After all the tumult in journalism over the past few decades, it was refreshing -- in a way -- to see that the Reader still apparently pays its writers by the word and does not employ editors.
That piece would have been better at half the length.
As for substance, the article and its protagonist exhibited most of the problems with the debate over the "rape crisis on campus." Among other things, the article takes pains at the beginning to point out the legal distinction between rape and other forms of sexual assault (some of which would just be plain old assault, if that), but then conflates everything as rape thereafter.
At the end of the article, the student victim/protagonist blasts the University for not informing her of the option to hold a disciplinary hearing. But, at the beginning of the article, a couple of thousand words earlier, she says she expressly rejected a hearing because it was close to finals week. Priorities.
Either the student or the writer, or both, need to get their story straight.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
momijizukamori
no subject
Date: 2015-09-25 01:31 pm (UTC)That piece would have been better at half the length.
As for substance, the article and its protagonist exhibited most of the problems with the debate over the "rape crisis on campus." Among other things, the article takes pains at the beginning to point out the legal distinction between rape and other forms of sexual assault (some of which would just be plain old assault, if that), but then conflates everything as rape thereafter.
At the end of the article, the student victim/protagonist blasts the University for not informing her of the option to hold a disciplinary hearing. But, at the beginning of the article, a couple of thousand words earlier, she says she expressly rejected a hearing because it was close to finals week. Priorities.
Either the student or the writer, or both, need to get their story straight.