Title IX, Civil Rights, Sexual Violence, and Clueless Whining

This weekend, Peter Berkowitz published a piece in the opinion section of The Wall Street Journal that probably ought to raise serious questions about his abilities as a scholar. The Stanford fellow was all up in arms over guidance to federally funded schools and programs on dealing with sexual violence as a civil rights issue under Title IX. In his letter, titled “College Rape Accusations and the Presumption of Male Guilt” and subtitled “Pressured by the Obama administration, universities abandon any pretense of due process in sexual assault cases.”, he wrote:

Our universities impair liberal education not only by what they teach and do not teach in classrooms but also by the illiberal rules they promulgate to regulate speech and conduct outside of class.

The Obama administration has aggravated the problem. On April 4, Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights Russlynn Ali, head of the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR), distributed a 19-page “Dear Colleague” letter to “provide recipients with information to assist them in meeting their obligations.”

At the cost of losing federal funding—on which all major institutions of higher education have grown dependent—colleges and universities are obliged under Title IX of the Civil Rights Act (which prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex) to thoroughly investigate all allegations of sexual harassment and sexual assault on campus, including the felony of rape. They are also obliged, according to Ms. Ali, to curtail due process rights of the accused.

Now, of course, it isn’t his opinions on how universities ought to be run that suggests his value as a scholar is limited, but his apparent unwillingness or inability to read the letter he was complaining about. For all his vitriol, it is both a needed and a rather unremarkable document. You can read it for yourself. It begins:

Education has long been recognized as the great equalizer in America. The U.S. Department of Education and its Office for Civil Rights (OCR) believe that providing all students with an educational environment free from discrimination is extremely important. The sexual harassment of students, including sexual violence, interferes with students’ right to receive an education free from discrimination and, in the case of sexual violence, is a crime.

Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 (Title IX), 20 U.S.C. §§ 1681 et seq., and its implementing regulations, 34 C.F.R. Part 106, prohibit discrimination on the basis of sex in education programs or activities operated by recipients of Federal financial assistance. Sexual harassment of students, which includes acts of sexual violence, is a form of sex discrimination prohibited by Title IX. In order to assist recipients, which include school districts, colleges, and universities (hereinafter “schools” or “recipients”) in meeting these obligations, this letter explains that the requirements of Title IX pertaining to sexual harassment also cover sexual violence, and lays out the specific Title IX requirements applicable to sexual violence.

The first thing to note about this letter is that it is desperately needed, particularly at the junior high and high school level. Despite what reading Berkowitz could lead you to believe, this letter is not aimed at colleges and universities. It’s aimed at all educational establishments, and the timing (given that we can’t send it back in a time machine several years) is excellent. When a cheerleader is forced to cheer for an athlete whom the school knows has been accused of raping her, we need this letter. When a child is expelled from school for reporting a rape, and when the response of the school to this child being raped a second time–on school property–by the same assailant is to say that “the girl failed and neglected to use reasonable means to protect her self,” we need this letter. It was about damned time.

It is also worth noting that despite Berkowitz’s sneer about women being a majority on campus (thus surely not in any need of any consideration in this setting where the authorities are still predominantly men) and use of the male pronoun for anyone adversely affected by enforcing Title IX’s requirements on sexual violence, the report itself highlights the fact that males are also protected by these requirements:

The statistics on sexual violence are both deeply troubling and a call to action for the nation. A report prepared for the National Institute of Justice found that about 1 in 5 women are victims of completed or attempted sexual assault while in college. The report also found that approximately 6.1 percent of males were victims of completed or attempted sexual assault during college. According to data collected under the Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security and Campus Crime Statistics Act (Clery Act), 20 U.S.C. § 1092(f), in 2009, college campuses reported nearly 3,300 forcible sex offenses as defined by the Clery Act. This problem is not limited to college. During the 2007-2008 school year, there were 800 reported incidents of rape and attempted rape and 3,800 reported incidents of other sexual batteries at public high schools. Additionally, the likelihood that a woman with intellectual disabilities will be sexually assaulted is estimated to be significantly higher than the general population. The Department is deeply concerned about this problem and is committed to ensuring that all students feel safe in their school, so that they have the opportunity to benefit fully from the school’s programs and activities.

Title IX protects the civil rights of all students, not just females, from discrimination based on sex. That means that male students are also protected from those like Berkowitz who gloss over the rape of men and boys in order to make their points.

But what is Berkowitz’s point? What is his main complaint? Right, that the Obama administration is weakening due process on campus.

OCR’s new interpretation of Title IX “strongly discourages” universities from permitting the accused “to question or cross-examine the accuser” during the hearing. In addition, if universities provide an appeals process, it must be available to both parties—which subjects the accused to double jeopardy.

Most egregiously, OCR requires universities to render judgment using “a preponderance of the evidence” standard. This means that in a rape case, a campus disciplinary board of faculty, administrators and perhaps students serves as both judge and jury. Few if any of these judges are likely to have professional competence in fact-gathering, evidence analysis or judicial procedure. Yet to deliver a verdict of guilty, they need only believe that the accused is more likely than not to have committed the crime.

This is the lowest standard. It is much less demanding than “beyond a reasonable doubt,” which is used in the criminal justice system, and the intermediate standard of “clear and convincing proof.” Yale, Stanford and many other universities have rushed to comply with OCR’s directives.

On campus, where casual sex is celebrated and is frequently fueled by alcohol, the ambiguity that often attends sexual encounters is heightened and the risk of error in rape cases is increased. The consequences for a wrongly convicted student are devastating: Not only is he likely to be expelled, but he may well be barred from graduate or professional school and certain government agencies, suffer irreparable damage to his reputation, and still be exposed to criminal prosecution.

This is where I really start to question Berkowitz’s basic fitness to comment on this issue. Despite the OCR letter itself being quite clear on the topic:

In some cases, the conduct may constitute both sexual harassment under Title IX and criminal activity. Police investigations may be useful for fact-gathering; but because the standards for criminal investigations are different, police investigations or reports are not determinative of whether sexual harassment or violence violates Title IX. Conduct may constitute unlawful sexual harassment under Title IX even if the police do not have sufficient evidence of a criminal violation. In addition, a criminal investigation into allegations of sexual violence does not relieve the school of its duty under Title IX to resolve complaints promptly and equitably.

Berkowitz can’t seem to tell the difference between an administrative procedure designed to make sure all students’ civil rights are being protected and a criminal trial. In case he needs the clarification, only in a trial is one convicted, and it is only in a trial that the Fifth Amendment protection from double jeopardy applies.

Nor does a Title IX complaint procedure constitute double jeopardy. It serves a different purpose than a criminal complaint–to ensure that the civil rights of all the school’s students are served in an equitable way. This becomes quite obvious if one reads the entirety of the section of the letter from which Berkowitz snipped his quotes:

As noted above, the Title IX regulation requires schools to provide equitable grievance procedures. As part of these procedures, schools generally conduct investigations and hearings to determine whether sexual harassment or violence occurred. In addressing complaints filed with OCR under Title IX, OCR reviews a school’s procedures to determine whether the school is using a preponderance of the evidence standard to evaluate complaints. The Supreme Court has applied a preponderance of the evidence standard in civil litigation involving discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII), 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e et seq. Like Title IX, Title VII prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex. OCR also uses a preponderance of the evidence standard when it resolves complaints against recipients. For instance, OCR’s Case Processing Manual requires that a noncompliance determination be supported by the preponderance of the evidence when resolving allegations of discrimination under all the statutes enforced by OCR, including Title IX. OCR also uses a preponderance of the evidence standard in its fund termination administrative hearings. Thus, in order for a school’s grievance procedures to be consistent with Title IX standards, the school must use a preponderance of the evidence standard (i.e., it is more likely than not that sexual harassment or violence occurred). The “clear and convincing” standard (i.e., it is highly probable or reasonably certain that the sexual harassment or violence occurred), currently used by some schools, is a higher standard of proof. Grievance procedures that use this higher standard are inconsistent with the standard of proof established for violations of the civil rights laws, and are thus not equitable under Title IX. Therefore, preponderance of the evidence is the appropriate standard for investigating allegations of sexual harassment or violence.

Throughout a school’s Title IX investigation, including at any hearing, the parties must have an equal opportunity to present relevant witnesses and other evidence. The complainant and the alleged perpetrator must be afforded similar and timely access to any information that will be used at the hearing. For example, a school should not conduct a pre-hearing meeting during which only the alleged perpetrator is present and given an opportunity to present his or her side of the story, unless a similar meeting takes place with the complainant; a hearing officer or disciplinary board should not allow only the alleged perpetrator to present character witnesses at a hearing; and a school should not allow the alleged perpetrator to review the complainant’s statement without also allowing the complainant to review the alleged perpetrator’s statement.

While OCR does not require schools to permit parties to have lawyers at any stage of the proceedings, if a school chooses to allow the parties to have their lawyers participate in the proceedings, it must do so equally for both parties. Additionally, any school-imposed restrictions on the ability of lawyers to speak or otherwise participate in the proceedings should apply equally. OCR strongly discourages schools from allowing the parties personally to question or cross-examine each other during the hearing. Allowing an alleged perpetrator to question an alleged victim directly may be traumatic or intimidating, thereby possibly escalating or perpetuating a hostile environment. OCR also recommends that schools provide an appeals process. If a school provides for appeal of the findings or remedy, it must do so for both parties. Schools must maintain documentation of all proceedings, which may include written findings of facts, transcripts, or audio recordings.

Note that the “to question or cross-examine the accuser” quote that Berkowitz presents isn’t actually in the OCR letter. There is a power shift being required by this letter, but it isn’t nearly the shift away from a presumption of innocence that he represents it to be. It is simply an acknowledgement that if schools fail to protect the rights of the accused and the accuser, that they will be reinforcing a fundamental inequality.

The letter from the OCR is a rather remarkable document in that respect. I suggest reading the whole thing. It addresses, in a more practical way than Berkowitz’s poetical hand-wringing, the problems of alcohol and sexual assault. It also has guidelines for drafting educational materials, which might be entertaining to compare to Berkowitz’s paranoid fantasy of the same.

Or if you’re short on time, you might just want to read the end of Berkowitz’s piece, with its overblown invocations of the major fields of human knowledge to lament that no one (no one!) in power seems to agree with him on this topic. Unlike the rest of his letter, it’s both entertaining and reassuring.

Title IX, Civil Rights, Sexual Violence, and Clueless Whining

48 thoughts on “Title IX, Civil Rights, Sexual Violence, and Clueless Whining

  1. 1

    This "Dear colleague" letter is a travesty & an appalling disgrace. How dare anybody flirt with the idea of denying any group of people their constitutional right to due process.Not only is Berkowitz a damn good scholar, he is a truly patriotic American & possibly a hero. I was nothing short of shocked to see an article in the New York Times actually defending men. Even though it was only aimed at protecting male faculty members & not students.I'll tell you what isn't "desperately needed" Ms. Zvan. Bullying an already crooked & crippled educational system into becoming an even more hostile environment for men than it already is. Fathers today might as well send their boys off to school with a target painted on their backs.Ms. Zvan, you're the one "glossing over male victims". I'm sure you're aware that men are the overwhelming majority of rape victims & that male rape has been called "The most closely guarded secret of American prisons" by Weiss & Friar. How many blogs have you written for these men? I'm sure you're also aware that approximately 40% of rape accusations are false. This percentage is believed to be a lot higher in colleges & universities where men & WOMEN are drinking heavily and letting their inhibitions fly. In fact, false rape accusations have reached epidemic proportions but you wouldn't know it from the many feminist factoids our media is saturated with. Remember the 2006 Duke Lacrosse fiasco? Under Russlyn Ali's suggested guidelines, those innocent men's lives would have certainly been destroyed by Crystal Gail Mangum who by the way, was a stripper who later committed arson & murder after it was miraculously proven that her accusation of rape was completely false. These innocent men were also booed on a daytime TV talkshow WELL AFTER they were acquitted of all charges. How could any decent person advocate subjecting innocent men to a "double jeopardy" in a culture that seems to perceive all men as "potential rapists & abusers"?This isn't "protecting men", it is making them sitting ducks for any & all woman they come into contact with. Whether her motivation is to gain victim status, monetary compensation, fame, a badge of honour, vindictive revenge, or an excuse for regretted consensual sex, poor & irresponsible behavior, or being unfaithful, Ali's blatantly unconstitutional guidelines will grant any woman the power to point her finger & destroy any innocent man's life. If this becomes the status quo, then America will be an even greater cesspool of feminist governance & misandry.

  2. 2

    Well, aren't you cute. How long did it take you to memorize all that? Your time would have been better spent figuring out that victims of sexual violence also have a right to due process, understanding the research on false reporting of rape, and paying attention to the realities of male victims of rape instead of holding them up as a shield. But it is funny you should ask. I'm working on a post on male victims of rape right now. Check back next week if you're actually interested. In the meantime, you just keep worrying about how you're not going to get away with everything anymore.

  3. 3

    Oh yes, that's all I'm trying to do is "get away with something" here. It isn't that I'm for constitutionally protected rights or the legal protection of the innocent. Obviously I want all men to "get away with" raping & abusing women without threat of criminal prosecution because thats all we men really want right? Well, at least thats what prominent feminists assert.“All men are rapists & that’s all they are”-Marilyn French, Author, “The Woman’s Room”.Your linked articles Ms. Zvan, are rather "cute", but unfortunately, they aren't worth diddly jack aside from being sterling examples of feminist drek which treat facts like loose change in a million dollar transaction. While I do applaud your bold audacity in actually admitting women do in fact lie, (I'm sure this alienated you from the 'sistahood'", it was undoubtably said only to garner some early credibility & soften us up for the standard rape factoids which followed. The truth of the matter is Ms. Zyan, is that places like theFalse Rape society & A Voice For Men paint a much MUCH different & far more believable picture on rape & abuse with articles & radio shows like these:http://falserapesociety.blogspot.com/p/informative-sources.htmlhttp://www.avoiceformen.com/feminism/government-tyranny/dept-of-ed-rewrites-the-constitution-at-the-expense-of-men/http://www.blogtalkradio.com/avoiceformen/2011/08/24/dr-t-on-false-allegations A far more realistic figure on false allegations is 40% (AT LEAST). Thats without going into what constitutes rape exactly."Politically, I call it rape whenever a woman has sex & feels violated."-Catherine MacKinnon (American feminist, scholar, lawyerThis "women lie narrative" you assert to be at the forefront of every rape allegation is & always has been a very foreign concept. This is true for all of human history, not just in the modern gynocracy. Even the Salem witch trials were a result of two young girls claiming to be victimized by a "non human" & chivalrous men rushing out to shoot first & ask questions never. All your listed sources are feminist organizations (or at least organizations sympathetic to feminist agendas) & you use the same old tried & true methods to sell the idea rape accusers are very rare & actual rape accusers are victims of prior abuse themselves. (Standard)! While I'm inclined to believe the latter is probably true, it doesn't make any difference. A false rape allegation is a false rape allegation & if you truly cared about men victimized by this you would advocate protecting the identities of the accused & call for equal criminal sentencing for those caught making a false allegation of rape or abuse. You certainly wouldn't advocate curtailing men's constitutionally protected right to due process.All victims of sexual violence absolutely have a right to due process but under the American constitution, everybody accused of a crime is supposed to be innocent until proven guilty.You're writing an article on male rape victims?-Great! Just be careful that whatever you build up with your right hand isn't torn down with your left by articles like this one. Don't you worry, I'll be keeping a close eye out to make sure that doesn't happen until me & my perky truths are inevitably blocked.

  4. 4

    Ah, yes, the French quote, which isn't actually a quote of her, but a quote from a novel (i.e., a piece of fiction. Her personal view? "Most men are on our side. They like their lives better than their fathers' lives. They like being involved with their children. They like having a better relationship with their women." She was such a monster, wasn't she?Of course you don't like the linked post and fact sheet. They don't tell you what you want to hear. That doesn't make scientific studies and the National Center for Victims of Crime "feminist drek." Lovely try, though. But if you'd really like a challenge, try finding anyone who actually says, "Women never lie." Then you really, really need to go figure out what rights are protected by the constitution. Double jeopardy I've already explained in the post you didn't actually finish reading. The presumption of innocence applies to the government taking action, not your neighbors' personal beliefs–and it sure as hell applies equally to those who bring rape charges.That's the problem with you fragile little MRAs. You cry, "Men have rights! Men have rights!" every time the same rights you've had all along are extended to women. Poor children.

  5. 6

    No. That's how I treat people whose comments use talking points I've already addressed in the post. Thus the comment about memorization–the comment isn't actually a response to what I've written. It's a script.

  6. 7

    I'm with Stephanie — it's adorable when someone uses Google to find dissenting opinions from their own, then pastes a pre-fabricated "rebuttal" wherever there's a comment field. Then, when it's pointed out to them that they didn't address the actual post, which actually negates or moots most or all of their arguments, they bluster and turn the thread into a link farm. And threaten to "keep an eye" on the blogger lest they step out of line. Yeah, that's really cute. Adorable, even.

  7. 8

    "…a quote from a novel."Really? Well this website has something to say about that.Still doubt the quality of Marilin French? Heres another quote from her:"Men's need to dominate women may be based in their own sense of marginality or emptiness; we do not know its root, & men are making no effort to discover it."Of coarse many men were on Frenchy's side. Thats largely what got us into this mess. Too many men simply gave into bigots like her without first stopping to question her motives or even THINK about the implications of turning government funded sows like her loose on our society. They did this out of some stupid misplaced sense of chivalrous honour & unfortunately many men still do this today. (i.e., Obama establishing a Whitehouse council on women & girls, VAWA, NOMAS, the male only draft, etc, etc, etc…). This "dear colleague" letter only further demonstrates that all of this is just par for the course in this "male dominated" society.Did you say linked fact sheet?http://www.avoiceformen.com/mission-and-values/aboutMy guess is, those are facts YOU wont want to hear. Mostly because they are credible & you will find no trace of political correctness in them. Unfortunately, we have never had to lie or throw out bogus stats like "1/4 men…" or "every 15 seconds…". Feminists do this all the time with rape, domestic violence, & a slew of other so called "women's issues". Their very livelihood depends on it. If there is no crisis, there is no need for them & there certainly isn't a need to allocate multi-millions (if not billions) of tax payer dollars to feminist blow hards in do-nothing positions. Established liars need not be continually refuted. How are scientific studies & National Center for Victims of Crime surveys wrong? I'll give you an example. A 2009 US National Crime Victimization Survey estimated that only 55% of rapes & sexual assaults were reported to law enforcement officials. When a male is raped, less than 10% are believed to be reported. Female on male & female on female rapes were ignored altogether in this survey. Thats how. These people are out to back up a narrative. That narrative being that only females are victims of rape & DV & only men are perpetrators. "1 in 4 women are rape victims in America". Well, that requires 60 million male rapists. Unfortunately only 0.002% of men are convicted rapists (But how many people are going to see that on the side of a bus & actually look into it)? 205 (& growing) wrongfully convicted people have been exonerated by DNA evidence since the beginning of the innocence project. 204 of them are men & most of them were falsely imprisoned for rape. (innocenceproject.org)We even have women claiming to be raped by ghosts!I noticed you had nothing to say about this quote:"Politically, I call it rape whenever a woman has sex & feels violated."-Catherine MacKinnonSo you'll get 2 more."I claim that rape exists any time sexual intercourse occurs when it has not been initiated by the woman, out of her own genuine affection & desire."-Robin Morgan (Former child actor turned American radical feminist activist, writer, poet, and editor of Sisterhood is Powerful & Ms. Magazine.“If 25% of my friends were really being raped, wouldn’t I know it”?-Katie RoipheThis is what's hilarious about you fragile feminists. Decades of having your words subsidized by political correctness have made you intellectually weak & totally inept. When people actually SHOW UP like I just did & call you on your bull, you train wreck. But you want to know where the difference between us is most blatant? Not one MRA is pushing for the denial of any women's constitutionally protected right to due process. Not one. We want liberty for all, you want femi-supremacism.

  8. 9

    Wow, Stephanie, you're lucky there's a double standard that protects women like you. (For example, if there were no double standard then every woman who ever told a Lorena Bobbitt joke in a school or work environment would be disciplined as a sexual harasser, and every man who ever heard one would be a victim.) In your case, your misandry certainly creates a "hostile atmosphere" for men.

  9. 10

    Really, Unknown? If I weren't "lucky," what are you suggesting would happen to me?Razlo, if you want your quotes addressed, make sure they're not made up. Seriously, sourcing is your friend if you ever want to know what you're talking about. Reading your own links helps too. For example, you're trying to argue that feminists think like French's fictional character, but you want to send me to a site that says not all feminists agree with that sentiment. Pick one.Then you linked a "fact sheet" that, in addition to coming from an "organization" that does nothing but sit online and spew venom, only has one piece of information about the rate of false rape claims–which says largely what I said in my post on the topic? Then assume that a rapist only ever rapes one victim? And did you really just say "political correctness" in earnest? Oh, child. You're not helping your case here–not that you would have one anyway.

  10. 11

    I guess I'll have to cut your meat up for you."…all men are rapists & that's all they are.""It seems Marilyn French also used the phrase in her own voice in an interview, but I'm trying track this source down."-You better hope he never finds it, but it doesn't really matter if he doesn't because:"that quote is representative of the book, & the book was a thinly veiled piece of feminist doctrine, & the phrase was picked up by real women of the time, & the book was the most popular selling feminist book of its time, & continues to sell well today…"-So, right away it is clearly obvious that the so called "woman's movement for equality" was founded on ideologies of misandry & bigotry & that those doctrines are still being spread to today's women."a quick internet search for the phrase reveals that it is currently mostly used by critics of feminism & by feminist pages with a "not" in front. …Nevertheless I want to use this phrase as an example of the endemic anti-male sexism within the feminist movement. …Not so much the use of that precise word-for-word phrase…but the presumption of the general concept of male = rapist, or "all men are potential rapists", for which it has become a symbol."So first of all, obviously no feminist could claim to be for equality & tie themselves to quotes like Frenchy's. So, even though some modern feminists try to distance themselves from blatantly sexist quotes like that, there is undeniable proof that these same misandric ideologies which feminism cultivates & encourages are still (& always have been) very prominent in feminists & the entire female culture.Especially the presumption of male guilt & (as the link explained) the presumption of all men being "potential rapists"."[rape] is a crime of opprotunity & many men will take their chance".-Kira Cochrane.You could have avoided this embarrassment if YOU had bothered to actually read the link.Despite her feminist friends fudging facts trying to clear her name, Catharine MacKinnon is a confirmed bigot & sexist of the highest caliber."Men who are unjustly accused of rape can sometimes learn from the experience."-Vassar College Assistant Dean of Students, Time magazine June 3, 1991. From "The Myth of Male Power" by Warren Ferrell, PHD.See, I knew you wouldn't like those facts. What you call "venom" I & a growing number of others call THE CURE."…only has one piece of information about the rate of false rape claims"Wrong!Paul Elam also devoted an entire A Voice For Men Radio show to the topic. I'm sure you'll find it VERY informative.Not factoring in the # of imprisoned men wrongfully convicted based on false rape accusations, or even defining what rape is exactly, Every one of those 3025 convicted rapist would have to rape AT LEAST 13 women EACH for those numbers to work! I'll remind you of this quote which you ignored;"“If 25% of my friends were really being raped, wouldn’t I know it”?-Katie RoipheI'll let the facts & the overwhelming amounts of evidence provided here make my case for me. If anyone denies my claims they are encouraged to look them up for themselves. I'm pretty sure you see the threat of that which is why I expect to get blocked & deleted any time now.

  11. 12

    Now you're giving me a Tripod site and telling me I should worry that the nonexistent interview might be tracked down any day? And a 1994 commentary that says rape rate statistics aren't well sourced–after I've given you two very recent reviews of rape statistics? You give me, again, unsourced rates of prison rape that more than triple the figures produced by the largest government surveys. You give me more unsourced quotes and argue that Snopes are the folks who have it wrong. You go from one victim per rapist to only counting convicted rapists to try to make rape statistics look silly.And you give me a bunch of crap about what "feminists" believe while bitching that all men are lumped together. You can't even address anything I have to say now, preferring to wrestle with the ghosts of decades past. Your entire paranoid delusion is built upon ancient, foggy foundations. And you think you're going to get banned for threatening "facts"? Try giving some first, and make them relevant to something other than your own feelings of inadequacy please.

  12. 13

    It's ever-more cute when the person arguing against verifiable facts using specious links and precious little evidence worries that they might get banned because they're challenging orthodoxy. Here's a hint, troll: Galileo complexes pretty much only worked for Galileo. You're not being systematically oppressed, just jeered at for being fantastically wrong.

  13. 14

    "To call a man an animal is to flatter him; he’s a machine, a walking dildo."–Valerie Solanas, "Authoress of the SCUM Manifesto"."In a patriarchal society, all heterosexual intercourse is rape because women, as a group, are not strong enough to give meaningful consent."–Catharine MacKinnon, quoted in Professing Feminism: Cautionary Tales from the Strange World of Women’s Studies.I could go on & on.I gave you that tripod site before & you claimed it:"…says not all feminists agree with that sentiment."Interestingly you completely ignored my entire rebuttal to that. I'll repeat it for you now. While the site did indeed say modern feminists (for the most part) are distancing themselves from that quote, it also makes the argument that this anti-male ideology was representative of one of the most popular selling feminist books of all time. The site then makes the case that even though this sexist quote is no longer at the forefront of feminism's public image, the misandric doctrine it represents is & always has been an integral part of feminism. Hell, here you are advocating the denial of men's constitutionally protected right to due process!To further support this, I even gave you a link to a commentary on an example, (a very recent example) of literally hundreds of women (incl. celebrities) demonstrating this inculcated misandry by laughing & joking ON A DAYTIME TV SHOW at a man who was drugged, bound, tortured & sexually mutilated. That's a lot to answer for. Did you? No, but you did say I have "paranoid delusions". Standard.Another quote you ignored was this one from Kira Cochrane published in 2005 in the NewStatesman."[rape] is a crime of opportunity & many men will take their chance".-Kira Cochrane. (it took me all of 2 seconds to find that source by the way).

  14. 15

    If you had bothered to actually read my links, you would've happened upon a wealth of knowledge on the subject of rape & false rape claims. Not the least of which was the SUPERB article titled "The Significance of False Rape Claims" (which I am unable to link to because of this site character limits) which practically refutes everything you've ever claimed about rape & false rape accusations all on its own. For ex. you asked how seemingly legitimate sources such as the NCVC are used to push feminist agendas? Well, in addition to the example I gave previously, I'll provide this excerpt for the article mentioned above."Organizations such as NOW & RAINN rely on the U.S Department of Justice's National Crime Victimization Survey to insist that rape is rampant & largely underreported. What those organizations do not publicize is that this survey, conducted by in-person & telephone interviews, defines rape as follows: "Forced sexual intercourse including both psychological coercion as well as physical force. . . ." You need to scroll to page 131 out of 133 to find that definition. Putting aside other problems with the definition, "psychological coercion," of course, can mean all manner of things that are not rape, including "I'll take your mother to the doctors tomorrow if you make love to me tonight."According to this article's SOURCED studies, more accurate statistics on false rape accusations were determined to be between 40%-60% without the use of polygraphs!"(Kanin, [the researcher], incidentally, was a feminist icon whose work was cited & relied on without question by feminists…He suddenly became a nitwit who forgot how to do research when his studies upset the narrative of the persons who dominate the public discourse about rape.)"I don't have to try to make feminist rape statistics look silly, they do that on their own. All I did was determine what 0.002% of the male population was & divided that by 1/4 of the population of women. While it is logical to believe a true rapist would victimize more than 1 person, it is absurd to think EVERY convicted rapists victimizes AT LEAST 13 people before being caught & convicted which is what feminist's own stats suggest. & remember, this is without factoring in wrongfully convicted men, or defining what rape truly is."bunch of crap""ghosts of decades past""ancient, foggy foundations""feelings of inadequacy"Yawn. Planning on actually SHOWING UP to this thing at some point or…?Oh, & be sure to pat your mangina Jason on the head. He's been a goooooood boy! Yes he has! Yeeees he has!

  15. 16

    Way to fight the good fight and fight for equality for men, by emasculating every man that dares to agree with a woman that you've got nothing. NOTHING. Sure, you've got some quotes. 90% of them appear to be specious. The other ten percent, who agrees with them? Do you have *anything* to offer in this conversation aside from ridicule and self-parody?

  16. 17

    Jason, I do not ridicule you for taking the side of a woman. Nor do I think any less of you for disagreeing with me. You have a right to all of that and there is no wrong in it.I ridicule you, Jason, because by siding with confirmed bigots, you are a traitor to the constitution, the entire male gender, & worst of all, yourself. You are to the Men's Rights Movement, what "Uncle Tom's" were to the Civil Rights Movement.As you are now, you are not my brother & I have nothing but the utmost contempt for you.

  17. 20

    Razlo, you keep pointing to people who aren't me and aren't saying what I'm saying (if they even said it themselves), as though that made me wrong about anything. The only thing you seem to complain about that has to do with my position is "denying due process," which I've already explained in the post and already pointed out in the comments that I explained in the post. I'm not bothering much with you because you're irrelevant. You are, however, boring enough that if you attack anyone again based on not matching some standard you're setting for gender roles, you're done.Now, do you have anything sensible to say about the content of the post or the letter itself–anything I haven't already answered?

  18. 21

    Razio's next comment:"But but look at these other people who also say things I don't like!"Comment after that will be something about the Soviets and precious bodily fluids.

  19. 22

    Any constitution or Charter which grants the right to due process to anybody regardless of race, sex or religion is what you're a traitor of.Judging by your site's title, you're probably a Canadian. You don't have to be an American to fight against American injustices. I am Canadian as well, & I have also graduated from University long ago. The chances of this deplorable mandate hurting me is virtually nil. I fight it regardless, because it is the right thing to do. I fight it because liberty matters. MEN'S RIGHTS matter. I won't be silent while men are further victimized by feminist governance."I would imagine you have more in common with White Rights movements than Civil Rights."Based on what?!Need I remind you of who you call "Master"?"I feel that 'man-hating' is an honorable and viable political act, that the oppressed have a right to class-hatred against the class that is oppressing them."-Robin Morgan, Ms. Magazine Editor."Q: People think you are very hostile to men.A: I am."-Andrea Dworkinhttp://antimisandry.com/feminist-misandry/feminist-quotes-20106.html

  20. 23

    I don't recall calling anyone Master in my life. With the exception of John Simm.Surprised that Razlo identified more quotes he didn't like by people who are saying things that Stephanie isn't? Because I sure am! Just waiting for the "bodily fluids" quote so I can call it two for two.Also: your fight is literally identical to this fight by Pat Robertson. http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/08/30/308165/pat-buchanan-decries-lack-of-affirmative-action-for-white-males/ That's pretty much what makes me say you're better off to identify with other people of privilege complaining about how those damned underprivileged folks are keeping them down and how they need a movement to assert their rights.

  21. 24

    @Jason.It doesn't matter that neither of you said these quotes. These are the principals of the ideology you side with & defend. You serve feminists & support misandric female supremacy. Once that is established, your opinions on civil rights & liberties are pretty much worthless. & don't give me that "I'm a feminist because I believe in equal rights for women" bullshit because under that definition, I myself am a feminist. I've proven that that isn't what feminism is about. Not even at its outset. I don't know about you, but if skin heads were backing a new civil rights mandate, I would be HIGHLY suspicious of it. Especially if many highly respected & educated people were slamming it on mass as unconstitutional.Regarding you're link, Firstly, that has absolutely nothing to do with me, anything I've said, the MRM or being a MRA so way to totally flop on that one. If you knew your history (not just the twisted feminist version we get in school), you'd know the bottom 99% of men have never been privileged. Therefore, our movement is not at all "identical" to Pat Robertson's ridiculous white affirmative action initiative.http://www.youtube.com/user/TheHappyMisogynist#p/uHowever, since you brought it up, how about doing away with all forms of government imposed discrimination (AKA affirmative action)? This meritless bureaucracy catapults people into positions because of superficial qualities like race or sex. You don't make up for past oppression (or in the case of women, perceived oppression) by imposing it on the innocent descendants of the guilty. Neither I nor my ancestors have ever oppressed anybody. How about every man, woman, black, white, or whatever earns their own way in life & stops looking to the government for handouts? Sounds good to me.

  22. 25

    "Attack"?! HA, Standard! Your mangina was none of my concern until he opened his f-ing trap & involved himself (…or herself). Berkowitz was absolutely correct when he said “Not only is he likely to be expelled, but he may well be barred from graduate or professional school & certain government agencies, suffer irreparable damage to his reputation, and still be exposed to criminal prosecution.”Here's why:Under the new federal rules, a school must inform a victim that she can file a complaint with the hearing board, file a Title IX discrimination claim, file criminal charges with the police, or any combination of the three. If the accused approaches her to try to “talk things out,” he can be charged with intimidation because he no longer has the right to face his accuser. On top of all that, school disciplinary committees are meant to hear cases of cheating or plagiarism. They're totally unfit & unqualified to judge evidence & settle "he-said, she-said" sexual assault disputes. All these schools care about is $$ & liability. Under this new guideline's "preponderance of guilt" standard, disciplinary committees can just say "her story is more believable" & turn him over to the conviction board with no threat of him suing for violation of his due process rights (& they will). They don't give a fried fuck about his life, they just want to look like they help victims & safeguard funding.“I don’t want to lose my grant,”-Temple University's dean of students, Stephanie IvesCan you imagine trying to transfer colleges of get employment with a transcript that said "Expelled For Sexual Assault"?"despite Berkowitz's sneer about women being a majority on campus (thus surely not in any need of any consideration in this setting where the authorities are still predominantly men) and use of the male pronoun for anyone adversely affected by enforcing Title IX's requirements on sexual violence, the report itself highlights the fact that males are also protected by these requirements: "Berkowitz isn't suggesting we neglect women, & since when has run BY MEN translated to run FOR MEN? Males are protected as well?! You show me stats on men falsely accusing women of rape & I'll show you a chivalrous disciplinary committee who gives 2 shits about them. Even if a man had the gall to accuse of woman of drugging or sexually assaulting him, she should still be innocent until proven guilty & she should still have the right to face her accuser. Reversing the sexes doesn't make it acceptable,

  23. 26

    Your competence as a writer has been drawn into serious question. I proved your stats on false rape claims to be totally wrong. In that instance, all you did was pull rape factoids to marginalize a serious problem & support the narrative that 2-6% of eleventy thousand out of 100 rape accusations are false. & now you're at it again. Only this time, your assessment is in stark contrast to many highly respectable professionals with nothing to gain by opposing this, who must also be, according to you, "clueless whiners with paranoid fantasies"."Department of Education needs to rescind/clarify this mess.  Speech is not a crime, but even the rights of those accused of crimes should not be subordinated to misplaced compassion or political correctness."-Ilya Shapiro"The new standard violates accused students’ due process rights. Campus judicial procedures already have questionable -validity. The preponderance standard, which essentially means 50.1 % proof, will just compound those problems. The Supreme Court’s precedents demonstrate that evidentiary standards should be higher, not lower, when so much is at stake."-Samantha Harris, (nonprofit Foundation for Individual Rights in Education) or "FIRE", which advocates for individual rights at colleges,"We’re not sending these students to prison, but the terminology is the same. They’re found guilty of serious criminal offenses. Perpetrators are subject to expulsion, which affects their employment & social prospects."-Excerpt from Harris's letter to R. AliI could keep going but I have character limits.Now, as you alluded to earlier, I must be getting close to being banned for "attacking" you or "using threatening speech" or some other bogus charge, but before then I was hoping you would answer a question I've always wanted to ask a feminist.How do you define sex for men? Is it anything like how an Antioch women’s center advocate explained it to freshmen: “If you want to take her blouse off, you have to ask. If you want to touch her breast, you have to ask. If you want to move your hand down to her genitals, you have to ask. If you want to put your finger inside her, you have to ask.”…..woooo, talk about passion!Tell me, is it men's responsibility to determine if a women is intoxicated? Should men start carrying calculators & asking a girl's weight before engaging in sexual activity? Is this what you want?! How do men protect themselves from false rape accusations? You tell me.I'll pre-empt a probable question-answer right now by saying women can avoid being raped by drinking responsibly, avoiding high risk situations & by not dressing like a slut & putting the message out there that they're "hot to trot". I think its odd they even need to be told this…

  24. 27

    "My fight is nothing like Pat Robertson's, but while you brought it up, here's an itemized list of every doctrine they espouse that I agree with!"Nobody here or in the sane slice of the world agrees with your assessment that the movement to stamp out sexism is founded by people who are so anti-sex, nor does anyone here have the views you believe us to. You're arguing with strawmen. That might work elsewhere, but it won't work here.Just say "precious bodily fluids". Please. Just once.

  25. 28

    mangy, to me your entire rebuttal here is exactly akin to saying:"Not all nazis are bad".Men today experience systematic discrimination in parenting, domestic violence policies, education, criminal sentencing, paternity, forced labor, military conscription, public health policies, genital integrity, false accusations, reproductive rights, portrayal by the media & in the coverage of their issues by the news media.Behind every one of these issues are feminists & manginas like you & Zvan. All I need to do is point to quotes like this one:-"The nuclear family must be destroyed… Whatever its ultimate meaning, the break-up of families now is an objectively revolutionary process."- Linda Gordon Women,1969.to prove that this was always the intention of feminism.You want to claim "not all feminists are like that"?Based on what? Not only is there no evidence for that, there's much against it. However, its a moot point because what really matters is we have feminist presidents, Secretaries of state, judges, bloggers, & speakers of the house who absolutely ARE "like that" & every feminist who has ever dictated policy was as well.As if on cue, NAWALT was the topic for this week's AVFM radio.http://www.youtube.com/user/TheHappyMisogynist#p/u/5/dp4veldIZ_MYeah, sure the majority of the world currently does believe feminism was a legitimate movement for equality & still is, but this is merely a testament to the power of indoctrination & propaganda. MRAs like myself are administering "red pills" to curb this problem one willing person at a time. Ever see "The Warriors"?We got the truth, sucker!I don't know what the hell you mean by "bodily fluids". In your case mangy, I really don't think I want to know…

  26. 30

    You'll have to explain how your link has something to do with the arguments presented here. Frankly, it completely bewilders me as to why you would even post it. Are you defending communism or something? Are you of the left by any chance?

  27. 31

    Bwahaha. Wow, that link payed off in spades.Did you at least catch the reference to 'precious bodily fluids'? Do I need to spell out the concept of satire? Did you happen to catch his delusional reference to 'essence' and denying it to women? Are you even cognizant of the fact that he is, indeed, highly delusional?

  28. 32

    "Did you happen to catch his delusional reference to 'essence' and denying it to women? Are you even cognizant of the fact that he is, indeed, highly delusional?"Oh, clearly he is but what does that have to do with the arguments presented here? Are you saying we should "deny our essence" to women? Ah, well…to each his own pal, but I'm not in agreement with you on that one. At all.

  29. 35

    Well, I see you've had a good time while I've been busy, Razlo. You've managed to mischaracterize scientific studies on the topic of false reports, both reviews of other literature, as "factoids." You've continued to define rape protections as something that only apply to or are needed by women, even while giving rhetorical lip service to the vague possibility of a male rape victim. You continue to suggest that an equal treatment of accuser and accused is somehow a hardship to the accused. You've defended treating administrative procedings like criminal procedings–something we don't do for anything else–on that basis that there are consequences for the falsely accused, as though there were none for the victims of the falsely exonerated.You've continued to act as though saying that somone is female is an insult. You've demonstrated you don't have a clue what enthusiastic consent looks like (which is unsurprising). And you've repeated demonstrably false ideas about what women can do to keep from being raped–unless you mean that women should stay out of "high-risk" situations like ever interacting with another human being. Yeah, you're a pretty ugly sod all over. That you think all this calls my reputation into question is highly amusing. But you just keep trying to get yourself banned. It makes you look so good.

  30. 36

    "mischaracterize scientific studies on the topic of false reports." has always been your bag, not mine. I've already proven this but you clearly failed to read or understand that evidence. Again.How about you pay some lip service to the facts or arguments I've provided for a change instead of trying your incompetent hand at pathologizing your detractors? Both you & those who drafted this mandate know as well as I do that this society doesn't give a rats ass about male victims of…anything. The sole purpose of this is to grant any random woman a far more efficient tool with which to destroy any innocent man's life. (More-so than false rape allegations already do). Unlike women, men have no incentives to falsely accuse a women of rape. Indeed men are more likely to be laughed at & ignored simply because they are men victimized by women."You continue to suggest that an equal treatment of accuser and accused is somehow a hardship to the accused."Ah…please tell me you don't hold a degree in journalism (although I wouldn't be surprised if you do). Having your fate decided by a panel of unqualified & inexperienced judges under a "preponderance of guilt" standard, & being denied the right to face your accuser isn't "equal" treatment by a very very long shot. You are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty. Considering false rape claims hover somewhere in the range of 40-60% & considering the many incentives women already have to make false allegations of rape, it doesn't take a feminist to see how this ludicrous mandate will definitely translate into extreme hardship for the accused whom will be men 99.999% of the time.Take for example, the case of a University of North Dakota student who was found guilty of sexual assault in a campus procedure using this preponderance standard. The school suspended him. Meanwhile, the police had decided to charge his accuser with filing a false claim, but she left to dodge the arrest warrant. A rape accusation should always be dealt with as a criminal proceeding because of the seriousness of the claim. The accusation alone can (& does) destroy people's lives! I would sooner let 1 real rapist get off than have 10 innocent men get convicted. But I'm sure to a feminist, the lives a hundred or even a million innocent men are not equal to one woman wronged.When did I ever say that being a female is an insult? Aren't my posts long enough (with facts & quotes you ignore), that you need to start putting words in my mouth?You've demonstrated how clueless you are when it comes to the entire topic of rape. Typical feminist. Even with "enthusiastic consent" (& yes I do know what that looks like), there is still no guarantee a woman won't make a false rape claim the next day.Accused: "But…she gave her "enthusiastic consent"!Judge:"You mean that poor thing weeping her little eyes out?! She wouldn't tell a lie!"How stupid would you have to be to believe this shit!? I'll tell you how much; feminist stupid! According to you, male sexuality is essentially russian roulette.Not dressing like a slut & wandering by yourself in shady social environments isn't a false idea of preventing rape, its a level of common sense most rational people possess. I don't dress in my finest clothes, slap on my gold watch & fan myself with money as I walk down the back alleys of slum neighborhoods. & guess what, I've never been robbed! Hallelujah its a miracle!

  31. 37

    You have blatantly ignored every single damning quote, fact, stat, link & argument put before you thus far. Standard!Are all feminists on crack? Seriously, they could be rounding up random men to ship off to concentration camps & feminists like this would be telling people to stop bitching because they are getting a free ride in a train. Then in the same breath, they would demand government regulations granting women free transportation as well. There is just no depth to their misandric bigotry & desire for female privilege.

  32. 38

    Razlo, when I've already pointed out that the only things you've linked to that provide anything more than "Oh, women lie about rape" are saying that they don't know what the actual rate is, you've provided no evidence. Almost everything you've presented is about (a very tiny number of) single cases. There are, in fact, studies that provide high rates of false reports, but they rely on police intuition or nondisclosed methodologies to get that number–as discussed in my post on the topic. I'm not ignoring anything about false rape reports. I just don't find your "evidence" new or compelling, and I think it's silly that you bring it up again after I've explained why.Again you try to apply criminal standards to administrative proceedings. Do you even remotely understand that "innocent until proven guilty" is a standard that applies in criminal cases only because the entity trying to demonstrate your guilt is the state? Yes, in cases where the state's power is stacked against someone, that makes sense. That's not what we're discussing here. We're discussing two individuals who are both competing for their right to an education. Neither one gets to have their innocence presumed. But you're doing a great job of demonstrating that you're only concerned about the civil rights of the accused. You've had nothing to say about what happens to them if they're forced to choose between safety and an education.And that's basically all you've had to say that's remotely on topic. Did you have anything else to add about civil rights in these cases, except that you always want the burden of proof to be biased in favor of the accused?

  33. 39

    Stephanie, if you actually read the links, you would have picked up that even though both of our sources say the actual number of rapes & false rape accusations are unknown, this is where the similarities end. Edward Greer called this 2% false rape stat "an ideological fabrication." in his study, "The Truth Behind the Legal Dominance 2% False Rape Claim figure". The following are quotes from that study (because I guess you didn't read it closely enough):"…without exception every scholarly or semi-scholarly source that utilizes the 2% false claim proposition can ultimately be traced back to 'Against Our Will' by Susan Brownmiller.""feminist publicist Susan Brownmiller’s interpretation of some data, now a 1/4 century old, [is] of unknown provenance from a single police department unit". A police unit which "did not rely upon any report [&] cannot remember precisely how they did obtain the 2% figure.So much for 2%. Now the evidence of 40-60%:"…aside from the limited probative empirical evidence on the issue, there are a number of good reasons to think that a significant fraction of rape complaints, far in excess of 2%, are false."-Greer's study.in 1989, "…the FBI conducted large numbers of >DNA TESTS< “to confirm or exclude the [accused rapist]. In 25% of the cases where they can get a result, they excluded the primary suspect.”& once again, Kanin’s major study of a mid-size Midwestern U.S. city over the course of 9 years found that 41% of all rape claims were false. Kanin also studied the police records of two unnamed large state universities, and found that in three years, 50% of the 64 rapes reported to campus police were >DETERMINED TO BE FALSE, WITHOUT THE USE OF POLYGRAPHS<. An independent evaluation of Air Force rape allegations revealed a false accusation rate of 60%. McDowell, Charles P., Ph.D. “False Allegations.” Forensic Science Digest.So we have DNA tests & university records determining that large percentages of rape allegations are false without even needing lie detectors. The FBI, the police & the Air Force don't just eliminate you as a suspect or define a rape accusation false on "intuition" alone. In fact, given the stereotyping of presumed male guilt & female innocence, there would have to be substantial amounts of evidence to exonerate a man accused of rape. I find it silly (& annoying) that I even need to explain this to you.The closing words in Greer's study really jumped out of the page."It seems clear that the 2% false claim figure, which has pervaded LDF discourse, has no basis in fact. Since this figure is clearly unsupported, there is no justification for shifting the burden of proof or redefining consent in rape crimes in accordance with this figure."“To refuse to inquire in mens rea…[may turn] rape into a strict liability offense where, in the absence of consent, the man is guilty of rape regardless of whether he (or anyone) would have recognized nonconsent in the circumstances.”Professor Susan Estrich, ("The Truth Behind the Legal Dominance 2% False Rape Claim figure).

  34. 40

    Those facts probably explain why 2 different units of AAUP (The American Association of University Professors) have criticized the OCR's new standard.The first isGregory F. Scholtz, Director of the Department of Academic Freedom, Tenure, & GovernanceThe second isAnn E. Green, Chair of the AAUP's Committee on Women in the Academic Profession and AAUP President Cary NelsonEven though campus procedures are not criminal ones, the accusation is still certain to damage someone's career & drastically alter their future. A professor would be fined with scant prospect of regaining his prestige & earning power. A student would be expelled & his transcript would carry a notation of the 'misconduct' that would potentially follow him forever. Even though the constitutional rights do not extend to campuses, the constitution sets out a fair, transparent & evidence-based standard that should be closely followed to guarantee the accused gets a fair trial. Given what is at stake, the accused SHOULD be presumed innocent! As Peter Berkowitz & Ilya Shapiro so effectively argued.In addition, the denial of due process has led to travesties in the past. One of the biggest examples of this was the Duke Lacrosse case. Mike Gaynor, the best commentator on the Duke case, commented: “the politically correct/hardline feminist folks especially in the media & at Duke wanted it to be true.” This led to the 88 professors signing a letter that was placed in The Chronicle that basically accused the defendants of racism & rape prior to their being tried by the courts or the university.That is the educational climate these men are already dealing with! The views feminists push of men on campus as predators are based on flawed studies & stats. But you demonstrate that even in this environment which is blatantly biased & hostile towards men, you are only concerned with the civil rights of the accuser (women) whom are proven liars 40-60% of the time. If a woman gets caught making a false accusation, what penalties will she be subject to? Is she expelled or fired? Is the 'misconduct' put on her transcript? Think hard about who is really choosing between safety & getting an education here.The OCR's interpretation of title IX is also a restriction of free speech & achedemic freedom. By making professors & students highly vulnerable to accusations of sexual harassment, the OCR encourages both self-censorship & the punishment of open discussion.The burden of proof should be on the accuser because in addition to everything stated above, there is much encouragement & many incentives in place for women to make false allegations of rape.

  35. 41

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_statistics#False_reportingAuthors A.W. Burgess and R.R. Hazelwood observe that "little is published which addresses the issue and concept of false allegation." The classification of "false reporting" makes no distinction between women who wilfully misreport and women who mistakenly identify innocent men.[14] Figures on false reporting used by journalists have ranged from 2% to 50% depending on their sources:"… one explanation for such a wide range in the statistics might simply be that they come from different studies of different populations… But there's also a strong political tilt to the debate. A low number would undercut a belief about rape as being as old as the story of Joseph and Potiphar's wife: that some women, out of shame or vengeance … claim that their consensual encounters or rebuffed advances were rapes. If the number is high, on the other hand, advocates for women who have been raped worry it may also taint the credibility of the genuine victims of sexual assault."[15]

  36. 42

    Razlo, at no point have I relied on Brownmiller's citation. As I've already pointed out, research has been done since 1994, when the article you're so fond of was written, as you would know if you had paid attention to it beyond "Yay! It says what I want!" That research demonstrates that police decisions on the topic are biased against the accuser as compared to independent decisions made on the evidence in case files. The military also has a long history of cleaning up its record on sexual assault by declaring accusers to be non-credible. But you just keep clinging to the ignorance of 1994 and trusting in authorities.Of course, you don't want to trust in authorities when it comes to these civil rights decisions, do you? Because they make a mistake that isn't in the favor of the accused so rarely that it makes the news when it happens. Hmm. Going to learn from those tiny numbers? No, because you don't care how many victims lose their civil rights if that means it ever, even once, happens to someone who is falsely accused. You haven't even paid one word of attention to the consequences to victims who lose in a system biased against them.And yes, of course an organization that advocates for faculty wants the rules withdrawn. They very much prefer that the balance of power be tilted toward the professors. That doesn't mean there's anything wrong with these rules. It simply means that there are competing interests. You still haven't given any reason that the interests of victims should be ignored.

  37. 43

    Your "other studies", were conducted by feminists who broaden the definition of rape to a ridiculous degree to produce higher estimates on "rapes" & a lower estimate of false rape accusations. They do this because they know they can make a pretty good name (& profitable career) for themselves in this female centric society by supporting the feminist's rape narratives. You ignore this because these feminists are producing results YOU want to hear."The false rape research was done in 1994". So?! Are women any less vindictive today? Has feminist governance waned at all since 94? Indeed there is much evidence (such as the recent Sharon Osbourne, Duke Lacrosse, & Dominique Strauss-Kahn fiascos) to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that both of these factors have actually compounded exponentially since then. Making a very strong case that false rape accusations are more than likely a HELL of a lot more common today than "rape" is. It takes a genuine psychopath from the extreme minority to commit actual rape. It only takes an angry woman who feels taken advantage of to make a false accusation. Yet who do feminists want to lay the burden of proof on again? Women? Standard!"That research demonstrates that police decisions on the topic are biased against the accuser [AS THEY SHOULD BE ACCORDING TO THE LAW] as compared to independent decisions made on the evidence in case files."So basically, you believe in the ludicrous pattern established by Nifong (an irredeemable anti-male feminist): Never permit the accused to publicly present proof of their innocence. (Doing so would end the case in five minutes.) Instead denounce them on rumor & hearsay; rouse public opinion against them; & create the expectation that they deserve to be convicted (guilty or not). Convict them not based on standard criminal procedures, but on whether or not "independents" feel like the accused is guilty. Well, in a culture dominated by feminist rape hysteria & incentives for women to falsely accuse men of…anything, normal unbigoted people, (in other words, non-feminists) would see a very severe flaw in that reasoning. This is the same standard used in the middle ages against gypsies, witches, & jews.Following the Dominique Strauss case, "victims" rights advocates were disappointed & outraged because:"The dismissal relayed a chilling message, that rich & powerful men were likely to get away with sexual assaults."It doesn't matter to them that the accuser changed her story 3 times & therefore destroyed her credibility, all that matters to them is ruining the life of a man (any man) who is accused of rape. Those people are your ilk.Rape crisis centers usually see a drop in reported rapes in the aftermath of high profile cases, especially those in which the prosecution failed like in the case of the Duke Lacrosse players. & speaking of Duke, that school expelled students, cancelled an athletic season & fired a veteran 16 year coach, all without any process or hearing whatsoever, & without examining any evidence. All this was in contravention of promises made in the student handbook.Your ideology precludes such conclusions & considerations. Why?To quote Chapin:"Feminists despise equality. They look for the government to exert itself as a means of fulfilling their every wish. Feminist don't care about equality or justice, their interests lie in female supremacy alone. Feminists wish to benefit women in isolation & are suspicious of anything that benefits men. They could care less about the fate of half of the world's population. Opposing female supremacy is the default position for anybody who believes in equality. Feminists are indifferent to the suffering of innocents & think that men can even learn from false charges of rape. They are wicked & we must verbally oppose them until our flesh oxidizes into dust."

  38. 44

    With feminist you're either FOR putting any & every man accused of rape behind bars, or you're a rape advocate. To hell with the reasons, incentives & encouragements for women today to falsely accuse men of rape, to hell with the fact the definition of "rape" has been broadened to include ANYTHING a woman claims it to be. To hell with the fact a woman caught making a false accusation suffers no penalties whatsoever, & to hell with the high preponderance of false rape claims that destroy innocent men's lives. None of that matters because to feminists, even If a million innocent men's lives are ruined, it doesn't make up for one woman who couldn't convince a jury that her consensual sex was actually rape because she regretted it the following morning."of course an organization that advocates for faculty wants the rules withdrawn. They very much prefer that the balance of power be tilted toward the professors."So let me understand your reasoning. Faculty organizations & highly accredited professionals like Ilya Shapiro protest this mandate because it means their rapist college professors might actually get pinched?! Well, even if that unbelievably asinine contention was true, how do you account for all of these fine people's stern objections? Many aren't even affiliated with faculty organizations. Some are even from student rights organizations. Shouldn't that clue you in that there IS something definitely wrong with these rules? Let me guess, they're all heartless rape apologists as well.You still haven't given any rational reason why the due process rights of the accused should be stripped away, aside from the typical anti-male feminist narratives.

  39. 45

    Really, Razlo? How was rape defined before the researchers whose papers I reported on, and how did that change? Nice to see you get all angry still without the research to back you up, though. Have the nasty women been all mean to you? Do you need a sucker? Is that why you keep bringing up events that are unrelated to the balancing of the civil rights of the accuser and the accused? Is that why you need to distort my positions and even misquote me?Yes, there are people who are upset that this change is happening. If you read their reasoning, all of it has to do with concern for the accused. Most of it is based in criminal practices, which are different for reasons I've already explained. None of it explains why the accused should be favored over the accuser when it comes to the right to an education. Only two things come close to that. The first is your assertion that lying about being raped is more common than being raped. That's contradicted by heaps of research, even if you don't like it. The second is the idea that accusers face no consequences for false accusations, to which your examples have already given the lie.But don't let me stop you. Froth on, despite my blog having been moved for a week and a half. Nice to see how you've been keeping that eye on me, though.

  40. 46

    I think most normal people's perception of rape includes; tearing clothes, biting, kicking, screaming, & violence. When feminist think of rape however:*"Sex is the cross on which women are crucified … Sex can only be adequately defined as universal rape." Hodee Edwards, ‘Rape defines Sex’ *"In a patriarchal society all heterosexual intercourse is rape because women, as a group, are not strong enough to give meaningful consent." Catherine MacKinnon in Professing Feminism: Cautionary Tales from the Strange World of Women's Studies, p. 129.. *"I claim that rape exists any time sexual intercourse occurs when it has not been initiated by the woman, out of her own genuine affection and desire." From Robin Morgan, "Theory and Practice: Pornography and Rape" in "Going too Far," 1974. *"Politically, I call it rape whenever a woman has sex & feels violated."-Catherine MacKinnon etc, etc…The "researchers" in your "studies" say that if a man has sex with a woman who is intoxicated, then he has committed rape. The problem with this is, no, he hasn't. You & you alone are responsible for how much you drink. If you drink excessively & end up sleeping with somebody you later regret, learn from that mistake & move on. That goes for men & women.Stephanie, instead of trying to denounce me as a bitter "hater" speaking from poor past relationships with women, I wonder if you could focus your efforts towards actually thinking & responding to my arguments & the relevant facts, stats, studies & quotes I've provided? I've given you several testimonials from deeply concerned, credible people, (including student's rights advocacy groups), who vehemently denounce this mandate not because of criminal practices, but because of how it is certain to utterly destroy innocent men's lives in many ways I've already explained.

  41. 47

    I'll tell you why I don't like your "studies" Stephanie. "Advocacy research" is worthless.Your "studies" are conducted by or under feminists or other misandric individuals who support a confirmed supremacist ideology. If you can't see the problem with this, let me explain. Supremacists are likely to bias their research methods to yield their desired results. If you investigate your "studies", you would find that sure enough, your feminist "researchers" broaden the definition of "rape" & narrow the definition of what makes a false accusation to support their pre-determined conclusions. I wouldn't consider a "study" conducted by Germany in the late 30's which asserts Jews to be inferior to be a credible one. Neither are any of the "studies" you've provided for the same reasons.So what makes my studies more credible? Well, for one, these researchers (such as the ones mentioned at False Rape Society, & "S.A.V.E.") have nothing to gain by biasing their results. Indeed they actually have much to lose by yielding results counter to feminist narratives. Several actually put their entire career (& lives) in serious jeopardy for merely challenging feminist agendas. Not the least of which is rape & the notion that, (see above quotes) all men are "potential" or "immanent" rapists, & all (ALL) women are "potential" or "immanent" victims of male rapists. This "Dear Colleague" mandate is an obvious extension of this bigotry. Once again, here are some reasons a vindictive women would make a false allegation of "rape":*to gain victim status, *To gain monetary compensation *Fame/ a "badge of honour" *Revenge*An excuse for regretted consensual sex, poor &/or irresponsible behavior, or being unfaithful.*Zero threat of being prosecuted for making a false allegation. (I asked you before if a confirmed false accuser has their transcript marked in the same way a convicted "rapist" would but you never answered that question).So, how could a rational person conclude then that men are more likely to rape, than a woman is likely to falsely accuse of rape? Especially since I've explained that only a psychologically unstable minority of people are able to commit actual rape?! Especially since I've explained that only 0.002% of American men are convicted rapists & credible research shows 40-60% of rape allegations are false?!I did say I'd be keeping an eye out on you but that was before I realized how small & insignificant your blog really is. I'll carry this to conclusion & then, I don't know. There isn't a shortage of feminists out there to expose as fools. If I got nothing else to do, I might move on to your other lies but, my efforts would be much more fruitfully spent in places where more rationally minded people (in other words, non feminists) are likely to meet. There is measurable evidence that feminist blogs & websites are seeing much less traffic, while Men's Rights blogs & sites are seeing exponentially more. Speaking the truth probably has a lot to do with that.

Comments are closed.