Barkley...but not now.