Affirmative Consent

'Our Strategy for Dealing With Rape on College Campuses Has Failed Abysmally.'

|

Tiffany Education Center
Public Domain

It's the truth. And Jed Rubenfeld, a professor of criminal law at Yale Law School, is preaching it in the pages of The New York Times.

In a lengthy weekend op-ed, Rubenfeld argued that colleges deal with rape foolishly when they hold due-process-free tribunals that merely result in the expulsion of the accused. That's both too harsh a sentence for a student convicted under the shabby evidence standard that colleges use and also too lenient a sentence for an actual rapist—who is free to continue harassing other women.

Instead, colleges should always go to the police. The normal criminal justice system is vastly better equipped to investigate and adjudicate rape, wrote Rubenfeld:

Moreover, sexual assault on campus should mean what it means in the outside world and in courts of law. Otherwise, the concept of sexual assault is trivialized, casting doubt on students courageous enough to report an assault.

The college hearing process could then be integrated with law enforcement. The new university procedures offer college rape victims an appealing alternative to filing a complaint with the police. According to a recent New York Times article, a "great majority" of college students now choose to report incidents of assault to their school, not the police, because of anonymity and other perceived advantages.

But the danger is obvious. University proceedings may be exacerbating the fundamental problem: the fact that almost no college rapists are criminally punished — which they will never be if the crimes are never reported to the police. Nationwide, the Department of Justice states that about 35 percent of rapes and sexual assaults were reported to the police in 2013. That's not enough, but it's a lot better than the 5 percent reported by college women.

Rubenfeld is also skeptical of university administrators' attempts to redefine or codify consent definitions, and he cites several examples of colleges that use misleading or flat-out wrong standards. While nearly everyone accepts that all drunken sex is not rape, some administrators maintain that consent is impossible if alcohol has been consumed. That's a ridiculous notion that necessitates viewing all men as sexual initiators, even though the decision to have sex is often impossible to trace so neatly to one party or the other.

On the subject of drunk sex, Rubenfeld raises a point that I have invoked many times recently about rape and the drinking age. The relevant section:

A vast majority of college women's rape claims involve alcohol. Not long ago, 18-year-olds in many states could drink legally. College-sponsored events could openly involve a keg, with security officers on hand to ensure that things didn't get out of hand. Since 1984, when the federal government compelled states to adopt a drinking age of 21, college alcohol policies have been a mockery. Prohibition has driven alcohol into private spaces and house parties, with schools largely turning a blind eye. When those spaces and parties are male-dominated, it's a recipe for sexual predation. Such predation has been documented: Attending fraternity parties makes women measurably more likely to be sexually assaulted.

We need to stop pretending that the campus rape epidemic demands an infantilizing, legislatively-enforced re-education about consent. College students are grown-ups; they don't need college administrators or the government to hold their hands while they ask whether it's okay to initiate each and every individual sex act.

At the same time, we need to treat rape like a serious crime deserving a full police investigation and trial. We should also recognize that insane alcohol laws contribute to the problem and aren't worth defending. I join Instapundit's Glenn Reynolds in hoping the new Republican Congress revisits them.

NEXT: Will Obama and the FCC Break the Internet with Net Neutrality and Title II?

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. We need to stop pretending that the campus rape epidemic demands an infantilizing, legislatively-enforced re-education about consent. College students are grown-ups; they don’t need college administrators or the government to hold their hands while they ask whether it’s okay to initiate each and every individual sex act.

    Hey, why don’t libertarians stop playing into the hands of leftist demagogues and tell the truth on this issue – that there is no rape epidemic, that actual FBI rape statistics show a two decade decline in sexual assaults, and that this has occurred despite the fact that people are more likely than ever before to report their rapes, which implies that the actual decline is almost certainly larger than even the stats show.

    I’m sick of libertarians behaving as if the left-wing view of the world is accurate but that their policies to fix it are wrong. Their policies to fix it are wrong because their view of the world is a fantasy contradicted by all available evidence.

    Don’t play into their hands by accepting the claim of a ‘rape epidemic’ which provably does not exist.

    1. I mean, that’s the funny thing. These stats get tossed around and taken at face value by people who are supposedly intelligent.

      Beyond that, it’s incredulous that any sane human being would think college administrators were equipped to deal with this issue even if it existed.

      1. You want to know what particularly irritates me? If there were an absolute, total lie coming from social conservatives about an alleged increase in murders related to video games, this website would rightfully call them on their lies.

        However, when feminists blatantly lie about a supposed epidemic which can be disproven in approximately two minutes, reason treats them as if they’re well meaning but simply misguided. They are not. They are malicious liars making up falsehoods for their own self-aggrandizement. These narcissistic, lying frauds should be called out for what they are, not coddled as if they’re trying their damnedest to fix a problem and are just using the wrong strategy.

        1. Irish, are those numbers only for ‘forcible rape’ or do they include ‘sexual assault?’ Because I get that a lot of the concern on college campuses has to do with both.

          1. It’s forcible rape, but I can think of no possible way that forcible rape has declined by 35% while date rape and sexual assault have not similarly declined. Unfortunately, such statistics aren’t readily available because they’re modern concerns which weren’t tracked with any consistency during the 80s.

            It also should be noted that if you dig into the stats, people between 18 and 24 have seen a greater decline in rape than America generally. As a result, not only is there no rape epidemic, but the people they’re freaking out about the most (i.e. college aged people) have actually seen the largest declines.

            It’s difficult to overstate how irrational the claim of a college rape epidemic is.

            1. Fair enough, that makes sense.

              1. It’s my understanding that most of the epidemic talk comes from self-reported surveys…similar to the bullshit on the military ‘rape’ scandal.

                It’s nonsense. Sort of like polling, it’s very easy to get the answers you want based on the question presented.

                There’s no actual crime statistics that support either narrative.

                1. It’s my understanding that most of the epidemic talk comes from self-reported surveys…similar to the bullshit on the military ‘rape’ scandal.

                  It’s nonsense. Sort of like polling, it’s very easy to get the answers you want based on the question presented.

                  There’s no actual crime statistics that support either narrative.

                  Plus there’s the minor issue that people who have been raped are vastly more likely to bother filling out a self-reported survey.

                  As a result, any self-reported survey is bound to over report the number of people who were the victims of any crime. If they did a self-reported study on muggings they’d certainly find that a far higher percentage of people were mugged than actually were simply because people who were mugged were more likely to fill out the survey.

                  1. Are you aware of any of the actual surveys cited and their methodology? Just curious.

                    I remember the question from the military survey that started that uproar. It asked whether the individual had suffered any form of unwanted touching or physical contact in the last year. The media got a hold of it, and it became ‘sexual assault’ which itself is often conflated with rape.

        2. War an Menz!

    2. I kind of think that they do this because they believe that the audience they are trying to reach has already bought hook line and sinker that there is a problem and will disregard any kind of further argument unless you concede that point. It’s an incredibly stupid argumentative style in my opinion, but that is the only rational conclusion I can come to.

      1. Bless their hearts, the editors are still waiting for the liberaltarian coalition to form, and though it tarry, they await it every day.

        1. The dawn of the rise of the independents is approaching any day now, along with cold fusion and voyager leaving the solar system

          1. And then the shirt-wearing patriarchy raped a comet or something or other, and ruined everything for everyone ever.

    3. I’m sick of libertarians behaving as if the left-wing view of the world is accurate but that their policies to fix it are wrong.

      You misspelled “cosmotarian”.

  2. Uh oh, what will this do to my plans for a Nirvana-themed keg party?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rCS14PoQc2M

    1. You won’t have a laundry basketful of cum-stained flannel?

    2. no one wanted to clean your brains and bone chunks off the wall anyways

  3. “Instead, colleges should always go to the police. The normal criminal justice system is vastly better equipped to investigate and adjudicate rape”

    There seems to be something incongruous about libertarians thinking private enterprises would do best to run to government agencies to figure out and handle things correctly.

    1. There seems to be something incongruous about libertarians thinking private enterprises would do best to run to government agencies to figure out and handle things correctly.

      Given that even the most private of colleges currently receives vast sums of money in the form of student loans and grants from the state, it’s a mistake to believe colleges are in any important way private entities.

      Plus, I personally think criminal justice is one of the few things which ought to be handled by the state. People on this site definitely disagree on that particular issue.

      1. To me, it’s a freedom of association issue. Colleges are free to associate and do business with whoever they want to, and they should not be restricted in how they decide that.

        How many people here would say that organizations should not be able to drug test and terminate employees if they determine they fail the test but should go to the police to decide if their employee is using?

        1. This is a false equivalence because in many instances the government is actually ordering colleges to engage in this behavior. California passed a law mandating this behavior and threatened to yank funding if colleges did not comply. Similarly, the Obama Administration Justice Department has been getting involved and is also trying to expand these tactics.

          Again, colleges are not actually private institutions since they are largely funded through state methods such as grants and government subsidized student loans and are often coerced into certain behaviors by the state.

          1. Good point, as I noted below the government pressure is a real problem.

            I think your second point is a bit problematic, because so many ostensibly private actors draw some kind of government benefit or subsidy. I wouldn’t want that to be the basis for governments meddling in their freedom of association (either way).

            1. Freedom of association goes out the window, but I want to emphasize…these aren’t private institutions. Most people go to PUBLIC universities/schools for the most part. Private schools can do whatever they decide to.

              There is simply no rationalization for establishing an extrajudicial layer of school bureaucrats to determine guilt. The matter is as simple as guilty or not guilty in a court of law to everyone besides feminists.

              1. There is simply no rationalization for establishing an extrajudicial layer of school bureaucrats to determine guilt. The matter is as simple as guilty or not guilty in a court of law to everyone besides feminists.

                Thread Winner!

    2. Bo, aren’t you the one whose dream job is advising Obama on how to get away with lying to the public?

      1. I mean, clearly he is well versed in that and succeeding beyond anyone’s wildest dreams, but didn’t you way that you want that job?

        1. No, I think I once said something like “if I were Obama’s counsel or adviser I’d tell him to say ___.”

    3. Didn’t Red Tulpa’s spiral out of control start after the shellacking his team took in 2012? Look’s like Blue Tulpa is doing an impressive job of following the script.

      1. I thought Red Tulpa was just Tulpa.

        1. As is Blue Tulpa and quite a few of ther socks.

    4. There seems to be something incongruous about libertarians thinking private enterprises would do best to run to government agencies to figure out and handle things correctly.

      My god, you are a loathsome prick.

      Except for the anarchists, most libertarians accept the general idea that having police force to deal with crime is one of the few legitimate functions of government.

      And you already know that. You’re just here to flood the board with bullshit for your own amusement.

      Go die in a fire.

      1. Talk about loathsome, you’d tell someone to ‘go die in a fire’ because they dared to, in your view, ‘flood(ed) the board with bullsh*it for [their] own amusement?’ Are you some kind of sociopath?

        1. “Are you some kind of sociopath?”
          Gee, Bo, I can answer that. You’re an egomaniacal asshole and your act has worn thin. If you were twice as smart as your mom claimed, you’d still be about a quarter as smart as you think you are. And she was ‘way too optimistic; your phone is smarter than you.
          Why anyone here treats you better than turd is treated is a mystery. go die in a fire.

          1. If anyone fit the concept of an angry sociopath it would be you Sevo. I’ve seen you absolutely crazed in spitting abuse because people had the temerity to disagree with you over whether Jesus existed historically. So I’m not sure you’re the well hinged observer whose judgment would be very compelling here.

            1. Bo Cara Esq.|11.16.14 @ 8:52PM|#
              “So I’m not sure you’re the well hinged observer whose judgment would be very compelling here.”

              Egomaniacal assholes will hide behind any fig leaf they can find.

              1. You’re like a walking projection there Sevo.

                1. Bo Cara Esq.|11.16.14 @ 8:59PM|#
                  “You’re like a walking projection there Sevo.”

                  Did you find that on your phone?

                  1. Performance evaluation seems more likely.

      2. “Except for the anarchists, most libertarians accept the general idea that having police force to deal with crime is one of the few legitimate functions of government.”

        im kinda partial to torches and pitchforks

    5. There seems to be something incongruous about libertarians thinking private enterprises would do best to run to government agencies to figure out and handle things correctly.

      …why? The court system is immeasurably more in keeping with libertarian concerns RE: presumption of innocence, trial by jury, admittance of relevant evidence, consistency in results, etc than any of the likely private alternatives in the here and now, especially one lacking these things.

      I mean, would you be saying the same thing if the Catholic Church were trying to make its ecclesiastical law binding on its members wrt sexual conduct?

      What is it about feminism that makes you stupid, Bo? You are a law student; I shouldn’t have to be pointing out the benefits of the court systems as a means of dispute resolution to you of all people.

  4. Clearly, there is a rape epidemic on college campuses. And even though it mostly only exists in the minds of women who are so angry that no one wants to have sex with them that they have to pretend that everyone does, to the point of forcing it, there is only one solution. Ban college campuses. Hey, I learned it from you, government, I learned it from you!

  5. “the concept of sexual assault is trivialized”

    No!?? You’re KIDDING?

  6. “Wait, you said you wanted *rappers* to perform at your party! Well, you should have been clearer.”

  7. It’s time to deny graduation to students who flunk their “How Not To Rape” classes.

    1. Wait, denying graduation would defeat the purpose. Maybe that’s where the problem arises.

  8. There’s only one solution. We ban college campuses and ban straight heterosexual sex. Or else the rape culture wins. Do you want the rape culture to win?

    What you say, progtards? Let’s form a coalition and ban shit! Nothing has ever been solved without banning shit.

    1. Chastity belts for all! You get to unlock them when you pay off your student loans!

      1. That’s really mean for some of us…

  9. Instead, colleges should always go to the police. The normal criminal justice system is vastly better equipped to investigate and adjudicate rape

    Vastly better equipped does not mean competent or interested. Governized policing and investigating sucks just as hard as all gov efforts.

    1. I would rephrase as “the colleges are so incompetent at this even the real-world courts start looking good.”

    2. This is my point above. A pretty good chunk of time here is spent on threads detailing how miserable of a job the police and courts do in this country. And we’re going to fault a private organization like Yale because they’d rather determine who they want to associate with themselves rather than turning to these Keystone cops?

      The real issue here is that the feds and some state governments are pressuring the private agencies to move in this direction. But if a private college wants to decide they don’t want to do business with a student and they’ll determine it by having a dog point or not at the fellow, that’s their right (as long as there isn’t a contractual violation).

      1. I’m not defending the admins of these places. They are, for the most part, the same type of lefty fuckwits that ruin whatever they touch.

        So unfairness is baked into how they operate. They cannot help themselves.

        I would like to see male enrollment at these schools crater and see if that changes anything.

        1. While not dismissing the role of the feds in pressuring the schools, I bet that the fact that more and more schools have clientele 60% or more female is driving some of this.

          1. And this could only accelerate that trend.

      2. Let’s point out another problem with this since you keep beating the drum.

        Yale or a private school is free to kick out a student who violates their rules and no one has said they shouldn’t be able to. Yet most libertarians are fine questioning decisions like that which become ingrained into the culture.

        There’s also the fact that Yale doesn’t have some crime task force with the skills to deal with this. They essentially have a campus cop and bureaucrats making the decisions. So, to say that this fulfills some libertarian pipe dream is asinine.

        Beyond that, it’s STILL A LEGAL MATTER. If there is a legit rape accusation, that’s what the cops exist for. The bureaucrats at PRIVATE schools can do as they please and kick the student out, but that does not and should not substitute for an actual criminal investigation.

      3. Like when a lawyer proves malfeasance on the part of said institution re a railroaded male student. If you are actually a law student you were too young to see when this shit was pulled during the Clinton years. Many a lawsuit was won and the progs had to back off.

        It’s going to happen again when multiple institutions take big hits to their endowments. You know, lawyer type shit like due process, bo peep.

  10. If I were in College today, and, since I’m in a state in which I can record someone without their consent, I would always have sex in my DORM and I would record the entire episode.

    It’s only a crime to distribute the recording. I’d keep the videos of each sex act (along with a clear consent before during and after) in my safety deposit box just in case I get Bill Cosby’d.

    1. Recording someone in a private space, without their consent to be recorded, is a crime in many jurisdictions whether you distribute or not.

  11. Here’s my idea: Colleges should leave rape accusations to the real-world courts, while reinstating parietal rules. A guy keeps a coed in his room overnight, discipline him for that, don’t put “rapist” on his record, leave that to the real-world judicial system.

    I mean, it’s an institution of higher learning, not a brothel.

    Fortunately, online education and similar innovations will force the current university model to reshape itself.

    1. will force the current university model to reshape itself.

      …to venues of cyber-rape!

          1. Stomach rape?

          2. Wow. Thank heavens Android doesn’t have Apple’s restrictive “walled garden” approach to mobile apps, so that creativity can flourish like that.

    2. Good grief, one minute you’re quoting cursing like a sailor type rap music, the next you’re clutching pearls about college hook ups. I guess you’re some kind of uptight, thug school marm?

      1. “uptight, thug school marm”

        Like this?

        http://www.idontbrakefornuns.c…..age1_1.jpg

        I admit that when some half-wit insists on loading me with insults, false accusations, and religiously-bigoted remarks when I comment, ordinary language is not adequate to express the depth of my contempt. It is necessary for me to reach into the rich vein of invective afforded by the English language in order for me to truly share my feelings with you.

        Really, instead of blame me, you should blame the English language for providing such apt words and phrases as “cretin,” “imbecile,” “half-wit,” and “tabasco sauce,” which are perfectly fitted to describe you and your proclivities.

        1. And to repeat a point I made earlier:

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lobjgVo0c2Q

          1. Hey, failure to respond is the same as an admission, shrinky-dink!

            http://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/rule_36

      2. Hey, you crack that intro to logic book yet? You did admit you hadn’t worked up to that before. Just wondering.

    3. Here’s my idea: Colleges should leave rape accusations to the real-world courts, while reinstating parietal rules. A guy keeps a coed in his room overnight, discipline him for that, don’t put “rapist” on his record, leave that to the real-world judicial system.

      Are you fucking kidding me, Eddie? Yeah, let’s make it so that consenting adults are punished for having sex! Not even for having sex, for allowing someone of the opposite gender to stay in their room! Given that I often had female friends stay at my place without fucking them, you’d effectively penalize people who were nice enough to let a friend stay on their couch.

      Not only that, but what do you do with people living in apartments? Does the college have the right to punish people for allowing a female friend to stay overnight in a rented, private apartment?

      I see some slight problems with this argument.

      1. I just know that colleges used to have those rules. Maybe it was a reactionary Dark Age from which we have with difficulty escaped, but my own opinion is otherwise. However, I’m not 100% I can convince others here.

        1. not 100% *sure*

  12. Yeah Its pretty clear that it has indeed failed.

    http://www.Safe-Anon.tk

  13. I was once walking on a college campus and I looked at a woman.

    1. You bastard!

    1. I didn’t know Gary Coleman was at the Obamacare signing ceremony.

    2. But Obama didn’t learn about this till this week.

      1. I can’t get any of the links to pass muster, but in the CNN feed, he says he didn’t know anything about “it” prior to his briefing.
        I’m sure that lie will be spun into many parts of the spectrum.

      2. ‘Nother try:
        “NEWS: OBAMA ON GRUBER: I JUST HEARD ABOUT THIS TODAY”
        […]
        “Sunday on Fox News Channel’s “Fox & Friends,” network White House corespondent Ed Henry asked President President Obama about Jonathan Gruber and the president claimed he had just heard about the ObamaCare architect before walking out on stage in Australia”
        http://www.news.nom.co/obama-o…..3018-news/

    3. “Obama: Gruber ‘Some Advisor Who Never Worked On Our Staff’–Gruber: President Personally Crafted ObamaCare Deception With Me”
      […]
      “President Obama said Sunday that the architect of Obamacare, MIT professor Jonathan Gruber, was just “some advisor who was never on our staff.”

      Jonathan Gruber was paid nearly $400,000 by the government for his role in helping craft the law.”
      (skwerilz no like link; bing or google)

      And today NBC and ABC finally admitted Gruber exists, sorta.

      1. and
        Michigan: $481,050

        Minnesota: $329,000

        Vermont: $400,000

        Wisconsin: $400,000

        1. along with Colorado, Connecticut, Maine, West Virginia and Massachusetts but I couldn’t find how much they paid him.

  14. Thankfully college is dying and their sphere of influence is waning. People are sick of graduating with debt the size of a mortgage and no discernible skills. This is the information age — the days of the liberal faux-intellectual class indoctrinating young people are numbered.

    1. It’ll be fun to watch.

    2. As long as employers continue to hire those with credentials, the secondary education system continue to be highly lucrative regardless of actual results.

      So, the private sector enables those left wing douchebags.

      1. Not their fault SCOTUS told them they couldn’t use testing to weed out dumb applicants. Check out Griggs v. Duke Power.

        1. You know, I wasn’t aware of that. It’s also incredible to me how many Supreme Court rulings have nothing at all to do with what the law is and what powers are granted to government and are instead related to concepts like social justice.

          But the jobs that need real credentials, based on a quick skim of that case, would still be able to test applicants as long as they could show it mattered to the position. I would imagine they’d still be worried about liability, though.

          1. Griggs was not a ruling on the 14th Amendment, but on laws passed by Congress.

  15. At the same time, we need to treat rape like a serious crime deserving a full police investigation and trial

    Yes, damn the patriarchy! You’d think this was already something that governments and societies have been doing since the Late Middle Ages, but I guess you’d be wrong about that. After all, an internet feminist says so.

    We should also recognize that insane alcohol laws contribute to the problem and aren’t worth defending.

    If only this had some coherence and connection to the topic of discussion. Laws requiring an adult to be 21 to purchase alcohol are stupid, but there is no evidence which demonstrates a causal connection to campus rape.

    Oh right, I forgot. It’s an “epidemic”, so let’s shoehorn every social cause we can think of into this thing. Opportunity only knocks once, and all that.

    1. It’s an “epidemic”

      Cue the Czar, whose inability to do anything about the problem is proof he needs a bigger budget. Rinse, repeat, refail.

  16. Madame Secretary and State of Affairs. Both look horrible. Just saw a commercial for the latter and man does it look like a lefty wet-dream where they are capable of making the hard but correct decisions despite, historically, being unable to that.

    1. “How much do we need to suspend 1st Amendment rights?”

      “How many LIVES do you want to save….?”

      *click*

      1. Yeah, and the scene where Katherine Heigl jacks the guy up against the wall was totally compelling too.

    2. They did this shit before Hillary ran last time, prepping the battlefield so to speak. The shows will be about as successful as Hillarys Campagin will be.

  17. In some countries making someone listen to Bob Costas is a major crime.

    1. Chris Collinsworth needs a huge, heapin’ cuppa “Shut The Fuck Up!” He used to be OK, but Jesus fuck me he’s annoying now.

      1. Nah, he’s always been a blowhard, sort of a Kirk Herbstreit senior. Bothe these idiots would be advised to take a tutorial from Vin Scully or Verne Lundquist.

    2. I believe it qualifies as torture…

  18. This article from Slate in which the author wonders why working class whites dont’ vote Democrat is hilarious.

    Specifically, whites were bewildered and infuriated with liberals who defended rioting communities?correctly noting the decades of deprivation and abuse that led to those violent outbursts?and pushed anti-poverty programs to address the underlying conditions. Black incomes rose while at the same time, many white incomes were beginning to stagnate or even fall. Why was the government spending our tax dollars on them, working-class whites asked, when they destroy their neighborhoods and refuse to work, and we’re losing our jobs and our homes?

    Part of this was just racism. For most of the post-war era, whites were empowered by the federal government to separate themselves and their lives from black Americans. For the white middle class, federal aid built white suburbs and white schools, and for the white working-class, it built segregated housing projects and cities. The civil rights revolution brought blacks and black demands to their doorsteps, and for the white working class?which couldn’t just leave for the suburbs?it fueled a backlash.

    “Why won’t white people vote for us?” he wondered, as he called them racists to their faces.

    1. I imagine this being said with the same sort of startled displeasure that a Briton might have used to say, “Why don’t the coolies simply participate in the civilizational project? Sometimes, I think they don’t even deserve the British Raj!”

      1. What political party did Truman belong to, Bouie? I want to hear you say it, you mendacious fuck.

        1. “Truman would be a Republican now!”

  19. What would actually reduce rape: legalizing prostitution.

    1. Not seeing how that works since rape is almost never about sexual deprivation.

      1. Handlebar|11.16.14 @ 11:24PM|#
        “Not seeing how that works since rape is almost never about sexual deprivation.”

        I’m not going to make the claim otherwise, but I’ve heard and read this claim often.
        Got a cite?

        1. Nope. If you wish to remain ignorant that’s your biz.

          1. Handlebar|11.16.14 @ 11:40PM|#
            “Nope. If you wish to remain ignorant that’s your biz.”

            You made the claim; prove it or STFU.
            If you wish to remain a bullshitter, that’s OK by me too.

            1. You didn’t ask the guy I was responding to for a cite, despite his far more iffy claim. Forgive me for thinking this is your reaction to a fact you’d rather not be true.

              1. There is a difference between a serial rapist and a date rapist. I know the feminist schtick is to lump them all together, but psychologically, they are different.

                A drunk dude getting into with a girl who doesn’t stop because she says no is not, in my view, motivated by the same thing as a guy who is drugging and raping them. And there’s probably still another difference with the guys who go out looking to force themselves on victims.

                So, I consider that a cheap explanation that is driven more by politics and feminism than anything else. They worry someone will sympathize somewhat with a ‘date rapist’ because it was viewed differently back in the day. But if you subscribe the same motives, they must be the same.

                Of course, you can recognize different drives and still condemn both acts.

              2. Handlebar|11.16.14 @ 11:56PM|#
                “You didn’t ask the guy I was responding to for a cite, despite his far more iffy claim.”
                So what? Did you get butt-hurt?

                “Forgive me for thinking this is your reaction to a fact you’d rather not be true.”
                Forgive me for thinking you’re a bullshit artist with no evidence for you claims.
                Fuck off, Bo.

      2. I don’t think you can make this claim, but you could point out that there are plenty of guys who are sexually deprived but refrain from raping. There is obviously more to rape than just sexual deprivation.

        1. There is truth to the claim that the type of rapist depicted on a show like Law and Order: SVU (where most Americans get their knowledge of the criminal underbelly of society, I’d say) is driven by something more than sexual desire. There are other things going on there. But many rapes don’t fall under that umbrella. They aren’t plotted out before hand so much as they happen in the moment.

          But people attempt to paint all rapists and now even those who guilty of harassment with the same broad brush. This isn’t to make light of the drunken frat boy forcing himself on someone, but just pointing out that they may have different motivations for what they do. So, yes, basic desire for sex probably is the reason most rapes would occur on a college campus. And legalizing prostitution probably would help matters. I think there are some studies on the matter.

          The sexually deprived male would have to go out of his way to look for a rape victim most likely, as well.

        2. lap83|11.17.14 @ 12:06AM|#
          “There is obviously more to rape than just sexual deprivation.”

          I’ve seen this claim also, but have yet to see evidence.
          Got any?

    2. Apples and oranges, bro.

  20. In fairness to the SJWs, they’re not suggesting that college rape victims should report it only to the college and not to the police. You’re engaging in a false dichotomy here.

    Surely you wouldn’t suggest that firing an employee who steals from the cash register trivializes theft because it’s not a coercive punishment.

    1. Oh, boy! New bullshit artist!

      Handlebar|11.16.14 @ 11:29PM|#
      “In fairness to the SJWs, they’re not suggesting that college rape victims should report it only to the college and not to the police. You’re engaging in a false dichotomy here.”
      No one said they shouldn’t REPORT it, but you knew that already didn’t you?

      “Surely you wouldn’t suggest that firing an employee who steals from the cash register trivializes theft because it’s not a coercive punishment.”
      Well, we get an accusation of false dichotomy followed by a load of false equivalence!
      Are you lost? Did you think you pile of bullshit would someone not get called here?

      1. “would someone not get called here?”
        See? See? that’s….!
        “Would someHOW not get called here?”

      2. You’re a non sequitur machine today. I recommend a cold coffee and a black shower, or maybe the other way around.

        1. Handlebar|11.16.14 @ 11:59PM|#
          “You’re a non sequitur machine today.”

          So, IOWs, you have no evidence to back up your bullshit?
          Are you Bo under a new handle? A random bullshit artist who just showed up?
          Inquiring minds, well, really don’t give a shit. Fuck off.

    2. What they are suggesting and attempting to implement is using public institutions to not only redefine rape itself, but also to significantly lower the standard of evidence needed to find a man guilty.

      Beyond that, the social justice warriors want this done in courtrooms, as well. For them, this is just a stepping stone to ‘progress.’

      Cobble up some bogus statistics showing a crisis at college campuses, enact laws, come up with some other bogus stats to show its effectiveness, and then attempt to implement on a larger scale.

      There in lies the difference since it needs to be stated explicitly for you.

    3. And the giovernment requires the firing of employees who steal from the cash register?

    4. pretty sure crimes where there is mallum en se (like rape)should be left innocent until proven guilty. you cannot prove guilt with he said she said, you prove guilt with an investigation.

  21. How could Mr. Rubenfeld have any doubts that colleges could investigate and adjudicate rape claims? Why, when rumors that Jerery Sandusky raped little boys in Penn State shower rooms first surfaced, Graham Spanier and company took a look and concluded that there was nothing else to see, move along now. And apparently the Department of Education OCR was so impressed with Mr. Spanier’s handling of these scandalous rumors against Sandusky that they mandated that all colleges follow Spanier’s example to qualify for federal funding.

    1. A good arguement against institutions investigating or adjudicating these charges as well as DoE engaging in the same activities.

  22. Epic fail all down the line, so moar control from both entities…yeah, that’s it.

  23. Colleges aren’t going to stop holding kangaroo courts and return to the standards of English Common Law because if they did they would have to face the fact that a fair proportion of their faculty are misandrist morons who prey pun credulous you college women for financial and emotional support. They would also have to tell their female students “If you wake up the next morning and, despite having decided at each stage to go farther, feel that you made an awful mistake; you weren’t raped, you were stupid.”

  24. When everything is rape, nothing is.

  25. I’d like to see a coalition of college women speaking out and saying. “Fuck what those ugly bitches say! If I’m not pushing you off me you need to be giving it to me hard.”

  26. my best friend’s aunt makes $69 /hour on the laptop . She has been out of a job for nine months but last month her check was $17708 just working on the laptop for a few hours. Get More Info….

    ?????? http://www.payinsider.com

  27. “Department of Justice states that about 35 percent of rapes and sexual assaults were reported to the police in 2013. That’s not enough, but it’s a lot better than the 5 percent reported by college women.”

    This is such fucking horseshit.

  28. One topic I’d love to see covered in a serious article: Why do college women go to frat parties, and especially why do they go their and drink?

    I’m not saying they shouldn’t – obviously, they have a right to go to any public place and not be raped, just like everyone else, but given that, why?

    1) Do they believe that frat parties are the rape dens we read about, but think that it’s worth it to get free beer, meet a frat guy, or just be at the hot party?

    2) Or do they not believe that there’s a significant risk of rape, and if not, why not?

    It’s been a long time since college, but modern journalism makes frats sound like that dog in the Far Side cartoon who writes “Cat Fud” on a drier.

  29. I recommend:

    “The Sexual Harassment Quagmire: How To Dig Out” http://malemattersusa.wordpres…..-quagmire/

    “Walk a Mile in Her Shoes is widely promoted but won’t achieve much” http://malemattersusa.wordpres…..es-little/

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.