Rape

Rolling Stone's UVA Rape Story Just Took Another Massive Hit

|

UVA
Troy / Flickr

The Washington Post just published another investigative report on the University of Virginia gang rape allegations—and whatever credibility Sabrina Rubin Erdely and Rolling Stone had left is totally obliterated.

WaPost spoke with the three friends who rescued Jackie after her alleged gang rape on September 28, 2012. The details they provided depart significantly from Jackie's narrative as reported by Erdely. The friends told WaPost that Jackie did not appear battered or bloodied and gave a description of the attack significantly different than what was later published in Rolling Stone. They also clarified that it was Jackie who didn't want to go to the police, not them:

The scene with her friends was pivotal in the article, as it alleged that the friends were callously apathetic about a beaten, bloodied, injured classmate reporting a brutal gang rape at the Phi Kappa Psi fraternity. The account alleged that the students worried about the effect it might have on their social status, how it might reflect on Jackie during the rest of her collegiate career, and how they suggested not reporting it. It set up the article's theme: That U-Va. has a culture that is indifferent to rape.

"It didn't happen that way at all," Andy said.

Instead, the friends remember being shocked. Though they did not notice any blood or visible injuries, they said they immediately urged Jackie to speak to police and insisted that they find her help. Instead, they said, Jackie declined and asked to be taken back to her dorm room. They went with her — two of them said they spent the night — seeking to comfort Jackie in what appeared to be a moment of extreme turmoil.

Erdely portrayed Jackie's friends as popularity-obsessed sociopaths who deterred her from reporting the assault. They say that's not true; it was Jackie who didn't want to report it.

That may seem damning, but it's just the beginning. According to the friends, Jackie did name her attacker, but no one by that name attended UVA. Pictures of the attacker—the man Jackie claimed was a UVA junior who had asked her out on a date—that she provided to the friends were actually pictures of a former high school classmate who never attended UVA and "hasn't been to Charlottesville in at least six years." His name is not the one Jackie gave her friends. These details were all verified by WaPost.

Here's the timeline, according to the friends:

The three friends said that Jackie soon began talking about a handsome junior from chemistry class who had a crush on her and had been asking her out on dates.

Intrigued, Jackie's friends got his phone number from her and began exchanging text messages with the mysterious upperclassman. He then raved to them about "this super smart hot," freshman who shared his love of the band Coheed and Cambria, according to the texts, which were provided to The Post. …

Jackie told her three friends that she accepted the upperclassman's invitation for a dinner date on Friday Sept. 28, 2012.

Curious about Jackie's date, the friends said that they failed to locate the student on a U-Va. database and social media. Andy, Cindy and Randall all said they never met the student in person. Before Jackie's date, the friends said that they became suspicious that perhaps they hadn't really been in contact with the chemistry student at all.

U-Va. officials told The Post that no student by the name Jackie provided to her friends as her date and attacker in 2012 had ever enrolled at the university. Randall provided The Post with pictures that Jackie's purported date had sent of himself by text message in 2012.

The Post identified the person in the pictures and learned that his name does not match the one Jackie provided to friends in 2012. In an interview, the man said that he was Jackie's high school classmate but that he "never really spoke to her."

The man said that he was never a U-Va. student and is not a member of any fraternity. Additionally, the man said that he had not visited Charlottesville in at least six years and that he was in another state participating in an athletic event during the weekend of Sept. 28, 2012.

If the friends' narrative is accurate, it seems doubtful that "Drew" exists at all, and is instead the product of some kind of catfishing situation. Compare that with Rolling Stone editor Sean Woods' initial claim that "I'm satisfied that [the perpetrators] exist and are real. We knew who they were."

One of the friends, "Randall," also told WaPost that Erdely lied when she wrote that he declined to be interviewed because of "loyalty to his own frat." Randall said he would have gladly given an interview but was never contacted.

The friends quoted in the latest article still say Jackie's changed behavior that first semester is evidence of some trauma she sustained. That may be true, although it is difficult to say what, exactly, that might have entailed. There is not a shred of evidence to suggest such a trauma bears any resemblance to the incredible story told by Rolling Stone.

Lest anyone think that this debacle is solely the fault of someone who falsely claimed rape, keep in mind that these fraudulent charges were put forth by a national magazine that made no effort to verify them, and ignored every red flag in its haste to publish the story of the century—even when Jackie refused to name her attackers and attempted to withdraw her story. Whatever the truth is—whatever the excellent reporters at WaPost manage to uncover next—the fact remains that Rolling Stone and Erdely should have known better.

The degree to which everyone involved in this travesty of journalism failed at their jobs is almost unbelievable. But unlike the story of a gang rape at UVA, we now have incontrovertible proof of it.

More from me on this subject here.

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.

302 responses to “Rolling Stone's UVA Rape Story Just Took Another Massive Hit

  1. The narrative pivoted days ago to “It’s not really about the story, it’s about the abhorrent reactions to the story and how quick people were to dismiss it!”

    The fact that this is total BS won’t make a difference to those on-board from the get go. They still believe it all means something and that something should be done.

    1. That kind of flailing just shows how damning this affair has been to the credibility of feminist SJWs.

      They had the perfect story of the century that was going to change everything and it’s completely blown up in their faces after weeks of bullying skeptics and fact checkers.

      1. It’s been fun to watch. Fuck those people.

        1. It’s been fun to watch. Fuck those people.

          Absolutely Schadentacular!

          1. Schadenfreude, schadenfreude
            Every morning you greet me
            (On HnR anyways. Nut punch, schadenfreude, repeat)

        2. What is funny, the White Privileged Male members of that frat will soon be even more privileged with Rolling Stones money, in other words a bunch of progressives $ will be handed to the group they most despise on this earth….next to race traitors of course.

          I will sleep well tonight over this debacle !!!

          1. ^This, this, a thousand times this.

          2. The party that Phi Psi will throw on the RS money makes me wish I was back in C-Ville – if only to start a few “grab its motherfucking keg!” chants

            1. Ha, that occurred to me too. Which means it’s bound to happen.

            2. I pledged Phi Psi a few years ago at UK but didn’t follow through. I wonder if that’s enough to get me in the door.

          3. I’m a female UVA alumna (2005). Privileged or elitist are the last words I would use to describe to guys who were in Phi Psi my year. Most of them were from the northern Virginia (DC suburbs) and had attended public high schools, like myself. There were 33 fraternities at UVA when I was there and they were all different. It’s incredibly unfair to assume everything that the Rolling Stone article is asserting about my school is correct. I had friends from very privileged backgrounds and some who could barely make it through the semester on their student loans. For the most part, people considered intellect as the best commodity, not a trust fund. I have supported Jackie from day one and still feel that something terrible probably did happen to her. We have all misplaced our trust in Rolling Stone and they have done such a disservice to sexual assault victims everywhere.

            1. “and still feel that something terrible probably did happen to her.”

              It’s called being crazier than a shithouse rat

              1. In all likelihood, something from her past made her crazy. That makes her somewhat pitiable, but that doesn’t change the fact she dragged people through the mud.

                As for Rolling Stone, fuck them! I hope this finally kills that rag once and for all.

              2. I’m neither an expert on the psychology of trauma victims nor shithouse rats, but from what I’ve gleaned from pop sci and TV shows like Law & Order (which certainly makes me an expert as far as the Internet is concerned), it’s not uncommon for trauma victims to block out details of something traumatic that happened to them. If that were to happen to you, if you try to later recall the details, your memory will likely make up things to fill in the gaps (many seem to have the belief that human memory is like a video tape that can be played backwards; its not like that at all). So two years later she may well remember details that are completely different from what happened.

                This is one reason we have statutes of limitations.

                1. Ok ok hold on, ‘repressed memories of childhood abuse’ is an earlier Freudian theory that he gave up later in his career. It was revived in the 70’s and 80’s and was featured in a book “The Courage to Heal” which caused the “Satanic Panic” moral panic of the late 80’s and 90’s. Freud found out that childhood abuse is quite real and a major factor to delinquency and criminal behaviour in both men and women, the repressed bit is not so real. Those people live with what was done to them every day. The moral of the story, be wary of the stories people tell.

            2. So why doesn’t anyone try and find out what really happened?

              1. Because every time they try what’s left of the story disintegrates even further. The “something” may be some sort of psychological break on the part of “Jackie” that led to her making up stories of physical trauma.

            3. One (completely offtopic) clarification. As a graduate from a NoVA public high school (2000, so probably around the same time as you if you spent 4-5 years in college), I can say most of those are public in name only. Parents pay huge premiums to live in districts that are orders of magnitudes better than the schools where many of them work (in DC itself), and in fact the schools tend to be quite good relative to the rest of the nation as well. I knew plenty of people from my high school that I would have no trouble describing as privileged or elitist. Particularly those who went to UVA. I mean come on, they wear ties to football games for christ sake!

              Full Disclosure, I went to Virginia Tech (which is sometimes considered a rival school) and had a younger brother go to UVA, so I might have a few biases…

              1. Wearing neckties to football games is a sure sign of privilege, because as everyone knows, neckties cost thousands of dollars and can only be afforded by rich preppies, or by poor students who take on crippling debt.

                1. I say! He speaks the truth! A toast to never knowing crippling student debt!

                  You there, fetch me my monocle!

      2. “Jackie” should be thrown out of UVA.

        1. I’d accept her being walked out.

        2. Under U.Va’s Honor Code she almost HAS to be expelled.

      3. That kind of flailing just shows how damning this affair has been to the credibility of feminist SJWs.

        You obviously haven’t been reading the SJW press. See, this story (according to them) has hurt rape victims and journalists; they are just being victimized again! Why won’t anybody help them?

        1. Dear lord..

    2. The friends quoted in the latest article still say Jackie’s changed behavior that first semester is evidence of some trauma she sustained. That may be true, although it is difficult to say what, exactly, that might have entailed. There is not a shred of evidence to suggest such a trauma bears any resemblance to the incredible story told by Rolling Stone.

      Why is no one talking about the obvious possibility here, which is that Jackie is seriously emotionally disturbed, made up ‘Drew’ in an attempt to make the Randall guy she had a crush on jealous, and then constructed the entire rape story for attention?

      Literally everything fits. Someone sent pictures of this man to her friends, but the guy is a former high school classmate of Jackie’s. If she knew of him from school, she easily could have gotten pictures online. Whoever sent texts to her friends said things like how Jackie was a ‘super smart hot’ girl who shared all the same interests with him but, dag nabbit!, was interested in this lucky son of a bitch her own age! (Kicks rocks sadly).

      This seems like something she very easily could have completely made up, in which case no rape would have occurred and her emotional collapse could have been the result of whatever issues she was dealing with that led her to do something so bizarre in the first place.

      1. Well, at least three H&R commenters are talking about it. I’m sure someone has thought about writing about it but didn’t want to risk the backlash from the SJWs “So all rape victims must be emotionally disturbed.”

      2. Yep. She’s a run of the mill fabulist. Erdely and her editor are the real villains, though. Basic fact checking should have prevented the whole fiasco.

      3. Exactly right, and very close to the point I was going to make.

        This can’t be a case of “catfishing.” It’s very plausible – and very likely in my estimation – that Jackie herself was on the other end of those text messages purporting to be Drew. I’d be interested in whether or not WaPo has the phone number or has tried to call it – certainly the police should have it by now. It could be a google voice number or something similar that Jackie could set up without needing another physical phone.

        1. I’d be interested in whether or not WaPo has the phone number or has tried to call it – certainly the police should have it by now

          Why should the police have it? They have no business being involved. Say what you will about Jackie’s BS attention-whoring story, but IIRC she never reported it to the police, and since the story has been proven demonstrably to be a big fat SJW wet-dream with no basis in reality, the police have no business wasting tax money looking into it any further.

        2. This can’t be a case of “catfishing. It’s very plausible – and very likely in my estimation – that Jackie herself was on the other end of those text messages purporting to be Drew.”

          That’s what he means. Jackie was catfishing her friends.

        3. This can’t be a case of “catfishing. It’s very plausible – and very likely in my estimation – that Jackie herself was on the other end of those text messages purporting to be Drew.”

          That’s what he means. Jackie was catfishing her friends.

        4. That’s what I thought too. If not catfishing, what’s the correct term? Manti Teo-ing?

          1. “…what’s the correct term? Manti Teo-ing?”

            ^^^This, so much this!

            My friends and I still laugh when Manti is on the television. Seriously, I can’t get enough laughter out of that fool.

      4. Why is no one talking about the obvious possibility here, which is that Jackie is seriously emotionally disturbed, made up ‘Drew’ in an attempt to make the Randall guy she had a crush on jealous, and then constructed the entire rape story for attention?

        Because that’s unproductive. Srsly.

        It does no good to discredit Jackie. However valid that might be from a strict fact-finding perspective, she is and must remain a victim of something, if only her own mental illness. IOW, she’s untouchable.

        Erdely and Merlan on the other hand are very much fair game as they are actively perpetrated this due to insistence that no vulgar fact-checking was needed.

        1. It does no good to discredit Jackie. However valid that might be from a strict fact-finding perspective, she is and must remain a victim of something, if only her own mental illness. IOW, she’s untouchable.

          Except she might not be mentally ill at all. It’s very possible she’s no kind of victim whatsoever and is a serial liar who almost ruined peoples’ lives for no reason.

          1. I think people rushing to the idea that she must be mentally ill are being far too charitable. This is psychopath land she’s in at this point. Even if Erdely pumped up much of what Jackie told her, Jackie knew. Any person who isn’t a moral degenerate would have then come forward and said “I cannot allow lies based on my statements to ruin people’s lives”. She didn’t.

            It’s very hard to be that mentally ill and not have people notice it and to even be receiving treatment for it. But sociopaths learn to hide it. They get good at it.

            Everything here screams that Jackie and Erdely are sociopaths.

            1. Any person who isn’t a moral degenerate would have then come forward and said “I cannot allow lies based on my statements to ruin people’s lives”. She didn’t.

              It’s my understanding that she tried to retract / kill the story before it was published.

              But yeah, there both sociopaths.

            2. I just read the WaPo article, and I think Epi called it.

              Jackie is a psychopath.

            3. She could be a compulsive liar, not a sociopath.

              I was friends with a kleptomaniac when I was 12. Until she started stealing my mom’s jewelry.

              1. IANA psychiatrist, but I think Jackie likely has borderline personality disorder.

                1. Over the line personality disorder

            4. When your positions and beliefs are based on superficial emotions rather than fact/evidence based rational thought, and logical reasoning, sometimes you just have to pound your fists on the desk and make shit up to get your point across.

      5. This is certainly consistent with the facts, but I’d be as slow to assume that that’s definitely what happened than I wish I’d been to assume that the original story was accurate.

      6. Maybe she was a “D” student.

        1. I think she was a UVA student.

      7. Out of all of the craziness of this story, I’m afraid you hit the nail on the head. This mail all have stemmed from a very disturbed girl trying to get attention from Randall.

        With the name and photo evidence we have now, I think she made everything up and there was no attack, no date, no 3rd year Chemistry student.

        Bigger story now is where in the hell did the Drew lifeguard, Phi Psi gang rape story come from? Jackie or Ederly?

      8. Someone?..

        People can have more than one cell phone right?

    3. that something should be done

      It’s possible that this phrase may be responsible for more evil and repression than any other in the English language.

      1. “There ought to be a law” also comes to mind.

        1. Or “why is that still legal?” for whatever un-PC thing they dislike.

  2. I read earlier that UVA is going to reinstate the Greek system… in January, which is absurd considering the completely made of nature of this story.

    1. That may just be a (rare) case of pragmatism: UVA is in finals right now and the semester ends on Tuesday.

  3. Lest anyone think that this debacle is solely the fault of someone who falsely claimed rape, keep in mind that these fraudulent charges were put forth by a national magazine that made no effort to verify them, and ignored every red flag in its haste to publish the story of the century?even when Jackie refused to name her attackers and attempted to withdraw her story. Whatever the truth is?whatever the excellent reporters at WaPost manage to uncover next?the fact remains that Rolling Stone and Erdely should have known better.

    I’m convinced Jackie is mentally ill so I’m fine with putting most of the blame on Rolling Stone, which should no longer be seen fit to wipe one’s ass with.

    1. Seriously, they should just close up shop in the morning.

    2. I’m convinced Jackie is mentally ill so I’m fine with putting most of the blame on Rolling Stone, which should no longer be seen fit to wipe one’s ass with.

      Especially given that Erdely lied in her article about trying to contact Randall, then made up a story that he didn’t want to talk to her ‘out of loyalty to the frat.’

      Not only did she purposefully not try to contact this guy, implying that she knew there were flaws in Jackie’s story and did not want them contradicted, but she then covered this up, and blamed the fact that she never talked to him on this mythic frat insularity that she’d based her whole hit job of a piece on.

      Rolling Stone is going to get sued into oblivion by the frat that got vandalized because of this.

      1. They ain’t the only ones. I have a feeling that Lena Dunham is going to have to pay “Barry” big money too.

    3. Ill or not the WaPo has shown Jackie was a truly horrible person before RS ever talked to her.

    4. I’m convinced Jackie is mentally ill

      Attention-whoring is not a mental illness. We seriously have to get past this notion of labeling any anti-social behaviour as mental illness.

      1. I agree, I understand the desire of some people to not want blame someone they think is mentally ill, but I still believe she’s ultimately responsible for her actions. For one thing, she got into to UVA so it’s not like she’s some low functioning special needs person.

        1. There is the possibility of adult onset schizophrenia…

          Which would be apparent, very soon.

      2. Close enough for government work.

        La Wik:

        M?nchausen syndrome, is a psychiatric factitious disorder wherein those affected feign disease, illness, or *psychological trauma* to draw attention, sympathy.

  4. What part of the “Narrative” do you not understand ?!?!?!?!?111

  5. “Grab its motherfucking leg”

    1. Even if the RS editors didn’t see any of the other red flags, that one quote should have given them pause.

  6. “Uh, like *whatever*, you people are like totally *obsessed* with this story and you’re totally being myopic about what is in reality a very serious and issue and your hyperventilation about some ‘mistaken details’ here are perpetuating an unhelpful narrative of doubt and mistrust of women which is really just emblematic of the very cultural problem we have striven earnestly against the tide to draw attention to.”

    /SENSIBLE AND THOUGHTFUL PEOPLE UNLIKE YOU SHITTY HATEFUCKING FRAT-APOLOGISTS

    1. I believe Mayella Ewell.

    2. You’re good. I’m better:

      “Yeah. These dudebros are a modern day lynch mob of misogynistic cis shitlord trolls. I wouldn’t be surprised if these exact same people were involved with the GamerGate fiasco.As soon women attain even a modicum of progress in this society, the machinery of oppression that is our patriarchal, racist, capitalist, homophobic, transmisogynistic and cissexist society begins to work day and night to discredit and use violence and fear to silence them. We saw this when the Supreme KKKourt sided with corporations over actual women whose very lives are in danger when they can not access birth control. We saw this with Trayvon and Sandy Hook, where the insecurity of the American patriarchy was in full display as they advocated for guns to perpetuate more violence against women and LGBTQ people’s children, especially black and brown children. And we see it every day when we confront street harassment, when a cis scum AMAB brutalizes and traumatizes us with comments like, “Hey, you look really beautiful today! Ugh, I am so damn tired and angry- I need to listen to some Beyonce, watch some Girls, snuggle up in my hypoallergenic blanket, and eat some vegan cheesecake while I sip on some fair trade organic red wine.”

      -Take that GILMORE, you heterosexist cis shit emperor!

      1. That is some darn good stuff.

        I think it might be time to start using some of the libtrolls own tactics against them, and post to major news sites as frothing RadFems insistent that GangRape is EVEN WORSE than the RS incident suggests – that rape happens to 50%! (not merely 1-in-5) and that its almost always GANGS OF FRAT BOYS as part of their initiation rites which they need to show proof of in order to get jobs working for the Koch Industries Rape Machine

        1. This suggests you’re not familiar with actual radfem posting and writing, which looks exactly like that and appears just like that.

          Or that at places like Huffington Post Dean Esmay’s article that notes ‘hey, men are abused, too,’ was taken down after publication thanks to feminist complaints.

      2. That was really quite good. A

        I’d say you would have passed the intellectual Turing test, if not for the last sentence, which crossed the line into parody.

      3. That is some serious mental illness right there.

  7. Why do you hate women, Robby? Don’t you realize that you’re supposed to believe them, no matter what?

    Seriously though, why does anyone read Rolling Stone? It’s trash, and it’s been trash for years. Which is a shame, because it used to be required reading for me.

    1. That’s truly sad, Andy. Crawdaddy was always the real rock-n-roll rag back in the day. Wenner has always been a pretentious puke.

      1. Thank you for mentioning Jann Wenner: Why isn’t his name and photo plastered all over this scandal?

        Is it because he’s a gay left-wingist? And of course a gay left-wingist is always above reproach?

        1. Calm down.

          Let’s remember, it’s possible for both W. AND Obama to be lousy Presidents, and for BOTH the left and right to use noxious, oppressive, divisive tactics.

          1. “… it’s possible for both W. AND Obama to be lousy Presidents…”

            Oh, you betcha. I agree completely.

            “…BOTH the left and right to use noxious, oppressive, divisive tactics…”

            One of the two parties you mentioned is far more skilled at this and does it far more frequently than the other.

            If you are suggesting they are equal in this, that is simply laughable.

        2. Is it because he’s a gay left-wingist? And of course a gay left-wingist is always above reproach?

          No, gays are the worst misogynists in the world? they hate women so much that they sleep with men!

          /sjw

  8. Erdely portrayed Jackie’s friends as popularity-obsessed sociopaths who deterred her from reporting the assault. They say that’s not true; it was Jackie who didn’t want to report it.

    To be honest, Jackie sounds like the sociopath. She was willing to fuck over complete strangers–potentially ruining their lives–for reasons we may never know, but at this point, “attention” seems to be what she was willing to destroy people for. She also threw her own friends completely to the wolves–again, portraying supportive friends as sociopaths–because she wanted more attention. Which she got from Erdely and Rolling Stone. Whatever the actual motivation, she is a profoundly disturbed individual that I am surprised was even able to make friends considering how sociopathic she seems.

    Normal healthy people do not blithely put scores of other people in the firing line–including supposed friends–without a shred of truth. Sociopaths do.

    1. Normal healthy people do not blithely put scores of other people in the firing line–including supposed friends–without a shred of truth. Sociopaths do.

      I think this describes Erdely and the people at Rolling Stone rather than Jackie, who is probably sick in the head.

      Erdely lied to advance her own career at the expense of a considerable number of other people who had their reputations threatened by the story. That’s worse than some girl with serious emotional issues concocting a tall tale that any sensible person would not have believed.

      1. Sorry, Serious, but I believe people are responsible for their own actions, and even if Jackie is “mentally ill”, she is still the one who started this entire story in the first place. She went to Erdely. Erdely is a scumbag, but she didn’t initiate the story. Jackie did.

        Even if Jackie has terrible emotional problems, it still seems as if she was willing to make up a story that could flat out ruin people’s lives–and over nothing. As far as we know, it wasn’t even some kind of revenge or anger, it was “pick frat out of phone book, destroy lives of guys you’ve never even met”. I’m sorry, but that’s insanely sociopathic.

        Jackie may have problems, but she’s also a moral degenerate and can go fuck herself on a glass table. Too soon?

        1. Sorry, Serious, but I believe people are responsible for their own actions, and even if Jackie is “mentally ill”, she is still the one who started this entire story in the first place. She went to Erdely. Erdely is a scumbag, but she didn’t initiate the story. Jackie did.

          Epi and I agree on something. I feel like this should be celebrated by all members at an official Reason pizza event complete with both deep dish and thin crust.

          1. Damn you, Sudden, damn you to hell.

          2. We will watch back to back TOS and TNG episodes and then argue over whether Alison Brie or Gillian Jacobs is hotter. ProL isn’t invited.

            1. We will watch back to back TOS and TNG episodes and then argue over whether Alison Brie or Gillian Jacobs is hotter.

              Why would we argue over this when the answer is Alison Brie?

              Are we going to argue over whether the sky is blue or green, too? Sometimes there is only one right answer.

              1. You’re a good man, Irish, I knew I liked you. It was a trick setup, but you passed with flying colors.

                (To be honest, Gillian Jacobs is really hot in her own right, it’s just that she had the misfortune to star in a show next to Alison Brie and get eclipsed.)

              2. The only right answer is a threesome.

            2. We can’t invite John cuz there’s no fat chicks on either show.

            3. Allison Brie is so hot that she makes Gillian Jacobs look like a man.

              1. Allison Brie is so hot that she makes Gillian Jacobs look like a man.

                Alright, let’s not say anything crazy that we’ll come to regret.

                  1. Simon, Irish literally just told you not to say crazy things.

        2. Too impractical, Epi. While I can agree with you here that “Jackie” is a whackjob, the way the public conversation must play out is that Jackie will be glossed over, and Erdely and Merlan will take the fall for this.

          The rest of America just isn’t up to the strict evidentiary and logical standards that we, here, are.

          1. I’m not talking about public perception, though, T-dog. Just about the way I view the situation, and how I think others might want to consider viewing it. We’re not a court here, or the rest of America. We’re a bunch of people with strict evidentiary and logical standards. So that’s the way I’m going to talk about it.

        3. She didn’t go to Erdely, Erdely was referred to her by someone in the rape activist crowd. It seems likely she made up the story for attantion and then felt she had to repeat it to Erdely or lose face in front of her activist buddies.

          But it seems to me unlikely she ever intended to make any legal charges.

          So she’s horrible and sick (and an idiot), but she didn’t try to get anyone thrown in jail.

          You have two fools with complimentary roles steeped in rape culture hysteria who found each other, tragedy and outrage ensue.

          1. Good point. Ederly went looking for the worst story she could find, obviously.

            So there mere fact that “Jackie” had hinted of gang-rape to someone, would have led Ederly directly to her.

            And, importantly, “Jackie” tried to back out. So it’s possible that she’s got some sort of a conscience. She didn’t want to name any names.

            1. “Jackie” tried to back out. So it’s possible that she’s got some sort of a conscience.

              Or it is just more bullshit. “Trying to back out” while still following through is meaningless.

            2. Or she realized the story she had concocted to entice the target of her unrequited love had begun to spiral out of control and she tried to put the breaks on it. You know, before SHE got in trouble.

        4. She didn’t go to Erdely. Erdely came to Charlottesville looking for a story. People told here that Jackie had a doozy of a story that she’d been telling around Grounds for a couple of years. Erdely then got in touch with Jackie, and was off to the races.

      2. Erdely lied to advance her own career at the expense of a considerable number of other people who had their reputations threatened by the story. That’s worse than some girl with serious emotional issues concocting a tall tale that any sensible person would not have believed.

        And Erdely has previously published multiple stories about rape in the military and rape by a Catholic priest, both of which have been criticized as seeming to also not make sense.

        Here’s info on her story about the pedophile priests.

        One of them died in prison, so he’s shit out of luck as far as getting exonerated. But one has already had his sentence overturned and new trials have been ordered for the other. The Catholic Church claimed Erdely was involved in ‘serial distortions’ and her primary source was a drug addict who claimed he was raped by a pedophile conspiracy in the basement of a church.

        Erdely is personally fucked. She might get sued herself for the multiple people she’s personally harmed.

        1. Tar and Feather Erdely and close the issue.

          This is exactly why the tar and feather punishment MUST be reintroduced. Too many sociopaths have too much access to activist journalists and SJWs to not set make an example of her.

      3. Hmmm, I think Jackie made up a story to get attention from a guy she was interested in but who didn’t return her feelings. It was pretty elaborate and pathetic, really. Until recently she refused to name her date and then fudged his identity when she finally did. She lost control of the story – telling multiple versions. It situation reminds me of The Crucible.

        1. It situation reminds me of The Crucible.

          NO YOU CANT HAVE THE CRUCIBLE THAT WAS WRITTEN ABOUT MCCARTHYISM AND THE ATTACK ON GOOD HEARTED COMMUNISTS IT BELONGS TO US!1!!1!!

          /SJWProgderp

    2. I’m actually pretty amazed at how “Andy”, “Cindy”, and “Randall” are not just throwing Jackie completely under the bus after the way she depicted them (though I suppose for all we know their conversation was a product of Erdely’s imagination and not Jackie’s). Randall, at least, still seems to be very concerned about Jackie herself.

      1. “Randall, at least, still seems to be very concerned about Jackie herself.”

        And it seems there’s a lot to be concerned about.

    3. In fairness, Jackie did allege that at a certain point she told Erdely not to publish her story.

      Of course, at this point nothing Jackie says has credibility, unless she comes forward under her real name and explains what’s going on. However, if she tried to back out of having the story published and Erdely did it anyway, then Jackie wouldn’t be a sociopath, she’d just be a compulsive liar who tried to back out once she realized everything was about to spin out of control.

    4. As you noted, sociopaths are very good at hiding it. They also tend to be very charming and are quite adept at manipulating people. There’s a reason so many sociopaths go into politics.

      1. That was in response to this sentence:

        Whatever the actual motivation, she is a profoundly disturbed individual that I am surprised was even able to make friends considering how sociopathic she seems.

  9. The only thing lacking at this point is the revelation that Erdely actually plagiarized certain details of the story from a Danielle Steele novel.

    1. Oh, just wait. A Million Steele Pieces.

    2. Umm, ya ever get bored, read the first chapter of Bret Ellis’ The Rules of Attraction. “She always knew it was going to be like this.”

    3. I believe it was actually plagiarized from Andrea Dworkin’s fevered dreams

  10. Hey,

    Does anybody remember when that chick from Jezebel accused Soave of wanting this whole thing to have happened?

    1. What is the circle of hell reserved for people like her?

      BTW, of course you do, Brandon, everyone does.

      1. Oinot? Is that you?

        Fancy meeting you here…

  11. Jackie has my sympathy, regardless of what she actually went through; she is a young woman with problems.

    Erdely, however, does not garner my sympathy. She did shoddy journalism, got defensive and insulting when called on that, and has now been shown to be a total…I suppose fraud is the best word. Enjoy your new career writing puff pieces for advertising circulars, Sabrina, and realize you’re lucky to have that.

  12. Sabrina Rubin Erdely and Rolling Stone magazine aren’t the only ones oblitered. Lena Dunham is on her way to olbiteration as well from what I read on Breitbart http://www.breitbart.com/Big-H…..unham-Book
    http://www.breitbart.com/Big-H…..id-nothing

    1. Random House has already backtracked. Like, Monday morning, after “Barry” started to get funds.

    2. Barry released this statement through his lawyer earlier today.

      1. That was pretty classy. I would like to think I would do the same in his position. But I probably wouldn’t.

  13. Could you explain the “catfishing” part? I honestly don’t quite get that. Is it that someone falsely presented himself as the person Jackie is accusing? or Jackie made up this person (in which case how is that “catfishing”)? or…? Thanks.

    1. It’s not catfishing. Robby seems hesitant, even now, to point out that it’s very likely absolutely nothing happened, that Jackie invented a date because she is crazy, and that she then claimed to have been assaulted out of some deep psychosis none of us can fathom.

      Robby’s a good guy, which is why he’s tried not to point out the obvious: That Jackie may be a total sociopath who is nothing more than a compulsive liar.

      I honestly can’t think of another possibility at this point. If Jackie provided the friends with pictures of this guy and it turned out to be someone from high school, then Jackie was inventing fictitious characters two years ago – in which case this all has to be some kind of weird lie she’s been telling.

      1. I think he’s implying that catfished her friends, Randall in particular, as you described in your post above. I think that falls within the definition of catfishing, but I’m not going to argue further on the subject if you disagree, it being completely unimportant.

  14. As con game that unravelled.

    And who exactly was doing this “kind of catfishing situation,” again?

    1. She catfished herself?

      1. Depending on just how mentally ill she is it is entirely possible that she did.

        That she was capable of crafting this fictitious boyfriend and being generally ignorant of it at the same time. Of fabricating the rape charge but then being utterly convinced that it happened.

        I’ve known 2 different women with variations on this kind of mental illness including my ex wife (who had a very minor case of it and interestingly enough also fabricated a rape claim, fortunately not against me) and her best friend from college who was pretty much capable of exactly what I described above.

        1. You assume this “jackie” is real but a victim of something, at least mentally screwed up. With all the fraud so far, the null hypothesis should be that no victim “jackie” exists at all, at most a shill in an elaborate scam. The wpost is interviewing somebody, but the supposed friends are also dubious at this point. But why speculate? Let’s have real names of everybody.

          1. Numerous reporters have talked to Jackie, all of them critical of the original story. If Jackie didn’t exist and wasn’t standing behind the story as published we’d know it by now.

            Also if Jackie didn’t exist she couldn’t have gone to the dean of sex assault and if that didn’t happen then UVA itself could have obliterated the story itself in the first 48 hours and it is important to note, they had EVERY reason to do so because the whole point of the story was attacking how poorly they handled rape allegations.

            No it is pretty clear Jackie is real and that she to this point at least is standing by her story as told to Rubin

            1. Perhaps the word “shill” confused you. I am not saying that this narrative of lies is without real human participants. I’d contend it’s is a con game, after all. Let me reword: Given the deliberate, planned and scripted lies and outright fraud uncovered, the default hypothesis here should be that “jackie” is not a victim of anything (not rape, not some pathetic mental case, not hysterical PTSP, not any of the other drama queen speculations), but at best a participant/collaborator in a scam. Let the public get names and let’s find out what’s what. Everything else is just soap opera in which “jackie” is a fictional character.

              With respect to the “dean of sex assault” and the supposed incentive to obliterate the story, you’ve got the incentives completely upside-down. UVA has been under investigation by the Feds for violations of federal law over its handling of complaints of sexual violence and harassment. Mere complaints, mind you. Furthermore, there is a case from earlier this year where UVA “allegedly” lost records and generally bumbled a case where a lawyered-up woman says she was drugged and raped by another student. The incentive to fast track complaints is obvious. The UVA administrators appear either partisans or asscovering bureaucrats. And don’t forget the role of Emily Renda (a real name!), the self-promoting coordinator, rape counsellor and mentor of “jackie,” linked to the UVA president’s office and DC politicos. As the story degenerates, watch her role.

            2. I’ll rephrase this for you in a clear and concise way.

              Null hypothesis: Jackie is lying about everything.

              Wef got a little fancy with the phrasing and the structure, but I believe that’s what she or he’s getting at.

      2. my guess is she liked Randall or Andy and was trying to make herself appear desirable with the Drew ploy.

  15. U-Va. officials told The Post that no student by the name Jackie provided to her friends as her date and attacker in 2012 had ever enrolled at the university.

    Of course the case is becoming much less clear on the particulars because of all the sensationalism and fanfare of the previous months. Like A Better Weapon said, this is not going to faze the rape culture fanatics one tittle because they already are committed to the narrative.

    If you remember the Duke Lacross Team false-rape case, you may also remember the level of certainty with which the case was discussed in the media, by journalists, columnists and intellectuals, that the woman had to be telling the truth because the alleged perpetrators were white and rich preppies. All discussion about corroboration was taken as second-guessing the victim or taking the aggressors’ side out of hatred of women. Even to this DAY there are those that believe the woman in the Duke case was raped and that the media were complicit in hiding the truth (!)

    I don’t foresee this case taking a different course. You will see recriminations against those that dare contradict the victim’s description of her alleged ordeal.

    1. Like John Feinstein, who just a couple of months ago on his radio show suggested that those Duke lacrosse guys must have been guilty of something because they were acting like tools.

      1. Nationally recognized “sports guys”…..the greatest SJWs of all!

    2. that the woman had to be telling the truth because the alleged perpetrators were white and rich preppies

      You just don’t understand OM since your hispanicness leaves you unable to fully grapple with the struggles of the white experience.

      Every day I wake up with these urges to violently gang-rape young women on shards of broken glass with my rich white friends of 2 months. It is engrained into our skin-color, as though absence of melanin also causes damage to the amygdala and we therefore have no moral compass whatsoever.

      I have to fight off these rape cravings on a daily basis. I just take it one minute at a time. Some of us aren’t so lucky, Warty for example.

    3. I remember seeing an interview with one of the Duke academics who signed that manifesto or whatever it was. Although she accepted that the stripper’s story had been made up, she still asserted something along the lines of “I can’t help thinking, however, that something happened here just by the amount of information we have.”

      1. I hear her. It’s exactly like the way I keep hearing all these stories about how Jews kidnap and murder Christian babies and use the blood to flavor the Passover matzo, and while things might not happen *exactly* the way those stories go, I have to believe that something must be happening.

        1. Ah, yes, the vaunted “Where there’s smoke, there’s fire” theory. I like to counter with an old Chinese allegory.

          An advisor was worried about his future with a certain king who employed him, so he went to the king one day and asked, “If one person told you that there was a tiger running loose in the city, would you believe him?” “No, of course not,” the king replied. “What if two told you?” “No, that would be impossible,” the king said. “What if three people told you?” “Well, if three people claim to have seen a tiger, there must be a tiger.” With that, the advisor decided to leave the king and find other employment.

    4. To this day there are people who sincerely believe that aliens contacted the U.S. in the 1950’s, that alien craft land regularly at area 51, and that the moon landing was faked because we have a treaty with aliens who have a base there.

      We used to put such people in insane asylums. Now we send them on chat shows.

      1. There’s an entire popular overnight radio program featuring these folks, and if you ever listen to it, it’s fairly amazing how credible and articulate the guests are, despite the absolutely insane subject matter they are describing.

        1. Are you referring to Coast to Coast AM? Art Bell was the shit.

          1. That show was amazing. If you ever need to really explain “credulous”, that show is your go-to.

            He would have on a guest to talk about Grey Aliens and their benevolence toward all mankind and every assertion was obviously well-known and had been know to be true for a long time. Minutes later another guest would be on discussing the Grey Alien conspiracy to destroy mankind and the Red Alien’s battle to stop them. Also presented as obviously true and well-known to all reasonable people for some time.

            Really a mind-blowing experience, if you suppose that there are those who took it seriously.

            1. You doubt the word of the aliens?

            2. Cyto, I would appreciate a trigger warning before you callously tear down the fabric of my worldview.

              And why do you always have to make this about color?!

      2. My favorite that I’ve been seeing around more and more…

        Sandy Hook is a hoax, it was a false flag operation and no actual kids were killed

        1. I used to know a guy who (IIRC) did get onto Coast to Coast AM with fantastic stories about how Japan really won WWII with fantastic aviation weaponry that was connected to Area 51, Soviet vampire soldier experiments, and all sorts of stuff like that.

  16. “”But really…. you can’t hold a whole fraternity responsible for the behavior of a few, sick perverted individuals.

    For if you do, then shouldn’t we blame the whole fraternity system?

    And if the whole fraternity system is guilty, then isn’t this an indictment of our educational institutions in general?

    I put it to you: isn’t this an indictment of our entire American society? Well, you can do what you you want to them, but I’m not going to sit here and listen to you badmouth the United States of America“”

    (borrowed from a WaPo comment, borrowed from Citizen Kane I believe)

    1. I’m inspired to change my log-in name to Marion Wormer.

      Vegetables are sensual. People are sensuous.

      1. Would you like to see my cucumber?

        1. Comments as double entendre are the same as rape.

          You just raped me. If you deny this is true then you are a rape denialist.

          1. Mac: You put your balls in my mouth while I was sleeping?

            Dennis: Yeah, man. Twice.

            Mac: That’s rape! That is borderline rape!

          2. I used to double-entendre Fawn that way.

            1. And that’s why she’s dead.

      2. I was just thinking of Marion Wormer the other day. She was so hot in that movie.

  17. The degree to which everyone involved in this travesty of journalism failed at their jobs is almost unbelievable.

    I think we don’t know the half of it, and I don’t just mean Erdely and RS. There are guaranteed to be more Erdelys out there. Because her attitude of “narrative” and “too good to look into” is something that we know is widespread; we see it in countless excuses for her behavior, or calls for why it still represents the narrative, or whatever completely intergrity-free arguments so many shiftless people put forward.

    The “failure at their jobs” isn’t unbelievable at all. In fact, it should be expected. Because there’s an entire culture of people out there who are totally ok with this, and would do it again in a heartbeat if guaranteed to get away with it. Or who want it to be true so badly that they just don’t want to verify facts.

    This shit is far more endemic than you expect, I guarantee you that.

    1. there’s an entire culture of people out there who are totally ok with this, and would do it again in a heartbeat if guaranteed to get away with it.

      Her failure was getting caught. She flew too close to the sun on wings of pastrami.

      1. “She flew too close to the sun on wings of pastrami.”

        Mmmmm. Sun-baked pastrami wings.

        1. Mmmmm. Sun-baked pastrami wings.

          Pair ’em up with our bottomless basket of fries and a Coors Light. Now at your local Buffalo Wild Wings!

    2. I have posted on numerous left-wing websites in response to hang-man noose and swastika sightings on campuses that they are likely bogus. When they are shown to be hoaxes and I make jokes about still doing candlelight vigils and this is still a teachable moment, I am attacked like hungry wolves on a carcass.

      These people have a desperate need to believe these instances exist and deep down inside want them to.

      1. When you define yourself as a victim of X, then you are in fact nothing if no perpetrators of X exist.

        Though by defining yourself as anything externally, you are a slave to those external things you cannot control, making it in general an undesirable idea.

        However, since society has decided to reward victim-hood status, the weaker in society respond by becoming victims.

  18. What should a journalist’s first duty be to? I’ll let Captain Jean-Luc Picard explain

  19. To concoct a story whole cloth and not accidentally even glancingly touch on the truth is a feat to be admired. Well played, RS.

    1. And then to stand by their guns and assert they did their due diligence before publishing, when they had in fact just made a couple of calls to the fraternity national office.

  20. Quick Survey =

    List the Worst Stories you have seen regarding

    – Over-reaction to the UVA rape story, claiming it confirmed all the existing biases of Progs
    – Over-reaction to DOUBT about the UVA rape story, claiming it confirmed all the existing biases of Progs
    – Over-reaction to the increasing awareness that the story is 100% fake, screeching that ‘FACTS ARENT THE POINT’ attempting to change the subject back to something that confirms the biases of Progs

    contenders =

    #1 – Anna Merlan, for launching into a hate-ridden irrational screech that anyone actually daring to question the original (incredible) claims in the story is basically worthless scum

    #2 – Zerlina Maxwell, for suggesting that the ONLY ACCEPTABLE RESPONSE to (incredible) claims of rape is *unquestioning acceptance*

    #3 – Pretty much anything in Gawker (though i was going to link to Sam Biddle’s piece on why the Frat is probably lying because Frats are full of Liars)

    any other “Best in (no)Class” items of note?

      1. Yeah Mandy…..when you’re playing an ever weaker hand make sure to push all your chips in! Didn’t learn a thing after the Duke case did you you silly bitch!

        Last month, Marcotte wrote of the Duke University rape case: “Can’t a few white boys sexually assault a black woman anymore without people getting all wound up about it? So unfair.”

      2. Well, to be fair, I do want Amanda Marcotte to suffer.

        1. That’s because you are a cultured and civilized man. All right thinking people want Amanda to suffer!

    1. How about Vox getting all Salvador Dali-Meets-Freud trying to explain how “Memory can play tricks on us, and “truth” may be real without memory being perfect… blarg blarg blarg…. Party of Science …….

      Or maybe the NYT digging up some journalism professors to say that ‘Not Interviewing Accused Rapists’ is like, totally normal and still professional and shit….?

      1. Or maybe the NYT digging up some journalism professors to say that ‘Not Interviewing Accused Rapists’ is like, totally normal and still professional and shit….?

        I might see this… might see this if the story and the facts were… well, in RS’s case, totally different.

    2. Quick Survey =

      List the Worst Stories you have seen regarding

      – Over-reaction to the UVA rape story

      There was this one in Rolling Stone…

    3. The comments on the Jezebel one are priceless.

    4. I’m sure Melissa McEwan has written something that should qualify, but I’ll be damned if I’ll look for it.

  21. She is going to be outed and soon. I have mixed feelings about that, but there’s no reason not to out her and I can’t see why a legitimate news outlet has yet to do so.

    1. She’s been outed already

    2. Been there, done that, seen the Pinterest page. Outed she is. And she’ll probably out-earn all of in some kind of marketing career.

  22. But unlike the story of a gang rape at UVA, we now have incontrovertible proof of it.

    It may not be incontrovertible proof, but it’s pretty close. The lying started before the night of the supposed rape (presuming WAPO verified the text with the fraudulent image Jackie sent them as they reported). That coincidence is extremely implausible, along the lines of 9 frat guys with good expected futures initiating a rape by force (as opposed to a rape by disputed consent) on someone who knows who to blame after its over.

    Good work.

    1. I think the story has been dialed back now to five guys who forced her to blow them, probably not as part of an initiation ritual, and maybe spur-of-the-moment. That story’s probably bullshit too, but it should be checked out just to be sure. For example, such questions as, Was it at a fraternity house? Since you don’t know the name of the fraternity, where was the house? On Madison Lane or Rugby Road? nouth of Beta Bridge or north? On the left side of the road or the right? What was the layout of the room where you were assaulted? Jesus Christ, don’t you remember a single detail about the assault!!!??? would all be in order.

  23. I found this interesting:

    “I definitely believe she was sexually assaulted,” said U-Va. junior Alex Pinkleton, a sexual violence peer advocate who survived a rape and an attempted rape her first two years on campus and is a close friend of Jackie’s. “The main message we want to come out of all this is that sexual assault is a problem nationwide that we need to act in preventing. It has never been about one story. This is about the thousands of women and men who have been victims of sexual assault and have felt silenced not only by their perpetrators, but by society’s misunderstanding and stigmatization of rape.

    What are the odds she got in touch with this group on campus who talked her into spinning this yarn, in the hopes that would get the university to change its policies? Well, it worked for a while.

  24. After it broke that the RS was not accurate, folks wrote that this would be damaging to women who were actually assaulted. I am not so sure. Regardless, what it will do is cause me to disbelieve every story that comes out in support of the progressive worldview. I should have been doing that anyway, but this seals the deal.

  25. Saying this is a failure is too kind. Erderly LIED. Flat out manufactured a vicious lie. There’s no failure here – there are sociopaths ruining people’s lives.

  26. But Robby, do you have a master’s in journalism?

  27. The Washington Post just published another investigative report on the University of Virginia gang rape allegations?and whatever credibility Sabrina Rubin Erdely and Rolling Stone had left is totally obliterated.

    Reason needs to quit starting these blogposts presuming innocence. There are womens’ reputations at stake.

  28. Jackie during the rest of her collegiate career

    College isn’t a career.

  29. Erdely portrayed Jackie’s friends as popularity-obsessed sociopaths

    Well, someone in this story is a popularity-obsessed sociopath… I can’t quite put a finger on whom.

  30. So Jackie and Erdely are two of the dumbest human being in the history of the human race, correct? How did they not realize this was going to happen?

    1. Because it’s worked before in other cases?

    2. Because Erdely had gotten away with it before (see the Federalist today). And I’m sure Erdely thought none of her “friends” would bother to check it out. And she was right. She just forgot there might still be some decent journalists out there.

      1. Although I am a little curious why the WaPo decided to go fact-check this story. I mean, I’m glad they did, but…Fast & Furious, Benghazi, IRS, etc. etc.

        1. They don’t like Rolling Stone either.

        2. Slate set up a podcast trying to use the story in furtherance of rape culture hysteria (Hanna Rosin & someone I don’t remember). It was obvious Erdely was avoiding questions and repeatedly contradicting herself. There were other red flags like insisting they were focused on the wrong issue which should be rape culture and UVA’s insufficient response.

          It’s not clear if either of the interviewers put WAPO specifically on the story (WAPO owns Slate) but the discrepancies were obvious to anyone in what was essentially a supportive interview. But the bottom line is: they knew the story was false.

          1. It was so obviously false that even Hannah Rosin had to admit it.

            Hanna ‘End of Men‘ Rosin. When your story on rape culture is so ridiculous that Hanna Rosin is expressing doubts, your story is fucked.

            1. The strangest single fact in the entire story is that Erdely thought she could get away with such a shitty effort. She didn’t reinforce the elements of the story that would draw attention, or drop them if they couldn’t be reinforced. It’s astonishingly amateurish.

              And likely she didn’t make more of an effort because she’s gotten away with it before.

              1. And she had Jackie as her human shield to deflect ANY criticism which would then be silenced by counterbattery fire from the screeching progs and their milque-toast ‘male feminist’ HiWis

              2. Ideology and ego often cause people to do stupid things.

        3. UVA is in their own back yard. And they have real reporters.

        4. 1) I bet some staff are from UVA and possibly were in fraternities and smelled BS from a mile away. And this story sells…really big.

          2) the rule about always believing rape accusers would be really, really inconvenient for the Clintons.

          But more of #1.

    3. Really dumb, morally bankrupt people tend to catalyze each other. Just go look at any “world’s dumbest criminals” where two or more people are the criminals.

      1. I don’t think Erdely is “dumb,” and Jackie probably is not, either. Smart people are often tripped up by their ideology and their egos. In Jackie’s case, there are clearly some mental problems.

    4. Because psychopaths don’t consider long-term consequences. Expect lies upon lies.

  31. The friends quoted in the latest article still say Jackie’s changed behavior that first semester is evidence of some trauma she sustained. That may be true, although it is difficult to say what, exactly, that might have entailed.

    Mmmno. I have, to some degree, actual experience with Borderline Personality disorder– and I’m not talking the pop-psychology shit term that people throw around just because they don’t like some woman, but the real McCoy.

    Here’s what the Nat’l Institutes of Health say:

    Extreme reactions?including panic, depression, rage, or frantic actions?to abandonment, whether real or perceived

    A pattern of intense and stormy relationships with family, friends, and loved ones, often veering from extreme closeness and love (idealization) to extreme dislike or anger (devaluation)

    Distorted and unstable self-image or sense of self, which can result in sudden changes in feelings, opinions, values, or plans and goals for the future (such as school or career choices)

    Impulsive and often dangerous behaviors, such as spending sprees, unsafe sex, substance abuse, reckless driving, and binge eating

    Having stress-related paranoid thoughts or severe dissociative symptoms, such as feeling cut off from oneself, observing oneself from outside the body, or losing touch with reality.

    1. The BPD girl I knew– the primary one that came to mind– was Rape Obsessed and nearly every relationship she was in either got to or very near an accusation of rape.

      Even I was questioned by police one night when one of her self-harm episodes went fucking apeshit-sideways-upsidedown-full-retard and made the rookie mistake of heading over to her apartment after she called me mumbling something about blood all over the place.

      1. Nice detective work, Paul. You are absolutely right, she definitely sounds like a diagnosis of borderline PD — and those of us familiar with this illness have encountered a number of “Jackies”. Be warned.

        One little-known fact, though, is borderlines are the world’s best first date. The overidealization symptom you describe makes them say to you how you are the funniest, most interesting, most handsome, most whatever she’s ever met and do you believe in love at first sight? If you hear all these things and your ego will let you, stay clear of date #2.

        1. She was the only ‘relationship’ I bought low, and sold high with.

          It was volatile, but I got out after the self-harm blood-all-over-the-apartment episode.

          After that, she (from what got back to me) descended into a pretty marginal existence, gained a shit ton of weight and now uses her cat as her facebook photo.

          On the rape allegations, she constantly told me about all her other boyfriends and dates, and their rapeyness. It had gotten back to me through another friend that she had casually said that I could be potentially rapey under the right circumstances.

          She also liked to list her top 10 suicide attempts.

          1. You really have quite the…uh..taste in women, don’t you, Paul. You’re like the Evel Knievel of dating.

            1. My ex-wife is a diagnosed Bi-polar… and was absolutely 100% sane compared to the above. But when she got manic… yeah. Don’t need to revisit that again.

              I have… history… and I admit it.

              A friend of mine said she was going to set me up with one of her friends but then thought better of it because she decided she was crazy.

              I was all, “Now hang on… there are degrees of crazy I’m willing to live with depending on the package”.

          2. She also liked to list her top 10 suicide attempts.

            I shouldn’t be laughing at this, but I can’t help it.

            1. Point being, the whole “I’m sure she suffered SOME trauma in her first semester because her behavior got so weird” has no basis in fact.

              There are some people whose behavior can turn on a fucking dime and there’s no rational explanation for it.

              1. Considering she was a freshman and the “incident” took place on Sept 28th, they can’t have known her more than a month.

              2. We call those people bipolar

                I had a friend who i was i to until i saw the switch. But man some of the most creative ideas…

          3. “On the rape allegations, she constantly told me about all her other boyfriends and dates, and their rapeyness.”

            The first time you heard that was your queue to RUN to the Exit.

            1. Hopefully there wasn’t a queue at the exit when he received his cue, eh wot?

            2. A queue is a line your stand in and a cue is when you say a line?

              Or something like that.

              (Note, a queue is also a long braid of hair that the Manchu and certain Native Americans wore.)

  32. I’m glad that Gamergate has been replaced with something where the SJWs are so unambiguously the bad guys. Jesus, what a bunch of retarded, mendacious, scheming, lying, idiotic fucks.

    1. The thing is, if you’ll notice the rate, they seem to be getting caught at higher and higher rates at this point. The fact that they are retarded, mendacious, scheming, lying, idiotic fucks sure isn’t helping their success rate. Expect more of this.

      I mean, remember when the Journolist thing got outed, and it was kind of a big deal, and that was basically it for the entire year? Now look at where we are; it seems the SJWs get busted for lying every few months at this point.

      1. “Useless Idiots”.

      2. Has the rate really changed?

      3. You guys need to stop using Twitter.

        I don’t, but from what I can tell, it seems to be a giant vortex of juvenile stupidity.

    2. It’s not that different…

      Gamers on GamerGate: It’s about journalist ethics!
      SJWs on GamerGate: It’s about misogyny!

      Regular people on JackieGate: It’s about journalist ethics!
      SJWs on JackieGate: It’s about misogyny!

      Really, the big difference is which side the media is on. I guess the SJWs lost control of them media on this one.

  33. First World College Problems #1: Hashtag Apology

    “On Friday, Smith College President Kathleen McCartney sent an all-campus email about various campus efforts to promote inclusion and to support those angered by the recent decisions of grand juries in Missouri and New York not to indict police officers who killed unarmed black men. The email’s substance was well-received on campus, but McCartney’s subject line — “All Lives Matter” — was not. Many of those protesting the grand jury decisions have taken to using the hashtag #BlackLivesMatter, while some of those criticizing the protest movement have been using #AllLivesMatter instead. Students told McCartney that her heading was being used elsewhere in this way. That prompted another email from the president. ‘I regret that I was unaware the phrase/hashtag “all lives matter” has been used by some to draw attention away from the focus on institutional violence against black people,'”

    1. It’s good to know no one ever lost in T-Ball.

    2. You must have busy much of today:

      https://reason.com/blog/2014/12…..logize-for

      1. Yeah, exams. ‘My bad’ if this was covered.

        1. Meh, your civic-mindedness is appreciated.

        2. Dude, you didn’t get an extension because, um, like, Ferguson and stuff?

    3. Another reason to look forward to the zombie apocalypse.

  34. First World College Problem #2: Hummus Boycott

    “After briefly removing products from Sabra, the New York-based company that makes hummus, salsa and other dipping sauces, Wesleyan University confirmed this week that its dining facilities will once again carry those items, despite months of student activism in protest of the company.”

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/…..89238.html

    1. If you make or sell Hummus, you have to deal with the consumers of Hummus.

      1. When I make hummus, I only have to deal with myself.

    2. Are we sure they really make hummus, and not a hummus-like product? Is that what the students were protesting?

  35. Rolling Stone’s UVA Rape Story Just Took Another Massive Hit

    ‘hey, come on there, Stone… Puff-Puff-Pass, dude….thats not cool… you totally just Obama’d the thing….’

  36. Yup, Jackie totally invented the boyfriend to try to make Randall jealous and when that didn’t work she upped the ante to try to make Randall feel bad for her.

    As soon as she started in about her imaginary boyfriend, someone just needed to turn to her and say, “Shut up, Meg.”

  37. This is… When I first read about this, some details bothered me and seemed to come from fiction rather than fact, but I was willing to suspend judgement.

    I mean, really, a fraternity with a ‘culture’ of gang rape? that’s out of bad porn, not reality. Random other fraternity members being willing to cover it up, let alone participate? Sure, horney, rich overprivileged frat want sex, even group sex. So they hire a prostitute, not rape a random girl. “Grab its leg”? That’s something out of Silence of the Lambs.

    And then there’s the people with their ‘don’t you dare disbelieve this girl who suffered a horrible attack..’ and I let myself be cowed out of speaking my reservations. I am ashamed of that.

    That fraternity BETTER sue the ass off of Rolling Stone.

  38. This is why I have a “Never talk to reporters either” rule.

  39. The comments on that article are pathetically hilarious. You’ve got some broken goon crying about “white male rape apologists” and claiming no one gives a shit about rape unless it happens to one of their loved ones.

    The SJWs REALLY overextended themselves on this one, and it shows in their increasingly histrionic statements.

  40. I think someone is stalking me.

    Me earlier:

    Literally everything fits. Someone sent pictures of this man to her friends, but the guy is a former high school classmate of Jackie’s. If she knew of him from school, she easily could have gotten pictures online. Whoever sent texts to her friends said things like how Jackie was a ‘super smart hot’ girl who shared all the same interests with him but, dag nabbit!, was interested in this lucky son of a bitch her own age! (Kicks rocks sadly).

    Commenter ‘Heather’ at WAPO’s site:

    Jackie has a crush on Randall, who isn’t interested in a romantic relationship. To make Randall jealous, she invents a chemistry student/lifeguard, who is very good looking and just happens to have a crush on her, but doggonit, she’s not interested in him (kicks rock), she’s interested in this 1st year nerd named Randall – what a lucky guy he must be.

    I think this is a transgendered version of me commenting from another universe. She substitutes ‘doggonit’ for ‘dagnabbit’ but otherwise that is eerily similar.

    1. Here’s the kicker:

      Heather looks like Allison Brie, and is your soul mate, if only you could meet her.

      But you can’t.

      (Kicks rock while Keane plays in the background.)

    2. Clearly Heather is actually Rand Paul plagarizing your work.

  41. To me it sounds like she was after that guy friend of hers (Andy), and made up this older guy so as to try to make Andy jealous.

  42. The SJWs are right. We do indeed live in a rape culture. We are told that all males are rapists, any interaction between a man and a woman can be construed as rape, and we’re supposed to “Listen and Believe” — without question — anyone (well, any woman) who claims rape.

    This isn’t going to end well for anyone — especially real rape victims who find their situation reduced to background noise against the cries of the hypersensitive.

  43. Shows you how dumb colleges have gotten to take a tabloid like Rolling Stone seriously. “Secret Exposed: How the Republican Party Created Climate Change” “Guns Possessed by Demons Terrorizing America” “Tea Party Zombies Attack!” “Ron Paul revealed to be the Antichrist” are the basic style of its reports, and this is what college professors are reading….

  44. All women are liars. All fratboys are rapists.

  45. It wasn’t peer reviewed so it ain’t science.

    1. 97% agree.

    2. You mean “male science”.

  46. I guess until this blows over it’s time to get back to writing about Climate Justice.

  47. This is looking increasingly like a story concocted by an emotionally unstable individual, sorry to say. I was willing to believe that maybe Jackie mixed up certain details, but given that the pictures don’t look like the guy she named that is pretty damning evidence that “Drew” never existed.

    Who knows? Maybe Jackie did initiate some sort of gang bang, in an attempt to make her friends think that “Drew” and her had hooked up.

  48. “The degree to which everyone involved in this travesty of journalism failed at their jobs is almost unbelievable.”

    Unbelievable? I’d say predictable.

    Is it somehow news that the Progressive Theocracy is completely indifferent to the facts, as long as the narrative serves their purposes?

    They’re willing to point guns at you to force you to live the way they want, and you’re shocked that they’ll lie to you?

  49. Has anyone considered the obvious? Rolling Stone sought out a young woman with a convincing story to further the proggy myth that women at elite universities are surrounded by male predators who can’t keep it in their pants (never mind that over 60% of students at these institutions are female)? They can easily get names from subscriber lists or marketing info agencies, then send out an e-mail blast and waive some $ in front of them?

    I hate to be so cynical, but I have seen this before, when I attended an Ivy infamous for its “rape list” in the early 90s.

    1. To what end? I don’t exactly see what “progressive” goal is served by vociferously fighting a “rape epidemic” that doesn’t exist. What is the end goal? To make college an unsafe place for men? Women already constitute a majority of the university population. Driving away men just leaves fewer marriageable men for the women than there already are.

      This seems to me to be a case of believing their own propaganda. The sole purpose of this stuff is to help themselves stay in the alternate reality they created for themselves.

      1. The feminists want to dramatically change the definition of rape.

        They are starting out doing so at the college level to condition people to accept it when they do it at the criminal level.

        To get that done, they need propaganda to convince people that there’s a rape crisis on campus.

        The end game for feminists is “enthusiastic consent” enshrined into the criminal law, in order to establish perpetual slavery for men.

        1. The definition of rape has already largely been redefined and conflated with other forms of so-called assault. That’s how the ‘rape’ statistics got so inflated.

          For example, a poll is taken asking women about ‘assault’ suffered from men. Being called the b or c word counts as a verbal assault, and even though the researchers might make a distinction between a so-called verbal assault and physical assault, the media and advocates lump all the ‘assaults’ together so that they all mean ‘rape’.

          The SJW crowd likely isn’t very good at math…

          1. The only reason women don’t perform well on math is the pervasive sexism of our society that crushes their dreams of all being engineers.

      2. To alter/suspend/upend due process. There is a very real core of these cunts that want school rape tribunals to take over the criminal investigation and subsequent prosecution. Also, by creating the notion of a rape epidemic from WASPs , you effectively taint ANY perp brought before the Tribunal of Cunts can open their moose knuckle of justice and quim all over Juris Prudence

      3. Putting on my super-cynical hat, who stands to gain from manufacturing a crisis of whom college-aged females are the target?

        It’s ALMOST as if this falls conveniently into a political message. What was it again?

        #waronwomen

        1. Notice also that in the fake rape threat in Wyoming, it mentions Republicans and so did Len Dunham. Its explicitly political when they want to claim Republicans are the rapists.

  50. The only thing left is to find a connection between Jackie and Erdely dating back to 2012 prior to the alleged incident.

  51. Look, it doesn’t matter if Jackie was really raped or not – if it happened in her mind, it was still real.

    No really, it doesn’t matter at all. Even if it costs the reputation her faux rapist, or the frat she claimed it happened in, or the school she was going to.

    Get with the 21st century you Neanderthals!

  52. Anyone else shocked “Jackie” actually exists?

  53. No. America is full of people peddling bullshit. If I told people I was doing a story on a rapist called WIllMG and I wanted to talk to potential victiims, my phone would ring off the hook with people relaying stories of things put into orifi by the Demon WlllMG.

  54. Re the possibility that Jackie created a rival boyfriend to arouse the competitive spirit of what’s-his-name, and even went so far as to send text messages to what’s-his-name and other pals ostensibly written by the non-existen rival and flattering of hers truly, Amanda Hess (I think) has a rehash of the Washington Post article up at Slate, and in it she discusses this very scenario in the solemnest of tones. She devotes the last paragraph to the hope that some Good Samaritan really did rape Jackie at some point, but the writing’s on the wall and she knows it.

    1. When I discuss these issues with rape crisis feminists I’m always left with the feeling that I’m the only one who is happy that rape has been in a significant decline for over two decades.

      1. That decline threatens to take their JERBS (and concomitant identiy).

  55. if these terrible sexual assault statistics were accurate, the feminists wouldn’t need to create these hoaxes to prove them.

  56. Hmmm a case of unethical journalism? Shocker.
    Adamant SJW Atchetypes? Who knew.
    a creamy embarassing facial by skeptics? Zomg you dont say.

    If only there was some movement, some hashtag, that represented a fight against biased, overly politicized unresearched narratives.

    If only.
    #GamerGate

  57. Lets hit them up jd, I mean like wow.

    http://www.Anon-Rocks.tk

  58. “Lest anyone think that this debacle is solely the fault of someone who falsely claimed rape, keep in mind that these fraudulent charges were put forth by a national magazine that made no effort to verify them, and ignored every red flag in its haste to publish the story of the century?…”

    It happened because we live in a “false rape accusation culture,” where false accusations are encouraged, supported, and profited from, and where those false accusations are only very, very rarely punished.

    There is no longer a stigma associated with making a rape accusation. Instead, a great deal is gained from it and from associating with “rape crisis feminism.”

    1. I see what you did there…

  59. Jackie’s UVA friends say she acted very differently after the alleged rape, and the working assumption seems to be that ‘something must have happened’, even it wasn’t an assault.

    But, considering that these UVA friends had only known her about a month or so, isn’t it possible that she had a longer history of erratic behavior prior to coming to UVA, acted normal for awhile, and then resorted to her earlier self? If so, that would explain why she appeared to suffer some kind of trauma at UVA because her new friends wouldn’t have known her longer history.

    Just speculation, of course, but that’s all we can do for now.

    Presumably, reporters know her real name and are investigating her earlier background.

    1. Or, maybe she is just a deeply emotionally disturbed person with sociopathic tendencies and a narcissistic personality disorder.

  60. This will put an end to rape culture:

    Bra stops sexual assault with 3,800 kilovolt electric shock

    http://www.ecnmag.com/blogs/20…..4&type=cta

  61. Yesterday I picked up a brand new Lotus Esprit after making $6059 this ? 4 weeks past an would you believe $10 thousand this past-month; this is actually the most-comfortable work I’ve had . I actually started 10-months ago and pretty much immediately got minimum $80 per-hr . Get More Info @

    BEST HOME BASE CHILDREN DEAL ….. http://WWW.WORK4HOUR.COM

  62. I see no comments from Zeb (IIRC he got raked over the coals for disbelieving Jackie from the get-go) and I’m wondering; does the WaPo story seem too good to be true also?

    They do a better job of saying, “We talked to her friends and this is their side of the story.”, but there is still lots of room for friends seeking celebrity/catfishing, her really being mentally detached (or was modestly detached and further detachment was induced), and/or a group of guys claiming to be pledges really did assault her?

    Not that I believe one iota of Jackie/Ederly’s story at this point, but that, if I wanted to bait a large group of people into playing the dismissive patriarchy role… or bait two groups of people into the emotionally-cold and dismissive patriarchy role and the over-empathizing emoting borderline nutjob role, I have a hard time thinking of how I would be more successful at it.

    Either way, the story (or both of them) has way too many loose ends for my taste.

    1. The distinction is that the RS article was not upfront about relying solely on one witness, whereas the WaPo story let’s us know what different people are saying. It doesn’t mean the other people are necessarily right, but the job of the journalist is to let us know what different people related to the situation are saying.

      1. The distinction is that the RS article was not upfront about relying solely on one witness, whereas the WaPo story let’s us know what different people are saying.

        I agree there is a distinction, but, if I’m looking for factual proof that a rape or rapes did or did not occur, forthright hearsay and furtive hearsay are still just hearsay.

        Like I said (in previous articles as well), there is no evidence now and that is rather directly Jackie’s fault. Without it, we’re left with irresolute/resolvable conjecturing and spectulation.

        1. Proof is basically in the eye of the beholder, and even at a trial a jury needs to evaluate the evidence and determine its credibility and value to the case.

          Now, it could be that Jackie’s UVA friends are mad at her b/c of their portrayal in RS and are now making stuff up to discredit her. Not plausible IMO but certainly possible. That being said, if they have text messages on their own phone and have a way of showing that Jackie put them in touch with the fictitious 3rd year guy, then that’s not hearsay of the rape, but evidence of Jackie lying.

          Anyway, that’s why a reputable journalist and investigators need to get as much information as possible

  63. IF Jackie really did lie about some 3rd year junior by creating false texts and sending fake pictures of him to her UVA friends BEFORE the alleged rape (that’s what the WaPo is saying), then her identity should be revealed.

    Yes, wait and make sure the trickery really happened, but if or when we know for sure she was lying about the perp before alleged rape, then she has zero credibility and doesn’t deserve anonymity.

    1. Her identity doesn’t need to be published, ‘Public Justice’ is already (being) done.

      There’s an article from RS putting Jackie’s friends’ heads on pikes and the WaPo staff went to them, showed it to them if they haven’t seen it, and asked for their thoughts.

      It wouldn’t surprise me if Jackie’s inbox is full of ‘WTF?’ and ‘FU!’ emails. Current friends and family members are probably experiencing an uptick in relationship, reproductive, parenting, and psychological advice via email too.

      I can only assume UVA and the local police have/had her name/identity before the story was published and, depending on how she consumed University/Public resources are considering appropriate recourse.

  64. BREAKING NEWS: The WaPost has just published an update. Jackie has changed her story again and has now revealed the identity REAL rapist. This time she swears she’s tailing the truth. “Drew” is actually well-known athlete at neighboring Duke University where he is a star lacrosse player.

    Meanwhile, back at UVA campus rape activists have issued a statement condemning the Post for the harm it has caused to victims, er, survivors, by not taking Jackie at her word and for enabling future rapists by insisting on fact-checking the story. The leading campus anti-rape organization “Take Back their Rights” has submitted a list of demands to UVA administration which include:

    1) Banning lacrosse on campus because of both the “triggering” effect it has on Jackie and other survivors, as well as the insensitivity, Christian supremacism and intolerant religious bigotry inherent in a sport named “The Cross” played primarily by white men.

    2) Add new rules to all sports which feature men playing with balls to require each male competitor to request active, affirmative consent from his opponent for each forward move he makes with his ball(s) on the field of play.

    UVA’s President has announced that she is forming a task force to address these requests and expects to formulate a revised code of conduct that properly balances the rights of men in sports and the rights of survivors to not be traumatized by triggering caused by seeing men’s balls in motion.

    1. insisting on fact-checking the story.

      They are forcing a woman to give them facts against her will. Just call a spade a spade; they are fact-raping her.

      1. proof that social justice is undermined by facts…

  65. Google pay 97$ per hour my last pay check was $8500 working 1o hours a week online. My younger brother friend has been averaging 12k for months now and he works about 22 hours a week. I cant believe how easy it was once I tried it out.
    This is wha- I do…… ?????? http://www.jobsfish.com

  66. Google pay 97$ per hour my last pay check was $8500 working 1o hours a week online. My younger brother friend has been averaging 12k for months now and he works about 22 hours a week. I cant believe how easy it was once I tried it out.
    This is wha- I do…… ?????? http://www.jobs700.com

  67. Google pay 97$ per hour my last pay check was $8500 working 1o hours a week online. My younger brother friend has been averaging 12k for months now and he works about 22 hours a week. I cant believe how easy it was once I tried it out.
    This is wha- I do…… ?????? http://www.jobs700.com

  68. my neighbor’s mother makes $67 /hr on the internet . She has been out of work for 5 months but last month her pay was $16448 just working on the internet for a few hours. see here……

    http://www.Jobs-spot.com

  69. Check this out:
    Human evolution, as we have known it, has ended. Biological procreation will soon be unnecessary. Its concomitant sexual dimorphism is no longer advantageous to human survival. In fact, it is almost irrelevant. The bodies and minds of men and women are now ill-suited for companionship and cooperation. The human/machine hybridization has already begun, seeking an existence devoted to intellectual and physical experience, and to recreation and refinement. There is only one biological and social form that is ideally suited for these pursuits. It is a form that was, ironically, considered to be a puzzling, yet reoccurring genetic mutation, and frequently dismissed as being aberrant: the gay male. For more information, read the first installment of the controversial creation story for the new phase of our evolution, “Fixed Stars Rise,” by Charles T. Laffoday. More info can also be found at YouTube.

  70. RS said their lawyers told them it was fine to run this modified literotica.com fiction from the “online” Non-consent/Reluctance section as fact? Right? Name this lawyer or name this firm? RS should soon no longer exist.

    Trying to prevent rape is like trying to prevent murder, armed robbery, or trying to prevent rain. Preventing crime is impossible but discouraging crime via consequences is the purpose of laws. All laws require honesty FIRST to exist.
    Neeley v 5 FCC commissioners,et al,(5:14-cv-5135)(14-3447)
    Plead for summary justice at the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals.
    http://theendofpornbywire.org/…..auper.html
    http://theendofpornbywire.org/Complaint.html

  71. Google pay 97$ per hour my last pay check was $8500 working 1o hours a week online. My younger brother friend has been averaging 12k for months now and he works about 22 hours a week. I cant believe how easy it was once I tried it out.
    This is wha- I do…… ?????? http://www.jobs700.com

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.