Skip to content

Josh Lueke is a rapist. How often does that bear repeating?

Apr 22, 2014, 4:40 PM EDT

Josh Lueke

Roy Hobbs said that some mistakes you never stop paying for. Maybe it should be that way. In terms of social stigma, at least, if not in terms of actual punishment. That’s what Rays’ reliever Josh Lueke — who plead down sexual assault charges to a false imprisonment with violence conviction — has learned over the years.

He has learned that no matter how long ago you paid the criminal price for your actions — in his case an extremely light 42 days in jail for what were undeniably odious and criminal actions which can only be logically defined as rape even if they were legally characterized as something less — people may still hold you socially accountable for many more years. This we have come to see with websites, with ballpark signs and with chants by fans whenever he comes into games. We have also seen it in the form of responses to those who would ask that we stop talking about Lueke’s history and instead marvel at how he has “persevered” through “adversity.”

Of late, a number of people have taken to pointing out on Twitter, each and every time Lueke comes into a game, that he is, indeed, a rapist. Of late a number of other people have responded that that first group of people should just drop it already and stop mentioning that fact. They do so less as a defense of Lueke’s tender sensibilities — as far as I’ve seen he ignores it and none of those who wish the matter would be dropped online are actually defending Lueke personally — than as an exclamation of the pointlessness of constantly mentioning it or, in some cases, as a matter of mental fatigue at having to discuss it all again.

It’s an interesting little debate, but one which Stacey Mae Fowles — a rape survivor — sees as not so little at all. Today she writes at Deadspin about why it’s necessary to remind baseball fans of Josh Lueke’s past:

Because most survivors never have the opportunity to name their attackers, I have to disagree with the suggestion that tweeting is a futile endeavor—naming Lueke is most certainly accompanied by its own sense of empowerment. My own fear may prevent me from calling out my attacker in a public forum, but at least I can remind the baseball community that we have failed victims every time Lueke comes up to pitch. The fact that others don’t see it as a meaningful action is entirely meaningless to me. You can volunteer and you can donate money, but the most significant acts when it comes to dismantling a culture that forgives rape is to name those who commit it and support those who endure it. The irritation this man faces each time the chorus of condemnation rises is wholly insignificant when held up against the plight of survivors, and it may be wise for those who dismiss the messages as a “waste of time” to think for a moment that rape victims might have different thoughts on what does and doesn’t constitute a waste of time.

Is it unfair to Lueke? Not in any way I can see. He is not subject to any more criminal sanctions nor, per our Constitution, should he be. But nor is he immune from criticism for his past. And more importantly, nor is society immune from reminders of how poorly we have dealt with rape as a crime, treated some rapists as something less than criminals and done grave disservices to rape victims as people suffering from trauma and often forced to endure more after the crime has already taken place.

I don’t beat the Lueke drum that often because there are plenty of people who do so who are more informed and in a better position to do it. But I don’t begrudge Stacey and anyone else who does.

Go read her post. Read it all before commenting. And think about it a bit before you do.

209 Comments (Feed for Comments)
  1. shanabartels - Apr 22, 2014 at 4:50 PM

    I didn’t have a chance to read the article yet — I will in two seconds. Just wanted to say that Lueke is spelled incorrectly in your headline and you may want to fix that.

  2. tfbuckfutter - Apr 22, 2014 at 4:51 PM

    Constantly. It needs to be brought up constantly. Not just because he basically got off without any meaningful punishment, but because if he molested a 6 year old child, he would never play again.

    And I’d say anally raping an unconscious and vomiting woman falls right below child molestation on the deplorable scale.

    We shouldn’t be debating if he should be allowed to move on with his life. We should be debating if he should be eligible for parole….you know, 5 years from now. And the answer then would still be “no”.

    I honestly hope he gets hit in the head with a line drive.

    • tuberippin - Apr 22, 2014 at 6:51 PM

      Should’ve been Lueke getting drilled with a comebacker to the mound instead of Alex Cobb last season.

  3. chacochicken - Apr 22, 2014 at 4:55 PM

    How big of a deal can it be if its not one of the Ten Commandments?

    Seriously, I wouldn’t want him representing my organization.

    • tfbuckfutter - Apr 22, 2014 at 4:59 PM

      http://i.imgur.com/vYKFdRF.jpg?1

      • js20011041 - Apr 22, 2014 at 5:31 PM

        Pretty much tells you all you need to know about the connection between Christianity and morality. (Psst, there isn’t one)

      • American of African Descent - Apr 22, 2014 at 8:22 PM

        But the Ten Commandments do prohibit adultery which, if you’ve read the New Testament, includes rape and a whole lot of other things.

      • Kevin S. - Apr 22, 2014 at 8:50 PM

        Yeah, that’s contradicted elsewhere. Shocking, I know.

    • historiophiliac - Apr 22, 2014 at 5:18 PM

      Chad Curtis approves this statement.

    • chacochicken - Apr 22, 2014 at 5:34 PM

      That’s right, he has to pay the woman’s father fifty shekels of silver and then marry her.

  4. baseballisboring - Apr 22, 2014 at 4:56 PM

    The sex offender registry is scary as hell to look at. I swear, EVERY guy on it has 3 offenses or more. How can you possibly be convicted of rape 3 times and still be out in society? Since the judge only gave him 42 days, all we have short of violence is Twitter shaming. I’m for it.

    • yahmule - Apr 22, 2014 at 5:40 PM

      They estimate only 4% of the rapes that are committed result in jail time.

      • sabatimus - Apr 22, 2014 at 6:49 PM

        1) Who’s “they”?
        2) Are you talking about reported rapes or the countless unreported ones?

      • yahmule - Apr 22, 2014 at 8:41 PM

        They estimate only 4% of all rapes that are committed result in jail time.

        https://www.rainn.org/get-information/statistics/reporting-rates

  5. madhatternalice - Apr 22, 2014 at 4:58 PM

    Read her article this morning.

    Missed in all this is that all the “outrage” that she’s pointing to comes from Twitter, a useless medium for identifying anything. Remember #CancelColbert? Or that faux anger over the Coca-Cola Super Bowl commercial?

    Twitter is now a place for people to join uninformed outrage, because it’s easy. Hit the “RT” button, and you too can be a part of a cause!

    Personally, I just don’t see the point in raising the issue with Lueke, when there are countless other individuals who have been prosecuted for rape who are walking around in public. Be consistent, or be not at all.

    • Kevin Gillman - Apr 22, 2014 at 5:10 PM

      One less rapist that is out in the streets, the better this world is. One person at a time.

    • sabathiawouldbegoodattheeighthtoo - Apr 22, 2014 at 5:17 PM

      There are few convicted rapists in places of prominence and esteem quite like Lueke.

    • tedwmoore - Apr 22, 2014 at 6:26 PM

      So, you think those attempting to shame him should either (a) obtain the names of every convicted rapist and shame him/her on twitter as well as at his/her place of place of employment, or, (b), shut up about it?

      • sabatimus - Apr 22, 2014 at 6:30 PM

        Exactly. Everyone has to choose their battles. Being “consistent”, as madhatternalice seems to define it, is simply not feasible.

      • madhatternalice - Apr 23, 2014 at 12:35 PM

        No, I think most of the “twitter” outrage is manufactured or lazy.

        Last I checked, Kobe Bryant, Mike Tyson, Donte Stallworth…these are people who have done just as bad, or worse. Yet no one’s talked about Kobe’s Colorado in years. Tyson is STILL favorably in the public eye, and Stallworth…well, he disappeared. Probably the best thing for him.

        All three of those people are far more well known that Lueke, yet they all get social media passes. Why is that?

    • tuberippin - Apr 22, 2014 at 6:54 PM

      “Personally, I just don’t see the point in raising the issue with Lueke, when there are countless other individuals who have been prosecuted for rape who are walking around in public. Be consistent, or be not at all.”

      Most of whom are not in the public spotlight as professional athletes making six or seven figures per season.

      The argument that people should either “be consistent” in shaming rapists or “not at all” is asinine.

  6. asimonetti88 - Apr 22, 2014 at 4:59 PM

    I think he should be publicly outed as a rapist and that he deserves any and all “shaming” that comes upon him. What he did was unhuman and I am appalled he received such an outrageously short sentence. I feel the justice system failed victims with that sentence.

    That said, I somewhat disagree with the author of the article that victims are being failed every time he comes up to pitch. Like you mentioned in the opening of your article, while his criminal justice was ridiculously light, he did still serve it. And once he’s served it, he does have the right to find work.

    It’s unfortunate that such a terrible person is able to find such a lucrative line of work, but it is what it is. But the failure lies on the justice system here, not the fact he’s a major league baseball player.

    That’s why it is so important to keep his crimes in the limelight…

    • asimonetti88 - Apr 22, 2014 at 5:01 PM

      I want to emphasize that in no way am I minimalizing his crimes or defending him in any way. He is a rapist and in my opinion should be in jail right now.

    • sabathiawouldbegoodattheeighthtoo - Apr 22, 2014 at 5:14 PM

      Right to work? Yes.

      Right to work for MLB, which claims the moral high-ground and demands its players serve as examples to young people and young athletes around the country and around the world? Nope.

      • drewsylvania - Apr 23, 2014 at 2:15 PM

        Kinda tells you where the Rays priorities are, doesn’t it? Knowing what he was, they traded FOR him.

      • sabathiawouldbegoodattheeighthtoo - Apr 23, 2014 at 2:35 PM

        Unfortunately, it seems the Rays have been exploiting “questionable moral character” as the new market inefficiency. To sign a Bonds or a Josh Hamilton, perhaps the production is worth the baggage. In this case, for a marginal MLB talent, it does not really seem worth it.

  7. rbj1 - Apr 22, 2014 at 4:59 PM

    44 years later Peter Yarrow is still getting blow back from his rape conviction:

    http://nypost.com/2014/04/22/la-guardia-hs-to-honor-convicted-sex-offender-folk-singer/?utm_campaign=SocialFlow&utm_source=NYPTwitter&utm_medium=SocialFlow

    I have no problem with that. Some crimes you should still be paying for the rest of your life.

  8. [citation needed] fka COPO - Apr 22, 2014 at 5:02 PM

    How often does that bear repeating?

    Until cases like Steubenville, OH are the rarity, and not seemingly occurring all the time. When there’s justice for girls like Lizzy Seeberg, and not indifference even after she kills herself. When schools take accusations seriously, like the case against Jameis Winston at FSU rather than ignore it for over a year.

    When people start believing the victims, rather than (even think it’s funny) say “she had it coming”, or “she probably wanted it” or “look at how she was dressed”.

    Even then it may not be enough…

    • historiophiliac - Apr 22, 2014 at 5:24 PM

      You should have seen the rash of crap I took for telling Tigers “fans” to wait for the investigation on Evan Reed before dismissing the complaint out of hand. It was disgusting — and some of the girls were the worst. I find it incomprehensible that people should still be so ignorant on the subject.

      Which reminds me of the time my mother got called for jury duty on a rape trial. They asked her if she could be impartial, and she said “absolutely.” They asked if the defendant was guilty, what would be a fair punishment, and she said “oh, he should fry.” She was excused.

      • [citation needed] fka COPO - Apr 22, 2014 at 5:31 PM

        I find it incomprehensible that people should still be so ignorant on the subject.

        In college, in the only sociology class I had to take, the professor asked if it was possible for a husband to rape his wife? One of the genius football players said it wasn’t possible, that it was his wife, and she should give him sex whenever he wanted it.

        And he was 100% serious.

      • historiophiliac - Apr 22, 2014 at 6:17 PM

        Equally horrifying: some of the people on the Reed thread actually suggested it couldn’t be true because the woman was like 15 years older than Reed. Her story about meeting him in a bar when he started chatting her up couldn’t be true, you see, because he would never go for an old lady. People seriously said that.

      • Kevin S. - Apr 22, 2014 at 6:25 PM

        I am ten months younger than Evan Reed. I’m currently dating a woman fifteen years older than me. She hates it when we get carded at bars because we otherwise pass for the same age. Trust me, anybody saying Reed wouldn’t chat up a woman fifteen years older than him is an idiot.

      • Old Gator - Apr 22, 2014 at 10:29 PM

        Citation: I taught plenty of football players at the college level at a university with major NCAA presence. I assure you that they were no dumber nor more thuggishly misogynistic on the whole than many of the other athletes or, for that matter, future accountants and engineers in those classes. Misogyny is distributed more or less evenly through the population, as are the criminal psychoses that lead to putting it into practice.

  9. sabathiawouldbegoodattheeighthtoo - Apr 22, 2014 at 5:02 PM

    ARod and Braun inspire the rage and wrath of the press, MLB and a large swath of the fans of the game. Bonds was blackballed and essentially kicked out of the game while still an extremely productive hitter. How much time and money did MLB spend on its “investigation” of ARod and the other Biogenesis crowd? How much time and money did congress spend looking at the “Mitchell Report?” All because these players took (or are suspected of taking) some certain kinds of workout supplements.

    Lueke and a number of others (like Miguel Cabrera, ) who have committed real crimes against actual victims are generally not discussed, and certainly not taken to task in proportion to their crimes, by the vast majority of press, fans or MLB. Is Lueke really that much better than the next guy on the TB depth chart that it is worth rostering a convicted rapist in a professional sport that claims to care about PR issues and setting a moral example?

    • wonkypenguin - Apr 22, 2014 at 5:08 PM

      As far as conversations about the baseball ramifications of this story, I agree with this entirely. Where is the outrage and representation from MLB on this issue?

      It’s the same reason I believe that, while the breast cancer awareness weeks/months in professional sports are obviously good, a domestic violence/sexual assault week would be much more appropriate for the setting.

      • sabatimus - Apr 22, 2014 at 6:33 PM

        (off topic, but MLB has the same stance with DUIs. Are they going to wait until someone kills somebody?)

      • mikhelb - Apr 23, 2014 at 2:41 AM

        ” a domestic violence/sexual assault week would be much more appropriate for the setting.”

        People in charge of MLB have a double standard so ingrained that I wouldn’t be surprised if a “domestic violence/DUI” week were to be instituted, they would choose Miguel Cabrera as their poster boy of all things that are correct.

        And it is not really off-topic to talk about DUIs since there have been people killed by former MLB players who drove while being drunk, see Leyritz.

    • shanabartels - Apr 22, 2014 at 6:06 PM

      Excellent point. There are plenty of dudes out there who can throw strikes and somehow manage not to rape people. Hire them instead.

    • grumpyoleman - Apr 23, 2014 at 9:02 AM

      Kind of a stretch putting Miggy into this category. Yes he has had issues due to his drinking but to lump his behavior into this type of discussion is a little uncalled for. And his situations have been discussed several times.

      • sabathiawouldbegoodattheeighthtoo - Apr 23, 2014 at 10:13 AM

        I would put Miggy’s transgressions somewhere between ARod’s and Lueke’s. DUI and threatening people with harm certainly comes in a bunch of rungs below rape, but I would say they are greater offenses than taking supplement Z instead of supplement A.

  10. sandrafluke2012 - Apr 22, 2014 at 5:04 PM

    Bull. There isn’t 100 percent proof he is.

    • dillongeeescapeplan - Apr 22, 2014 at 5:08 PM

      “Look at me, I’m making outrageous comments! Give me attention!”

      • tfbuckfutter - Apr 22, 2014 at 5:13 PM

        Do you mean the content or the grammar?

    • [citation needed] fka COPO - Apr 22, 2014 at 5:27 PM

      He plead guilty to false imprisonment, and his semen was found inside her. Please explain how it got there without rape, you waste of space…

      • sportsdrenched - Apr 22, 2014 at 5:58 PM

        I agree with everything else you said. I would just like to point out that Semen being present does not mean there was a rape. Semen would be present from consensual sex too.

      • tfbuckfutter - Apr 22, 2014 at 6:12 PM

        Except that he lied and said they didn’t have sex and after the semen from her anus came back as his, he said they had sex but it was consensual.

        And she was intoxicated well beyond the level necessary to render her unable to legally give consent anyway.

      • [citation needed] fka COPO - Apr 22, 2014 at 6:15 PM

        She was vomiting and extremely intoxicated, so she wouldn’t have been able to provide consent.

      • historiophiliac - Apr 22, 2014 at 7:18 PM

        You’d be surprised at how many people don’t understand that being unable to give consent means it’s rape.

      • sandrafluke2012 - Apr 22, 2014 at 7:59 PM

        was he drunk? How is he supposed to know how drunk she is

      • raysfan1 - Apr 22, 2014 at 8:17 PM

        A woman who is as drunk as the victim cannot give consent. The rapist, on the other hand, cannot claim intoxication as an excuse to commit rape–or any other crime for that matter.

      • tfbuckfutter - Apr 22, 2014 at 8:20 PM

        Being drunk is no excuse for a crime.

        Being drunk negates ones ability to consent to sex.

        It’s a bit of enigmatic, but it makes sense.

        It’s kind of like a car. Once alcohol becomes involved you have to make really sensible decisions or you’re risking your life.

      • Old Gator - Apr 23, 2014 at 12:06 AM

        Well sandrafluke, we’ve known you were a moron from the first time you ever posted here. We just didn’t quite get how much of a moron you were. Thanks for helping to enlighten us.

  11. atxjustin - Apr 22, 2014 at 5:09 PM

    Josh Lueke may not respect women but he respects the game.

    • El Bravo - Apr 22, 2014 at 5:26 PM

      This. C’mon now people. It’s so topial, hilarious, and full of button-pushing goodness. Well done.

  12. thebadguyswon - Apr 22, 2014 at 5:11 PM

    This is Bud Selig’s MLB….where Barry Bonds is persona non grata and a rapist pitches in relief in Tampa Bay. Selig, and the Rays, should be ashamed of themselves. Josh Lueke is a POS.

  13. xpensivewinos - Apr 22, 2014 at 5:16 PM

    Strange how someone is writing something every five minutes about Yasiel Puig and Carlos Gomez and the atrocities they commit against humanity, but not that much about Lueke and his charming endeavors…..

  14. blingslade - Apr 22, 2014 at 5:20 PM

    I’m sure he’s a good guy at heart, as long as he isn’t out there doing this anymore he should be allowed to move on with his life.

    • tfbuckfutter - Apr 22, 2014 at 5:26 PM

      I like that.

      “Eh, as long as you’re not going to do it anymore, we’ll just let it go.”

      “Hey Jeffrey Dahmer, we see what you’re doing….seriously, we caught you….knock it off…knock….it…off…if we catch you eating one more person, we’re really going to have a serious conversation about why that is not ok.”

      • historiophiliac - Apr 22, 2014 at 5:36 PM

        You don’t understand, he’s a good guy at heart.

      • blingslade - Apr 22, 2014 at 5:59 PM

        Luke has paid his price and is still paying the price for his misdeeds. Plus, he’s on the sexual offender list.

        It’s not like he’s going to do it again so we should let him lead his life in peace.

      • historiophiliac - Apr 22, 2014 at 6:35 PM

        blingslade must be his acountability buddy who will keep him from doing it ever again.

      • indaburg - Apr 22, 2014 at 8:23 PM

        I’m sure he’s a good guy at heart. Whenever he blows up on the mound, I always say, “This couldn’t happen to a nicer rapist.”

        Last year, I was at the Trop when they had some fan giveaway thing if the fan could spell Lueke’s name. This was of course being broadcast on the Jumbotron. If the fan had been me, the temptation to spell “R-A-P-I-S-T” might have proved too great.

      • raysfan1 - Apr 22, 2014 at 8:24 PM

        I don’t think anyone here is advocating following him around in his private life yelling “there goes Josh Lueke the rapist!” Thus, he is being left to live his life in peace.

        However, as a public figure, when he appears on a Major League Baseball field, he is fair game. So are my Rays for employing him. So were also the Mariners and Rangers for employing him.

      • tfbuckfutter - Apr 22, 2014 at 8:33 PM

        raysfan, I am ABSOLUTELY advocating that.

      • raysfan1 - Apr 23, 2014 at 12:20 AM

        I stand corrected!

    • sabathiawouldbegoodattheeighthtoo - Apr 22, 2014 at 8:23 PM

      If he agrees to castration, I will forgive him. Shy of that, I remain suspicious.

    • scatterbrian - Apr 22, 2014 at 8:35 PM

      Good guys don’t rape people.

  15. musketmaniac - Apr 22, 2014 at 5:22 PM

    so the board thinks that bonds and steroids are to blame. typical baseball fans. they ran out of ice in the press box the last time I was at pnc. You think bonds stole it or melted it.

  16. jdd428 - Apr 22, 2014 at 5:27 PM

    In no way to I condone anything Lueke did and I have no problem with people bringing up his past – it’s their right to do so. And if his actions stained him for life, so be it – he deserves whatever he gets.

    But I also believe – that although his sentence was extraordinarily and inappropriately light – legally he paid his debt and he is entitled to make a living and the Rays (or any other team) are entitled to employ him if they choose.

    Although the crimes are not even close to the same, it reminds me of the treatment Michael Vick receives. He too paid his debt and should be allowed to move on. In fact – and again, I do not condone his actions – his victims were not human, yet he has faced stiffer punishment and more scrutiny. Something there seems amiss.

    • tfbuckfutter - Apr 22, 2014 at 5:35 PM

      I don’t think anyone is suggesting he should be tried again, or that the Rays don’t have the right to employ him or that he doesn’t have the right to work for them.

      However, fans have every right to express their disgust and pressure the Rays to hold their organization to a higher standard.

      He, and Michael Vick, are legally being allowed to “move on”.

      • yahmule - Apr 22, 2014 at 5:45 PM

        Don’t forget Mike Tyson.

      • yahmule - Apr 22, 2014 at 8:44 PM

        For anyone who misunderstood, let me clarify, don’t forget convicted rapist Mike Tyson.

    • sabathiawouldbegoodattheeighthtoo - Apr 22, 2014 at 5:49 PM

      Athletes are essentially professional entertainers. Some people take issue with the money they spend on their entertainment being given to people with serious moral issues.

      Pete Rose is banned from baseball for betting. Is betting really worse than rape? How much ink has been spilled clamoring for ARod to be banned from baseball because of his gym practices and lozenges. And Lueke?

      • raysfan1 - Apr 22, 2014 at 8:34 PM

        Baseball’s rules aren’t based on morality. Rape is of course infinitely worse than gambling. Drunk driving is worse than gambling. Betting on baseball threatens to undermine fans’ belief in a fair contest in which the winner is not predetermined–that, in turn, threatens the bottom line…ie, money.

      • sabathiawouldbegoodattheeighthtoo - Apr 22, 2014 at 9:15 PM

        Sure, it is not about morality, per se. But Baseball and the BBWAA have certainly held up the torch or moral righteousness often enough in recent years. The moralitry clause in the HoF voting rules are invoked constantly when discussing PED users.

        I wonder how his teammates feel about his presence in the clubhouse. With guys like Torii Hunter coming out and saying they would not be comfortable with an openly gay teammate, I wonder how they feel about an openly rapist teammate. Is gay worse than rapist?

      • raysfan1 - Apr 23, 2014 at 12:35 AM

        Don’t get me started on the BBWAA members who were part of enabling the PED culture and then positing moral outrage now.

        I’d like to think there is discomfort on the Rays with Lueke’s presence–although there’s no way he gets ostracized or openly castigated if for Jo other reason than they must work together.

        As for gay players, the only part that bothers me is that it’s an issue. There’s not only no way that there’s not any gay players, I can’t see how at least some teammates don’t know. I think the biggest thing keeping some “in the closet” is the totally berserk media circus that will inevitably erupt rather than the bluster of people like Hunter.

      • mikhelb - Apr 23, 2014 at 2:50 AM

        @raysfan1: MLB has a set of internal rules in their Constitution, some of those rules are based on morality; the Comissioner has the right to ban anybody for doing something that violates those rules. Selig could have used that to ban ARod if the arbitrator somehow found that there was no punishment to his “crime”.

  17. ningenito78 - Apr 22, 2014 at 5:30 PM

    The rage of victims shouldn’t be placed solely on convicted rapists. If you want people to stop ‘minimizing’ rape then their scorn and the justice system should also heavily penalize the women who make up rape charges out of spite or attention. They do every bit, if not more, damage than Lueke is coming up to pitch as a convicted rapist.

    • tfbuckfutter - Apr 22, 2014 at 5:35 PM

      Yeah. Women making up rape charges for attention is such a huge problem.

      Moron.

      • historiophiliac - Apr 22, 2014 at 5:38 PM

        It’s widespread! Like voter fraud!!!

      • js20011041 - Apr 22, 2014 at 5:45 PM

        That’s garbage. It is a problem. We see this time and again. Falsely accusing someone of rape is just as bad as rape itself. It victimizes not only those that have been falsely accused, but also real rape victims. As someone who has been falsely accused of improperly touching a woman, I can tell you that there are few feelings more helpless than being falsely accused of a crime. For you to dismiss that is horsesh!t.

      • yahmule - Apr 22, 2014 at 5:47 PM

        Maybe your story is horsesh!t.

      • js20011041 - Apr 22, 2014 at 6:08 PM

        Well, yahmule, since you were obviously there, why don’t you give an accurate account of what happened? Oh, that’s right, you weren’t. You weren’t there. You haven’t been falsely accused. You have no idea what that feels like. In other words, thanks for contributing, schmuck.

      • historiophiliac - Apr 22, 2014 at 6:23 PM

        Dude, even if your story was true, being accused of “improperly touching” someone is NOTHING like being raped. You have to be seriously privileged and clueless not to get that.

        But I appreciate your assessment of all women as prone to lying about such things and being so willing to falsely accuse people. I’ve done it like so many zero times.

      • js20011041 - Apr 22, 2014 at 6:46 PM

        Did I compare it to being raped? I must have missed that. Please point out where I made that comparison.

        I was simply agreeing with ningento78. Women are just as capable of being untruthful as men are. A rape accusation should not be taken as true until proven wrong. That’s one of the nice things about our judicial system. You actually have to prove guilt. You don’t rely simply on accusations. The fact that we even need to have that discussion is disturbing.

      • historiophiliac - Apr 22, 2014 at 7:31 PM

        “Falsely accusing someone of rape is just as bad as rape itself…As someone who has been falsely accused of improperly touching a woman, I can tell you that there are few feelings more helpless than being falsely accused of a crime…”

        No. You never had to be afraid for your person, and unproven charges (which would be the legal designation on most) are not ever as bad as being actually raped. Also, as it apparently worked out for you, why do you think the system needs to be changed? Did it not work for you? Oh, yeah, residual bitterness at women having the “power” to make complaints. No one here is arguing with you that cases need to be decided on the facts. We are disputing your suggestion that false accusations are as much of a problem in/to our society as rape itself. If you can get that worked up about your dignity being offended and your honor, you have a life to be thankful for — not to whine about.

      • tfbuckfutter - Apr 22, 2014 at 7:49 PM

        Haha.

        I like how you asked where you made that comparison and then she pointed out where you made that exact comparison.

        “Falsely accusing someone of rape is just as bad as rape itself.”

        I really wish I saw this sooner. I’m willing to bet if you ever find yourself being man-on-man raped you will be thinking “Wow, I am now remembering that time a girl said I raped her. That was way better than this.”

      • js20011041 - Apr 22, 2014 at 7:57 PM

        Hey putz, she didn’t accuse me of comparing a false rape accusation with rape. I would have gladly admitted that I did. She accused me of comparing, my situation, being falsely accused of improperly touching a woman, with rape. That I did not do. Reading comprehension is fun. Go crawl back into your self loathing, testicularless hole.

      • js20011041 - Apr 22, 2014 at 8:09 PM

        Historophillac

        STOP! Stop putting words into my mouth. I most certainly did not say that false accusations were as prevalent as actual rapes. I made the point that they do occur, they are an injustice, and they are a problem. Nothing more, nothing less. Stop being dishonest. Stop inferring meaning beyond my actual statements.

      • historiophiliac - Apr 22, 2014 at 8:11 PM

        Ha ha You don’t have testicles!

      • tfbuckfutter - Apr 22, 2014 at 8:14 PM

        You just improperly touched my feelings with your meanness.

      • tfbuckfutter - Apr 22, 2014 at 8:17 PM

        And I’ll have you know, good sir, that I have testicles.

        You falsely accusing me of having no testicles is the same thing as someone accusing someone else of rape which is the same thing as rape.

        You sir, are a de facto rapist.

      • historiophiliac - Apr 22, 2014 at 8:19 PM

        “We see this time and again.”

        You are suggesting it happens a lot. Give us some statistics, please. How frequently does this happen that we need to crack down?

        Dude, this is just not the post for you to go off on that. You’re coming off as an apologist. Being the accused is never as bad as being a victim. Just agree that rape is terrible and move on.

      • yahmule - Apr 22, 2014 at 8:52 PM

        I can’t give an account of what happened.

        Here are my problems with your account:

        1) I don’t know if any of this happened or if you just wanted to personalize your argument.

        2) I only have your account.

        3) You sound like the schmuck with your false equivalences.

    • tfbuckfutter - Apr 22, 2014 at 5:37 PM

      This jackass comment is actually one of biggest reasons that such a small percentage of actual rapes are reported.

      Because of morons perpetrating the attitude that the woman may just be an attention seeker.

    • billybawl - Apr 22, 2014 at 6:04 PM

      The fact that people have made up false accusations that wrongly accuse others of a crime does nothing to excuse the actions of those who actually commit crimes. They’re not two sides of a scale. You can condemn both.

    • tfbuckfutter - Apr 22, 2014 at 6:19 PM

      I actually really like that your idea for helping with the rape problem this country has is to create a potential scenario where a woman can be imprisoned for reporting a rape.

      That will technically lower the number of rapes because even fewer actual rapes will be reported due to fear of imprisonment.

    • tedwmoore - Apr 22, 2014 at 6:42 PM

      Not certain what you mean by “heavily penalize”, but in most jurisdictions false accusation is a crime and can lead to a jail sentence.

    • js20011041 - Apr 22, 2014 at 8:28 PM

      This is exactly what I’m talking about. We can’t have a rational discussion about this because of idiots like YOU TWO!. I’m perfectly willing to acknowledge that Lueke is a worthless POS. In fact, I’ve stated this countless times. Just ask indaburg what a pain in the ass I’ve been about it. Here’s the problem. Stating that men being falsely accused is a problem IS NOT being a rape apologist. No amount of word twisting and inferred meaning will get you there. Get that radical feminist gestapo propaganda out of your head.

      • historiophiliac - Apr 22, 2014 at 8:50 PM

        The problem is that you don’t stop there. You say he’s a bad guy BUT… Just stop with he’s a bad guy. Again, this is not the place for feeling bad for people who are accused (but not convicted or in other ways actually harmed) of committing a crime (and you didn’t even seem to indicate your situation rose to that level). I did not say you *were* a rape apologist. I was trying to get you to understand that you said ridiculous things because you were being defensive — and it comes off as excusing or minimizing the problem. You’re trying to turn a post about victims and rapists into one about sympathy for those “falsely” accused. The whole point is about holding rapists accountable and you want to sidetrack it from that…which is a problem.

      • [citation needed] fka COPO - Apr 22, 2014 at 9:06 PM

        Stating that men being falsely accused is a problem IS NOT being a rape apologist.

        Yes false accusations suck, but when they are no where near the magnitude of actual rapes, it’s a problem, we as guys, will have to deal with.

      • babyfarkmcgeezax - Apr 22, 2014 at 9:21 PM

        Looks like historio has taken offense to some “unwritten rule” being violated by js2001

    • mikhelb - Apr 23, 2014 at 3:26 AM

      I know of a guy who was accused of touching his niece, the girl, aged about 12 declared to the justice system what happened, the guy was imprisoned.

      That guy was a “minister in training” in a church and was absent 5 to 6 days a week in a somewhat remote location, the girl accused him of raping her but he was at the church all that week and when he came back got apprehended. He declared he did not do it, he had witnesses that he spent all that week with them in that remote location doing humanitarian work. The justice system decided not to believe them.

      The guy got what is know as “the rapist treatment”, which is to shave part of his eyebrows so once he gets to jail everybody knows he is a rapist and can be raped sooner or later. From what I was told: he got raped in prison, multiple times, he feared for his life and even considered suicide.

      Then, one day… his niece told his mom that she wasn’t raped, that she invented it all because she didn’t want to return to the foster home where she was living, and figured that if her uncle was out of the equation she could very well live in her uncle’s home.

      She had been placed in that foster home at a very young age by her mom, together with one or two of her sisters because her mother wasn’t able to take care of them. She told the judge who oversaw the case, he ordered for the uncle to be freed and his recurring nightmare ended.

      As of now, he is unable to find work because his rap sheet still exists, the church where he helped in humanitarian work ceased to require him, he now working as construction worker.

      The few times I’ve had the chance to talk with Francisco I’ve been unable to talk about what happened to him. It seems he has forgiven his niece, those who raped him in prison… i don’t know.

      Her niece… well, she returned to the foster home and months later almost killed other kids when she initiated a fire at midnight to escape that place and fake their deaths or something, later she said one of the persons in the foster home raped kids and feared for her and her sister’s health (don’t know what happened in that case), and ultimately initiated a fire in her mother’s house (who was my neighbor) and if it wasn’t for a casual passerby in the middle of the night, maybe I could have died since her room was on fire and less than 2 meters separate our houses.

      The last time I saw her, she was about to get married.

      In short: sometimes people who are falsely accused suffer. not always, but sometimes. And it can potentially put people’s lives at risk… sometimes.

      The justice system in Mexico is crappy, it works… sometimes. A judge decides based on evidence and declaration whether somebody is guilty, innocent or non guilty. Unlike the US and other countries where a panel of people decides whether somebody is guilty or not (though studies have shown one of the inefficiencies in that attractive persons are less likely to be found guilty, or get reduced sentences).

      • mikhelb - Apr 23, 2014 at 3:28 AM

        Dang! Sometimes i write a bit too much. Sorry.

  18. shanabartels - Apr 22, 2014 at 5:59 PM

    To everyone making the “Lueke served his time in the eyes of the law” argument, let’s put this in context. Sure, once someone has served his sentence — whether the court of public opinion tends to agree with the length of it or not — he is a free man. I get that.

    But let’s all remember what it’s like for us regular folks in the world who don’t play sports professionally. When we fill out college applications, they ask if we have a criminal record. When we go looking for an apartment to rent, our prospective landlord does a criminal background check and makes sure we have a decent credit rating before allowing us to lease the apartment that interests us. And the pertinent point here: every job application asks about criminal history. The vast majority of companies don’t want to hire anyone with a history of petty shoplifting or an abundance of unpaid traffic violations, let alone someone who has been convicted of a violent crime.

    I have personally worked for an organization that helps folks who were recently incarcerated and would otherwise be homeless to find gainful employment and supportive temporary housing after they are released from prison and have no safety net to help them get back on their feet. I worked there years ago on a temp assignment so I’m not an expert in the field, but I believe this program only accepts individuals who were incarcerated for drug-related offenses; I’m pretty sure anyone with a history of violence is ineligible for the program. In any case, I do know that it’s a very strict zero-tolerance program — if anyone has a drug relapse, he is immediately kicked out of the program, as there is always a long waiting list of folks who are eligible for the program and willing to take it seriously. (Normally I don’t think they would brief a temp on the eligibility requirements, but one day I asked a co-worker why I hadn’t seen this one guy around the office in a while, and that was why. You relapse, you’re out.) This program is only there to aid those who are committed to overcoming the demons and determined to do productive things with their lives.

    For the average American, finding a job when you have a criminal record is very difficult. And for the most part, that’s how it should be. I certainly wouldn’t want to hire anyone whose history suggested that he or she would be likely to embezzle from my organization or assault a client or co-worker. We have a reasonable expectation as Americans that our bosses or HR departments aren’t in the habit of hiring, well, unsavory characters if you want to phrase it generously, and violent criminal offenders if you don’t.

    Why should baseball be any different from the rest of America? If a convicted rapist probably can’t get a job in retail, corporate, or government work, I don’t understand why sports should have any other standard. Josh Lueke assaulted someone — and I don’t have to say allegedly, because he was convicted — in a really violent and awful way. Why are people okay with sweeping that under the rug? I certainly can’t get past that fact, and it’s not like he’s done anything to acknowledge any kind of understanding that he did something extremely wrong or made an effort to do some kind of community service reparations even for superficial PR image rehabilitation purposes, let alone to actually attempt to grow as a person and prove that he wants to do better. Short of that, yeah. Josh Lueke is a rapist.

  19. pappageorgio - Apr 22, 2014 at 6:15 PM

    Lueke did a horrible thing and there is no excuse, I do not defend, condone, or minimize this but I’d question the writer of this piece on a few points.

    Why, despite by her own admission that she is unwilling to face her own assulter, does Lueke bear the responsibility of now being the poster child of all rapists everywhere? Why shouldn’t she be putting up signs in her neighborhood next to all of the sex offender’s houses? I don’t mind the fact that she thinks Lueke should pay dearly or that he didn’t pay enough…….but why does he deserve to pay more? Because he plays baseball for a living? Because he makes a lot of money?

    I don’t know much about this guy……but if he goes on to lead a good life and become a good person. Using his posiiton as a player to support noble causes and does his best in life to redeem his deplorable deed? Does he not deserve redemption? Should one night in which a young kid under the influence made a horrible, terrible, evil, mistake……mean that he should now be the person that everyone blames for all assult everywhere? Because…it’s kind of the implication she makes.

    My second problem is her stance against men. She clearly has a problem with all men. While the crime against her I’m sure has lead to this, it’s just not right. She implies several times in her post that somehow that men should have less right to be appauled by rape. That men have less right to call Lueke out for his bad acts. It’s clear that in her mind all men (not just those twisted individuals who commit the crime) are the cause of all rape….and in some way we don’t have the right to be offended by this crime. It’s men’s fault.

    I am extremely offended by this idea (and she’s hardly the only one who’s ever put it out there). It leads to the idea that men are all some sort of primal animal who lacks self control…..running out and violating anyone weak enough to let them. It’s crap. Rape is the sort of violence that everyone has the right and the responsability to be offended by. If men are calling out Lueke…good for them. I harldy surrender my right to criticize a rapist because she believes I’m just one hard-on away from doing it myself.

    I understand the intent and the feeling that led her to write this and I’m sure it took courage given what she has faced……but I think she needs to look inward in some ways and project her anger in the correct direction. Not just in the direction of Lueke and then any other man.

    • shanabartels - Apr 22, 2014 at 6:24 PM

      You just cried misandry. Amazing.

      • historiophiliac - Apr 22, 2014 at 8:21 PM

        Why do you ignore woman-on-woman crime?

        /s

      • shanabartels - Apr 22, 2014 at 11:51 PM

        Some of the dudebros who identified themselves as such so loudly today on this little corner of the internet are such incredible specimens, I don’t even understand how they function in society. It’s truly impressive.

        Let’s just have a round of applause for the dude who thinks that the guys out there who have been wrongly accused are the real victims in all of this. A+ thesis right there.

        I just can’t even. I’m done.

      • historiophiliac - Apr 23, 2014 at 12:09 AM

        They just feel threatened and weak because the world is changing. And there were lots of way fab guys on here too. Take heart!

      • shanabartels - Apr 23, 2014 at 1:08 AM

        I know, I know. I’ll try not to completely lose faith in humanity.

    • sabatimus - Apr 22, 2014 at 6:43 PM

      Yeah, the argument you post isn’t going to be popular, but I agree. I think Lueke is a POS. and an even bigger one for lying about it instead of owning it. I’d probably be the first person to call him out if I saw him on the street. But rape can certainly be a mistake in judgment, and some people don’t have the self control of others. The idea would be to learn from one’s mistakes–to apologize deeply and heartfelt (even though no apology can possibly be enough), and not do it again. Everyone makes mistakes, some bigger than others. Raping someone and thereby ruining someone’s quality of life is a huge one. But learn from such mistakes, and don’t do them again. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not defending rape. I’m defending the idea that people are not perfect and that they hopefully will learn from their mistakes.

      It could be worse. He could be a serial rapist and/or Ben Roethlisberger.

      • [citation needed] fka COPO - Apr 22, 2014 at 7:16 PM

        But rape can certainly be a mistake in judgment, and some people don’t have the self control of others.

        Going to give you the benefit of the doubt here and assume you didn’t mean the second part of that sentence, right?

        Raping someone and thereby ruining someone’s quality of life is a huge one. But learn from such mistakes, and don’t do them again.

        The problem with rape specifically is that there almost isn’t any relief for the victim. The rapist may spend the rest of their life in jail, and that still doesn’t make it right for the victim. Never mind a case where the rapist lies to police, and then changes his story when confronted with additional evidence and luckily only serves 42 days in jail.

    • mikhelb - Apr 23, 2014 at 3:34 AM

      There are crimes that should not have redemption for the perpetrator, rape is one of those crimes.

  20. gothapotamus90210 - Apr 22, 2014 at 6:30 PM

    There’s no level of decency with any of this, but what he did while she was throwing up is incomprehensibly foul.

  21. hockeyflow33 - Apr 22, 2014 at 6:34 PM

    I don’t know if I agree with the assessment that rape is somehow excused in our culture; that and pedophilia are considered far worse than death. Even a murderer hates a rapist.

    The fault doesn’t lie with MLB, it lies with the DA’s office and the ability of the prosecution to bring forth a compelling case. The fact that he wasn’t in jail proves that the problem belongs with how they crimes are prosecuted.

    • tfbuckfutter - Apr 22, 2014 at 6:41 PM

      It’s definitely excused, depending on the perpetrator.

      Dirty guys pulling women into alleys, of course, no one has any sympathy for.

      Privileged frat bros plying girls with alcohol and banging their unconscious bodies is “well she shouldn’t have put herself in that situation. No one forced her to drink so much” or “boys will be boys”.

      Rape where the victim knows the perpetrator regularly goes unreported or is dismissed. Violent stranger rape is treated much differently.

      • sabatimus - Apr 22, 2014 at 6:47 PM

        I know someone who apparently actually believes that “there’s no such thing as domestic violence” and “women are all asking for it”. Fortunately I hope I never run into that jackass again. But such sentiments definitely are rooted in misogyny. I mean, it hasn’t even been 100 years since the passing of the 19th Amendment yet.

      • js20011041 - Apr 22, 2014 at 6:56 PM

        Please tell me you’re not going to bring up some “rape culture” or “patriarchy” nonsense?

        Rape often goes unreported and is usually dismissed because it is incredibly hard to prove. Often, there is no physical evidence of rape and it boils down to her word against his. It sucks, but the alternative would be worse. Would you, would anyone, want to live in a country where a simple accusation stands as proof of guilt?

      • hockeyflow33 - Apr 22, 2014 at 8:13 PM

        There’s something to be said about putting yourself in bad situations but I’ve never heard that as a justification for rape. I’m not sure how you completely absolve someone’s bad decision that contributed to a horrible atrocity committed against them; again, that in no way excuses the perpetrator but if you’re hanging out with unsavory characters and getting blackout drunk…

        If a crime goes unreported I don’t know why anyone would expect the offender to be caught.

      • tfbuckfutter - Apr 22, 2014 at 8:27 PM

        hockeyflow, you have the legal right to be safe in your person at all time. Cosmically no, smart people take precautions, but that is not a legal responsibility.

        If I wander down a dark alley, that is absolutely a stupid action for me to do.

        I am not, however, in anyway responsible for the actions of someone who decided to rob and stab me in that dark alley. I shouldn’t have put myself in that position logically, but that person has no right to commit a crime just because someone has made himself vulnerable.

        Suggesting the victim of a crime deserves to shoulder some blame for making themself vulnerable is excusing the crime to a certain degree.

    • [citation needed] fka COPO - Apr 22, 2014 at 7:19 PM

      I don’t know if I agree with the assessment that rape is somehow excused in our culture; that and pedophilia are considered far worse than death. Even a murderer hates a rapist.

      Steubenville, OH, Lizzy Seeberg, Jameis Winston, the thousands of sexual assaults in the military, etc

      • historiophiliac - Apr 22, 2014 at 7:48 PM

        You know all those service people we salute at games? Some of them are rapists or sexually assault others (including men). Frankly, women who serve (particularly through the AF Academy) should get extra thanks for what they put up with. You shouldn’t have to be sexually assaulted to serve your country.

      • yahmule - Apr 22, 2014 at 9:02 PM

        Teenage girls get run out of town and see their houses burned to the ground for reporting rapes by high school predators, but there’s no rape culture in the eyes of some. Which, I guess, only proves that one exists.

      • raysfan1 - Apr 22, 2014 at 9:04 PM

        Let me speak for a moment as a USAF veteran/retired officer.
        Please bear in mind the AF has over 325K men and women in uniform, and many more living and working on AF bases world wide. In other words, if all were in one place, you’d have the population of a major city. As such, every evil imagineable does unfortunately happen. In general, however, it happens less than “in the real world,” and that is part of why some high-profile cases are as notorious as they are. It is also, however, fair to say that things for women in the military used to be far worse than they are now. Nowadays, every base has a person whose whole job is to be someone people who have been assaulted can turn to–they can report the assault completely anonymously if they choose and just use the services offered for medical treatment and counseling…or they can press for full investigations, etc. At a base where I was one of the senior ranking officers, we had one case in which the victim was enabled to transfer to the base of her choice to be able to have a fresh start while the person who attacked her faced charges, and was ultimately convicted. Is the Air Force perfect? Hardly. Is the Air Force trying, and trying to improve? Yes.

      • historiophiliac - Apr 22, 2014 at 9:25 PM

        I will believe that, raysfan, when the USAF starts convicting these guys regularly. The Academy is notorious for having a sexual assault problem that has persisted for years (with impunity), but I’m not trying to single out the Air Force alone on that. It’s a problem throughout the military — and why women have to be the ones to make a stink about it in Congress is beyond me. When you have a guy in charge of handling sexual harassment complaints being arrested for doing the same to others, you know you have a long way to go. I will suggest to you, though, that your experience with a complaint might have been better because you were one of the superior officers — in which case, thank you for making a difference.

      • raysfan1 - Apr 23, 2014 at 12:49 AM

        I make no excuses for what happened at the Academy. However, no, the experience I related was not because I was there–it was part of an ongoing culture change. I am proud of any small help I provided in that direction, but the changes are happening with or without me.

  22. sandrafluke2012 - Apr 22, 2014 at 7:34 PM

    So, a rapist gets let out. If no one hires him, what do you want him to do for money?

    • tfbuckfutter - Apr 22, 2014 at 7:43 PM

      Die.

      That’s my answer to your question. Not a request of you.

      Although it’s also kind of a request of you.

      • sandrafluke2012 - Apr 22, 2014 at 7:52 PM

        classy

      • tfbuckfutter - Apr 22, 2014 at 8:12 PM

        Wrestling with pigs everyone gets muddy.

      • js20011041 - Apr 22, 2014 at 8:20 PM

        This is the reality of the PC police. “Agree with us or die.” “You’re either a radical feminist or a misogynist.” “You either agree that all white people live in a world of rainbows, lollipops, and dollar bills falling from the sky or you’re a racist.”

        No dissent is allowed. Freedom of thought is discouraged.

        Kind of sounds like, I don’t know, a cult?

        The funny thing is, tfbuckfutter and I probably agree on better than 90% of the issues. Unfortunately, he, like many liberals, has adopted a stance of being such a flaming, self-righteous a$$hole.

      • tfbuckfutter - Apr 22, 2014 at 8:29 PM

        Shut up honkey.

      • js20011041 - Apr 22, 2014 at 8:37 PM

        Sick burn, bro. Let me know when you conjure up an actual response.

      • tfbuckfutter - Apr 22, 2014 at 8:42 PM

        The burn wasn’t for your benefit.

        But yeah no, we totally could have started a bowling team or something if not for your whole “being accused of rape is the same thing as being raped” stance.

        Whatever we have in common in the future lmk so I can reconsider my opinions.

      • js20011041 - Apr 22, 2014 at 9:03 PM

        Believe me, I want nothing to do with a self-righteous turd. My point was solely about showing how irrational and dogmatic liberalism has become. Out of curiosity, when did free thought and open discussion become the enemy? Modern liberalism is very much a divisive, agree with us on all fronts political ideology, and I just don’t understand it. I’m liberal on most issues, but what I am not is a slave to dogma. You are. That’s the difference.

      • scatterbrian - Apr 22, 2014 at 9:10 PM

        Are you seriously trying to debate the concepts of free thought and open discussion in a thread about rape?

        Learn to pick your battles better.

      • tfbuckfutter - Apr 22, 2014 at 9:18 PM

        I’m not sharing dogma. I am sharing my opinion.

        I’m also not sure where I’ve been self-righteous. If being more sensitive to the victims of rape than the perpetrators makes me a militant feminist self-righteous dogmatic testicleless turd in your eyes well….luckily I have the self-confidence to continue living my life as I do instead of letting one negative event in my life cloud my world view and turn me a wee bit demented.

      • js20011041 - Apr 22, 2014 at 9:32 PM

        scatterbrian, you’re proving my point here. Some of the people commenting on this site want to turn this post into an anti-rape rally. “RAPE BAD, WOMEN GOOD! RAPE BAD, WOMEN GOOD! RAPE BAD WOMEN GOOD!”

        Of course rape is bad. Most people don’t need to be told that.

        What we see here, and what I object to is that any deviation from the “script” is met with dehumanization. This is why I object so strongly with political correctness. If one disagrees with a liberal (and by liberal, let’s be honest, we mean radical feminist) position, no matter how small or trivial, that person is swiftly and resoundingly called out as being a bigot of some sort. That’s horsesh!t. It’s anti-intellectual and it’s dishonest.

      • tfbuckfutter - Apr 22, 2014 at 9:34 PM

        So….rape IS bad but women AREN’T good?

      • js20011041 - Apr 22, 2014 at 9:44 PM

        Yet again, more word play. Did I say that women weren’t good? If I didn’t say it, don’t infer it.

        Of course, if you’re asking me if women are good, I’ll give you the same answer I would if you asked me if men were good. Some are, some aren’t. Somehow, I suspect your answer to those two questions would be different.

      • tfbuckfutter - Apr 22, 2014 at 9:55 PM

        Well….personally, I try not to judge.

        You self-righteous dick.

        (Seriously, this had been so much fun. But I think I’m out. Love ya.)

      • historiophiliac - Apr 22, 2014 at 10:02 PM

        OMG! Liberal = radical feminist = bad But, really, he’s no bigot. He’s tooootally open-minded and not at all prone to hyperbole. Good grief. I’d give you your testicles back so you could go off on him, but as a liberal, I just can’t allow you to man up.

        PS It’s utterly laughable that he accuses us of being anti-intellectual.

      • tfbuckfutter - Apr 22, 2014 at 10:15 PM

        There is entirely too much talk in this thread about my testicles.

      • scatterbrian - Apr 22, 2014 at 11:54 PM

        My point is that a thread centered around a rapist is not the suitable forum for debating concepts like free thought and open discussion, and I will now include complaining about political correctness. That does not support your opinion, and that does not reject your opinion. And it absolutely does not prove your point.

        Just put your gun back in your holster and save it for another time.

    • doctorofsmuganomics - Apr 22, 2014 at 7:54 PM

      I vote battle royale. make that bitch a reality

      • sandrafluke2012 - Apr 22, 2014 at 8:25 PM

        He is probably the one that supported Ted Kennedy and Bill Clinton

    • American of African Descent - Apr 22, 2014 at 9:16 PM

      It’s a good question, though. What do you do with the rapist, or the murderer, or the batterer when they get out? If we’re going to release people from prison, what are they going to do for food or for clothing or for shelter? The way I see it we have three choices. First, we can extend the punishment for whatever crimes so that the criminal never gets out. (Good luck lobbying the legislature on that one.) Second, we can put these people on the public dole. (Your tax dollars, hard at work.) Or third, we can allow these people to earn a living.

      Expecting people to kill themselves, tfbuckfutter, is wishful thinking. Plus, what about the people who are actually innocent? Some crimes are unforgivable, but sexually assaulting someone who (i) lived, (ii) was an adult, and (iii) was not seriously physically injured during the sexual assault is not one of those. (What makes sexual assault worse, for example, than domestic violence? Or armed robbery?)

      • tfbuckfutter - Apr 22, 2014 at 9:27 PM

        For one thing, the psychological effects of rape make it much different. (Although I will argue that the negative effects are largely reinforced by society and aren’t ingrained, but that’s a psychology discussion that doesn’t ever go over well amongst those who don’t have at least some formal education on the topic, so I will avoid it)….

        Although I do agree that rehabilitated convicts do need to have a place in society where they are accepted because that greatly reduces recidivism rates….however, as I initially pointed out, the act Josh took part in is only slightly below pedophilia on the deplorable chart, so while an armed robber may deserve full forgiveness and a second chance, some crimes should always carry a stigma.

        That said, if dying isn’t an option that is palatable to the criminal, there are plenty of jobs that no one wishes to do and plenty of places no one particularly wants to live….they can do those jobs and live in those places. Where they are in constant fear of being robbed or raped.

      • mikhelb - Apr 23, 2014 at 3:40 AM

        Or like George Carlin once “proposed”: a Battle Royale with proven crime perpetrators in a secluded island with PPV broadcasting it, money from the televised event going to victims and their families.

        And I am talking about the japanese “Battle Royale” and not the watered teen–disney-version of it that is “The Hunger Games”.

  23. doctorofsmuganomics - Apr 22, 2014 at 7:58 PM

    Evan Reed and Josh Lueke should form a tag team.The MegaPervs

    Reed can be the Randy Savage of the two. Lueke seems like a hulk hogan

    • historiophiliac - Apr 22, 2014 at 8:23 PM

      Hey, hey, let’s finish the investigation on Reed first. No torches without convictions.

      • doctorofsmuganomics - Apr 22, 2014 at 8:49 PM

        …so you think Reed should be Hulk? I’m flexible

  24. musketmaniac - Apr 22, 2014 at 8:12 PM

    So Kevin likes old vag, you shouldn’t try to pawn that off on the rest of us. Not everyone like wrinkles and opinions.

    • Kevin S. - Apr 22, 2014 at 10:52 PM

      If you’re going to troll, try to work on your reading comprehension.

      • historiophiliac - Apr 23, 2014 at 10:48 AM

        How can you stand women with opinions???!!!

      • Kevin S. - Apr 23, 2014 at 11:01 AM

        I value her opinion on what furniture should be in the living room, and what spices we should keep in the pantry.

        Those are the opinions we’re talking about, right?

      • historiophiliac - Apr 23, 2014 at 12:45 PM

        Of course, there’s no way she would understand hardware or pitch counts. How ridiculous to even suggest it! Is her Jeter jersey pink?

      • Kevin S. - Apr 23, 2014 at 1:08 PM

        With rhinestones.

  25. randygnyc - Apr 22, 2014 at 8:39 PM

    Lets never forget that Bill Clinton was also a rapist. Its just not possible to have consensual sex when one person holds such power and sway over another.

    • Old Gator - Apr 23, 2014 at 12:19 AM

      I don’t know. I think if he really tried, he could have resisted Monica.

    • dcarroll73 - Apr 23, 2014 at 12:49 AM

      … except in a case with a proven history of stalking the attractive power holder? Please stick to the facts when you’re trying to throw in an irrelevant slur.

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Featured video

When home-field advantage isn't so
Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. T. Lincecum (3034)
  2. M. Bumgarner (2575)
  3. M. Morse (2390)
  4. J. Shields (2213)
  5. Y. Cespedes (2053)
  1. H. Pence (1472)
  2. T. Ishikawa (1416)
  3. L. Cain (1401)
  4. U. Jimenez (1375)
  5. B. Butler (1370)