David Weigel | April 16, 2007
A vindicated Cathy Young assesses the damage that the Duke lacrosse scandal did to feminists who like to cry "rape" and let loose the dogs of war.
Help Reason celebrate its next 40 years. Donate Now!
Try Reason's award-winning print edition today! Your first issue is FREE if you are not completely satisfied.
I was really amazed at the parallels between the Duke case and
the Scottsboro case.
Incidentally, the NAACP had a pretty poor showing in that case too.
They were afraid of a backlash should any of the defendants prove
to be actually guilty and the NAACP was involved in their
defense.
Thus, they were willing to sit back and let the 9 defendants face
the Electric Chair (although the youngest, 13 at the time would
probably have evaded execution).
From Peter Applebome's April 15 Times Select column:
But Tricia Dowd, a teacher from East Northport, N.Y., whose son
Kyle was a senior on the team, watched in stunned horror as the
case and its attendant demonizing of bad white boys kept going,
even after DNA evidence that Mr. Nifong promised would convict the
guilty and free the innocent matched no one on the team.
...
Mrs. Dowd, after the rape charges were dropped in December, sent an
e-mail message to Houston Baker, a celebrated English professor at
Duke who, when the story first broke, condemned rapacious athletes
''safe under the cover of silent whiteness'' given ''license to
rape, maraud, deploy hate speech and feel proud of themselves in
the bargain.'' She asked him if he would reconsider his early
statements.
''LIES!'' responded Dr. Baker, now a distinguished university
professor of English at Vanderbilt. He said she was a
''provacateur'' who was ''trying to get credit for a scummy bunch
of white males!'' He accused the players of living like ''farm
animals'' and concluded that she should forgive him if she really
is ''quite sadly, mother of a 'farm animal.' ''
Great guy to have in your faculty ...
drop the habit of knee-jerk support for every accuser-and to
show decency and compassion toward the victims of false
accusations
The first step being publishing the name of the accuser. Why are
alleged rape victims given anonymity while the accused are dragged
through the mud and ruined even before they are tried? A true
feminist should want equal treatment for both parties.
Just out of curiosity, does anybody here know somebody who was falsely accused of rape?
wayne,
Yes, a roommate of mine was. Or at least I'm pretty sure he was
innocent.
You can email me per my sig link if you'd like more details.
Some just won't let it die:
The charges were dropped. Does this mean that they are
innocent? None of us actually know what happened that night. Sorry,
unless you were there, you don't know what happened.
feministing.com
Let's see, the other dancer who was there said nothing happened as
well as every other possible witness. Get the kitchen and go bake
Nifong a cake. Sickening.
Dahlia Lithwick in Slate is one of the worst offenders. She wrote a whole collumn last spring about how there was mounds and mounds of physical evidence in the case and the DNA test results did not mean they were innocent and how the people like Johnson who were defending the LAX players were just as bad the ones who were assuming their guilt. Of course it turns out that the defenders were right and Lithwick was wrong and what does Lithwick do? Apologize? Admit she was wrong? Of course not. She writes a whole piece on how the the entire affair is somehow related to the firing of the eight U.S. Attorneys. Apparantly in Lithwick land, the whole thing was George Bush's fault.
I also know a guy who actually served about 15 years in prison
for a rape that he did not commit. It was actually a "famous case"
for a few days in about 1990 or so.
Gary Dotson was accused and convicted of raping a young girl (she
was about 17 years old, he was 19) and sentenced to many years in
prison (I don't know how many). The young girl grew up and married
and recanted her story fifteen years later because she felt guilty
about sending him up the river without cause (or a paddle). It
turns out that she had sex with her boyfriend and was afraid her
parents would find out so she cooked up this rape story. She picked
Gary Dotson out of a line up and he did fifteen years in Joliet's
max security prison.
I know him because I dated his older sister.
If feminists want to retain their credibility as advocates
for victims of rape, they need to drop the habit of knee-jerk
support for every accuser-and to show decency and compassion toward
the victims of false accusations.
Be careful here. Support for a victim, via counseling and whatnot,
is a fundamentally different task than prosecuting a suspect. A
counselor or friend or other supporter must start from the
presumption that the victim is telling the truth. Likewise, a court
must operate on the assumption that the accused attacker is
innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
These two different tasks require two different assumptions. This
might lead to some awkward contradictions in how people are
treated, but it's necessary nonetheless. The important thing is
that since the two tasks require two different assumptions, the
tasks should be kept separate.
The reconciliation of these different assumptions is somewhat aided
by keeping in mind that not every awful experience rises to the
level of a felony, and not every recollection (however strongly
believed and however real thet pain) is an accurate reflection of
what happened. This preserves our respect for the very real pain
that a victim might be experiencing, while tempering the rush to
judgement that might otherwise lead to innocent people going to
prison.
"The Duke lacrosse case may bring a new, fairer approach to
accusations of rape."
Or it may shift things back to the bad old days of knee-jerk
rejection of the accusations of rape victims, and of minority rape
victims in particular.
This would have been a good chance to write a column condemning the
tendency to rush to judgement based on one's preferred political
narratives; instead, Cathy Young wrote a piece about how one set of
preferred political narratives should be looked at with greater
skepticism.
The one time a situation called for a Cathy Young column, she's
having none of it. Figures.
Wayne,
My best friend was falsely accused when he was in college. He slept
with some girl one night, and she had morning-after regrets, so she
freaked out and accused him of forcing it. This guy is the last
person in the world who would ever do anything like that, even
blitzed out of his mind. She pursued it pretty far, and it was her
word against his. He was pretty close to being kicked out of
college when she finally recanted and told the truth. He was really
shook up over it. At about the same time, at my college (you know,
the one all over the news today), there was a debate raging in the
school newspaper editorial section over rape and sexual
discrimination. I wrote in a great op-ed that told the story of my
friend, and lambasted the "guilty until proven innocent"
backwardness of this climate.
Here's the Lithwick column.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/21/AR2006042101758.html
Judge for yourself how accurately John describes Lithwick's
argument.
Joe,
When that one set of political naratives tried to convict an
innocent person despite all evidence, that political narative kind
of has it coming. Further, please explain where anyone jumped to
the conclusion that the LAX players were innocent from the start?
It was only after the rediculously weak nature of the evidence
began to emmerge did people like Charles Johnson start saying "wait
a minute". Indeed, in the first few days of the accusations no one
was saying that the LAX players were innocent. You make it sound
like a bunch ignorent bigots came out and said "it is a black
stripper she must be lying" and are now trying to claim
vindication. That is not what happened at all. The LAX players only
had defenders after the evidence started to come out. So please
tell us exactly what any one besides the lynch mob has anything to
explain?
T,
"If feminists want to retain their credibility as advocates for
victims of rape, they need to drop the habit of knee-jerk support
for every accuser-and to show decency and compassion toward the
victims of false accusations."
I think you missed the point. It was painfully obvious that these
Duke "rapists" were innocent for a lonnnngggg time and yet the
man-hating feminists insisted that they were guilty, if not rape
then certainly of something terrible such as being white, male, and
uppre class. In fact, many still insist they are guilty.
The point Ms Young makes is that feminists, and every body else,
are more convincing if they are fair.
Who suffers more, a woman who is raped or a man (or men) falsely
accused? Gary Dotson did fifteen years in a maximum security prison
for a rape that he did not commit, indeed for a rape that never
occurred. Who suffers more?
"And what about all this physical evidence? That unambiguous,
objective scientific evidence? Supporters of the Duke students say
the lack of a DNA match exonerates them. Peter Neufeld of the
Innocence Project says, "There's an old saying that the absence of
evidence is not necessarily evidence of absence." Nurses say the
injuries are consistent with rape. The boys say someone else raped
her. Time-stamped photos suggest that the alleged victim was
injured before she arrived at the party. Other photos suggest new
injuries occurred while she was there. Lost fake fingernails in the
bathroom suggest a fight. The lack of any DNA material under those
nails suggests she never fought back. Photos say she was
intoxicated upon arrival. The second stripper implies she was
drugged at the party."
All of that turned out to be completely false. Every last bit of
it. Lithwick printed it as if it was the gospel truth and then
tried to cover her ass by claiming that "you can pick your fact
here". Of course all the "facts" she bothered to lay out pointed to
the players guilt. That was a loathsome hit piece.
One of my roomates in college was falsely accused of rape.
It didn't get very far; I had only left them alone for 45 seconds*,
and she had a history of making such accusations.
*Yes, I was an asshole. I had a major exam the next morning, and
was not about to lose sleep so that my roomate could have a
make-out session.
"Or it may shift things back to the bad old days of
knee-jerk rejection of the accusations of rape victims, and of
minority rape victims in particular. This would have been a good
chance to write a column condemning the tendency to rush to
judgement based on one's preferred political narratives; instead,
Cathy Young wrote a piece about how one set of preferred political
narratives should be looked at with greater skepticism.
Joe,
You seem to be mistaking her omission of condemnation of the bad
old days as a tacit nostalgic longing for it. Just because she
didn't explicitly condemn the bad old days doesn't mean she
supports their return.
Furthermore, I think your hypothetical situation wherein we
suddenly (all because of one case) revert back to the days where
women are scorned for making accusations of rape is ridiculously
far-fetched.
Rape is tough. Many of the key bits of evidence--barring the
rape allegation itself--are the same bits of evidence that exist
with consensual sex. Everyone knows this, but all of the other
politics that come into play confuse the core issue--this is a
terribly difficult crime to prove.
With murder or battery, there's usually definite evidence that
something wrong happened (though, of course, there are defenses
that can be raised). With rape, a simple lie can make things very
bad for the accused. While we don't want rapes to occur and go
unpunished, neither do we want false accusations to result in
innocent people going to jail. With most crimes, the latter is
society's biggest concern and the burden of proof, as
extraordinarily unfair as it can be to victims, must be on the
state (and the accuser), not on the accused. Of course, I'd like to
take a tire iron to anyone who raped someone that I cared about,
but my personal desire for revenge isn't what society cares about,
in theory.
John,
"When that one set of political naratives tried to convict an
innocent person despite all evidence, that political narative kind
of has it coming."
Certainly, but let's not pretend that the tendency allow political
narratives to cloud one's judgement of the facts of a case is
limited to any particular side of the fence. It would be a shame if
the lesson some people learn here is to doubt rape accusations, or
worse, those make by black women against white men.
As far as a "lynch mob," I think you're reading what you want to
see into my comments. Again.
Evan!,
"You seem to be mistaking her omission of condemnation of the bad
old days as a tacit nostalgic longing for it. Just because she
didn't explicitly condemn the bad old days doesn't mean she
supports their return." Not at all - I certainly don't think Ms.
Young believes that. My complaint actually is as I wrote it - she
condemned one ideological faction, when the failure it demonstrated
can be found all across the spectrum.
She missed an opportunity here. She set her sights too low. That's
my complaint.
"Furthermore, I think your hypothetical situation wherein we
suddenly (all because of one case) revert back to the days where
women are scorned for making accusations of rape is ridiculously
far-fetched."
Hyperbolic language aside ("suddenly," "all"), I imagine the
sentiment you express is a lot easier to believe from where you and
I sit.
"Certainly, but let's not pretend that the tendency allow
political narratives to cloud one's judgement of the facts of a
case is limited to any particular side of the fence."
That is true Joe, but you could right that about any case. In this
case one side was clearly wrong and said and did some very nasty
things and deserve to be told that absent any "yeah buts".
To be honest, I am prejudiced against student athletes, and was
initially inclined to believe the charges. But, by June, I was
beginning to suspect that the crime had not happenned.
When one took a look at the publicly available evidence, the mass
of contradictions in the states case were quite evident. The
blatant
wintess intimidation was a pretty big clue early on that this
was a frame job.
" It would be a shame if the lesson some people learn here is to
doubt rape accusations, or worse, those make by black women against
white men."
Of course we should doubt rape accusations, and blackness does not
confer virtue.
Amongst just a handful of posters here we have at least three (I
did not count them) stories of false rape accusations. If that does
not make you distrust accusations of rape then you are soft between
the ears.
"She missed an opportunity here. She set her sights too low.
That's my complaint."
And my response is that her sights are as high as you want them to
be, and what you're demanding she recognize goes without
saying.
Cathy,
For once, your column was almost correct.
Since it is such a "hot-button" crime, for all the wrong reasons,
any false accusation of rape should be punished, very
severely.
Kudos to the men who seem to have a more forgiving attitude,
perhaps due to their relief.
But, all those who marched against the innocent boys, all those
Duke faculty who wrote crap against them, all those Duke
administrators/board members who now try to "apologize", all those
columnists who condemned them, all the members of Nifong's staff,
all his re-election campaigners, all who profited politically or
financially, all who did not call "BULLSHIT" from the very
beginning, and the accuser herself (whatever her supposed mental
state), should serve years upon years in maximum security. Nifong
himself should be in something the writers of "OZ" only had
nightmares about. And Duke University should forfeit its entire
endowment to the accused.
Forgive me if I seem harsh, but lies cannot be tolerated. Those who
benefit from lies cannot be tolerated. There is no excuse.
Evan!,
Perhaps I've become less pessimistic about my fellow man, but the
list of things that go without saying has shrunk.
wayne,
Were this site less of a sausage-fest, I could easily find women
who can tell stories of being assaulted, or of friends who've been
assaulted. Seizing upon anecdotes to reinforce your preferrred
political narrative is no way to go through life.
tarran,
When I first heard the charges, I took a wait and see attitude. I
wasn't there, I didn't see the evidence, so I didn't want to
conclude anything. Then the media storm began, and I thought a lot
of the teevee people were rushing to judgement based on their
political beliefs. Then when the first problems with the evidence
came out, a whole set of other teevee people started shouting, and
I thought they were rushing to judgement based on their political
beliefs, as well.
After a certain point, though, the holes in the case clearly went
beyond the ordinary inconsistencies.
While in college in the mid 80s a friend was accused of date
rape and the case went to trial. It was striking at the time
because it was the first case I ever heard of, and he was looking
at 20 years in prison, and didn't seem like that kind of guy.
After testimony stating the woman was vigourously kissing the guy
from witnesses in the bar, the cab driver, and finally the girl's
roomates, he got off. Did she have second thoughts after bringing
him into her room and closing the door? No one but the two of them
know, and it sure seemed it wasn't worth the woman's hassle.
Hey, I'm a taco... so to speak.
I'm not proud of this part of my life, but while in college, I once
got myself knocked up by an abusive boyfriend. I was giving the
baby up for adoption. When the adoption counselor heard that the
baby's father was abusive, she flew off the handle and tried to
talk me into accusing him of rape. Why? Simply because he was
abusive, therefore I must have been coerced into
having sex with him even if I didn't know I was.
I was discussing this at the time with a ditz lefty friend, and she
opined that to the extent that a man manipulates a woman into
having sex, it's actually rape. So... what then? If a guy is sweet
to me to get me to like him because he likes me and wants, not
unnaturally, to rub body parts with me for a while, this is
actually coercion? Hell, what if he fell in love with me and
persuaded me to marry him... is that really
That got cut off somehow. It should have ended:
"...if he fell in love with me and persuaded me to marry him... is
that really slavery?
I think we all need to be a little less afraid of our own and
others' natural and understandable sexual impulses. We don't have
to be more open, but we should cut each other a bit more
slack."
Let me moderate my previous. I stand by everything I wrote. The
reason I do is that rape is such a serious charge that, I believe,
it is indefensible as a "mistake" or "emotional disorder."
No, I agree, it is not fair that women (or raped men) have the
burden of proof. And, no, being a ho (I'm sorry, "stripper") does
not excuse rape by "clients."
But facts are facts. It denigrates all rape victims when cases such
as these are allowed to proceed. And it casts doubt on all our
society when the persons I ragged on above are not punished
severely for their transgressions. When lies are told, there must
be retribution, and it must be severe; otherwise, there will be
more lies.
BTW, I should balance my roomate-falsely-accused-of-rape story
with the fact that one of my relatives was raped by a stranger. I
view rape as a very serious crime. It is, however, a crime that
lends itself to false accusations.
Shrug.
On a lighter note, I have another acquaintence who was accused of
rape. I don' know how the case turned out - I was about to go to
sea in the Navy when it broke. Shortly before I reported to my
ship, I got together with soem of my old friends, and was told that
a fellow physics major had been accused of "date rape". Upon
hearing this, I immediately shot back, "That's impossible! No way
R_____'s guilty of date rape. That implies some woman agreed to go
out on a date with him. Impossible!"
I am so going to hell. ;)
Lithwick argued that it was best not to jump to conclusions before people have all the facts. And, on that score, those who defended the Duke players may have been just as bad as those who defended the accuser. No one had all the facts; they were just going with their uninformed hunches, and acting like of course they were right. She was saying it's healthy not to be too sure you're right. RTFA if you disagree.
Lithwick argued that it was best not to jump to conclusions before people have all the facts. And, on that score, those who defended the Duke players may have been just as bad as those who defended the accuser. No one had all the facts; they were just going with their uninformed hunches, and acting like of course they were right. She was saying it's healthy not to be too sure you're right. RTFA again if you disagree.
It would be a shame if the lesson some people learn here is
to doubt rape accusations
Shouldn't people be skeptical of any accusations? Why should we
take people at their word when they make criminal accusations about
other people? Isn't our entire system of justice predicated on
"innocent until proven guilty"?
Were this site less of a sausage-fest, I could easily find
women who can tell stories of being assaulted, or of friends who've
been assaulted. Seizing upon anecdotes to reinforce your preferrred
political narrative is no way to go through life.
Your prefered narrative is that people are guilty until proven
innocent, where as his prefered narrative is that people are
innocent until proven guilty. Sorry if I prefer his
narrative.
Lithwick argued that it was best not to jump to conclusions
before people have all the facts. And, on that score, those who
defended the Duke players may have been just as bad as those who
defended the accuser. No one had all the facts; they were just
going with their uninformed hunches, and acting like of course they
were right. She was saying it's healthy not to be too sure you're
right. RTFA again if you disagree
But it is 100% OK to jump to the conclusion that someone is
innocent. Those who defended the Duke players without all the facts
did what reasonable people should do, make the presumption of
innocence. What is so difficult about "innocent until proven
guilty" for people to understand? Assuming someone is innocent is
the RIGHT THING TO DO!!! It is one of the most basic premises of
what we consider "justice".
Rex Rhino,
"Shouldn't people be skeptical of any accusations?" Just to be
clear, I'm not talking about the responsible skepticism that should
attend any accusation of a crime, but the outright denialism that
predominated in our culture until a few decades ago.
"Your prefered narrative is that people are guilty until proven
innocent" Uh, no, see my comment at 2:10 PM. I don't like it when
anyone starts pretending they know what happened in any individual
case, based on what they've seen on tv.
"But it is 100% OK to jump to the conclusion that someone is
innocent." No, you're confusing "conclusion" with "presumption."
It's 100% OK to presume someone innocent, unless it is proven
otherwise. It is not OK to assume that someone is innocent, all
evidence aside.
joe
good noting the diff between presuming and assuming.
I just don't know that the denialism of our culture a few decades
ago merits comparison to the assumptionalism (forgive the term!) of
our sensationalist culture today in which any suspect of any crime
(however real or unreal) is apparently automatically guilty.
30 years ago, accusers were "distraught" or "mistaken." Today, all
accusers are beyond question.
Where's the balance?
"""The charges were dropped. Does this mean that they are
innocent? None of us actually know what happened that night. Sorry,
unless you were there, you don't know what happened."""
Cognitive dissonance anyone? Because they believe the accused was
guity, they get that funny feeling Feslinger was talking about and
they just can't accept information contrary to their belief,
regardless of how true the new information is. They wouldn't
believe God if he came down and told them himself. Sort of like
those that say Libby is not guilty.
Charges dropped, they are still guilty. Get convicted in court, not
guilty. Go figure. This country must be getting dumber by the
year.
TrickyVic,
Try reading the comments of that thread. Apparently, hiring a
stripper to dance at party means it's OK to be accused of rape.
I both know someone who was falsely accused of rape and someone
who was raped.
I can't help but wonder what goes through the head of an ACTUAL
rape victim who has not pressed charges, who sees some woman (whose
identity is not disclosed) lying about being raped and making a
huge national stink about it. What a slap in the face that must be,
huh?
I agree with Albionite on this one. This girl needs to be
prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
The faculty of Duke who so quickly demonized the LAX players should
be ashamed of themselves. Are they not supposed to be some of the
smartest people in the country, and yet they can't restrain from
making statements of hate against young men who have no control
over their socio-political situation? Somehow the speech that comes
out AGAINST hate crimes resembles closely what they are trying to
criticize.
"Where's the balance?"
Sadly, Albionite, it sometimes seems that the "balance" is provided
by having one segment of the population engage in reflexive
conclusion of guilt, and the other engage in reflexive conclusion
of innocence. They just move around based on some subset of the
details of the case. Sigh.
TrickyVic, how did you get from "None of us actually know what
happened that night. Sorry, unless you were there, you don't know
what happened," (the words you quoted) to "they are still
guilty?"
"This girl needs to be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the
law."
Fair enough, but let's keep in mind, "to the fullest extent of the
law" includes recognizing diminished capacity and actual
insanity.
That young woman doesn't seem to be "all there" to me.
I have to agree with Joe in the larger sense that this result
will, in many parts of the country, cause people to doubt
all rape victim claims, but I contend that those people it will
affect were already predisposed to thinking that way anyway, and
that they will merely use this as the only real case they can
remember to justify their opinion on the matter.
There are people who angrily deny all rape claims, but I don't
think that's what most of the people here who are talking about
"innocence until proven guilty" are talking about.
Before I left home for my freshman year of college, my mother
warned me to be careful who I got involved with because "girls can
be vicious" and "you could be falsely accused of something
terrible." These are not the sorts of things that my mother
normally talks about, but she obviously recognized that this is a
serious problem in our country where the culture of victimization
can take down even the most undeserving of people in flames of
hatred.
Joe, not originally... I meant to refer to the little
blue-flowered Hungarian speedwell, Veronica austriaca, one of my
favorite sweet garden flowers (picture here:
http://www.robsplants.com/images/portrait/VeronicaAustriaca050601a.jpg
) It's been fifteen years since I first used the name to register
for a free e-mail account. :)
I didn't actually even read Watership Down until after I named
myself that, but some of my friends think it's funny how much I
sometimes resemble the rabbit in the book, character-wise.
No silly comments about one of the things rabbits are best known
for, given the tenor of the thread, heh.
Why are alleged rape victims given anonymity while the
accused are dragged through the mud and ruined even before they are
tried?
Because the MSM is PC/feminist and/or cowardly.
(BTW, the 'shield laws' apply to court personel, not to 'reporters'
and such; in most states, at least.)
A true feminist should want equal treatment for both
parties.
Bwahahaha! People who want equal treatment use other terms to
describe themselves.
Anybody else notice that the same people who are defending the Duke kids because so many rushed to judgment are rushing to judgment themselves by assuming that the accusor filed a knowingly false rape claim?
I am a huge fan of both Duke lacrosse and rape acquittals, so this was a great story as far as I am concerned.
"""TrickyVic, how did you get from "None of us actually know
what happened that night. Sorry, unless you were there, you don't
know what happened," (the words you quoted) to "they are still
guilty?""""
It's the opinion of others, those with cognitive dissonance. Many
people still believe they are guilty of a crime when no trial has
taken place, charges were dropped because the evidence did not
support the claim.
What do you need to be considered innocent in this country? One
person claims you did something and that's it? Hell, the one guy
had ATM receipt, a cabbie, and a cell phone call as proof he wasn't
there, and that still isn't good enough for some people!
"""Try reading the comments of that thread. Apparently, hiring a
stripper to dance at party means it's OK to be accused of
rape."""
Apearently so, also, a dunk female changing her mind the next
morning is rape is some places too.
"""Anybody else notice that the same people who are defending the
Duke kids because so many rushed to judgment are rushing to
judgment themselves by assuming that the accusor filed a knowingly
false rape claim?""""
You're falling way short on that. We defend the Duke kids not
because of a false rape in the past, but because the evidence does
not support the claim.
The solution, of course, is to require condom manufacturers to include duplicate informed-consent contracts in their product.
Discussion of the media reaction to the dismissal of the
charges, from a guy who has been following the case in depth since
last year and who realized early on that the case was bogus:
http://abcnews.go.com/US/LegalCenter/story?id=3043570&page=1
Incidentally, the author of that article is a leftist professor
whose decision to stick up for the falsely-accused students seems
to be based on the fact that the folks at Duke were giving leftist
professors a bad name. From his blog
http://durhamwonderland.blogspot.com/
you can see examples of this guy insulting the prosecution and its
supporters by linking them to, or comparing them with,
conservatives.
My best friend in college was raped.
Conversely - although it was only a nasty prank and not a real
accusation - in high school a regrettably unidentified individual
called my parents pretending to be the father of a classmate and
claimed that I had sexually assaulted his daughter.
"The solution, of course, is to require condom manufacturers to
include duplicate informed-consent contracts in their
product."
And little pencils.
"And little pencils."
This comment reminded me of a longforgotten yet very painfull
nickname the kids in my high school had for me .
No silly comments about one of the things rabbits are best
known for
Eating carrots?
Taking a wrong turn at Albuquerque?
""""The solution, of course, is to require condom manufacturers
to include duplicate informed-consent contracts in their
product."
And little pencils.""""
Great, now I have to bring a Notary Public on dates too? Damn, my
accountant and lawyer are not good enough. Dating is getting real
expensive.
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245