Trump administration to revisit Title IX

[zman]

So why would you imply that I am less concerned with justice? You come at the discussion from the wrong direction. It doesn't take much research to realize that we live in a man's world with all of the traditional biases. We are not very far away from a time when guys would brag about getting a coed drunk and getting a piece of ass. It is not all about persecuting poor innocent men, it is about giving women the strength to fight back against being treated like a sexual object. The world is changing and many do not want to lose there built in protections. Guys should just dial down their testosterone and look at it from the point of view from a young coed that gets treated like a tramp when they are sexually assaulted.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Yes. So let's hand due process to kangaroo courts held by school administrators. I guess as long as we only f*ck over a few innocent young men it's worth it?

Hell, change away as long as it's a just process. Clearly the current system isn't.

 

[Spoofin]

Thanks everyone for posting, but I'm really only interested in Cruze's thoughts on this story.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Pompous Elitist]

So why would you imply that I am less concerned with justice? You come at the discussion from the wrong direction. It doesn't take much research to realize that we live in a man's world with all of the traditional biases. We are not very far away from a time when guys would brag about getting a coed drunk and getting a piece of ass. It is not all about persecuting poor innocent men, it is about giving women the strength to fight back against being treated like a sexual object. The world is changing and many do not want to lose there built in protections. Guys should just dial down their testosterone and look at it from the point of view from a young coed that gets treated like a tramp when they are sexually assaulted.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Indoctrinated.

Scary.

 

[tato2001]

Indoctrinated.

Scary.

Not only indoctrinated, but absurdly and morally inconsistent.

1) it's effectively a '2 wrongs make a right' argument. "Since men have historically been able to use their position of dominance to get away with sexual assault, it is now OK to restrict our society's fundamental founding principles in order to make it easier to punish them:

2) it's a 'sins of the father' argument. For the sake of argument, I'll concede that this is a historical problem as Alchemy2u presents. However, the vast majority of those that benefitted from this circumstance are long past college. "Sorry young fella, but since I made some inappropriate moves against the ladies back in the day, you will now be presumed guilty. Hope it works out for you, I'm gonna go play golf."

3) And of course the craziest point: presuming that since men have historically had the power to get away with sexual assault, blanket policies restricting the ability of the accused to defend themselves are 'just'. The same logic could be used to argue that since privileged rich dudes can buy better legal counsel (like, say, OJ Simpson and his 'dream-team' attorneys), we should restrict the right to retain criminal lawyers. I would bet a lot of money that someday we'll see statistics on Title IX cases that show those punished are not just disproportionately men, but disproportionately poor minority men (those who can't afford to make a stink and file a lawsuit once an accusation comes their way). It doesn't get much more illiberal than enacting policies restricting due process that impact poor minorities more severely. Fifty years ago progressives would march in the streets when a black man was accused of rape by a white woman and punished without due process (Emmett Till, et. al.). My how the movement has changed.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/h...ations-are-against-minorities/article/2578329

And for an update on just a few recent lawsuits (there's many more) against Universities:

August 28th, Pitzer Dean conceals evidence: http://claremontindependent.com/pitzer-dean-concealed-evidence/

August 30th, Court bars Miami U from suspending accused male student: http://www.engelandmartin.com/feder...ty-suspending-student-accused-sexual-assault/

August 23rd, Judge blasts Penn State for never asking rape accuser for evidence: https://www.thecollegefix.com/post/35711/


July 31st, Judge halts suspension of male student that accused female partner of sexual assault: http://cornellsun.com/2017/07/30/ju...lleges-perverse-and-bizarre-title-ix-outcome/

July11, Settlement reached with Allegheny College over student accused of sexual assault: http://www.meadvilletribune.com/new...cle_ab5c2144-aa67-586b-91a7-58da209e7ec0.html

 

[Pompous Elitist]

From the Penn State story:

Title IX investigator Katharina Matic actually redacted Doe’s written statements at least twice, preventing the hearing panel from considering evidence that Roe’s claims were contradicted by witnesses for both parties and by Roe herself.

Judge ‘strains to understand’ why hearing chair excluded questions

Brann knocked down Penn State’s defense of its investigative practices and judgments made about which evidence and questions to allow in the proceeding, and said it violated its own rules to judge Doe responsible.

Doe has “demonstrated a likelihood of success on the merits of his due process claim,” Brann said, writing in a footnote that Doe hasn’t briefed him on the other claims...

The hearing chair had rejected these questions as seeking “new information” and “irrelevant.” The judge said he “strains to understand the hearing chair’s reasoning.”

Because the outcome of the proceeding depended on “credibility-based determinations,” the university was wrong to block “almost all” of Doe’s 22 questions for Roe, including her failure to produce a medical exam that allegedly followed the alleged digital penetration, Brann said.

The exam and related physical evidence were “certainly not new,” and they were “essential” to the panel’s credibility determination – particularly in light of an admission by Karen Feldbaum, associate director of student conduct, that she never asked Roe for the actual medical report. Brann said:

If produced in a redacted form, this medical exam could unquestionably affect the credibility of Roe by (1) confirming its ultimate existence, and (2) corroborating or discrediting her allegations against Doe.

 

[Pompous Elitist]

Part 2 of The Atlantic series. Bad Science.

https://www.theatlantic.com/educati...ind-campus-response-to-sexual-assault/539211/



I talked with Richard McNally, a psychology professor at Harvard and one of the country’s leading experts on the effects of trauma on memory, about the assertions Campbell made in her presentation. He first said that because assaults do not occur within the laboratory, “there is no direct evidence” of any precise or particular cascade of physiological effects during one, “nor is there going to be.” But there is plenty of evidence about how highly stressful experiences affect memory, and much of it directly contradicts Campbell. In his 2003 book, Remembering Trauma, McNally writes, “Neuroscience research does not support [the] claim that high levels of stress hormones impair memory for traumatic experience.” In fact, it’s almost the opposite: “Extreme stress enhances memory for the central aspects of an overwhelming emotional experience.” There is likely an evolutionary reason for that, McNally said: “It makes sense for natural selection to favor the memory of trauma. If you remember life threatening situations, you’re more likely to avoid them.” Notably, survivors of recent horrific events—the Aurora movie-theater massacre, the San Bernardino terror attack, the Orlando-nightclub mass murder—have at trial or in interviews given narrative accounts of their ordeals that are chronological, coherent, detailed, and lucid. (In the years since McNally’s book was published, some neuroscientific evaluations of military personnel have indicated that, in conditions of the most extreme stress, these hormones might prevent certain memories from being retained, causing gaps or errors in a person’s recollection. But these findings are different from the assertion that traumatic memories are stored in infallible yet “fragmented” condition.)

 

[Bob_Loblaw]

So why would you imply that I am less concerned with justice? You come at the discussion from the wrong direction. It doesn't take much research to realize that we live in a man's world with all of the traditional biases. We are not very far away from a time when guys would brag about getting a coed drunk and getting a piece of ass. It is not all about persecuting poor innocent men, it is about giving women the strength to fight back against being treated like a sexual object. The world is changing and many do not want to lose there built in protections. Guys should just dial down their testosterone and look at it from the point of view from a young coed that gets treated like a tramp when they are sexually assaulted.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I didn't imply that you are less concerned with justice, I came out and said it.

Your response to the topic of whether or not Title IX sexual assault cases is unjust was "poor prosecuted men". It was not argument around Title IX's validity. Your argument was, essentially, even if Title IX is unjust, who cares - - - the victims are just men. Your argument is an acknowledgment (or lack of concern) of Title IX's unfairness because of the type of victim that injustice creates. It's literally the least liberal (in a classic sense) ideology one can have. Think of the Bill of Rights. . .the whole thing was "regardless of who you are/what you do. . .you get these things". That's why Lady Justice wears a blindfold.

Your line of thinking is the kernel of toxic thought where atrocious ideologies find refuge. It's where groups like the KKK, Skinheads, and Antifa justify their garbage.

As to this point, it's the exact post-modernist stuff I would expect.

(1) In 2017, how, specifically, do traditional biases stop women from reporting sexual assaults? But do you believe we have a system that does not encourage women to come forward?

(2) For you, it is precisely about prosecuting "poor men". It was your reaction to the entire bit. For me, it's about having a just system. Just systems are beneficial to the accused and the accusers. . .a like. I don't think the University of Minnesota did the alleged victim any favors. Furthermore, I don't think University of Minnesota did future and past victims any favors. A system that is 100% concerned with justice (on this specific case at hand) is better for the victims, the school, accused. . .everyone.

(3) What built-in protections are you talking about? Specifically. The Bill of Rights?

 

[alchemy2u]

I didn't imply that you are less concerned with justice, I came out and said it.

Your response to the topic of whether or not Title IX sexual assault cases is unjust was "poor prosecuted men". It was not argument around Title IX's validity. Your argument was, essentially, even if Title IX is unjust, who cares - - - the victims are just men. Your argument is an acknowledgment (or lack of concern) of Title IX's unfairness because of the type of victim that injustice creates. It's literally the least liberal (in a classic sense) ideology one can have. Think of the Bill of Rights. . .the whole thing was "regardless of who you are/what you do. . .you get these things". That's why Lady Justice wears a blindfold.

Your line of thinking is the kernel of toxic thought where atrocious ideologies find refuge. It's where groups like the KKK, Skinheads, and Antifa justify their garbage.

As to this point, it's the exact post-modernist stuff I would expect.

(1) In 2017, how, specifically, do traditional biases stop women from reporting sexual assaults? But do you believe we have a system that does not encourage women to come forward?

(2) For you, it is precisely about prosecuting "poor men". It was your reaction to the entire bit. For me, it's about having a just system. Just systems are beneficial to the accused and the accusers. . .a like. I don't think the University of Minnesota did the alleged victim any favors. Furthermore, I don't think University of Minnesota did future and past victims any favors. A system that is 100% concerned with justice (on this specific case at hand) is better for the victims, the school, accused. . .everyone.

(3) What built-in protections are you talking about? Specifically. The Bill of Rights?

Ok, so what is the rate of unreported sexual assault that take place on college campuses. Why is it so high? What makes a group of men think it is culturally acceptable to tag team an intoxicated young lady they don't even know and who does know them and without her consent? Why did so many posters on this board thing it was also acceptable?
You are so quick to jump to conclusions and paint people with your preconceived biases, what makes you think I agree with how the investigation took place at the U. Of course justice should prevail, but if women are afraid to report instances because they don't think it will make a difference, something needs to change.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Pompous Elitist]

Ok, so what is the rate of unreported sexual assault that take place on college campuses. Why is it so high? What makes a group of men think it is culturally acceptable to tag team an intoxicated young lady they don't even know and who does know them and without her consent? Why did so many posters on this board thing it was also acceptable?
You are so quick to jump to conclusions and paint people with your preconceived biases, what makes you think I agree with how the investigation took place at the U. Of course justice should prevail, but if women are afraid to report instances because they don't think it will make a difference, something needs to change.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The irony.

I don't know where to start unpacking this.

 

[Spoofin]

Ok, so what is the rate of unreported sexual assault that take place on college campuses. Why is it so high? What makes a group of men think it is culturally acceptable to tag team an <b>intoxicated </b>young lady they don't even know and who does know them and <b>without her consent? </b>Why did so many posters on this board thing it was also acceptable?
You are so quick to jump to conclusions and paint people with your preconceived biases, what makes you think I agree with how the investigation took place at the U. Of course justice should prevail, but if women are afraid to report instances because they don't think it will make a difference, something needs to change.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What makes this situation so bad is that you are not the only one to still spew the bolded parts even tho they were never proven true and in the case of the first debunked by the alleged victim herself.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[dpodoll68]

Ok, so what is the rate of unreported sexual assault that take place on college campuses. Why is it so high? What makes a group of men think it is culturally acceptable to tag team an intoxicated young lady they don't even know and who does know them and without her consent? Why did so many posters on this board thing it was also acceptable?
You are so quick to jump to conclusions and paint people with your preconceived biases, what makes you think I agree with how the investigation took place at the U. Of course justice should prevail, but if women are afraid to report instances because they don't think it will make a difference, something needs to change.

Please point me to the evidence of her intoxication and lack of consent. And no, her testimony doesn't count as evidence.

Your assumption of guilt is wildly un-American and precisely the reason this system needs a drastic overhaul. To cite Blackstone's Formulation: "It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."

 

[TAW]

OK, I will probably regret wading into this thread, but - as a woman - I can't let it pass.

While sexual assault investigations, and college rules surrounding them, may need some tweaks, the basic facts are still real.

1) To the dominant class, equality seems like their rights are being taken away. This is true whether it is race, sex, sexual orientation, or class. Someone asking for equal protection doesn't mean your protections are reduced - unless the laws were unfair to begin with.

2) Yes, women are afraid to report sexual assault. In addition to time off from work, school, family time, etc., they face the wrath of message board warriors, work- and class-mates, and the random social media responder. And, what is their best case outcome? Someone is restrained from doing the same thing to another woman. The incentive to report is not strong. Those who do report must be strong enough to face the blow-back.

3) Pardon me for going political, but I have a hard time believing that an administrator (unqualified to begin with) appointed by a man who bragged about grabbing women by the pussy and that because he was a star (i.e. entitiled) he could do whatever he wanted with women, would reach a reasonable decision regarding sexual assault. (Excuse me while I vomit a bit in my mouth.)

Fire away entitled class.

 

[Unregistered User]

It's where groups like...Skinheads...

Whoa there. I know a lot of Trads and SHARPs who are nothing like those other groups (and some skinhead factions), so let's not lump them all together.

 

[Section2]

OK, I will probably regret wading into this thread, but - as a woman - I can't let it pass.

While sexual assault investigations, and college rules surrounding them, may need some tweaks, the basic facts are still real.

1) To the dominant class, equality seems like their rights are being taken away. This is true whether it is race, sex, sexual orientation, or class. Someone asking for equal protection doesn't mean your protections are reduced - unless the laws were unfair to begin with.

2) Yes, women are afraid to report sexual assault. In addition to time off from work, school, family time, etc., they face the wrath of message board warriors, work- and class-mates, and the random social media responder. And, what is their best case outcome? Someone is restrained from doing the same thing to another woman. The incentive to report is not strong. Those who do report must be strong enough to face the blow-back.

3) Pardon me for going political, but I have a hard time believing that an administrator (unqualified to begin with) appointed by a man who bragged about grabbing women by the pussy and that because he was a star (i.e. entitiled) he could do whatever he wanted with women, would reach a reasonable decision regarding sexual assault. (Excuse me while I vomit a bit in my mouth.)

Fire away entitled class.

I have a really interesting rebuttal but am afraid of being accused of mansplaining.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[zman]

1) To the dominant class, equality seems like their rights are being taken away.

Fire away entitled class.

I would contend that YES, rights of young men are being taken away. Just because you want justice for past injustices does not make it right.

 

[freshtrout]

Getting back to the title of this thread, Trump Admin to revisit Title IX... it's likely not true as he and his admin tend to lie about most everything. Take it with a grain of salt. He and they may think that they can score points (votes) by bringing it up with their usual bravado.

 

[zman]

NM. Not worth the pissing match.

 

[Pompous Elitist]

OK, I will probably regret wading into this thread, but - as a woman - I can't let it pass.

While sexual assault investigations, and college rules surrounding them, may need some tweaks, the basic facts are still real.

This would be a good place to start - do you have facts?

1) To the dominant class, equality seems like their rights are being taken away. This is true whether it is race, sex, sexual orientation, or class. Someone asking for equal protection doesn't mean your protections are reduced - unless the laws were unfair to begin with.

You clearly are new to the issues at hand. Everyone has a right to an education, even men. That's what this is all about. I'd start with The Atlantic pieces but there is a growing body of work. Nobody is suggesting sexual assault as societally defined is acceptable.

2) Yes, women are afraid to report sexual assault. In addition to time off from work, school, family time, etc., they face the wrath of message board warriors, work- and class-mates, and the random social media responder. And, what is their best case outcome? Someone is restrained from doing the same thing to another woman. The incentive to report is not strong. Those who do report must be strong enough to face the blow-back.

This could be true in some or even most cases but I fail to see how it justifies what has happened. You're looking at this issue in a far too superficial and emotional angle. There seems to be a broken value system here. Should we assume guilt of every black (or insert group here) suspected of a crime simply to possibly prevent more crime? That seems ok?

3) Pardon me for going political, but I have a hard time believing that an administrator (unqualified to begin with) appointed by a man who bragged about grabbing women by the pussy and that because he was a star (i.e. entitiled) he could do whatever he wanted with women, would reach a reasonable decision regarding sexual assault. (Excuse me while I vomit a bit in my mouth.)

Most of us seem to run centrist to liberal here in the classic sense. Equal rights, equal opportunity, free speech. Most people's politics are complicated...some like to lump everyone together into easy to target groups. Your point is irrelevant. The ACLU, legal scholars, and people of left, right, and center disagree with you including women.

Fire away entitled class.

ok

 

[Spoofin]

Please point me to the evidence of her intoxication and lack of consent. And no, her testimony doesn't count as evidence.

Your assumption of guilt is wildly un-American and precisely the reason this system needs a drastic overhaul. To cite Blackstone's Formulation: "It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."

I'll agree with your post and add that we can look at her testimony on the "intoxicated" topic. She had X drinks (can't remember, was it 6?) - but admitted herself that it was "hours before" that she had "none after", that it "wasn't an unusual amount" for her, and that she "didn't feel drunk". Yet, some will forever talk about taking advantage of a drunk girl.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[freshtrout]

NM. Not worth the pissing match.

Major yawn

 

[zman]

Yep.

 

[alchemy2u]

OK, I will probably regret wading into this thread, but - as a woman - I can't let it pass.

While sexual assault investigations, and college rules surrounding them, may need some tweaks, the basic facts are still real.

1) To the dominant class, equality seems like their rights are being taken away. This is true whether it is race, sex, sexual orientation, or class. Someone asking for equal protection doesn't mean your protections are reduced - unless the laws were unfair to begin with.

2) Yes, women are afraid to report sexual assault. In addition to time off from work, school, family time, etc., they face the wrath of message board warriors, work- and class-mates, and the random social media responder. And, what is their best case outcome? Someone is restrained from doing the same thing to another woman. The incentive to report is not strong. Those who do report must be strong enough to face the blow-back.

3) Pardon me for going political, but I have a hard time believing that an administrator (unqualified to begin with) appointed by a man who bragged about grabbing women by the pussy and that because he was a star (i.e. entitiled) he could do whatever he wanted with women, would reach a reasonable decision regarding sexual assault. (Excuse me while I vomit a bit in my mouth.)

Fire away entitled class.

Excellent post, but ignorance is blind and all you will hear is mansplaining as they to try justify how they are being persecuted. It is hard for some to step back and look at the world from another persons point of view.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[zman]

Excellent post, but ignorance is blind and all you will hear is mansplaining as they to try justify how they are being persecuted. It is hard for some to step back and look at the world from another persons point of view.

Way to be understanding. And completely wrong.

 

[Pompous Elitist]

Excellent post, but ignorance is blind and all you will hear is mansplaining as they to try justify how they are being persecuted. It is hard for some to step back and look at the world from another persons point of view.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Again with the irony. Freshman?

 

[alchemy2u]

Again with the irony. Freshman?

No, my daughter graduated from the U about 10 years ago.

 

[Cruze]

.

 

[Cruze]

.

 

[Bob_Loblaw]

Ok, so what is the rate of unreported sexual assault that take place on college campuses. Why is it so high? What makes a group of men think it is culturally acceptable to tag team an intoxicated young lady they don't even know and who does know them and without her consent? Why did so many posters on this board thing it was also acceptable?
You are so quick to jump to conclusions and paint people with your preconceived biases, what makes you think I agree with how the investigation took place at the U. Of course justice should prevail, but if women are afraid to report instances because they don't think it will make a difference, something needs to change.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ok. You're a lost cause.

You ask - "What makes a group of men think it is culturally acceptable to tag team an intoxicated young lady. . .without her consent?" THEN you ask "You are so quick to jump to conclusions and paint people with your preconceived biases".

LOL.

You can't make this stuff up. My hunch about you has been validated by each and every one of your posts on this subject. I really don't think you're coming from a bad place, but your rationale is extremely dangerous.

 

[Cruze]

nm

 

[Cruze]

bump