As most know by now, Ben Roethlisberger is accused of sexual assault. Isn't this the second time that this sort of thing happened to him? Wasn't it only like a year ago that he was accused of the same crime? If so, shouldn't we, the fans, be viewing this as guilty until proven innocent? While I understand that he probably can get many women, and probably does, it's possible that he is enjoying the feeling of superiority that rape is said to produce in the perpetrators.
An interesting question I have is this: if Ben Roethlisberger did sexually assault this girl and he goes to jail for a few years will we treat him the same, worse, or better than we treat Dog Killer Vick? If he is proven guilty realistically, shouldn't we treat him worse. Unlike Vick, these aren't animals that don't know better. This would be a person that has to carry around that shame and guilt for the rest of her life. This person would probably suffer from trust issues if he did do what she is alleging.
Another interesting question is: Do we give Ben Roethlisberger more of our benefit of the doubt simply because he is white? I'm not someone who likes to bring up races in this manner, but it seems apparent that perhaps we are giving him more of a benefit of the doubt than we do for someone like Ray Lewis, who has been found innocent of the murder that he might have committed. Many people felt that Kobe Bryant was guilty of sexual assault as well. So, are we treating these white athletes better than the black athletes? I'd really like to know this. My brain says no since I don't want it to be that way, but my heart says realistically, we are.
The last question I have is this: How would Ben look in the color orange? And will he play a game similar to that in The Longest Yard (is this the movie with Adam Sandler?) where he has to take down the prison guards? I think that could be some pretty cool entertainment.
Posts
I love you Ryan, you're the controversy king of Armchair Superstar. No fear.
ReplyDeleteHere's my take, having been an, um, participant in the legal system several times. You should never treat somebody as guilty until proven innocent. I understand that this isn't the first time he's been accused, but what happened that first time? Nothing. The allegations were false.
I want to clarify that I'm not saying ALL women who allege sexual assault by athletes are gold-digging liars. Only some of them are. Just like some athletes are scumbags who assume consent because of their Bentley.
Do I think Roethlisberger is a serial rapist? In this case, hells no I don't. I didn't think Kobe was guilty either, though I'm sure there was sex in both cases. Consent, sex, power, and alcohol are a messsssssy mix, and it's always hard to unravel the moral morass. (you like what I did there with the alliteration? yeah you do.)
Now on to the question of: Better or worse than Vick? The thing about Michael is, dogs are helpless creatures and have absolutely no way of keeping themselves from being exploited.
Human beings, on the other hand, are at least somewhat responsible for their own actions such as : Flirting with another person, misleading another person, taking advantage of another person. But it's a much less black and white ethical issue.
This is why Donte Stallworth wasn't as bad as Vick, either, despite the fact that HE KILLED A DUDE!
Black vs. White: I think it has really become less of an issue in recent years. Again, looking at the Stallworth case, I was shocked at the fairness of the sentence he got - I thought the court treated him fairly and justly. I think more pundits would agree with me, had he been white.
90% chance this is settled out of court. I'd put money on it, if gambling on sexual assault were morally acceptable.
Keep up the good work, Ryan.
Let the Judaical system run its course Mr Ryan Esquire
ReplyDeleteLet me clarify one comment. When I said should we look at him as guilty before proven innocent I was referring to citizens outside the judge, jury, lawyers, and court staff. For instance, in probably most people's minds in the State of Illinois Blagojevich is guilty. There will be no vindication for him until he is proven innocent in a court of law. But the court of law should still operate under it's own standard of innocent until proven guilty.
ReplyDeleteI am glad that this topic has a tagline of orange jumspuit
ReplyDelete