Humiliated Frat Boys Sue 'Borat'

NCfan

trappedinmyradio wrote:

no, i would guess that they didn't read the release form. but, i bet, they thought it was really cool and told all of their friends how cool and funny it was.

I bet they didn't read it either, which is their fault. However, they were most definetly exploited. I'm sure Sasha Cohen didn't say, "hey I'm going to use this footage in a movie that makes you look like an ass."

You guys that think these guys got what they desvered are happy becuase these guys are "frat guys". I'll give you the benefit of the doubt for arguments sake and agree that these guys are indeed a bunch of "frat ducks". Regardless, they were still exploited and that's not cool.

floyd1975

Uncle Leo wrote:

Better than the above "stupid talk to rape" comparison. The social significance is not the same and I am not saying it is. But the "...however, I think some are..." is similar. It's saying "I am not prejudiced against these people, but there seem to be a lot that i do not like."

I agree with you Uncle Leo. I thought your example was a good one. Both terms are meant to marginalize a group of people based solely on biggotry.

trappedinmyradio

Pacomc79 wrote:

In the end about 98% of all lawsuits are about money.

100% of civil suits are about money!

floyd1975

NCfan wrote:

I bet they didn't read it either, which is their fault. However, they were most definetly exploited. I'm sure Sasha Cohen didn't say, "hey I'm going to use this footage in a movie that makes you look like an ass."

You guys that think these guys got what they desvered are happy becuase these guys are "frat guys". I'll give you the benefit of the doubt for arguments sake and agree that these guys are indeed a bunch of "frat ducks". Regardless, they were still exploited and that's not cool.

They should not do something that makes them look like idiots in front of the camera. Furthermore, they should not sign something without reading it.

newagehippie

trappedinmyradio wrote:

this further proves my fact that frat boys serve no purpose to society other than feeding the human fires that warm some areas of the country.

One shouldn't judge. I was in a fraternity, and some of my best friends who are some of the best dudes in the world were met through it. I agree that loads of fraternity members often give bad examples, but that is college dudes in general. A real fraternity is more than "beer and bitches", there are some great lessons learned and taught through the rituals of chapter, and I am sure all are like mine ot some degree. If you have never been a part of one, you will most likely will not understand, but for those of us, or at least for me, some of life's greatest lessons were learned from those times. It isn't the fraternity that makes the dudes look bad, it's some of the dudes that makes the freternity look bad....

NCfan

soulsinging wrote:

im gonna quote myself becos you ignored this once and i know you'll do it again cos you have no response to it.

Ha, ha.. touche! That's pretty good. But seriously, no that is not rape. It might be morraly questionable, but so is being a freshman slut.

trappedinmyradio

NCfan wrote:

I bet they didn't read it either, which is their fault. However, they were most definetly exploited. I'm sure Sasha Cohen didn't say, "hey I'm going to use this footage in a movie that makes you look like an ass."

You guys that think these guys got what they desvered are happy becuase these guys are "frat guys". I'll give you the benefit of the doubt for arguments sake and agree that these guys are indeed a bunch of "frat ducks". Regardless, they were still exploited and that's not cool.

there is a difference between being exploited unknowingly and being exploited knowingly. one is bad and one is okay because of waiver (release form signed). they knew they were being filmed, they knew it would possibly be used in a film, therefore, they did what they did knowing that people would see it, thus no exploitation.

trappedinmyradio

newagehippie wrote:

One shouldn't judge. I was in a fraternity, and some of my best friends who are some of the best dudes in the world were met through it. I agree that loads of fraternity members often give bad examples, but that is college dudes in general. A real fraternity is more than "beer and bitches", there are some great lessons learned and taught through the rituals of chapter, and I am sure all are like mine ot some degree. If you have never been a part of one, you will most likely understand, but for those of us, or at least for me, some of life's greatest lessons were learned from those times. It isn't the fraternity that makes the dudes look bad, it's some of the dudes that makes the freternity look bad....

keep reading through the thread...i have no problem with a member of a fraternity. they are some of the best guys i know too. but, you, a member of a fraternity, know a number of frat boys...the guys that were all about beer, pot, and bitches...in any way they could get any of them.

hippiemom

NCfan wrote:

I bet they didn't read it either, which is their fault. However, they were most definetly exploited. I'm sure Sasha Cohen didn't say, "hey I'm going to use this footage in a movie that makes you look like an ass."

You guys that think these guys got what they desvered are happy becuase these guys are "frat guys". I'll give you the benefit of the doubt for arguments sake and agree that these guys are indeed a bunch of "frat ducks". Regardless, they were still exploited and that's not cool.

Cohen couldn't have made them look like idiots unless they acted like idiots, which they were apparently all too happy to do.

The lawsuit says the film "made plaintiffs the object of ridicule, humiliation, mental anguish and emotional and physical distress, loss of reputation, goodwill and standing in the community."

Sounds to me like these boys learned the hard way that what passes for "cool" in their little caveman community is seen as idiotic by the greater society. They were going to be the cool guys on campus in the big hit movie, and it didn't work out that way ... now they're a national laughingstock.

I wonder if any of this has caused them to rethink their racist and sexist views, or if they're totally focused on feeling sorry for themselves.

trappedinmyradio

NCfan wrote:

Ha, ha.. touche! That's pretty good. But seriously, no that is not rape. It might be morraly questionable, but so is being a freshman slut.

but, if you got her to suck your dick and taped it and showed it to all your friends and her parents and relatives without her consent...then there is a problem...these guys signed a release.

soulsinging

NCfan wrote:

Ha, ha.. touche! That's pretty good. But seriously, no that is not rape. It might be morraly questionable, but so is being a freshman slut.

nice justification. you ARE the kind of fratboy i always hated... the kind that raped my gf. the kind that thinks anything is acceptable if it gets you laid.

funny how a girl who gets drunk and pressured into sex is a slut. 2 frat brothers getting drunk and being videotaped are just victims. those poor, rich, white, fraternity boys.

sweet adeline

hippiemom wrote:

I wonder if any of this has caused them to rethink their racist and sexist views, or if they're totally focused on feeling sorry for themselves.

good point, i'd guess the latter.

thankyougrandma

It's not like they would have told them :" say this and that" and then having their opinion manipulated, they were film expressing their own thoughts (from what i can understand). They only have themselves to blame.

trappedinmyradio

hippiemom wrote:

Cohen couldn't have made them look like idiots unless they acted like idiots, which they were apparently all too happy to do.

I wonder if any of this has caused them to rethink their racist and sexist views, or if they're totally focused on feeling sorry for themselves.

they just learned to (1) read that which they sign, (2) be their true selves in private...or in their little caveman community...

you probably know contract law better than i do...you can probably have the landmark case for capacity before i can pour milk over cheerios. so, you know, as i do, that these seasoned filmmakers, more likely than not, would not have drunk frat boys signing release forms.

soulsinging

NCfan wrote:

I bet they didn't read it either, which is their fault. However, they were most definetly exploited. I'm sure Sasha Cohen didn't say, "hey I'm going to use this footage in a movie that makes you look like an ass."

You guys that think these guys got what they desvered are happy becuase these guys are "frat guys". I'll give you the benefit of the doubt for arguments sake and agree that these guys are indeed a bunch of "frat ducks". Regardless, they were still exploited and that's not cool.

so were all those "freshmen sluts" you coerced into sex. but who cares about them right?

NCfan

hippiemom wrote:

Cohen couldn't have made them look like idiots unless they acted like idiots, which they were apparently all too happy to do.

The lawsuit says the film "made plaintiffs the object of ridicule, humiliation, mental anguish and emotional and physical distress, loss of reputation, goodwill and standing in the community."

Sounds to me like these boys learned the hard way that what passes for "cool" in their little caveman community is seen as idiotic by the greater society. They were going to be the cool guys on campus in the big hit movie, and it didn't work out that way ... now they're a national laughingstock.

I wonder if any of this has caused them to rethink their racist and sexist views, or if they're totally focused on feeling sorry for themselves.

I'm curious what your views are on a rape claim in which the consenting girl was drunk. According to the law, she cannot give consent if she is under the influence.

She could not be "expoloited" if she had better morals, judgement, etc...

Sounds like to you, she would just be learning the hard way that being a slut isn't so cool the morning after.

trappedinmyradio

NCfan wrote:

I'm curious what your views are on a rape claim in which the consenting girl was drunk. According to the law, she cannot give consent if she is under the influence.

She could not be "expoloited" if she had better morals, judgement, etc...

Sounds like to you, she would just be learning the hard way that being a slut isn't so cool the morning after.

she can't give consent if she is so drunk that she can't form an intelligible response. if the guy is drunk and the girl is drunk then it's pretty much a cancel out situation. but, a drunk girl and a sober guy that has to ask more than once and has to take her pants off...rape.

norm

NCfan wrote:

I'm curious what your views are on a rape claim in which the consenting girl was drunk. According to the law, she cannot give consent if she is under the influence.

She could not be "expoloited" if she had better morals, judgement, etc...

Sounds like to you, she would just be learning the hard way that being a slut isn't so cool the morning after.

Do you play lacrosse?

soulsinging

NCfan wrote:

I'm curious what your views are on a rape claim in which the consenting girl was drunk. According to the law, she cannot give consent if she is under the influence.

She could not be "expoloited" if she had better morals, judgement, etc...

Sounds like to you, she would just be learning the hard way that being a slut isn't so cool the morning after.

why si it up to her? shouldnt YOU have better morals than to take advantage of a girl who is intoxicated? why is it all up to her? is it too much to expect you to act like a gentleman?

you cannot say a girl who consents to drunk sex is just fine and these guys are victims. there is no logical distinction.

trappedinmyradio

cutback wrote:

Do you play lacrosse?

you better take a look at that situation before you start lobbing speculation about.