The Other McCain

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

The Rape of Credibility: Feminism’s Agenda and the Jackie Coakley Scandal

Posted on | December 9, 2014 | 99 Comments

@ChuckCJohnson reports that the young woman pictured above is named Jackie Coakley, and that she was the main source for Rolling Stone‘s sensational (and now discredited) story about an alleged 2012 gang rape at a University of Virginia fraternity house.

Can I say for certain that Coakley has been correctly identified? I cannot, but (a) I have named my source, (b) so far as I know, neither Rolling Stone nor anyone else has denied this identification of Coakley as their source, and (c) you can check it out for yourself.

The Internet is a wonderful thing. Google is your friend.

“I think a crime of rape off campus or a crime of rape on campus ought to be treated the same way. And the sooner it’s treated the same way, the sooner the message is going to get out that you can’t get away with something on campus that you couldn’t get away with someplace else. . . . It’s high time to make sure that a crime is a crime wherever it is committed and treated the same way. And when it is treated universally the same way we will have less rape on campuses.”
Sen. Chuck Grassley, Iowa Republican

A woman with an agenda named Sabrina Rubin Erdely was hunting for a nice juicy campus rape story to “report” and Jackie Coakley was apparently willing to tell Erdely such a story. Some people are hashtagging this #UVAHoax, and I am not prepared to say that the Rolling Stone is a hoax, per se. It was certainly a shabby excuse for journalism. Rolling Stone raped its own credibility and, in doing so, exposed the fundamental problem with feminism’s “rape culture” narrative, as Robby Soave explains quite well at Reason magazine:

Suppose Jackie’s story was not so incredible. Suppose that premeditated, ritualistic gang rape was a plausible occurrence at the average college. Suppose that one in every five — or four, or three — female students found themselves in serious danger of assault the moment they set foot outside their dorm rooms. Suppose that America’s campuses really did rival Somalia in terms of the violence faced by young women. . . .
On the other hand, suppose the details of Jackie’s story were exaggerated, or in doubt. Suppose that premeditated, ritualistic gang rape was highly implausible. Suppose that cherry-picked statistics from a few unrepresentative studies were clearly masking an extraordinary decline in rape rates nationwide over the past few decades. Suppose the best available evidence suggested that campuses were, on the whole, safer for women than other environments. Suppose that campus sexual assaults were largely the work of a few sociopaths and nearly always the result of alcohol-induced incapacitation.
Wouldn’t the supposed solution to the campus rape crisis look markedly different?

Please read the whole thing, but you get the basic point: What we have here is a conflict between (a) known facts about rape on college and university campuses, and (b) controversial and tendentious claims about campus rape made by feminist ideologues.

“The problem is [Erdely] found a story that was embellished. It didn’t hold up.”
Rolling Stone staffer, quoted in the New York Observer

“According to Got News, Jackie Coakley has misled several students at her high school and college about her sexual history, suggesting she may have completely fabricated rape stories and sexual abuse within her past relationships with men.”
Benjamin Simon, Inquisitor

Here’s the thing: We don’t know what we don’t know.

That is to say, drunk college kids — and massive alcohol consumption is nearly always involved in these incidents — are unreliable narrators about what they did while they were drunk. The incessant demand of feminists that we must “believe the victims” requires us to be clairvoyant, to read the minds of two drunk teenagers and to witness (with our extra-sensory perception) the scene in a darkened dorm room where a sexual encounter occurred to which the only actual witnesses were the drunk teenagers themselves.

Indisputable evidence is generally lacking in these cases, and the testimony of the accused and accuser are all we have to evaluate. What happens is that we make what we call “common sense” judgments. Alas, many people’s version of “common sense” is heavily influenced by feminist rhetoric that depicts all males as sexual oppressors, which requires the rest of us to reply, “No, you’re crazy.”

Is Jackie Coakley the source for Rolling Stone‘s story? Did the incident described in that story actually happen? We don’t know.

It is not “rape culture” to say we don’t know what happened, and it is not ethical journalism to report as fact things you don’t know.

Chuck Johnson says that Jackie Coakley is Rolling Stone‘s source, and that she has been a feminist activist since high school. It is now the job of reporters to investigate and discover as many of the facts as can be discovered about this story, in an effort to determine how it was that Rolling Stone got suckered into this journalistic catastrophe.

Prediction: Within a week, we will see Rolling Stone‘s source being interviewed on a major network TV program.

 





 

Comments

99 Responses to “The Rape of Credibility: Feminism’s Agenda and the Jackie Coakley Scandal”

  1. RobinDTaxpayer
    December 9th, 2014 @ 11:27 pm

    She wanted to “make a difference.”

  2. RS
    December 10th, 2014 @ 12:37 am

    The problem with the story is that it is too perfect. That’s what caused my antennae to quiver when this first started making news. And the problem with “perfect” stories is that they have details. Those details can be checked and refuted if they are fiction. The failure or unwillingness to do that checking is know in the law biz as “falling in love with your own case,” such that one doesn’t deal with or investigate inconsistencies, discrepancies and so forth. It never works out well in the end.

    (BTW, the Adware redirect is now gone. Ace was having a similar problem for commenters.)

  3. Kirby McCain
    December 10th, 2014 @ 1:29 am

    I have a post on this whole train wreck of a story tomorrow. Until then I will leave you with a quote from Town Hall.

    “A generation that jumps to conclusions on the basis of its own emotions, or succumbs to the passions or rhetoric of others, deserves to lose the freedom that depends on the rule of law.” – Thomas Sowell

  4. K-Bob
    December 10th, 2014 @ 1:43 am

    We have an epidemic of aging former hippies who ache to bring back the protest days of the Sixties so they can feel good about their miserable waste of a life.

    • The supposed Campus rape epidemic• The supposed wave of white cops  murdering black youths• The supposed War on Women• The imported ebola crisis• The imported illegal alien youths crisis• The AGW climate scam

    All of those go hand in hand with their intense desire to feel young again, leading protests and sit-ins. Only this time as well-paid leaders and organizers: the Grievance industry.

    To make it worse, and even more reminiscent of the Sixties, they’ve also brought along their xenophobic behavior and outright hatred of others.

    • An increase in phony claims about whites  becoming a minority.• The increase in intolerance of Jews,  and increasingly, Catholics.• Increasing calls for a race war.

    And on the list of KKK-style rhetoric and behavior goes.

    This is what you get when you make class warfare so important.
    This is what you get when you call for more and more government intervention in our lives. This is what you get when you have spoiled, unproductive, immature people claiming to know how they can do a better job running our economy.

    In fact, it’s what you get when you have anyone claiming they can do a better job running the economy. More phony causes, and more divisive, angry behavior.

  5. Zohydro
    December 10th, 2014 @ 1:56 am

    You’ve left out “homophobia” and “marriage equality”…

  6. RKae
    December 10th, 2014 @ 2:01 am

    College students dream of being able to say, “I was THERE, man!”

    …Now they just need their “Ohio State moment.” Don’t have one? Manufacture it.

  7. RKae
    December 10th, 2014 @ 2:06 am

    To solve the rape epidemic, I suggest that young people make absolutely certain that they have consent.

    They need to get a written document to that effect.

    I realize that sounds cold and emotionless for such a passionate act, so I suggest that they make it FUN. Instead of just simply signing the document, they could make a party out of it. Invite friends over. Maybe dress up to make it special. The man could rent a tuxedo, and so could a few of his closest friends. The woman could get a large and beautiful gown for the occasion.

    Have some good food to mark the day. I think a big cake would be splendid! There should be dancing and champagne!

    Of course, this is all very expensive. I advise only doing it once in a lifetime.

  8. Evi L. Bloggerlady
    December 10th, 2014 @ 2:14 am
  9. PeterP
    December 10th, 2014 @ 2:40 am

    Jackie Coakley will be a media superstar soon. Could a reality show be far off? Perhaps a book? She’s gonna make some serious cabbage.

  10. PeterP
    December 10th, 2014 @ 2:41 am

    The story is chock full of every stereotype a feminist ever held about rich, white fraternity boys. Every single one can be found in the first 3 paragraphs of Erdely’s vile narrative.

  11. K-Bob
    December 10th, 2014 @ 2:42 am

    Probably because I’m a H8r.

  12. PeterP
    December 10th, 2014 @ 2:45 am

    This Erdely article is so chock full of stereotypes about white frat boys it would be like someone writing an article about black men and starting it out as follows:

    “Three lazy, shiftless black men with gold teeth, stockings on their head, listening to Lil Wayne on their headphones while eating watermelon and fried chicken attacked a white woman – you know how they love white women – in a crack house on South Central in LA last night.”

    Would anyone believe this nonsense?

  13. concern00
    December 10th, 2014 @ 3:11 am

    It’s been a good week, what with this UVA nonsense coming right on top of Lena Dunham’s white lie. Why is that it is seemingly impossible to hold liberals to account in the same way that a conservative would be?

  14. Adjoran
    December 10th, 2014 @ 3:41 am

    Her story to the three ‘friends’ – one was contacted by WaPo – was entirely different. No frat mentioned, and she claimed to have been forced to perform oral sex on multiple men. No evidence of injury, but clearly upset, he said, and declined the offer to be taken to the ER. She only wanted someone to stay with her in her dorm that night.

    That was in 2012, allegedly. She told her story in some version to group counselors the next school year, who urged her to report it. She finally filed a complaint with the school after her adviser asked about her failing performance.

    UVA’s administrators aren’t Good Old Boys. More feminists than McCain could offend, and the Prez is an old cronie of Elizabeth Warren’s. A female ‘speaking truth to power’ was right up their alley, but they let her choose between a police report, a school complaint with a formal hearing, ‘mediation’ with the attacker(s), or nothing. She chose nothing and they saw nothing to pursue.

    They knew it was crap. No way they let it slide otherwise.

    Enter Erdely, veteran of two previous rape stories, one withdrawn and the other questionable, as she ‘shopped around’ (HER phrase) to find a story she could use to grab attention and sell a screenplay.

    Wonder why the details changed so much? Why Erdely agreed not to contact anyone else?

    Because most of it was concocted by Erdely, with or without Jackie’s assistance.

    Jackie seems a sick, broken, disturbed young woman. She didn’t file a false police report or even complaint against another student, though. She dropped her case.

    The fraud is Erdely, and RS knew it.

  15. FenelonSpoke
    December 10th, 2014 @ 4:19 am

    That is brilliant; Thanks.

  16. Wombat_socho
    December 10th, 2014 @ 6:45 am

    You can only cover so much of the SJW crap in one comment.

  17. Dana
    December 10th, 2014 @ 7:12 am

    Senator Grassley’s statement is spot on, but if we treat rape on campus exactly like rape off campus, the left will be deprived of a weapon to push their agenda.

    And their weapon is the college administration. By treating on campus rape as something to be reported to the college administration, rather than to the police, it becomes a problems of politics rather than a problem of law enforcement. Very few college administrators are trained in law enforcement; they are concerned with money and grants and publicity, and wind up responding in ways which address those concerns, not doing something really radical like apprehending the assailants. Then, when an alleged assailant is named, he is dragged before not a court of law, where his guilt must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt, but some form of board or hearing or tribunal, in which the standards of evidence and proof don’t really exist.

  18. Watcher of Weasels » Watcher’s Council Nominations – ‘Like A Rolling Stone’ Edition
    December 10th, 2014 @ 7:16 am

    […] Other McCain – The Rape of Credibility: Feminism’s Agenda and the Jackie Coakley Scandal submitted by The […]

  19. Dana
    December 10th, 2014 @ 7:18 am

    If that photo really is of Miss Coakley, and if the woman pictured really is the “Jackie” who was Miss Erdely’s source, she has the one obvious attribute which could make her a star: she’s a babe! Perfect white teeth, great looks, beautiful smile, seems like she’s thin at least from what we can see, and, of course, she’s a white girl. She’s an absolute media dream!

  20. Zohydro
    December 10th, 2014 @ 7:33 am

    She somewhat resembles that tart, Britney Spears…

  21. Dana
    December 10th, 2014 @ 8:17 am

    Our esteemed host wrote:

    Indisputable evidence is generally lacking in these cases, and the testimony of the accused and accuser are all we have to evaluate. What happens is that we make what we call “common sense” judgments. Alas, many people’s version of “common sense” is heavily influenced by feminist rhetoric that depicts all males as sexual oppressors, which requires the rest of us to reply, “No, you’re crazy.”

    And that is the problem for the feminists: the standard of proof for criminal conviction is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, and he said/she said doesn’t meet that standard. There has to be more evidence, and frequently, there isn’t.

    This means that many rapists who really are guilty are going to get away with the crime. It used to be said that it is better for a hundred guilty men to go free than one innocent man to be unjustly convicted, but say that to a feminist concerning rape, and she’ll slap you.

    Back in 2007, concerning the Duke lacrosse not-rape case, a commenter styling himself Harkonnendog posted this on Amanda Marcotte’s site, Pandagon:

    Rape is a crime unlike others. In any rape case, but especially in a rape case where a black woman accuses a white man, the rapist should be considered guilty until he proves his innocence. And he must prove his innocence not beyond a reasonable doubt, but beyond any possible doubt. The Durham rapists have not done so, by any means.

    People claim this is unfair, but 400 years of slavery and countless millenium of male on female rape make this not only fair, but necessary. Let’s just say the accusation of rape IS false, that doesn’t take away the rapists (yes, they’re still rapists even if these particular men didn’t rape this particular women) genealogical guilt. How many slaves have their forefathers raped? Nobody asks that question.

    And I’ve no doubt these men would be raping slaves if they could get away with it. They are white and rich, they are jocks, they attend an expensive university, (no doubt with money saved from when their families owned plantations) and they hired black strippers. Even worse, they requested white strippers first, which proves they are bigots.

    People who talk about the details of guilt in this particular case are missing the forest for the trees. The narrative is bigger than 3 white boys whose lives are inconsequential compared to the sweep of history- of the descendants of slaves getting just recompense on the descendants of slave owners.

    I have the original links, but the lovely Miss Marcotte scrubbed the whole post, and then the entire site, when she went on to bigger and supposedly better things. However, I’m certain that Harkonnendog believed every word he typed, and that the Pandagonistae pretty much agreed with him.

  22. Dana
    December 10th, 2014 @ 8:19 am

    Because. Just because.

  23. JeffWeimer
    December 10th, 2014 @ 9:23 am

    Don’t forget, they should have a symbol – a small token – of their mutual consent. Perhaps the exchange of rings?

  24. RS
    December 10th, 2014 @ 9:51 am

    It’s probably not a wild stretch to think that the most strident “believe Jackie no matter what” supporters would claim membership in the so-called “reality based community,” distinguishing themselves from those of us who commemorate such things as, oh say, a Supreme Being assuming human form via the mechanism of a Virgin Birth. The thing is “reality-based” is, in its essence, based upon evidence. Yet, when confronted with actual evidence, the “reality-based” types flee to the comforting embrace of a belief based solely upon faith: Men=Evil; Women=Good. If that’s not a religion, I don’t know what is. This campus rape crisis is the Left’s “Flying Spaghetti Monster.”

  25. Watcher’s Council Nominations – ‘Like A Rolling Stone’ Edition | therightplanet.com
    December 10th, 2014 @ 10:01 am

    […] Other McCain – The Rape of Credibility: Feminism’s Agenda and the Jackie Coakley Scandal submitted by The […]

  26. sobxdude
    December 10th, 2014 @ 10:08 am

    She is a babe, alright. But STAY AWAY from this train wreck. whew!

  27. Dana
    December 10th, 2014 @ 10:16 am

    You needn’t worry about me: I’m 61 years old and have been married to another absolute babe for 35 years, 6 months and 21 days, and I ain’t changing that up now!

  28. Squid Hunt
    December 10th, 2014 @ 10:25 am

    You can’t trick us. You’re just trying to oppress women with your patriarchical concepts of equality in responsibility!

  29. Evi L. Bloggerlady
    December 10th, 2014 @ 10:28 am

    Erdely threw Jackie under the bus and then Rolling Stone backed it up and ran her over again.

  30. Art Deco
    December 10th, 2014 @ 10:28 am

    Erdely, Rolling Stone, the UVa press office, and Jackie herself have had nearly four days to say that CC Johnson has identified the wrong person. Since people jumped all over him for misidentifying a photograph of a participant in a 2011 demonstration as Jackie, I’m beginning to doubt it’s because no one has tipped them off. If this shoe fails to drop in the next couple of days, we can say it’s her.

    Jackie will have an opportunity to correct the record, and that may mean Erdely’s under the bus.

  31. Art Deco
    December 10th, 2014 @ 10:29 am

    She’s had cosmetic work on her teeth.

  32. Evi L. Bloggerlady
    December 10th, 2014 @ 10:30 am

    Maybe Belle Knox can hook her up with a job in Hollywood (or the Valley).

  33. Squid Hunt
    December 10th, 2014 @ 10:31 am

    That’s the only way they can recover this fiasco is to give her sainthood.

  34. petetheelder
    December 10th, 2014 @ 10:51 am

    It is important to note that in the original story RS this was not true: “That is to say, drunk college kids — and massive alcohol consumption is nearly always involved in these incidents — are unreliable narrators about what they did while they were drunk.”

    Ederly was explicit that Jackie was sober during the supposed incident. Most of the very first paragraph of the story was all about Jackie being sober. She intentionally included that detail to deflect that potential criticism.

    So many other “rape” stories include drunk participants that Ederly was determined to either find a student who claimed to be raped while sober or to change the story so that she was sober.

    It would be informative to hear from Jackie’s friends if they thought she was sober that night, but I don’t think any reporter who has interviewed them asked that or else they didn’t report the answer.

  35. Adobe_Walls
    December 10th, 2014 @ 10:52 am

    On the other hand she could be a bag of cats.

  36. Dana
    December 10th, 2014 @ 10:54 am

    So? They still turned out great.

  37. Adobe_Walls
    December 10th, 2014 @ 11:00 am

    Now that’s just mean. Kudos

  38. Adobe_Walls
    December 10th, 2014 @ 11:16 am

    Because most of those responsible for that job aid and abet the liars, when they aren’t in fact lying themselves. You know, for the cause.
    As for Dunham’ white lie, it’s likely to be known as slander in the not too distant future.

  39. Watcher’s Council Nominations – ‘Like A Rolling Stone’ Edition | Virginia Right!
    December 10th, 2014 @ 11:16 am

    […] Other McCain – The Rape of Credibility: Feminism’s Agenda and the Jackie Coakley Scandal submitted by The […]

  40. Zohydro
    December 10th, 2014 @ 11:26 am

    You are fortunate that I’ve full faith in your cisheteronormative patriarchal fervour and Judeo-Christian ideological purity, or I would have denounced you…

  41. Adobe_Walls
    December 10th, 2014 @ 11:36 am

    There are already multiple lawsuits pushing back against these kangaroo courts. At least a couple have been successful and more will be in the future. As the number of successful suits and their payouts grow, at some point the universities will attempt to defend themselves citing the coercion of the Departments of Justice and Education.For some bright attorney versed in the ins and outs of Title IV, there could be the makings of a class action lawsuit.

  42. Zohydro
    December 10th, 2014 @ 11:37 am

    Still photogenic, like, say, St Kate!

  43. Zohydro
    December 10th, 2014 @ 11:40 am

    “St Jackie” she is, then!

  44. PCachu
    December 10th, 2014 @ 11:57 am

    “It is not! I resent that! Slander is spoken. In print, it’s libel.”

  45. JohnnyL53
    December 10th, 2014 @ 12:29 pm

    The ‘not drunk” detail was just to give them an out about the changing story and explicit then fuzzy details. Everything changes depending on what time of day it is not cause she was drunk but because she was obviously too traumatized to be able to remember much of anything.

  46. Watcher’s Council Nominations – ‘Like A Rolling Stone’ Edition | NoisyRoom.net
    December 10th, 2014 @ 12:45 pm

    […] Other McCain – The Rape of Credibility: Feminism’s Agenda and the Jackie Coakley Scandal submitted by The […]

  47. Dana
    December 10th, 2014 @ 12:50 pm

    Both Miss Erdely and “Jackie” are under the bus, having dived under there themselves, “Jackie” by not telling the truth, and Miss Erdely by not checking out the story.

  48. RKae
    December 10th, 2014 @ 12:50 pm

    You know what they say:

    Hot, single, sane – you only need 2 out of 3.

  49. Trevor Loudon's New Zeal Blog » Watcher’s Council Nominations – ‘Like A Rolling Stone’ Edition
    December 10th, 2014 @ 12:50 pm

    […] Other McCain – The Rape of Credibility: Feminism’s Agenda and the Jackie Coakley Scandal submitted by The […]

  50. Art Deco
    December 10th, 2014 @ 12:59 pm

    Unless they were hideously stained by tobacco use (unlikely at her age) or mottled from a reaction to antibiotics (rare), the cosmetic work done did not improve them. It just makes her look like Joe Biden or Paula Deen.