Campus Sexual Assault/Rape: Epidemic or Hysteria?
[guest post by JVW]
Picture this scenario: You are a software salesperson for a medium-sized firm. You spend your day contacting potential customers, both via cold calls and for follow-ups to previous conversations. It’s hard work and your success rate is fairly low (the salesman’s lament is that you hear “no” ten, twenty, even thirty times for every “yes”), but you make enough sales to be considered a moderate success.
One day you are at work and you are asked into a closed meeting. There you are confronted by the VP of human resources, the associate director of manufacturing, one of the senior programmers, and a marketing assistant. They announce to you that they are the company’s disciplinary panel and that you are under investigation because a customer with whom you wrote a contract back in November 2012 now claims that you offered them a kickback and that you wrote the contract in a way that runs afoul of the law.
“Wait a minute,” you say to them, “if you are alleging that I broke laws then I want a lawyer present.”
“This is not a legal proceeding;” the VP for HR replies, “this is an informal hearing in which we are only establishing whether or not you are subject to internal sanctions.”
You are read the allegations against you as reported by the customer, but you are denied a copy of the written accusations and your accuser is allowed to – even encouraged to – leave the room during your “testimony.” You are required to address these allegations immediately on the spot without any time to prepare a defense. No one on the disciplinary panel has a legal background and no one has experience in software sales or writing contracts. There is no hard evidence of your alleged wrong doing in terms of saved email or phone messages. Still, based upon your demeanor and your testimony and the importance of the customer, the panel judges that you are very likely to have committed the acts of which you are accused, so your employment is summarily terminated and you are escorted out of the building.
——–
Does that sound far-fetched? This is apparently roughly analogous to the situation faced by an unnamed male Swarthmore College student who was subject to campus disciplinary proceedings based upon a rape that was alleged to have occurred 19 months earlier. This case has been covered by Powerline, with some original reporting coming from a conservative Swarthmore publication earlier in April with a follow-up a couple of months later. The ending is similar to the scenario I posited below: the student is never charged with a rape, yet Swarthmore deems that he is worthy of expulsion based upon what certainly appears to be a superficial investigation carried out by a panel with no particular expertise in this area.
This is the end result of a campaign waged by campus feminist activists. Unhappy that the vaunted sexual liberation of American youth oftentimes has deleterious consequences, they have determined that there exists today a “rape culture” on campus that is almost exclusively the fault of young male students and the overall patriarchal campus culture. They draw upon the figure from a study of two universities to conclude that one in five college women is subjected to unwanted sexual contact at some point during her undergraduate years. The study in this case defined “sexual contact” as “forced touching of a sexual nature (forced kissing, touching of private parts, grabbing, fondling, rubbing up against you in a sexual way, even if it is over your clothes).” Unsurprisingly, the most aggressive voices among highly politicized feminists have changed that statistic into one in five women being raped in college.
So it comes as no surprise that the Obama Administration — which depends heavily on young single women delivering votes for him, his agenda, and his preferred candidates — would make addressing campus sexual assaults a priority item. The Department of Education, invoking Title IX, is threatening federal intervention against any institution they judge to be unsuitably aggressive in investigating and punishing reported sexual assaults. More ominously, the administration is coercing universities into creating the same sort of kangaroo courts, devoid of due process and staffed by administrators with zero legal training, similar to the one that expelled the Swarthmore student.
Certainly there is no shortage of loutish college boys who seek to use alcohol and peer pressure to entice naive college girls into pushing past the boundaries of their modesty, just as there is no shortage of mindless floozies who believe that drunken sexual promiscuity is a sign of maturity and advances the cause of feminism. Contrary to the clichés that abound among college administrators, our colleges and universities are not populated solely with mature and sophisticated adults, but also with plenty of overgrown adolescents who are no more capable of handling adult freedoms at age 19 than they were at age 15. Any attempt to change a campus culture (and, let’s face it, a youth culture) which fosters regrettable and sometimes even criminal sexual hookups needs to focus on a variety of factors including the easy availability of alcohol and drugs, the loosening of sexual mores in our society, and the lack of rules and supervision prevalent in today’s college environment. Designating young women as perpetual victims always teetering on the verge of being force-fed liquor and raped by uncontrollable college brutes will only further polarize debate, sometimes along rather unpredictable lines. Since she is far more eloquent than I, let me allow Christina Hoff Sommers to have the final word on what she terms the “rape culture hysteria”:
Molestation and rape are horrific crimes that warrant serious attention and vigorous response. Panics breed chaos and mob justice. They claim innocent victims, undermine social trust, and teach us to doubt the evidence of our own experience.
E.M. Forster said it best in A Passage to India, referring to a panic among “good citizens” following a highly dubious accusation of rape: “Pity, wrath, and heroism filled them, but the power of putting two and two together was annihilated.”
– JVW
I wonder if I didn’t inadvertently bury the most interesting perspective in this entire debate. The next-to-last link in my post comes from a woman named Judith Grossman, who wrote an op-ed last spring in the Wall Street Journal. Here is how it begins:
Read the whole thing; like the Swarthmore case, it’s eye-opening.
JVW (feb406) — 5/21/2014 @ 11:34 amThere is no depth that modern liberalism cannot descend to.
askeptic (8ecc78) — 5/21/2014 @ 11:41 amFollowing up….Perhaps Pol Pot did have the correct perspective upon intellectuals, not that I agree with his method of correction.
askeptic (8ecc78) — 5/21/2014 @ 11:43 amNever, in my whole life, has a girl or woman charged me with rape, attempted rape, unwanted sexual advances, sexual harassment, or even a panty raid. I feel so … like … I just don’t make an impression on women.
Be a f***ing gentleman, watch your mouth and your hands around women, pick the ones you choose to “associate” with carefully, and you have very little to worry about, even from the nutcases. Mommy-and-daddy-spoiled, drunken fratboys and jocks can take a flying jump at their “due process”, for all I could care.
nk (dbc370) — 5/21/2014 @ 11:47 amBe a f***ing gentleman, watch your mouth and your hands around women, pick the ones you choose to “associate” with carefully, and you have very little to worry about, even from the nutcases. Mommy-and-daddy-spoiled, drunken fratboys and jocks can take a flying jump at their “due process”, for all I could care.
Don’t know that I would be so dismissive of due process, but I agree with you that college boys ought to be extra careful about their interactions with drunk girls, especially if the boys have been furnishing the alcohol. And if you are the type of college boy who gets extra horny when you get drunk, perhaps you ought to limit your activities in that respect to the world of Internet porn.
JVW (feb406) — 5/21/2014 @ 11:55 amThe Department of Education needs to be abolished cause it’s stupid and fascist. American kids are raped far more enthusiastically and far more brutally by these idiot whores we call public school teachers than they could ever be by hapless pot-smoking internet porn-addicted low testosterone american college boys.
happyfeet (8ce051) — 5/21/2014 @ 11:55 am“Handling adult freedoms at age 19”??
I was 21 when I graduated and adult was not an adjective easily applied to my cohorts & I. However, it was a near-Ivy in the Reagan years.
Captain Ned (401d83) — 5/21/2014 @ 12:04 pmCaptain Ned, I suppose these days even adults aren’t quite up to handling adult freedoms. It’s the Era of the Everlasting Adolescence.
JVW (feb406) — 5/21/2014 @ 12:11 pmHere’s an interesting article on the subject. 53 million unmarried voting age women is a big constituency. The social-con stuff probably isn’t priority numero uno for single women.
Also, the womyns outnumber the mens on campus, so the free market ought to work better than date rape, if the boys would just give it a chance.
carlitos (e7c734) — 5/21/2014 @ 12:20 pmDerp. Here’s the article.
carlitos (e7c734) — 5/21/2014 @ 12:20 pmAlso, the womyns outnumber the mens on campus, so the free market ought to work better than date rape, if the boys would just give it a chance.
Yeah, I think women are now 57% of enrolled undergraduates. You’re right that the law of averages should be in favor of the fellas, but I think that Johnny Fratboy has the expectation that he is going to score with entire sororities — he really isn’t looking for that special lady just yet.
JVW (feb406) — 5/21/2014 @ 12:27 pmI am curious how this type of thing would be handled on campus if it were a man saying he was unknowingly drugged and raped by another guy. Are the “disciplinary councils” equipped and planning to deal with all sorts and variations of alleged incidents–or just the ones involving loutish frat boys?
elissa (b8196a) — 5/21/2014 @ 12:36 pmT’would be interesting to see the case in which a male student, during a night of alcohol-intensified partying, goes home with a girl, who proceeds to give him an absolutely awesome blow job, and he then discovers that, beneath her panties is the same genitalia with which the Lord has blessed him.
Surely, surely! this would be rape or some form of sexual assault, because the male student would never have consented to sex with a transvestite, but since every form of sexual oddity is now a protected class, could the tranny ever be guilty of anything?
The Dana who isn't an attorney (3e4784) — 5/21/2014 @ 1:08 pmIt’s neither an epidemic or hysteria. It’s dementia.
Skeptical Voter (12e67d) — 5/21/2014 @ 1:08 pmOr, what if the male in question is
The speculative Dana (3e4784) — 5/21/2014 @ 1:09 pmblacka person of color, from a disadvantage background, whilst the young lady is a pretty and privileged white girl? Which party has the superior rights in this case?Surely, surely! this would be rape or some form of sexual assault, because the male student would never have consented to sex with a transvestite, but since every form of sexual oddity is now a protected class, could the tranny ever be guilty of anything?
Stop it, Dana. You’re making college administrators break out in a cold sweat just contemplating this!
JVW (feb406) — 5/21/2014 @ 1:18 pmI have been on committees where this is discussed. It starts with the given that a “culture of rape” exists on campus. I have even been present when the committees are concerned that there haven’t been “enough” reports of sexual violence on campus. Like “microaggressions” and “triggers,” this is a new thing on the quad.
So about a year ago, I was on a committee where one member started in on the “culture of rape” business. For once in my academic life, I stood up.
I told them that two friends of mine had been raped in college. I saw what it did to them. And that the police must—must—be called each and every time that word is used. To do otherwise is to cheapen the word, and is an inexcusable insult to the victims of that violent act.
There was a long pause, as if I had broken wind at a dinner party.
At last, a Women’s Studies professor on the committee said that such an attitude would cause “underreporting” of “assaults” on campus.
I politely wouldn’t let it go. “As opposed to ‘rape’?” I asked.
A sour look crossed her face. “You don’t get it,” she replied.
“I think I do,” I said to my colleague. “In the names of my friends from college, I think I do. Call it ‘assault’ if you wish.”
Strangely, I received letters of private support from other faculty. And I’m lucky: I have tenure now, and my statement will probably keep me off these kinds of committees in the future. Win-win, I guess.
Personally, I think that this assault problem could be minimized by preventing the students from getting wasted at parties, but this is never, ever going to happen on a campus. And it’s surprising, since the PC Police really like to tell other people what to do and think.
It’s going to be a long, tough battle for the soul of this nation. And it’s going to take far, far braver people than me. But we all need to do our part.
At least on that day, I did.
Simon Jester (2a4d8d) — 5/21/2014 @ 1:19 pmSimon, great comment — thanks. I really appreciate your perspective from the trenches.
There were so many different directions I could have explored in this post, but in the interest of keeping it from being ridiculously long I provided mostly an overview. The whole conflating of “sexual assault” with “rape” is very troubling, especially since the over-broad definition used in “sexual assault” might include a guy inadvertently rubbing up against a woman on the dance floor. Left-wing women’s advocates when challenged on the 1 in 5 statistic usually claim that most of them involve penetration and only a smaller fraction fall into the lesser category of unwanted fondling, but there is solid evidence that they use rigged surveys and selective data-slicing to obtain their desired result.
JVW (feb406) — 5/21/2014 @ 1:52 pmIt’s not hysteria because so many of those participating do not have lady parts.
It’s pure mob justice.
htom (412a17) — 5/21/2014 @ 1:55 pmComment by JVW (feb406) — 5/21/2014 @ 12:11 pm
Enough about The President.
askeptic (8ecc78) — 5/21/2014 @ 1:56 pmSimon — well done. Sadly, it will be a “lose” for those hoisted by The Committee, and there is nothing more you could do for them. Once you’d spoken up, you have to be muted, at least.
htom (412a17) — 5/21/2014 @ 1:58 pmInterestingly, there have been a very few reports where I work of male-male sexual assault, as well as female-female. All of the cases I know of were fueled by alcohol and drugs and improper signals and misinterpretations.
You should see the limbo about the definition of “sexual” in “sexual assault.”
What did disturb me were several cases of possible Rohypnol dosing. That gets me angry. I worked very hard with Dean of Students to get chemical confirmation and criminal charges. I couldn’t get the students to give blood samples. So we backed off. If the folks really did dose people, they need some time in the Crossbar Motel, where they will learn a less academic meaning of sexual assault. As it stands, I could not tell.
Which brings it back to having the police involved in this kind of thing.
I take genuine assault cases extremely seriously; even though the students aren’t children, we have a parental pseudo-role, and students need to be safe…while also finding their freedoms.
I think that nk had it best. Don’t get messed up at parties. Choose your friends and lovers carefully. Keep an eye on your friends. And don’t get messed up at parties.
Yes, I said that twice.
Simon Jester (2a4d8d) — 5/21/2014 @ 2:04 pmOh, where I am teaching, I only know of two people tossed out for this kind of thing, and both of them went through a police investigation.
But you are very correct: the PC Police really do want a standard where one person’s word is absolute evidence.
Because no one would lie about that kind of thing.
Oh, please. But I can’t quite say that. Or I really would be a pariah.
Simon Jester (2a4d8d) — 5/21/2014 @ 2:06 pmAnyone asserting that this is acceptable behavior should probably talk to a provider.
Snip (031824) — 5/21/2014 @ 2:06 pmthere is no shortage of mindless floozies who believe that drunken sexual promiscuity is a sign of maturity and advances the cause of feminism.
Sez you. There’s nowhere near enough to go around.
Rich Rostrom (c01875) — 5/21/2014 @ 2:08 pmAnyone asserting that this is acceptable behavior should probably talk to a provider.
Uh-huh. And anyone who conflates this with “rape” completely lacks perspective and does not deserve to have their opinions considered in rational society.
JVW (feb406) — 5/21/2014 @ 2:14 pmIt seems to me that many more responsible women totally outside the academic feminist drone circle of influence , women such as that mother Judith Grossman who’s now had first hand experience with Kafka and campus Kangaroo Courts , are going to have to take the lead role in outing and combating this. It’d be nice if there were still some sane women professors who actually like men on campus–and there probably are–but as Simon suggested they are too afraid for their careers to say much until they get home.
elissa (b8196a) — 5/21/2014 @ 2:16 pmWish I could talk to you about this IRL, elissa. There is reason to hope. Digits interposed.
Simon Jester (2a4d8d) — 5/21/2014 @ 2:18 pmnk @4, you are just flat wrong. Being a gentleman will not protect you from false allegations. I will get to my tale of woe in a minute, which didn’t happen on a college campus but in the Navy.
The concept of “rape culture” has been building for years. Again this stems from the cultural Marxism I’ve been going on about for quite some time. What matters are the outcomes of these Stalinist show trials. Not the truth. In fact, if you’ve read any of my comments, or read or watched anything I’ve linked to, then you know that even believing in something like objective truth makes you an enemy of “social justice,” “redistributive justice,” “economic justice,” “academic justice,” “environmental justice,” or any other of the various forms of injustice that the left has rebranded and attempts to impose instead of justice.
One thing you must understand is that the left proudly lies to achieve its ends. Kevin Williamson at NRO has written eloquently about this on a variety of subjects including gay marriage. The only way the left to get gay marriage was to accuse anybody who pointed that out of being a loon, a wing nut. The ink was barely dry on the Lawrence decision and people were pushing for gay civil unions. And attacking people who opposed them because they were just a step on the road to gay marriage viciously.
Yet here we are. As Scalia predicted in his brilliant dissent from the Lawrence decision. But then, who couldn’t? I think it’s safe to say that when the left says they just want the Sudentenland, they want Europe. Or as Bill Whittle has pointed out, it’s like asking a coke addict how much coke they want. Really, they want all of it.
I remember when I was in college I got an “anonymous” survey from the Wymyn’s Studies Dept. asking me about my rape habits.
No, seriously.
It assumed I was a rapist and asked me such questions as how many women I had raped, whether I used drugs or violence, etc. It was exactly the sort of thing you’d expect from a summer intern from MSNBC. I threw it in the trash.
Two weeks later I received a letter from the Wymyn’s Studies Dept., addressed to me by name, complaining that they hadn’t received my “anonymous” survey. So they had lied to me about that, which I already knew anyway, and that was one of the reasons I would have never sent in the confession in the first place. Other than the obvious reason is that the “are you still beating your wife” style of questions didn’t leave open the option of not being a rapist.
All men are rapists, nk. None are gentlemen per the Wymyn’s Studies Dept. So that won’t protect you on a modern American college campust. In fact, since all men are rapists, rapists don’t deserve due process. Rapists don’t have rights. To suggest that the accused should be considered innocent until proven guilty is to promote rape culture. Only a rapist would suggest that.
Here’s a story from Al Jazeera America (?!?!) about a student at the University of North Dakota and his Stalinist campus show trial.
I’ll just quote the best part.
Got that? The police discovered the woman had perjured herself when accusing the guy of rape, was charged, then became a fugitive from justice.
And the University still wouldn’t lift the ban against the guy. Not until his mom organized a campaign that put such tremendous pressure on the administration that the craven administrators were willing to resist the Wymyn’s Studies Dept., which insists that women never lie about rape, and admit, yeah, the woman lied about the rape and the guy was innocent. But by then the guy refused to go back.
I can’t blame him, although I don’t really have a high opinion of him. Not just for the casual sex, although that adds to my impression of his weakness of character (breaking down crying at the hearing, falling to his knees?). And he seems to be something of a momma’s boy.
I got caught up in the witch hunt atmosphere following Tailhook. When the Navy put the Wymyn’s Studies Dept. in charge doling out retribution to all the rapists. In other words, all the men. I recall getting training materials (which I now wish I kept, but at the time threw away in disgust like the “anonymous” rape survey) which told us to document all unproven allegations against the sailors we were in charge of. Because apparently with enough unproven allegations all bundled together that would constitute a valid case.
Six year old school girls have figured out that lying about a sex crime can rid them of a teacher they don’t like. Naturally a flood of allegations flowed in from female sailors against male supervisors, or any guy they had a grudge against. I actually had women tell me they intended to file a false charge, just to get back at someone or because they didn’t think the command had treated them fairly. Such as one LT who said she was going to “throw a grenade back through the door on her way out” because she didn’t get an end-of-tour award. She left, then came the accusations. Or another Petty Officer I overheard joking with her friends about getting somebody. Then saying “watch this” as she stalks off to take offense at something so she can file the complaint. In every case I knew of I told the command the accusation was BS, but I have never seen a command dismiss one of these charges let alone charge the accuser with filing a false charge. Because the people what were in charge didn’t get promoted for charging false accusers. They got promoted for the number of sexual harassment scalps they collected. And if they weren’t actually malicious then they were hiding in the corner like a scared rabbit.
Well, I did see one charge get dismissed. Mine. And those of few friends of mine. In our case we weren’t accused by the woman. We were accused by two department heads who badly wanted a few scalps of their own. And a scumbag from a different command who was trying to deflect attention away from his own douchebaggery.
A woman who was a friend of ours had gotten promoted, and in fine Navy tradition one Friday night she threw a “wetting down” for her new LT bars at one of the party rooms at the base all-hands club. She had too much to drink, and at some point wandered away from the party. We split up to look for her. Couldn’t find her. Finally some of us regrouped and decided to go back to her room at the Batchelor Officer’s Quarters and see if somebody had found her. Sure enough, one of the guys had found her and was trying to get her to drink a glass of water and take some aspirin. When she saw the rest of us she thought the party was back on and wanted to go out to a bar with us. We told her that was a bad idea. By a few seconds I was the last guy out the door. I told her, “look, your water and aspirin are on the counter.” And as I was leaving she asked me, “Steve, did I embarrass myself?” I told her not to worry about, just go to sleep.
It turned out that an @$$maggot from another command who also lived in BOQ had witnessed the scene and figured it was his chance to get some. So either she didn’t lock the door or she opened it when he knocked. Because when one of the aforementioned department heads also came by to check on her, he found the two of them alone together. When he demanded to know what was going on, $***bird says he was being a hero and had just broken up what was going to be a drunken orgy. And started rattling all the names of the guys he saw leaving her room.
The following Monday all hell broke loose. All the department heads who wanted their scalps separated us and began interrogating us. It didn’t matter that the woman wouldn’t accuse us of anything; they were threatening to charge her with conduct unbecoming for getting drunk unless she rolled on us (I really regretted telling her not to worry about it, because I knew certain @$$holes who could do something like that had at least stopped by her wetting down). It didn’t matter that none of us admitted to anything. It didn’t matter that the only guy who had accused us had himself been caught in a comprising position. The chance was just too good for them to show they were totally onboard with the Navy’s newfound passion for combatting sexual harassment and assault. Whether it happened or not.
When none of us refused to budge, finally the XO put a stop to it. She (that’s an important detail) told the department heads they had nothing and to drop it. The witch hunt against us. The potential conduct unbecoming charge against her. Everything.
I seriously doubt I would have survived if this happened on a college campus. Or for that matter in today’s Navy.
Steve57 (c8cb20) — 5/21/2014 @ 2:21 pmLOL, snip. A guy copping a feel as he reaches over to help a girl with her seatbelt, or passing by just a little bit too close in the library stacks are “moves” as old as the hills. Girls old enough and smart enough to get into college are also smart enough to know how to deal with this stuff and discourage it of it’s unwanted. And that’s not rape or assault.
Forcible assault and rape are serious crimes and need to be handled by law enforcement–not a committee of students and faculty. Let’s not confuse the issue here. K?
elissa (b8196a) — 5/21/2014 @ 2:31 pmSimon–I’m still screwing around with the computer system and my email addys. I am slow, but have not forgotten, and I am not ignoring you or avoiding you! 🙂
Also, I’ve been very very busy of late cleaning goose poop off the driveway.
elissa (b8196a) — 5/21/2014 @ 2:41 pmA guy copping a feel as he reaches over to help a girl with her seatbelt, or passing by just a little bit too close in the library stacks are “moves” as old as the hills.
Not only that, but when I was growing up there were actually rules about this. It was understood that when you were making out with a girl and went for second base, if she told you no and moved away your hand you had to wait at least five minutes before trying again. Some girls would then end the makeout session before you had your second chance. Others would let it continue, and if you tried the second time and were denied you were honor-bound not to try again. That was a rule that you just didn’t break. I think in our era of greater sexual “sophistication” we have unfortunately lost those rules and become more crude as a result.
JVW (feb406) — 5/21/2014 @ 2:54 pm“snip” had to be intentionally obtuse to take that position.
JD (675235) — 5/21/2014 @ 2:55 pmNo worries, elissa. I don’t mind the hierarchy you describe at all, especially after reading student evaluations this term.
I am particularly happy at the way you describe women in your post, having power and responsibility both. Not as passive victims or delicate flowers. There is something that is both entitled and passive in many students today; ownership is more fundamental and will take them farther.
So far as women keeping men at bay politely, I sure learned about that in college effectively. But I was fortunate to have the acquaintance of strong and confident women, who very kindly put me in my place and taught me to be courteous and thoughtful.
Maybe this will make you laugh. Most women know about the “force field,” but most men can’t perceive it. You know, in high school, your date is driving you home and you do NOT want him to touch you at the end of the date…i.e., the force field.
Most guys don’t perceive it. That is why women need to be direct and polite…especially to gentlemen still dieseling on testosterone fumes (and as the parent of a teenager, boy howdy do I know about that!).
Assault is different. Rape is different. Both to the Nth degree. This is why I want the police brought in, each and every time those words are used. And I continue to insist that the “culture of rape” meme damages the cause of women, and keeping them safe and equal. It presupposes them as victims, and actually inferior to males.
Which is just what government wants. I would rather see a whole bunch of stylish tasers, personally.
Steve57, I am sorry for the horror story you experienced. Awful. But notice it was as much about bureaucrats counting coup as anything else. Sad.
Simon Jester (2a4d8d) — 5/21/2014 @ 3:03 pmJD, wasn’t there a troll named “parsnips” a while back? Just sayin’.
Simon Jester (2a4d8d) — 5/21/2014 @ 3:04 pmIt is likely FooBar
JD (675235) — 5/21/2014 @ 3:05 pmI went to school in New Orleans. It was quite the orgy. Fortunately, I had a girlfriend, so my drunken exploits were welcomed by one, and only one, young woman.
Hadoop (f7d5ba) — 5/21/2014 @ 3:08 pmInstapundit recently shared a press release about a man who had been allowed to file suit against the college that had subjected him to the sort of proceeding described in the post. I look forward to hearing of its success.
Right now, college administrators weighing the moral calculus of the situation see no downside to acceding to the feminist movement, and only downsides to any attempt to rein them in. If they realize they can be sued, perhaps held personally liable, along with everyone participating in the proceeding, and the purported victim can be sued for defamation, this might drive home the notion that there are costs to denying males their rights.
Karl Lembke (e37f42) — 5/21/2014 @ 3:32 pmThe left wingers continue to screw our country. Even though I stood up and exclaimed, “NO, STOP THAT !” each time they turned out the lights and placed their hand on my inner thigh.
Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 5/21/2014 @ 3:45 pmPIVism is another national disgrace.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 5/21/2014 @ 4:07 pmSister in law used to be in the internal investigation dept (or whatever it is called)in the USAF and told me that the vast majority of rapes reported were fabrications. Upon investigation they were often found to be cheating spouses having regrets and needing to convince their bitter halves that they weren’t to blame. And yes, alcohol and drugs were often involved leading to a loss of good judgement.
Gazzer (554004) — 5/21/2014 @ 4:19 pmI wish I had seen Simon Jester’s comment @17, and JVW’s comment @18, before writing my naval epic.
But, oh boy, am I familiar with standard of justice the “rape culture” proponents want. None at all.
As well as the skewed surveys and frankly not selective use of data but invented data they use to support their foregone conclusions.
I disagree that it’s a new thing. After all, cultural Marxism, the evil that has spawned the concept of “rape culture” to denigrate the US, has existed in the US since the 1930s. And when I got my “anonymous” rape survey it was in the mid-80s. I don’t recall the term of “rape culture” being used, but it was taken as given that rape was epidemic. And Wymyn’s Studies professors were already defining rape to include “unwanted sex.” And they defined “unwanted sex” to include any sexual encounter a female student later regretted having.
If we define “rape” to include “regrettable sex” then by that definition men are “raped” nearly as often as women. But men don’t get the same survey’s the Wymyn’s Studies Dept. send the women. I do recall a figure being bandied about back then; that one in four women are raped in their lives. But that’s according to the biases of the denizens of the Wymyn’s Studies Dept. It isn’t that one in four women reported being raped. Women on campus (and presumably in wider society as well) were surveyed about their sexual experiences, and how they felt about them. Then the Wymyn’s Studies raters would decide how many women they surveyed had been raped. Naturally, it was lots. Naturally, it was lots more rape victims then ever went to the police, since most of the rape victims didn’t even know they had been raped believing they had a consensual encounter that they later wished the hadn’t. But the Wymyn’s Studies Dept.s had what they advanced as the evidence that there was a crisis of under-reporting “rape” and “sexual assault.”
And dammit, we needed to do something about it. Such as encourage false accusations, and never punish women who falsely accuse men of rape. Or, at least not harshly. With only a slap on the wrist lest we “send the wrong message to rape victims.” See, even false accusers are still somehow victims.
Virginia Woman Falsely Accuses Man Of Rape And Sends Him Away For Four Years Before Recanting . . . Given Just 60 Days In Jail To Be Served On Weekends
Of course, maybe this wasn’t going on across the nation at the time, so perhaps it took some time for the contagion to spread from my and similarly inclined campuses across the nation. Certainly by 2006 it was nationwide, as Prof. Turley helpfully reminds us by mentioning the Duke Lacrosse case. Unmentioned in Turley’s blog post (above) is the fact that 88 Duke professors signed a petition condemning the presumed rapists. Naturally the usual suspects were involved; the gender and ethnic grievance departments were the driving force. Particularly female african studies professors. Two were the driving force. What’s interesting is what they and other professors had to say about both the Duke Lacrosse players and their petition.
The above is a perfect encapsulation of the “critical theories” developed by the cultural Marxists of the Frankfurt School some 80 plus years ago.
And 87 professors later tried to weasel out of responsibility by writing a “clarifying letter” claiming they hadn’t done what they had done. They claimed their obvious prejudgement of the case was not in fact prejudgement of the case, refused to take any responsibility for their actions let alone make an apology or a retraction, instead blamed bloggers and reporters for things that were entirely the fault of the professors, and said that they would continue to fight to change the culture at Duke that produces the “atmosphere that allows sexism, racism, and sexual violence to be so prevalent on campus.”
In other words, the same old left wingers I remember from the ’80s. And I’ve noticed a standard tactic. Since they don’t care about the facts of any individual case, whenever there is a high profile case they immediately attack while the administration they’re attacking is still in a state of shock. They get their cultural transformation demands met before the truth is worked out. And so what if the Duke Lacrosse players were declared entirely innocent? That just proves “white privilege.” Of course a black girl couldn’t expect justice when the culture is rigged to promote “white privilege.” And of course as a black girl couldn’t get justice from the evil patriarchy. And of course a poor girl couldn’t expect the rich to face punishment from a system where the rich can buy their way out, etc.
These professors and others are still sticking to their lies. And why wouldn’t they? Their lies are the narrative. And as good cultural Marxists and critical theorists they can never abandon the narrative. The culture must be transformed regardless of the truth, as even they admitted. In fact, they don’t believe in the truth. But if the rest of us dolts require “facts” they’ll be happy to invent them. Such as sham convictions at their Stalinist show trials. And let’s face it; as the topic of this post confirms, why would they abandon their narrative when they appear to be winning?
The problem I had was that the military is just as rife with this malignancy as academia. As I learned post-Tailhook, give the inside-the-beltway brass a hard shove and threaten their four star retirements and they’ll turn into dancing bears. Whatever you want, they’ll do, as long as you’re Congress. And Congress wanted to change the “hyper-masculine” culture of the military regardless of the facts (indeed before the facts could be gathered in case there were none, just like 15 years later at Duke). The fact that nobody who demanded a court martial was convicted of anything related to tailhook, and the fact that the original NIS (now NCIS) report didn’t really find much wrongdoing just proved to the feminists that the military is supremely sexist. And currently the fact that the military isn’t getting enough “sexual assault” complaints nor is it convicting suspects who are accused just proves the military is still to “hyper masculine” and sexist to take sexual assault seriously. And of course the patriarchal, oppressive military is a hostile environment for women in general, so naturally women are afraid to report “sexual assault.”
So now according to the Wymyn’s studies dept. and their auxiliaries in Congress the military can’t be trusted to handle sexual assault cases. They’re demanding outside Stalinist show trials like they’ve achieved throughout academia.
Democrats Divided On Whether To Remove Military Sexual Assault Cases From Chain Of Command
They haven’t gotten them yet. But they will. The Democrats and their pet Republicans have already planted the seeds.
Yes, they know the results you want, Senators. Of course, providing those results used to be called “unlawful command influence.” But who cares about that anymore, either, when it’s the results that count.
Steve57 (c8cb20) — 5/21/2014 @ 4:28 pmSimon Jester @34, I agree that the “rape culture” mindset harms the cause of women. Even some feminists have observed this. For instance the “regrettable sex is rape” standard implies that women never become adults, but are instead children who can’t be held accountable for their own actions.
Or that “drunk consent is not consent” standard. A woman has an alcoholic drink and, again, becomes a child no longer responsible for her own actions. But the man could have had just as much to drink, and he remains an adult responsible for his actions.
I know some police detectives socially and via my time in the reserves. I haven’t met one that would charge a guy with rape under either of the above circumstances. As far as they’re concerned if they’re both adults, they’re both equally responsible. Which is why, in the article I linked to earlier from Al Jazeera, they charged the woman who cried rape with perjury. Her attempt to charge her boyfriend with rape when they just had what she later decided was “regrettable sex” (possibly with “drunken consent” thrown in) just wasn’t anything the cops were interested in so she had to plus-up her story a bit. I’m sure she didn’t even realize what she was doing was a crime, because it wouldn’t have been on campus. In fact, I’m aware of instances where women who had “regrettable sex” but initially decided it was just as much their fault as anybody’s have been convinced by the Wymyn’s studies types that it wasn’t her fault but was in fact rape. And to bring charges.
Apparently that’s a great way for women to boost their self-esteem if they sleep with a guy who never calls back. Become a victim, and you’re a campus celebrity.
My horror story wasn’t that bad compared to others. And you’re right, it was just as much about the bureaucracy counting coup as anything else. But it isn’t as if the women weren’t aware of this. And it isn’t as if some wouldn’t take advantage of the situation. It’s why, as I mentioned earlier, I actually heard women brag that they were going to make false accusations, secure in the knowledge that no one would ever take action against them. Nor would it have been easy, since the bar was set so high it was practically impossible even if you could prove the accuser knowably made a false charge. Because there were still other factors such as they maliciously made a false charge. As I said, if I knew an accusation was false I’d report the information. But the accusers were right; nobody ever lifted a finger. The bureaucracy wanted those scalps.
In fact, recall that I was instructed I had to document those false accusations. Because apparently enough unproven allegations were supposed to constitute a case.
As I said my situation wasn’t that bad. I just moved off base and got my own apartment as quick as I could to escape those malicious, prying eyes and I never, ever dated a woman in the Navy (we had a saying back then, across all the services: “any man stupid enough to date a fellow officer deserves what he’s going to get”).
Worse were the cases we were told of in our mandatory annual sexual harassment
propagandizingtraining. One that stands out was during a training session given by a JAG officer and some old crone from the Naval Supply Center San Diego. These ladies wanted to let us know that the Navy took sexual harassment very, very seriously.So they told us about one of their former employees. He was a supervisor, and some of his workers complained about how a particular lady was dressing. Too provocatively. So one day he stops by her desk, and very quietly suggested that she should start dressing more professionally. She immediately and loudly accused him of sexual harassment for making a crude remark and touching her inappropriately.
The ladies from the NSC wanted to emphasize that they had absolutely no evidence that what the above woman said was true. He insisted that he merely asked her to dress more professionally, and her account wildly differed. No one saw the guy touch her, even though there were others in the office.
But in the name of taking sexual harassment very, very seriously, they removed him as her supervisor, gave him a reprimand, and warned him to never be alone with that woman again.
One day this guy volunteers to man the customer service counter so one of his coworkers could go to lunch. A Sailor comes in with an order for supplies, and this guy is a bit unfamiliar with some of the items so he tells the Sailor he needs to go find some help. Most of the offices are empty, so he keeps looking until, you guessed it, he walks into an office where that woman is. They are alone. Her back is to him, so he immediately leaves and eventually finds some help. But somehow the lady finds out that this guy had walked into her office and files a grievance.
The command investigates. The guy walked into that office on official business. The guy didn’t know she was in that particular office. In fact, because of the configuration of the desks and partitions, there was no way he could have known she was in that office until he walked a little way into it. And he immediately left. But for a few brief seconds they had been alone in the same office. So in the name of taking sexual harassment very, very seriously, they fired him.
These two were proud of this story. The entire command is sitting there in stunned silence. A female petty officer sitting behind me finally whispers to herself, “that poor guy.” So I raise my hand and start asking the JAG. A few questions. It finally dawns on her that the thing I take very, very seriously about that story was the complete lack of due process they afforded this guy. The JAG is shocked and her jaw drops. Then she demands to know, “Don’t you think sexual harassment is a danger you need to protect your sailors from?”
I said, “LT, you’re a danger I need to protect my sailors from.” The skipper was not happy with me, but he stopped the training at that point since I was getting applause.
It’s not that I don’t believe sexual harassment exists. It’s just that of the accusations I’ve seen (including those I’ve already mentioned) I’ve had reasons to doubt them. Especially my own case. That left a lasting impression. It also doesn’t increase my ability to believe these accusations when the Navy is bragging about how they don’t need evidence to convict the accused of sexual harassment during official training.
For instance, when a couple of junior enlisted women bring sexual harassment charges against their chief in revenge for enforcing uniform regulations about their hair and nails. That guy got raked over the coals for months in sort of a kafkaesque nightmare before his command let him off with a non-permanent letter of reprimand in his file. (I only got the third degree for a single day.) Or when a notorious malingerer (after a night of partying she always made sure to carefully put down her jelly doughnut before dramatically pretending to faint so she could go to sickbay) finally wore out medical’s patience since there was nothing physically wrong with her, and she finally faced the administrative separation we had longed for. Then she decided to file a sexual harassment complaint so it would look like the chain of command was taking retribution against her.
I recall that we couldn’t separate her while that was being worked out. I transferred before anybody made any final decisions about her. Who knows, her maneuver may have worked.
Steve57 (c8cb20) — 5/21/2014 @ 5:55 pmOh dear… Sammy has subsumed Steve 57
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 5/21/2014 @ 6:03 pmI thought Steve57 had very valuable things to contribute, and do not begrudge his use of space. I bet the electrons involved were happy to be of service, as opposed to who knows what internet alternatives.
In some ways it is simply a version of wanting the freedom to do whatever one wants and deny any responsibility. The culture is overly sexualized starting at pre-pre-pubescence, no such thing as segregated dorms on campus in many (most?) places anymore, and yet somehow “they” expect people to behave responsibly.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 5/21/2014 @ 6:18 pmNot only that, but “they” say that youths will have sex anyway, so give out condoms rather than a little more challenging version of self-control.
And then “they” are surprised when the youth aren’t so self-controlled after all, including young women and their “regrettable sex”.
Yes, people are to be held accountable for their actions, but that doesn’t mean others get to make it as challenging as possible. If you had a roommate who was a recovering alcoholic, it would be cruel and unwise to demand to have cold beer in the fridge and bottles of wine and liquor in the cabinet.
Thanks for the kind words, doc. I suppose my comments were too long. It’s just that I’ve been dealing with policies such as those being imposed on these colleges for decades. First in college myself. Then in the Navy. So naturally I’ve had plenty of time to think about the subject, and apparently much to say.
Initially the Navy wasn’t that bad. But then of course Tailhook happened. Naturally the feminists took advantage of that, and Bill Clinton was happy to help. As we saw, the feminists were completely happy with that lecher getting away with just about any sexual debauchery. Including at least one credible charge of rape. And they were happy to do so because he delivered the goods.
So after Tailhook they demanded that Clinton change the military according to their favored policies. Unlike the case with universities Clinton didn’t need to look for laws like Title IX for leverage. He didn’t need leverage; as Commander in Chief he had complete authority to do what he wanted. Which is why the left loves to use the military as its social petri dish. And they can claim success because the brass will implement those policies in the most draconian fashion they can. Because they don’t want to hear any criticism (and why, like the VA, you can’t believe any data from DoD especially command climate opinion surveys since people already know that anyone pointing out the emperor has no clothes will be crushed). Recall how the Army managed to produce a report on the Fort Hood shooting and not mention Major Hasan or Islam even once? That’s what I’m talking about. They will let their soldiers get killed before they will sacrifice the diversity programs their political masters demand; diversity was Army COS Casey’s primary concern when he learned of the massacre of his soldiers. And last but not least the Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute can produce training just as awful as any university gender/racial grievance studies department. Recall how a few years back we learned the DoD was blaming Soldiers and Marines for their own deaths, due to their “cultural insensitivity,” when their Afghan partners decided to murder them. Where do you think that came from?
Not to go off on too much of a tangent, but things have gotten so bad with the diversity training in general that the troops are actually getting out because of it. They can’t stand the constant harangue. And what is called training really more resembles maoist struggle sessions.
I pity them. Things are already much worse then when I was in, and they’re about to get even worse with this feminist/leftist jihad against a non-existent “epidemic” of rape/sexual assault/sexual harassment. As at Duke, the truth doesn’t matter. Never letting a crisis go to waste, even if they have to invent the crisis, so that they can transform the culture is the only thing that matters. The thing is, unlike on college campuses not all the political lynchings will be administrative procedures. Based upon my experience I have no doubt that if they apply enough pressure, and commanders exercise the unlawful command influence they’re being told in no uncertain terms to bring to bear, they will be able to conduct political lynchings in actual courts.
Steve57 (c8cb20) — 5/21/2014 @ 7:56 pmThe question that needs to be asked is:
askeptic (8ecc78) — 5/21/2014 @ 10:24 pmUnder current social constraints, can we win an existential conflict?
The short answer, askeptic, is no. A longer answer contained in this article.
An Officer Corps That Can’t Score
How military careerism breeds habits of defeat
It is longer, but not complete. Because never does the author mention to what officers have become @$$-kissing conformists. A PC culture that has nothing to do with winning wars.
Steve57 (c8cb20) — 5/22/2014 @ 2:26 am#15
Dana.
It’s all about the narratives. See
http://dukefactchecker.blogspot.com/2011/08/sheppard-what-happened-fc-probes-sudden.html
Worse is the Frank Lombard case, also at Duke, whose narratives are so confusing nobody talks about the horror.
Richard Aubrey (0605ef) — 5/22/2014 @ 5:52 amThe punishment for perjury set forth in the Pentateuch was “as he thought to do to his neighbor.”
Ibidem (c5f1de) — 5/22/2014 @ 8:57 amI’d say that seems like a fairly good reference point, with some sort of adjustment for damage to reputation and work, plus a caveat so that someone who confesses on their own to perjury before a falsely convicted person has served their full sentence will get a shorter sentence than someone who did not confess (cut off at time actually served?)
Greetings:
For more than a while now, I have believed that today’s liberal and/or progressive mentality is the result of parenting failures. Specifically, those so afflicted were unable to inculcate the lessons of “Chicken Little” or “The Princess and the Pea”.
The former would have enlightened them that things that have a negative impact on them do not mean that the world is on the brink, or even the eve, of destruction. The latter would have taught that psychological fixation on a problem pretty much precludes its healthy resolution.
And so, here we are.
11B40 (6abb5c) — 5/22/2014 @ 9:43 amI represent students charged and brought before these kinds of committees. Without discussing specifics, I can tell you that although the schools believe they are providing due process, if it is due process, it is the barest minimum.
One of the committees I went before was chaired by a professor of women’s studies. You can imagine how that went.
Students can review their files, but are not allowed to make copies of anything in them on the grounds that it is a violation of the federal statutes on student privacy.
I have had some cases where the complainant does not appear at all, or if she does, testifies from another room or by phone.
There is no doubt that crime occurs on campuses, but serious crimes should be referred to the appropriate authorities.
rochf (f3fbb0) — 5/22/2014 @ 10:05 amComment by Steve57 (c8cb20) — 5/21/2014 @ 7:56 pm
Recall how a few years back we learned the DoD was blaming Soldiers and Marines for their own deaths, due to their “cultural insensitivity,” when their Afghan partners decided to murder them.
How come they were more culturally insensitive” than in Kuait, or in Bosnia, or for that matter, in Iraq?
The enemy was infiltrating the “friendly” forces!
Sammy Finkelman (42d229) — 5/22/2014 @ 10:16 am44. Steve57 doesn’t make typos. And not much of that is quotes.
Sammy Finkelman (42d229) — 5/22/2014 @ 10:18 am53. The truth would indicate a terrible intelligence (and command) failure, some of it on the civilian level.
Sammy Finkelman (42d229) — 5/22/2014 @ 10:20 amComment by rochf (f3fbb0) — 5/22/2014 @ 10:05 am
The most serious crimes occurring on campus occur within the offices of the administration. They are basic violations of Civil-Rights protected by the Bill of Rights, and should be prosecuted under the full weight of established Civil-Rights law, with personal liability by violators.
askeptic (8ecc78) — 5/22/2014 @ 10:45 am“When none of us refused to budge, finally the XO put a stop to it. She (that’s an important detail) told the department heads they had nothing and to drop it. The witch hunt against us. The potential conduct unbecoming charge against her. Everything.”
The presence of a female officer is not enough. The case of a female general overturning a jury verdict that she believed was in error has caused her career to be ended.
“Lt. Gen. Helms has a record of more than thirty years of distinguished military service, in which she became the first American military woman in space, among other significant achievements. Her career is to be celebrated,” McCaskill said. “However, I continue to have deep concerns with Lt. Gen. Helms’ decision, while a commander and courts-martial convening authority, to overturn the jury verdict of a military court martial in which the jury found an Air Force officer guilty of sexual assault. She made this decision against the advice of her staff judge advocate.”
The case was clearly a miscarriage of justice. No matter. A scalp must be provided, even the general’s scalp.
Well, we don’t need her anyway . After all NASA’s mission is out reach to Muslims.
Helms has applied for retirement, Air Force spokesman Lt. Col. Allen Herritage said on Nov. 8.
Maybe she will go to work for Elon Musk.
Mike K (cd7278) — 5/22/2014 @ 10:53 amBetter yet would be to retire to MO and start building a war-chest to challenge Claire with in ’18.
askeptic (8ecc78) — 5/22/2014 @ 11:37 amaseptic, I think she is too smart to want to enter politics but who knows ?
Mike K (cd7278) — 5/22/2014 @ 1:09 pmSammy, that’s the point. The enemy was infiltrating the “frieindly” forces. But from the gender/racial/ethnic grievance studies departments via the Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute. There are a few other breaches in the palisades they’ve exploited. And then there’s Congress.
Essentially the enemy within hates the military. It is too white, male, heterosexual, Christo-fascist, and imperialist.
This is the kind of training they’re inflicting on the troops. It is exactly the kind of training that the campus leftists demanded that Harvard inflict on students at orientation at the Kennedy School of Government, and the university administration refused to do so. But when the campus leftists are the administration, the military can’t refuse.
So what you get are dead soldiers and marines. In Afghanistan and at Fort Hood. And as I observed from General Casey’s reaction they care more about their diveristy initiatives than they do about the lives of the troops.
Again, it’s much worse than when I was in it’s going to keep getting worse (Mike K. is correct; today it’s not enough merely to have a female officer in the decision loop to give a determination not to prosecute a sexual harassment allegation “credibility.” But it was back in the early 90s before all this apparatus was in place.)
CDR Salamander is the go-to blog to keep track of the insanity currently being imposed upon the military.
Diversity Thursday
I love his weekly DIVTHU updates.
Hagel’s Transgender Bender
All this social engineering leads to this:
The American Officer Corps, and a record of defeat. William S. Lind interview, on Midrats
And this:
Sailors leaving Navy over stress on social issues, Top Gun instructor says
As I said many times, probably too many times, the troops simply can’t put up with the BS anymore. The constant harassment in the name of ending all forms of harassment, the legal jeopardy for saying or doing the least little thing wrong, and a “transformed culture” that encourages hypersensitivity (ever try to live with a thousands of people, nearly all complete strangers, living and working in cramped, crowded spaces with almost no privacy for six solid months and never say anything to offend anyone?).
In nearly all ways the case for gays and now the transgendered to serve in the military mirrors the case for SSM. It is a dishonest emotional appeal masquerading as if it were an argument. The emotional appeal denies reality and history. And then the attack comes. There is not rational basis to be on the “wrong side of history” (a very Marxist concept, that) so therefor any opposition must be because of bigotry.
Just like SSM, the whole point of all this social engineering is to “fundamentally transform” a culture that the “fundamental transformers” fundamentally dislike. And they don’t care if it destroys the only legitimate societal purpose of whatever institution they’re destroying. In this case, the armed forces ability to prosecute a war.
It doesn’t matter how many troops leave the service (all of them are having the same problems as the Navy, based upon my sources). The troops don’t like being the laboratory rats as the leftists experiment on them to learn how to develop “the new Soviet man.” Because they can always cook the books. If they can lie about everything else to advance the cause, they’ll of course lie about readiness, too. Since it’s no longer important.
Keep that in mind when the brass makes noises like, “It’s a complete non-issue, everything is going so smoothly, not even a hiccup, OMG we wish we did this years ago, blah blah blah.”
Steve57 (c8cb20) — 5/22/2014 @ 1:19 pmIt appears my last comment is caught in the filter. It was link heavy; I provided six links, but I only quoted briefly from three. Hopefully it will make it through.
But Sammy @53, you are right (as you are occasionally). The enemy is inside the wire. I described the changes being inflicted upon the military entirely for social engineering purposes and with no regard for mission readiness. Actually with apparent contempt for mission readiness, since the people demanding and implementing these changes to the culture despise the military.
The upshot is you get an officer corps that doesn’t know how to win wars, and is comfortable with defeat. And why shouldn’t it? Since the only purpose the military serves in the minds of our leftist masters is a social engineering laboratory where they can force it to look like they think America should look. And you have a recruiting and retention crisis as the troops and junior officers run, not walk, for the exits to escape the constant indoctrination.
They know this social engineering is a disaster, and they see the senior brass telling the world how well all this social engineering is going. How it’s a non-issue. Combine that with the senior brass expressing concern for their diversity programs whenever the troops are killed in the line of duty and they can’t escape the clutches of these fawning sycophants fast enough.
But what’s going on is exactly what the feds would like to do on college campuses, and for the same reasons.
Steve57 (c8cb20) — 5/22/2014 @ 1:47 pm