• Blog Entries

    • By JimmiJo in ES Coverage
         1
      Cowboys versus Redskins - now that just sounds correct.
       
      Hello friends, JimmiJo here along with THE Spaceman Spiff. Space is already on the sidelines, yucking it up with the important people. Me? I'm thinking how grateful I am for the 3-car accident on the beltway...
       
      If you cannot get up for this game, there isn't enough viagra made on earth for you. After all; the Redskins are hosting their eternal rival, the Cowboys. Winner will be sitting on top of the division, with a truckload of bragging rights.
       
      What's not to like?
       
      Well, for starters, everybody and their mom is inactive. Chris Thompson Jamison Crowder, Paul Richardson, Quinton Dunbar; all inactive. What a time to have have your top two receivers out. The chatter here in the press box is Washington should do what they can to bring in receivers - to include making a trade with the Raiders for Amari Cooper.
       
      Then there's the question of which Redskins show up? They could come out and light Dallas up. Or, post an anemic effort to suffer another embarrassing lost. Neither would surprise me.
       
      One this is for sure, the distribution in fans is something like 55-45 Redskins. Already an embarrassment. Until you consider this team has done much to earn the lack of support.
       
      Still, you have offer the finger in the middle to those fans who sold their tickets to Dallas fans. What were you thinking?
       
      Back shortly...
       
      Inactives
       
      The Redskins declared the following players as inactive:
      o   No. 10 WR Paul Richardson Jr.
      o   No. 23 CB Quinton Dunbar
      o   No. 25 RB Chris Thompson
      o   No. 30 S Troy Apke
      o   No. 55 C Casey Dunn
      o   No. 74 T Geron Christian Sr.
      o   No. 80 WR Jamison Crowder
       
      The team held a touching tribute to my friend Rich Tandler, who passed this week.
       
      Follow along in-game on Twitter @Skinscast
       
      Half
       
      Did you hear the one about the team that got chance after chance but couldn't score more than a touchdown?
      That's right; they are tied at 7 at the half and completely anemic in the second half.
       
      "Against the run of play" is a term you hear in soccer all the time. It is applicable here. It means the better team is either tied or trailing.
       
      Whoever said football was fair?
       
      Washington needs to find a way to get hot in the second half. The Dallas Cowboys are infinitely beatable today.
       
      JimmiJo
       
      How do you like them apples?
      The Washington Redskins sent them home happy today. Along the way my ulcer started bleeding, I threw up twice, and peed the chair I was sitting in.
      Up by 10 at the two-minute warning, I did not expect to be hoping for a missed field goal to avoid overtime. But there I was, crossing fingers and toes and noticibly relieved when the ball bounced off the upright to seal the win.
      A lot of things had to go right for the Dallas Cowboys to even have a shot at the end. A lot more things went right for Washington.
      The Redskins held Ezekiel Elliot to just 33-yards rushing. They forced two fumbles by Dak Prescott, one of which went for a Redskins' touchdown, and sacked him a total of four times. 
      Ryan Kerrigan had his best day of the season, sacking Prescott twice, one of which caused the fumble for the score. Preston Smith scored the touchdown off of the fumble. Jonathan Allen and and Ryan Anderson each logged a sack. DJ Swearinger hit Prescott square on the ball to cause the other fumble by Prescott.
      And then there was the offense.
      Adrian Peterson defies time and physics in what he can still do on the football field. His ability to change directions instantly, the speed he still posesses, and his ability to play through multiple injuries is astonishing. He ran for 99-yards on 24-carries with a 4.1 yard per carry average. 
      Kapri Bibbs, the other back; added just 13-yards rushing. But as a receiver he caught 4 passes for 43-yards and the first touchdown of the game.
      Josh Doctson reeled in 3-receptions for 43-yards. Jordan Reed added 43-yards on his two catches. Maurice Harris logged 2 for 22-yards.
      Alex Smith had a adequate outting. He went 14/25 for 178 yards and a touchdown for a quarterback rating of 98.1. He was sacked once.
      His obvious miss of Jeremy Sprinkle running free in the end zone is almost cause for termination. Connect on that throw and the game is much more comfortable at the end. 
      The real stars of this show were the fat guys in the trenches. The offensive line that opened highway lane-wide holes for Peterson to run through, and the defensive line that wreaked such havok all game. 
       
      But we have to thank Dallas as well for things like an illegal snap to back the field goal unit up at the end. The holding call that negated the big gain one play before the sack/fumble/score was huge. They seemed to find ways to beat themselves.
       
      Despite the above, Dallas was right there until last miss that struck the goalpost. The win was entirely too close for comfort.
       
      But now that's it's over, I sure am enjoying the win.
       
      The Redskins sit alone at the top of the division after 6-weeks. They travel to New York next week where they can continue to help themselves with a win.
       
      But just because New York currently resides in the toilet does not mean they intend to roll-over and play dead. Washington will have their hands full if they don't get more production out of the offense.
       
      That's next week though. For now, I am intent on  enjoying an excellent victory. Against the Dallas Cowboys.
       
      What's not to like?
       
      Talk soon!
Sign in to follow this  
BenningRoadSkin

Seattle Times: Nearly Every Native American Woman in Seattle Surveyed was a Victim of Rape or Coerced into Sex

Recommended Posts

Quote

In the survey of 148 Native American and Alaska Native women, more than half the women — 53 percent — were homeless at the time they answered the questions.


By Vianna Davila 

Seattle Times staff reporter
 

When Abigail Echo-Hawk first started her job as director of the Urban Indian Health Institute, she felt compelled to open the bottom drawer of a file cabinet in the corner of her office.

 

The Seattle Times’ Project Homeless is funded by BECU, The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Campion Foundation, the Paul G. Allen Family Foundation, Raikes Foundation, Schultz Family Foundation, Seattle Foundation, Seattle Mariners, and Starbucks. The Seattle Times maintains editorial control over Project Homeless content.

 

Among a dozen files inside, she noticed one labeled “Sexual Violence.”

 

Echo-Hawk had stumbled upon a copy of questions from a 2010 survey, co-produced by the health institute and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), documenting experiences of sexual violence among Native-American women living in Seattle.

 

The survey findings alone are shocking: 94 percent of the 148 women interviewed, all of whom identified as American Indian or Alaska Native, reported they had been raped or were coerced into sex at least once in their lives.

 

And more than half the women — 53 percent — were homeless at the time they were surveyed.

 

But also surprising was the fact the survey results had been kept under wraps for six years by the time Echo-Hawk discovered them in her desk in 2016. Results from two other surveys on sexual violence, done in two other U.S. cities at the same time as the Seattle report, had long ago been released.

 

This week, almost two years later after working with the CDC to release and interpret the data, the health institute released the survey results and report, called “Our Bodies, Our Stories,” first in a community meeting Wednesday, and then to the public Thursday.

 

 

Read more here:

https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/homeless/survey-reveals-high-rates-of-sexual-assault-among-native-american-women-many-of-them-homeless/

 

 

Also:

 

http://www.kyuk.org/post/fifty-four-percent-alaskan-sexual-assault-victims-are-alaska-native-study-says

 

https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2014/09/rape-culture-in-the-alaskan-wilderness/379976/

 

And of course this case last month:

https://jezebel.com/man-who-strangled-woman-unconscious-wont-serve-jail-tim-1829192899

(the woman was apparently Native American)

 

 

This is an older article, but from 1978-2015, it was not illegal for non-Indigenous men to rape indigenous women:

https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/bnpb73/native-american-women-are-rape-targets-because-of-a-legislative-loophole-511

 

This is all crazy and just shows where the world is at this moment and how terrible life continues to be for Indigenous people.

Edited by BenningRoadSkin
  • Sad 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't the shockingly high number at least partly the result of ambiguous CDC survey questions?

  • Confused 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, grego said:

Isn't the shockingly high number at least partly the result of ambiguous CDC survey questions?

seriously? That's what you took from it?

  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, BenningRoadSkin said:

seriously? That's what you took from it?

 

not sure, because i'm working and reading at the same time, and the link to the cdc survey from the article isn't working for me, so i don't know what survey they are referring to. the only cdc survey i am familiar with is one that was criticized for its questions and methodology, so i don't know if this is that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, grego said:

 

not sure, because i'm working and reading at the same time, and the link to the cdc survey from the article isn't working for me, so i don't know what survey they are referring to. the only cdc survey i am familiar with is one that was criticized for its questions and methodology, so i don't know if this is that. 

Why don't you read the article instead of looking for something minor to derail the conversation?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, because women always lie about sexual assault.

 

But no, see those two little men in the lower right corner? Those are the men lied about.

 

 

FB_IMG_1538763946122.jpg

Edited by LadySkinsFan
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, BenningRoadSkin said:

Why don't you read the article instead of looking for something minor to derail the conversation?

 

you think the survey they are talking about is minor?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, grego said:

 

you think the survey they are talking about is minor?

No, I think what you want to focus on is minor.

 

 

Let's talk about the mistreatment of indigenous women and how it was actually legal to commit crimes against indigenous by non-native people for so long. Let us focus on that and how this can be fixed and bring attention to it. Not your attempts to derail.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, BenningRoadSkin said:

Why don't you read the article instead of looking for something minor to derail the conversation?

In fairness, he said the link wasn't working for him.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Riggo-toni said:

In fairness, he said the link wasn't working for him.

 

He said the CDC link in the article isn't working, not that the article isn't. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

'shut up and don't ask questions' attitude aside, any number above '0' in terms of victims of sexual assault is too high. obvious point is obvious. however, 1 in 5 is national emergency, hide your kids, hide your wife bad. i'd like to know of that's where we are. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Murdered and missing Native American women challenge police and courts

 

Quote

MISSOULA, Mont. – Native American women across the country are being murdered and sexually assaulted on reservations and nearby towns at far higher rates than other American women. Their assailants are often white and other non-Native American men outside the jurisdiction of tribal law enforcement.

 

In some U.S. counties composed primarily of Native American lands, murder rates of Native American women are up to 10 times higher than the national average for all races, according to a study for the U.S. Department of Justice by sociologists at the University of Delaware and University of North Carolina, Wilmington.

 

Other possible victims have never been found. As of 2016, there were 5,712 cases of missing Native American women reported to the National Crime Information Center.

 

“The numbers are likely much higher because cases are often under-reported and data isn’t officially collected,” said the U.S. Sen. Heidi Heitkamp, a Democrat from North Dakota, who has introduced legislation to improve how law enforcement keeps track of missing and murdered indigenous women.

 

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, BenningRoadSkin said:

Hey @grego, I am going to put you on ignore. You are not going to derail  attempt to have a conversation with me about an article i posted on a public message board. .

 

sorry, what was i thinking. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, grego said:

'shut up and don't ask questions' attitude aside, any number above '0' in terms of victims of sexual assault is too high. obvious point is obvious. however, 1 in 5 is national emergency, hide your kids, hide your wife bad. i'd like to know of that's where we are. 

 

Relook at my graphic. Open your ears and eyes when women tell you their experiences, and realize that most assaults aren't reported. That may give you some insight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t think Gregos reaction is terribly unreasonable.  Whenever anyone cites a study I’m always interested in seeing the details involved, and that goes double when the people citing the study have an interest in it.  These things are often misrepresented in the press.  This isn’t to say their motivations or goals are bad, I think this group and this person is just looking to help.  I can appreciate that, but that 94% number is so high that I’m immediately curious as to how broad their definition for “coercion” is.  I’m guessing it’s not the standard definition of forcing someone to do someone via threats or violence.  

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, LadySkinsFan said:

 

Relook at my graphic. Open your ears and eyes when women tell you their experiences, and realize that most assaults aren't reported. That may give you some insight.

 

i don't disagree with a single word you are saying. but the cdc survey that appears to be the one in the article isn't without criticism. it's impossible to know the number when it comes to sexual assault, but i'd like to try to find out so something can be done about it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I found the UIHI report and the definition for coercion is as follows:

http://www.uihi.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/UIHI_sexual-violence_r601_pagesFINAL.pdf

Quote

Coercion is any completed sex after a perpetrator told lies, made false promises, threatened to end the relationship, wore the victim down through repeated requests, or exerted their influence or authority.

That definition is fairly broad and very much subject to individual interpretation, but it's also the standard definition apparently (source: https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/sv_surveillance_definitionsl-2009-a.pdf)  The choice to combine rape and coercion into one number however, doesn't seem standard.  Maybe its an intentional choice made hoping to raise some eyebrows?  It certainly had that effect on me, like I said before 94% is a big number.

 

It doesn't look like they've fabricated any numbers or made anything up.  How they chose to present the numbers is interesting but I've worked in the charity world and I know personally how it feels to know that people are in great need, and be surrounded by people just going through their daily lives.  It's reasonable to present things in a way that garners some attention.  I hope UIHI does get some additional support and that they can continue to make a positive impact on native women that need their help. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you're the one coerced, it still is a violation of one's body for the benefit of the one coercing. 

 

Think of someone putting undue pressure on you to do something you don't want to do, and further it includes the use of your body. Get it now?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've read and watched more of these stories than I ever thought I would.

The victims are mostly in places we don't travel to, unless you visit the upper territories of Canada or Alaska on a regular basis. 

I'd give up some Middle Eastern news to learn more about what happens on our own continent. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, LadySkinsFan said:

Yes, because women always lie about sexual assault.

 

But no, see those two little men in the lower right corner? Those are the men lied about.

OK, I don't want to start a hullabaloo, but that graphic has been passed around a lot recently (not just on this site). Can someone explain to me how that graphic's numbers are deemed accurate?  How do they determine n men are "rapists"? Should it be accused rapists? How do they determine x% went to trial? y% were convicted? And how is someone labeled a rapist "falsely accused?"

 

These things bother me. Last night during intermission of the Caps game I flipped over to Alaskan State Troopers on Discovery.  A trooper claimed that by the time a driver is arrested for DUI, they have driven drunk 80 times. Like, how do we know that? Is that a MADD stat?

 

Statistics, to be useful, need to come from a known criteria, and be defensible. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Popeman38 said:

OK, I don't want to start a hullabaloo, but that graphic has been passed around a lot recently (not just on this site). Can someone explain to me how that graphic's numbers are deemed accurate?  How do they determine n men are "rapists"? Should it be accused rapists? How do they determine x% went to trial? y% were convicted? And how is someone labeled a rapist "falsely accused?"

 

These things bother me. Last night during intermission of the Caps game I flipped over to Alaskan State Troopers on Discovery.  A trooper claimed that by the time a driver is arrested for DUI, they have driven drunk 80 times. Like, how do we know that? Is that a MADD stat?

 

Statistics, to be useful, need to come from a known criteria, and be defensible. 

Watch Farenheit 9/11. There are only 2 officers policing the interstate in the entire state of Oregon. 

Know ****. It will help you. 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, skinsmarydu said:

Watch Farenheit 9/11. There are only 2 officers policing the interstate in the entire state of Oregon. 

Know ****. It will help you. 

WTF does this even mean?

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.