The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

#RapeCulture Eggs and Omelettes

Posted on | May 21, 2014 | 32 Comments

Last night I linked A.J. Delgado’s item about the suspicious nature of the rape “epidemic” on college campuses. This phenomenon contradicts common sense: Overall, rates of violent crime (including rape) in the United States are on a downward trajectory, and universities have undertaken extraordinary programs to raise awareness (for both men and women) to prevent rape. However, the reported incidence of rape has actually increased on campuses, and Delgado asks: “Did all the bad guys suddenly decide to enroll in universities?”

This trend makes no sense, you see, and this strange trend calls for scrutiny of the individual cases that comprise the trend. Professor William Jacobson at Legal Insurrection notes a case at Columbia University, where a male student-athlete has filed a federal lawsuit, claiming that his due-process rights were violated when the university punished him for alleged “sexual misconduct” that was never reported as a crime. The lawsuit describes a one-night hook-up between the student-athlete and a female student in her Columbia dorm room on May 12, 2013, and alleges:

Several weeks into the Fall 2013 semester and nearly five (5) months after the one night of sexual activity, Jane Doe decided to report the Evening of May 12 as “non-consensual” sexual activity. No contemporaneous report was ever made nor was any police report was ever filed by Jane Doe in connection with her sexual activity with Plaintiff John Doe; no visit to a medical care facility was ever made by Jane Doe in connection with such sexual activity either; and indeed, no allegation of improper sexual behavior was made by Jane Doe for nearly five (5) months after the one night of sexual activity with John Doe. Notwithstanding the foregoing, and further notwithstanding a paucity of direct evidence, including an unforgiveable lack of administrative continuity and simple, practical good sense during the investigatory process, Defendant Columbia found John Doe guilty of sexual misconduct in having non-consensual sex with Jane Doe and has issued Plaintiff John Doe an order of suspension from Columbia University until Fall 2015.

Here’s the important thing: We don’t know, and in fact cannot know, what actually happened on May 12, 2013, because the only witnesses to the sexual activity were the two people involved.

As usual in such cases, it’s “he-said/she-said,” with no evidence or testimony beyond the competing claims of a woman who says it was rape and a man who says it was consensual. We can, perhaps, deduce a belief one way or the other based on circumstances, but we can never really know — and yet the student-athlete was suspended on the basis of this university disciplinary procedure, where the rights of the accused and standards of evidence are not the same as in a criminal court. He was, in effect, found guilty without trial.

This is simply wrong. If the guy committed rape, he should be prosecuted as a criminal, and if the accuser was unwilling to pursue criminal prosecution, then the university cannot let its disciplinary process function as a pseudo-court where students are judged “guilty” of heinous crimes for which they never actually stood trial.

If incidents like this Columbia University case are typical of what is driving the campus rape “epidemic” trend — and I don’t claim to have done enough analysis to say that it is so — then we have a very serious problem: Colleges have become Darkness at Noon, like the Moscow “show trials” of the 1930s, where a political agenda incites a prosecutorial zeal that tramples the innocent under foot.

There is an old (and extremely cynical) phrase that was used by Soviet apologists to defend the inhumanities perpetrated by the Communists: “You have to break a few eggs to make an omelette.” That is to say, the murderous nature of the Bolshevik regime was excusable to admirers of the Soviets, because the victims (eggs) were killed (broken) to create a socialist order (the omelette).

Knowing what we know about feminists and their agenda — which demonizes men and stigmatizes heterosexuality — what political purpose is served by the proliferation of “sexual misconduct” accusations on campus, especially when the statistics are inflated by the inclusion of cases where no criminal charge was ever made?

The accused are just “eggs,” broken in the process of making this feminist “omelette,” which has a suspiciously totalitarian flavor.

 

Bookmark and Share

Comments

  • Cactus Ed

    Make note of the linguistic terminology, and especially that which has feminist genealogy.

    “Rape-culture” may not be so “rapey”…

  • dicentra

    DO NOT MISS this video wherein two very scary women defend this behavior.

    The assumptions underlying their “arguments” are worse than specious: they resemble Nazis trying to explain why Jews should never be heard.

  • http://www.journal14.com/ Dana

    T’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?

  • http://www.journal14.com/ Dana

    Rape, real rape, is, of course, a Crime Against Feminism as well as a crime against an individual. Trouble is, the standards of our criminal courts, proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, make rape cases very difficult to prove . . . and the feminists are up in arms about this. The standards have to be changed, to pretty much guilty until proven innocent, to level this playing field. They can’t do that in the criminal courts, but they damned sure seem to be able to do that on college campuses.

  • bridget

    There are also some interesting parallels to the whole “paycheck fairness” debacle. Back in 2009, the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act was justified because women were only earning seventy-seven cents to the man’s dollar! Five years later, women are still earning seventy-seven cents on the man’s dollar. This is apparently not a sign that Ledbetter ought to be repealed; rather, it’s an indication that we need more laws.

  • concern00

    Thank goodness we have such respected cultural icons as Whoopi Goldberg to advise us on rape-rape.

  • maniakmedic

    Is a one night stand – or sex in general – really worth the risk of possibly being accused of rape? I personally lean toward keeping it in one’s pants until married being the smarter choice. But what do I know? I’m just a sexually repressed prude (according to people who use their nether regions as their social opener).

  • Pingback: Egg Breaking Feminists Rule 5 | Batshit Crazy News

  • http://www.journal14.com/ Dana

    Or, what if the male in question is black a 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?

  • http://www.journal14.com/ Dana

    When you add alcohol, you subtract logic.

  • Pingback: Did @MarielHemingway Just Offer to Sell Herself to a ‘Saudi Sheik’? | Regular Right Guy

  • maniakmedic

    But not all these situations involve alcohol. I’ve watched plenty of people make really bad decisions completely sober. My favorite are people who get drunk specifically to justify their bad decisions.

  • Wombat_socho

    How Japanese of them.

  • Doug

    I’ve read about lots of these cases, and what seems to be happening is that the colleges have accepted the feminist claim that drunk women are legally incapable of consenting to sex, and therefore once the boy admits that he got drunk with the girl and that they had sex, he’s guilty of sexual assault, period, end of case. Any evidence that she initiated the sex, or enjoyed it, or said she wanted it, or continued to have a relationship with the boy afterwards is irrelevant, because the girl’s consent was ipso facto invalid. That is the only explanation for the results in the various cases that have been reported in the press.

  • Daniel O’Brien

    You mean “rape-rape”.

  • http://wizbangblog.com/ Adjoran

    The problem is that when adjusted for education, experience, and time with the company, all discrepancies disappear.

    In fact, women in upper management positions actually make a little more than men when the qualifications are “equalized” – but it isn’t enough to whine and cry about.

  • http://wizbangblog.com/ Adjoran

    The son of an old friend went to school last year and his Dad gave him permission cards which read, “I consent to sex with [John Doe] on [date] at [time]. I certify my judgment is not impaired by alcohol or drugs.” and a signature block, about the size of large business cards.

    I don’t know if he ever actually used them or not.

    I told his Dad the cards should be titled, “The Gift of the Vagi.”

  • Pingback: FMJRA 2.0: Satisfaction : The Other McCain