Sex

U. Michigan Sex Assault Survey: Some Nonconsensual Touching, Very Little Forcible Rape

UM does not seem like a uniquely dangerous place for women.

|

Touching
Dreamstime

The University of Michigan has just released the results of a commissioned survey studying sexual assault rates on campus. While The Detroit Free Press gravely summarized its findings as "20% of U-M female undergrads sexually assaulted," a closer look reveals that that figure includes everything from unwanted touching and kissing to being guilted into having sex.

From the survey:

While approximately 89% of U-M students said that they feel safe from sexual misconduct on the Ann Arbor campus, 11.4% of all students experienced some form of nonconsensual touching and kissing or oral, vaginal, or anal penetration – including 22.5% of undergraduate females and 6.8% of undergraduate males. The survey also found that 9.7% of all female students (graduate and undergraduate) experienced unwanted oral, vaginal, or anal penetration (compared to 1.4% of male students). In most cases, the unwanted sexual penetration occurred primarily after verbal pressure and under the influence of drugs or alcohol. "Verbal pressure" was described in the survey as "continually verbally pressuring you after you said they didn't want to. This includes telling lies, threatening to end the relationship, threatening to spread rumors about them, showing displeasure, criticizing your sexuality or attractiveness or getting angry but not using physical force." Fewer than 1% of students reported 5 nonconsensual penetration due to the use of physical force. "Physical force" was described as "holding you down with their body weight, pinning your arms or having a weapon."

The ideal rate of nonconsensual touching and kissing is of course zero. At U-M, it's 22.5 percent for undergraduate women. That's too high; no student should feel pressured into having sex, or put up with nonconsensual groping. It's worth considering what policies could reduce these problems and make the campus an even safer place for students.

All that said, just 1 percent of students endured the worst kind of sexual assault: forcible rape. This suggests to me that UM is not a uniquely dangerous place for women—indeed, as the survey acknowledges, non-student females are at greater risk of sexual assault than women in college.

For more on the subject of rape statistics, read Elizabeth Nolan Brown's analysis of the recent Washington Post study here.

NEXT: Do state and local governments have free speech rights?

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. criticizing your sexuality or attractiveness

    Does this include verbal pressure coming from voices in the victim’s head?

    1. “Hold my mattress for a sec – I’m gonna try something….”

    2. I’d f… you if you weren’t so ugly.

      Please, please, please, f…. me. I don’t want to be ugly.

      ===========================

      It was never like that when I didn’t go to college back in the ’60s.

  2. “Verbal pressure” was described in the survey as “continually verbally pressuring you after you said they didn’t want to. This includes telling lies, threatening to end the relationship, threatening to spread rumors about them, showing displeasure, criticizing your sexuality or attractiveness or getting angry but not using physical force.”

    Man: hey baby, you wanna go back to my place and bang.
    Woman: Nah.
    Man: C’mon….
    UM Sociologist: TEH RAPEZZZZZ!!!1!!1!!!

    1. This includes telling lies, threatening to end the relationship, threatening to spread rumors about them, showing displeasure, criticizing your sexuality or attractiveness or getting angry but not using physical force.”

      So I’m a victim. Good to know. Where the fuck’s my check?

      1. I’ve also recently learned that I’m a victim of sexual assault.
        My phone auto corrected to “asexual assault,” man am I glad I caught it before posting. Did not want to see the responses to that…

  3. “It’s worth considering what policies could reduce these problems and make the campus an even safer place for students.”

    A solution in search of a problem.

  4. Fewer than 1% of students reported 5 nonconsensual penetration due to the use of physical force.

    Is that 5 a citation or the minimal number of penetrations to be included in the 1%?

    1. The top 1% control over half of all unwanted penetrations!

      1. I AM THE 99%!!!!

        1. STEVE SMITH IN TOP 1%!!!!

          1. Somehow, I knew this, as soon as I hit……!!!!

            1. REALLY!?

              Forgot….

              “Somehow, I knew this, as soon as I hit…..LESSTHANSIGN ENTER GREATERTHANSIGN!!!!

    2. Robbie has a participation trophy in journalism from U-M.

      1. Too bad he didn’t attend Dartmouth, like all the REAL journolists….

        1. I thought journolists went to Columbia?

  5. I seriously do wonder if the authors of this study have ever had a one night stand. Because every single one I’ve had involved overcoming last minute objections. It’s like sales. Every woman will, unless you happen to Ryan Gosling or Leo DiCaprio, go with the “I dunno if we should do this” or some variant thereof. That is just how sex works.

    1. It happens to Messrs. Gosling and DiCaprio as well.

    2. I solved that problem with “Just sleep with me naked. No sex.” And then — no sex. About 3/4s came back gagging for it. And the other 1/4? I got to sleep naked with them.

      1. Ghandi style.

        1. Except I had sex with 3/4s of them.

      2. I solved that problem with “Just sleep with me naked. No sex.”

        We used to date, didn’t we?

      3. Gagging for it?

        Did they throw up on you?

        1. Some of them. But only after swallowing.

    3. I think you just admitted to being a serial “rapist”.

      1. It just frustrates me to no end that studies like this fail to understand how much more time and effort I have to expend when using the chloroform rag as opposed to merely responding to “I dunno if this is a good idea” with “y’know what you’re right, let’s forget I even tried and not tell anyone about this.”*

        *Note to the Department of Justice: the preceding comments are entirely hyperbolic and intended as satire. The author of these comments does not now nor has he ever owned or used chloroform on any creature, and certainly not a woman. He has however used cheesy pickup tricks in an effort to bed women, with varying degrees of success.

        1. Oh, sure, you’re covered for now. But just wait till we get legislation passed to criminalize *promoting* rape. Even hyperbole will be verboten.

          1. You joke.

            I think I overheard a Fox News talking bobble head say today that we MUST jail people who put ISIS links on their Facebook pages or show support or solidarity with them in any way. They must be imprisoned before they have a chance to do any damage.

            1. And there’s no better way to make sure people don’t become radicals than to throw them in prison for their speech.

              1. It’s also an excellent way to ensure they get teaching gigs later on in life.

            2. I’d really rather they left and joined ISIS. As long as they aren’t allowed to come back.

    4. I think you told us much more than you thought you did.

      1. Go on…

    5. That’s never happened to me. It’s usually something like, “You’re not going to tell my mommy, are you?”

  6. Why indulge the “research” with the imprimatur of fact? Put another way, why accept, as fact, that 22.5% of the women experienced some non-consensual touching and kissing?

    1. Is it that hard to believe that 1 in 4 college women experienced an incident at a party or bar where some drunk a-hole grabbed their ass on the dance floor?

      Oh wait, Wolverine women. Point taken.

      1. WOLVERIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIINE………….women!!

      2. Wolverine’s women have a 5 in 4 chance of dying painfully.

  7. . A new NBC(my personal favorite new source) tweet has just informed me that White Americans are the biggest terror threat to America.

    https://slimgur.com/image/6qA

    how far are we going to let these rednecks go?! first they shoot up a black church…then they rape all the women at Michigan…then when we take common sense measures to prevent this from happening again…they they throw a hissy fitand complain we are taking aware their sacred symbols!

    Do you see the picture in the NBC tweet?! I am sorry but you can tell the world would be a better place if we executed him on sight. He is obviously racist and a danger to America as we know and love it.

    1. “This web page is not available :(”

      I haz a sad….

    2. Were the MSM always Pravda-level liars and I just didn’t notice, or is this fairly new? I swear, NBC, MSNBC, CNN, ABC, they are just pure propagandists. Rather than report on real and important news they concentrate on fluffy distractions and push SJW bullshit issues.

      1. Yes.

        Briefly stated, the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect works as follows. You open the newspaper to an article on some subject you know well. In Murray’s case, physics. In mine, show business. You read the article and see the journalist has absolutely no understanding of either the facts or the issues. Often, the article is so wrong it actually presents the story backward-reversing cause and effect. I call these the “wet streets cause rain” stories. Paper’s full of them.

        In any case, you read with exasperation or amusement the multiple errors in a story-and then turn the page to national or international affairs, and read with renewed interest as if the rest of the newspaper was somehow more accurate about far-off Palestine than it was about the story you just read. You turn the page, and forget what you know.

        1. Newspaper stories are essentially an appeal to authority; the “authority” that a major news outlet is supposed to have. Except they absolutely don’t.

    3. hey rednecks, if the guys in skinny jeans are willing to strut and talk shit about you, you’re not doing biggest terror threat correctly.

    4. Whew! Good thing I no longer identify as white…

      1. Are you a Denisovan like me? Damn homo sapiens!

    5. The way they determine that whites are the most dangerous terror threat is by doing just raw number crunches, i.e. more acts of terrorism are committed by white people, therefore they’re a bigger threat.

      There was a study from the New America Foundation that said non-Islamic terrorism is more of a threat than Islamic terrorism, but the actual numbers showed that there were half as many fatalities in Islamic terrorist attacks in America than non-Islamic since 9/11.

      Now, 98% of America is non-Islamic and 2% is Muslim. So if you proportionately, Islamic terrorism is VASTLY over-represented relative to non-Islamic terrorism, but these people just decided to ignore percentages of the population.

      It’s sort of like how they try to argue white people commit more mass shootings, but they only commit more mass shootings because they’re such a high percentage of the population. White people actually commit fewer mass shootings than their percentage of the population though, so the argument about scary, white mass shooters is provably wrong.

      1. Except whites command the privileged heights in American society, while minorities are second-class dregs. Ergo when minorities murder some folks they’re merely lashing out against their oppression, whereas when white men commit atrocities it’s an authentic act of terrorism.

        1. It’s legitimately hilarious. The issue I have is that this is basic math – if a particular group makes up 65% of the population and commits more than half of a certain type of crime, does that mean that group is a ‘threat’ to commit that crime? No – not unless the number of crimes they commit is over 65%. If it’s under 65%, then they’re actually less likely to commit the crime than their portion of the population, and as such it is an outright lie to claim that group is a ‘danger’ to commit crime x.

          I saw the exact same argument from a feminist who was defending that college professor who said white men are a ‘problem population.’ The feminist argued that more sexual assaults are committed by white men than other racial groups, therefore this was factually accurate. At no point did she consider that white men make up well over 50% of all men on campus, so the fact they commit the most sexual assaults does not imply they are a problem population since the percentage of assaults they commit is actually almost identical to their percentage of the population (I believe the number of sexual assaults committed by white men was like 60% and they’re a little over 60% of the population).

          Lesson: Progressives do not understand basic statistics.

          1. That, plus Tim McVeigh really skewed the stats by being so successful at murdering people. And, of course, race riots and Occupy violence never seem to be counted as “left-wing” violence or terror.

          2. Oh, I wouldn’t say that, because it lets them off the hook. Progressives ferret out statistics that substantiate their narrative and disregard everything else. They’re not innumerate, they’re inveterate liars.

      2. Whites are more likely to be crisis actors than any other group. I am sure of it.

  8. So I met this gal a college party back in the day (1982) and found out she was a Stone’s fan. They were playing at a venue about 2 hours away. I said “let’s go!” having no idea whether of not I could get tickets. I did and got a date. The concert sucked, it was in a stadium and raining half the time, and the sound was terrible. On the way back I reached over to give her a kiss. Damn it, I deserved at least that. She turned her head. That hurt. This might be the only thing I distinctly remember from 1982. In 2015, would this be considered an unwanted sexual advance?

    OK, I might be leaving something out. I was going to drive her to the concert and back but my car broke down the day before. So we were on a bus when I tried to kiss her.

    1. Attempting to get a kiss on the cheek out of a woman who you just spent a significant sum of time and money trying to pamper and earn her love is the functional equivalent of having murdered all passengers and the bus driver himself, knocking her unconscious with only your considerable manhood, taking her lifeless and unmoving body into a dirty gloryhole infested bathroom at a shady truck stop in the middle of nowhere, and laying her over a toilet seat covered in excrement while you penetrate her with the business end of a toilet bowl plunger. There may be a few degrees of difference, but both are RAPE RAPE.

    2. Terrible music, 4 hour ride on the bus, and rained on.

      I just can’t understand why she wasn’t tearing your clothes off.

      *snicker*

      1. If she rode back on the Stone’s velvet paneled tour bus it might have worked out differently.

        *snicker*

        And thanks for re-opening that gaping wound in my soul.

        1. See? The date wasn’t a total bust; there was gaping involved.

      2. PWN’D

    3. “So we were on a bus when I tried to kiss her.”

      Wow, how did this fail.

    4. +

      A similar thing happened to me at a concert. I ended up beside this girl I knew from way back. Guess Who! I said. She looked at me like I was some sort of Bad Company, but she eventually said Yes and I gave her a KISS. What a Rush! Never did get her to the Honeymoon Suite, though….

  9. The ideal rate of nonconsensual touching and kissing is of course zero. At U-M, it’s 22.5 percent for undergraduate women.

    That seems like a lot. But “non consensual touching” could mean someone hugging you good bye that you didn’t want hugging you. Sure it’s non consensual but rape? Hmm.

    This suggests to me that UM is not a uniquely dangerous place for women?indeed, as the survey acknowledges, non-student females are at greater risk of sexual assault than women in college.

    So maybe we should worry more about non-student women being raped than the students?

    1. That will be next. When this falls flat, and it will, they will try that angle and keep trying different ones until they finally destroy the rule of law. That is the goal here.

    2. I’ll say it again – I’ve been non-consensually touched on multiple occasions and, shockingly enough!, I don’t consider myself the victim of serious sexual abuse.

  10. I am shocked and dismayed that the current crop of bullshit data on Campus Rape is skewed in exactly the same way as all the other previous bullshit data because they use such an incredibly wide definition of “assault” or “sexual violence” that it dilutes the concept to utter meaningless.

    It seems to be an effort to create the impression of statistical certainty by repeating exactly the same idiotic methodology over and over.

    I am less shocked this particular gloss on the matter included the pre-requisite “to be sures, any rape is too much rape, so please dont mistake us for one of those other rape-apologist scum”,

    ….and failed to bother to note how many other people have endlessly pointed out these same flaws in the research on the topic,

    …. and more importantly – how entirely contradictory it is compared to “Real Data” that shows that students suffer significantly less real sexual violence than say, poor people who don’t go to the Adult Playgrounds we call College these days.

    1. Different arm of the same bunch that does exactly the same thing with climate data.

      1. The classic of the Bullshit Data genre seems to be the CDC study, who created the “everything including the kitchen sink” definition of ‘sexual violence

        Scroll to the bottom of this masterpiece and read the survey questions

        http://www.cdc.gov/violencepre…..2010-a.pdf

        Basically, if someone once made a suggestive remark on Facebook, or left you a voicemail message you didn’t want = PRESTO!! you’re a sexual violence statistic

        pointing out that this is how they get to their magic “20%” number seems too complex a task for most journalists

        I’m particularly sick of hearing cite this survey-based bullshit when actual crime-reporting data shows that the college snowflakes are actually *less* likely to have anything nasty happen to them = e.g.

        A 2014 report from the Department of Justice called Rape and Sexual Assault Victimization Among College-Age Females, 1995?2013 found that non-students aged 18-24 were 20% more likely to be sexually assaulted than students. Also, as these Reuters graphics show, the severity of the assault was worse for non-students, the rate of completed rape as opposed to other kinds of assault being 50% higher.

        1. Besides the dumbing down of definitions to hit their “Crisis level” statistics, the other really pernicious POS methodology is the DoE’s requirements for Title IX reporting under the Clery Act

          http://knowyourix.org/the-clery-act-in-detail/

          I’ve never seen any journalist bother to note that the act requires by law that *anything constituting a ‘report’* be included in any official statistics, and that there are likely to be multiple forms of required “reports” per instance.

          e.g. say some student complains to a campus administrator that there was an offensive remark made, then the admin tells someone else, and then the parent calls someone else to check on what the fuck is the big deal…. it is required to be counted as *4 separate reports*, despite the underlying ‘incident’ being only a single event.

          Additionally, the act also requires the reporting data to be preserved even if there is later determined to be *no merit to the original complaint*, or even if nothing actually happened at all.

          The more I read about the freaking law, the more it became obvious that the whole thing is designed to create this massive statistical pile of horseshit that creates a virtuous cycle of Title IX funding.

          1. Now we know why Obumbles was pushing for this so hard.

            If you don’t have a crisis, create one.

            At some point in my early 20’s I realized that any attempt to mislead people, no matter what method you use, is lying. It caused me to re-examine my own behavior and outlook and changed me into someone that the old me would barely recognize.

            It is amazing to me how mendacious these people are. It never occurs to them that if you have to lie to make your case, you don’t have a case worth making.

            1. “. It never occurs to them that if you have to lie to make your case, you don’t have a case worth making.”

              This is pretty much the opposite of what they teach in critical theory-based courses.

              they create the intellectual framework which suggests that there is effectively no difference between lies and truth, and that reality is merely how one chooses to look at any given phenomena, and that power is created by being able to alter the frame around which we define reality.

              They skipped right past the part about how the “undoing” of these artificial relations is how to help educate people, into creating their own self-generated mythos with which to suck up tax dollars and force people to vote TEAM Whatever by convincing them they’re racists if they don’t

              shorter = they believe their own bullshit. its all just signaling what tribe you’re with anyway.

              re: the above point about the DoJ statistics = how fucking widely reported was that particular detail in the wake of the December “UVA Rape” hoax? ZERO. nobody seemed the slightest bit interested in talking about how the *best data we have* – actual rapes – show that students are 50% less at risk than same-age people who don’t go to college? sorry, inconsistent with the narrative.

              1. Remember the Exxon Valdez?

                When that happened a proggie that I worked with told me she was going to boycott all petroleum products. I then told her what those were….paint, fabrics, medicines, plastics…in essence everything. She would have to boycott everything. She thought petroleum products meant only gasoline and oil.

                She was upset with me for ruining her feel-good outrage. She asked me why I would do that.

                I remember it like it was this morning. I said “Stand up straight, hold your chin up, look ’em in the eye and tell the damn truth.”

                She was shocked. The look on her face was like she was looking at a space alien. I guess she viewed me the same way I view someone who lies.

                That was the first time I discovered that there are people who think lying to yourself and to others is practically a virtue.

                1. I once tried explaining that concept to Bo in a Richman thread. You can imagine how well that went.

                  1. Bo is Tulpa. He’s here to quibble and obfuscate. Explaining things to him is about as productive as nailing tacks into your balls.

                    1. No, if I nailed tacks to my balls then I could at least swing my sack around like a mace. Maybe get a Carney job or something.

                    2. “Maybe get a Carney job or something.”

                      Whitehouse press secretary?

                  2. What Warty said, and also, one of the things Tulpa has continuously shown is an absolute inability to comprehend reputation and how that is connected to lying to people. That’s why he could not understand why trolling under different handles–lying–made him a pariah. He literally cannot understand this. And you’ll note he brought that same exact inability to his Bo sock.

                2. That was the first time I discovered that there are people who think lying to yourself and to others is practically a virtue.

                  I don’t think it’s so much that for many of them. I think they…ahem…project their own desire to manipulate with lies and their own not having any moral qualms about it onto everyone else. So to them, someone who prefers not to lie–especially because they value their reputation and understand what “reputation economy” means–is sort of like an alien to them. They didn’t think you existed. As far as they think, everyone lies constantly; it’s just what people do. That’s why they think the worst of their enemies too. They must be lying at all times! Just like I do! We all do it! Right?

                  1. They must be lying at all times! Just like I do! We all do it! Right?

                    Speaking of Tulpa…He’s said pretty much exactly that a time or two.

                    1. I JUST SAID THAT YOU JERK

                  2. “They didn’t think you existed.”

                    Bingo.

                3. Suthenboy, this goes to the heart of the liberal/progressive worldview, which is all about the feelings. You spoiled her feelings with logic, and they rarely appreciate that. (Even if you are spoiling unpleasant feelings. But then, for many, outrage is a pleasant feeling.)

                  1. I have a friend who I am sure is only happy when his life is fucked up, because it gives him subject material to troll for sympathy. He was absolutely bewildered with me when I told him his predicament was not only 100% his own damn fault, but that he had been explicitly told that it would lead to his predicament,and he went and did it anyway, so I couldn’t give two shits about how miserable he was.

  11. The numbers are so low because U of M women have horrible attitudes. They are so bad that even STEVE SMITH would be turned off.

  12. I was at a fraternity party, one night (mid ’70s) and a group of us were in a circle, shooting the shit. A girl whom I did not know smiled up at mt, and eased her way into the circle next to me, and the conversation continued. After a while, I realized she was rubbing her left nipple against my right elbow fairly obvious and aggressive manner, every chance she got.
    [cut to the chase]
    Later that same evening, we ended up at my house, fucking our brains out.

    Who got raped?

    1. one night (mid ’70s)

      Interesting… I had mistook you for someone younger, 40’s not 60’s. And I thought Robby Soave was much older. (He’s in his late 20’s). I’m not so good at guessing the age of posters.

    2. Ah the old subtleties of female-to-male seduction, I remember well the poor innocent men I lured to my bed in just such a manner. They’re gone forever now aren’t they?

  13. I went to a bonfire and lake party back in the late 70’s. On the ride home there were 7 of us in a four-door chevy chevette(?). Some girl I did not know and I were in the cargo area under the hatch-back, squished into a very small space. She was in a bikini I was in swim trunks. She was conversing with other people in the car. I had not talked to her all night.

    Without missing a beat in her conversation with the others in the car she reached between her legs and behind her to me, wrangled Mr. Happy out of the trunks and inserted me in her. I was pleasantly shocked. I offered no resistance.

    These days I would be the guilty one.

    1. Hatchback Mountain.

      1. You sir are possessed of many talents

      2. I have had a little rum, but goddamn, that made me laugh.

    2. *high fives Suthenboy*

    1. We’ve got a lot of corpse fuckers running around here don’t we?

      1. i was looking for a post where I predicted that the Dukes of Hazzard were next in line in the Great Purging. (*it turns out I was third in line who made the same observation)

        I just happened to stumble across that asshat’s remark and thought it made for a priceless coupe de grace

    2. I am curious, on a technical level, what the subpoena means. Reason requires some basic login information to post here. Thanks Mary, So an email account is required for confirmation. Any email account will do. So to identify a poster who wrote something awful you have to know his login email address. Those can be dead-ends. But the subpoena calls for IP addresses too. Will the court understand DHCP? Does Reason.com log IP addresses? It could, theoretically, with a time stamp traced back to ISP logs (from another subpoena, I presume). But why would the Reason squirrel log IP addresses? Answer me, squirrel.

      1. “why would the Reason squirrel log IP addresses? Answer me, squirrel.”

        As they mentioned in their exhaustive post after the gag was lifted, this commenting setup has been targeted by a wide variety of ne’er-do-wells beyond the mere Crazy Mary types – everything from commercial spam to obsessives trying to torpedo the site…. tracking IP is (i assume) de rigeur for basic security work.

        1. I don’t buy that, Gilmore. Even very simple authentication protocols will make spam too tedious to be worthwhile on this type of site. And all web sites are susceptible to being overloaded.

          1. It is absolutely the norm to log every IP that hits the site. Most management software will allow you to look at IPs and use various filters to try and cut out the spam and robot and crawler and whatever else ones. And usually, you would never look at just a list of IPs. You would look at the IP associated with a particular comment, or to a registration handle, or during a certain time period.

            It’s incredibly easy to log every IP address that comes in, so…they do.

            1. It’s incredibly easy to log every IP address that comes in, so…they do.

              That box is checked by default. Here’s an IDEA: uncheck it. Be active, take ownership. RTFM.

              1. Oh, I understand what you’re saying now…why doesn’t reason just uncheck the box to be “unable” to comply with requests made for IP addresses.

                The simple answer is that 1) there may be no box to uncheck (tracking IPs is so basic a thing in web servers that I could easily see not doing it as being considered “uh, what?”), and 2) it really is part of their toolset in dealing with spammers and, more particularly, griefers. Some might figure out how to obfuscate their IP address but some won’t and they can be dealt with with a simple IP ban.

                1. To match up your numbers.
                  1) Specify a router/firewall that does let you uncheck the box. That’s engineering.
                  2) I already mentioned that a basic authentication protocol would pretty much kill that.

                  You’re not convincing me. Work on your war-face.

                  1. But it’s exactly the same as my O-face!

                2. Reason was tracking ip addresses before logins existed. I know this from some communication during a spoofing war. Someone. (Mary?) was posting nast things under my handle.

          2. Well then obviously they’re doing surveillance for the Kochtopus, selling our data to Amway, plotting to harvest our organs or something

  14. OT

    It’s not Obama’s house.

    I’m just sayin’.

    1. King of proggie bullshit is being heckled by an illegal alien transgender person. Priceless.

      When you create a world of lies very soon you lose touch with reality and spin off into bizarro land. Its fun to watch them eat their own.

      1. Yeah, and illegal alien transgender person was protesting Obama’s treatment of LGBTQ prisoners awaiting deportation, and Obama threw her out because it’s his house and she was being rude…

        And this is getting positive coverage for Obama in the press?!

        It isn’t that they don’t care about consistency; it’s that they’re consistently pro-Obama. Obama can do whatever he wants–even perpetuate racist policies like the Drug War–and that’s okay because Obama isn’t a racist, you see.

        So, yeah, he treats LGBTQ illegal alien activists like shit, and he gets applauded for it in the MSM–because he’s not a Republican racist. If it were a Republican that pulled that shit…

        Anybody else remember when Bush had that Chinese human rights activist dragged away for asking the visiting Chinese Premier embarrassing questions about human rights?

        1. Yes I do, and I also remember when the Iraqi threw a shoe at him. That got 24/7 commentary for days.

          Hey, what are all those anti-war protesters doing these days? I haven’t seen them for a while.

          1. They’re all up in arms about some flag.

            Meanwhile, Obama has killed at least 168 children in Pakistan alone.

      2. Also, Bezmenov comes to mind: “when they see their beautiful world of equality and social justice, what it means in reality, they won’t like it very much”.

    2. I see that the article conflated this activist with a Daily Caller reporter who asked a question in the middle of one of Obama’s speeches, thinking the speech was over.

      I suppose they needed to look for a right-wing counterpart to a leftist heckler, and this was the best they could come up with.

  15. Look, nonconsensually touching coeds is a crime (especially if you’re ugly). The problem is conflating this with the sort of thing people worry about when they hear about sexual assault – the stuff Jackie said happened to her.

    So it’s a bait and switch to create the idea that there’s some kind of epidemic of sexual violence on campus (but apparently not enough of an epidemic to make you consider staying off campus altogether).

    Cui boner? Social-justice activists in search of social-justice jobs, I suppose.

    1. “Look, nonconsensually touching coeds is a crime (especially if you’re ugly). The problem is conflating this with the sort of thing people worry about when they hear about sexual assault – the stuff Jackie said happened to her.”

      Well, the real problem is that no one in the history of the human species has been raped in the way Jackie described.

      1. Oh, I expect you can find those sorts of crimes in war zones or whatever, and to Rolling Stone a frat house is basically like a war zone.

  16. Fewer than 1% of students reported nonconsensual penetration due to the use of physical force.

    All that said, just 1 percent of students endured the worst kind of sexual assault: forcible rape.

    It said: “fewer than 1%,” but how much fewer? 0.9%? 0.001%?

  17. Is the site getting hit by a DDOS? Cuz it’s been pretty atrocious on 2 different browsers

    1. Working fine for me on “mammals only Wednesday”.

  18. A dangerous place for the fucking women is right the fuck in front of the goddamn stove cuz I will fucking karate chop your ass bitch if you even think about fucking giving me advice on how to fry ham hocks. Not that I don’t love humans and ladies but this fucking whore hates kitchen advice. I’ve ninja kicked the innocent right in the goddamn nostrils over shit like how to grate frog pupils. Not going for it, fucks. Never. Leave my fucking stove front alone vaginas and cocks… has nothing to do with spacerockets crashing to earth or shit but this thing is my thing and fuck you all if you hate me because I FUCKING want to create exquisite mouth lasers on plates.

    I will fucking kill my mom who makes the best fucking pies in the entire universe if she fucks with my midgetback rib recipe. I will strangle her, bury her under my fav oak and then when my piss and booze and assorted nonmentionables have worn off I WILL fucking use superAgile powers to raise her ass from the dead, dust her old fucking ass off, give her a homemade donought, send her the fuck packing to the home I bought her and then show up on thursday to play Scrabble. Lovya mother. not that your lovely genetic smash fuck connection to me will ever read this FUCKING hellhole of minds eating granite comets for luncheon.

      1. Fucking goddamn Hit n Run trophy goes to the fuck who tried to assassinate my ass on my own fucking live tv…. man… I dodged a fucking goddamned rpg right in the dickhole….link about made this shit fuck fall on his bellybutton cock and Moriah.. man WHAT THE FUCK is up with this NAME…

        my lovely deep old school long lost friend in years I will never recover LOVED the pre-internet game of Moriah…. we’d dial in the Toledo main library in 88 playing Moriah on the plato network… my heart bleeds time rivers while I am given the upswing notes to jest comets, love.

        1. my heart bleeds time rivers

          Your post downthread “time ass-fucks you without lube while you sleep” got me back good, pal. 😉

    1. Ms. Dalmia writes for TNR?

    2. I will say it again. Bobby Jindal is not an Indian. He is an American.

  19. The ideal rate of nonconsensual touching and kissing is of course zero. At U-M, it’s 22.5 percent for undergraduate women. That’s too high; no student should feel pressured into having sex, or put up with nonconsensual groping. It’s worth considering what policies could reduce these problems and make the campus an even safer place for students.

    Besides outfitting all men above the age of 15 with telepathic powers or going with the sex contract, how, exactly, do you get that “ideal rate” of non-consensual touching?

    1. “I don’t know nothin’ ’bout reviewin’ no movies!”

      1. I think we should all stop reading F. Scott Fitzgerald because there’s some serious racist shit in his book Beautiful and the Damned about a Japanese butler.

        And we should stop reading Faulkner because of this paragraph:

        “For every Southern boy fourteen years old, not once but whenever he wants it, there is the instant when it’s still not yet two oclock on that July afternoon in 1863, the brigades are in position behind the rail fence, the guns are laid and ready in the woods and the furled flags are already loosened to break out and Pickett himself with his long oiled ringlets and his hat in one hand probably and his sword in the other looking up the hill waiting for Longstreet to give the word and it’s all in the balance, it hasn’t happened yet, it hasn’t even begun yet, it not only hasn’t begun yet but there is stll time for it not to begin against that position and those circumstances which made more men than Garnett and Kemper and Armstead and Wilcox look grave yet it’s going to begin, we all know that, we have come too far with too much at stake and that moment doesn’t need even a fourteen-year-old boy to think This time. Maybe this time with all this much to lose and all this much to gain: Pennsylvania, Maryland, the world, the golden dome of Washington itself to crown with desperate and unbelievable victory the desperate gamble, the cast made two years ago”

        BAN IT, I DON’T EVEN CARE IF IT’S FAULKNER, IT’S PROBABLY RACIST

        1. Of course, that came from Intruder in the Dust which is actually a book supportive of black rights in the South of which Faulkner said:

          “the premise being that the white people in the south, before the North or the Govt. or anybody else owe and must pay a responsibility to the negro”

          Fuck context though, it doesn’t take a negative enough view of the confederacy.

        2. But it’s still safe to read H. P. Lovecraft, isn’t it?

          1. Just not out loud.

          2. So long as you stay away from his poem “On the Creation of Niggers.”

            Yes, this does actually exist:

            “When, long ago, the gods created Earth
            In Jove’s fair image Man was shaped at birth.
            The beasts for lesser parts were next designed;
            Yet were they too remote from humankind.
            To fill the gap, and join the rest to Man,
            Th’Olympian host conceiv’d a clever plan.
            A beast they wrought, in semi-human figure,
            Filled it with vice, and called the thing a Nigger.”

            That’s some Next Level Racism. He literally argues black people are like a missing link between beasts and the rest of humanity. Lovecraft didn’t believe in subtext – his racism is right on the surface.

            1. But it isn’t sort of appropriate for someone deeply associated with unspeakable horror?

            2. Lovecraft had a lot of issues, and unsurprisingly, miscegenation was one of them. It is thought to have inspired/been an influence on The Shadow over Innsmouth.

            3. Eric Hoffers comments about “the problems with blacks” printed in the NYT in the 1960s are pretty jaw-dropping in their candor

              They would be considered the apex of racism now. At the time people thought he was dropping mad science

              Can’t find the original article, but the feedback to it here gives a sampling

              http://www.nytimes.com/1964/12…..react.html

            4. Lovecraft was racist even for his own day, which is saying something.

              1. Not just his racism, but the *degree* of it. The visceral disgust – call it *horror* – he felt toward other races was bad even for that day.

          3. There has been some talk of changing the World Fantasy award, which is a stylized bust of Lovecraft.

        3. Hemingway was an anti-semite, so we need to not watch Humphrey Bogart in To Have and Have Not.

          1. Steinbeck portrayed a stereotyped Asian in East of Eden

            Let’s throw that on the bonfire while we’re at it.

          2. “E.E. Cummings
            Throughout the 1930s and 40s, E.E. Cummings was one of Ezra Pound’s only political confidants. Their correspondence is an unsettling record of their flirtation with, and ultimate embrace of, anti-communism, anti-semitism, and (in Pound’s case, if not also in Cummings’) fascism.
            October 8, 1941, New York”
            http://theamericanreader.com/8…..zra-pound/

            First, the misspell his name (it is e.e., since it’s his name and that’s what he says it is) and then they include anit-communism along side anti-semtitism!
            Regarless, ol’ e.e. was an anti-semite along with Pound, AFAIK, and I haven’t heard of anyone banning their works.

            1. “*anti-communism,* anti-semitism, and (in Pound’s case, if not also in Cummings’) fascism” [emphasis added]

              One of these things is not like the others

              1. Especially at that time, there was more than a little overlap.

    2. When they begin calling for a ban on Twain you’ll know they’ve gone full retard.

      1. Um, his use of Nigger in Huck Finn?

        1. Yeah, So?

          1. Already controversial. I suppose banning him totally wouldn’t be that far off…

      2. Huckleberry Finn is already one of the most challenged books in public schools because of the word ‘nigger.’

        It’s not even like Twain was trying to hide the fact that the point of his book was anti-racism, but people still don’t get it.

      3. I have heard mumblings about that before.

        It is all about destroying the culture that made us what we are. A fundamental transformation, if you will.

    3. So will the Pulitzers and the Academy Awards be retroactively taking away its Awards? Will stores stop selling it? Will the AFI remove it from its lists? Will the National Film Registry remove it and The Birth of a Nation?

    4. Victor Fleming also directed the Wizard of Oz and Vivien Leigh was married to Olivier and appeared in A Streetcar Named Desire. George Reeves was in it too. And Clark Gable was mentioned (inaccurately) in The City on the Edge of Forever. What to do?

    5. Did you read his article? He says it belongs in a museum. Sounds like a call for it to be removed from stores…

  20. the earth has tits and that bitch that swung by a billion years ago killed trillions of dinos for a tit grope… just a fucking mountian, space. The real shit is in the subways protected by fucking weird wonks with pens… don’t breath on a tit, comets. Humans are far more worried about their flesh brushes than fucking being crushed by that fuck brushing dead stars off the floor of space… man, what the FUCK is up with that bitch? Earth doesn’t stand more than a few millions of ice ages and, humans? Passing mention on the old streams and granites…

    our laws and anger and massive priests wearing ties and smiles and the beneath hell of joe and bob and nancy making shit in on old stoves and lines in huge factories no one ever discovered because they’ve been sent to slavery after a decade and that decade is gone because time… well. time.. is really fucking super swift and if you are reading this fucking waste of time at any age below 35 please realize time doesn’t speed up as your fucking young ass ages…. time dons the fattest black cock ever produced and when your dumbass is sleeping this shitfuck calls time rapes your tiny butthole forward an entire decade in a single fucking spurt of time cum.

    just assistant on the fucking time thing, dudes

  21. The human skin has a billion nerves on it. Most of the fuck that touches it is accidental. Like spiders and fucking moths in the sleep. Wind sweeps shit against the skin and plump cute fat girls in Ohio clubs will always grab tight male and female ass with not a single fucking query., man. not a single fucking query. i don’t know if millenials do this shit or not but I’ve danced with plenty over the fucking years…. tale after the fucking tale, man and I’ve never been in prison- I always fucking get fucked up or hammered into strange places with a recovering alcoholic skeered to huff lines or kick back shots or some dude that owes me goddamn bucks.

    1. That, uh, really sucks. Badly.

      You should be angry.

      Come on over into the light Irish. Try this:

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

      No electronic bullshit. Just first class instruments and some primo vocals.

      1. “No electronic bullshit”

        Really? Your objection was with the electronic part of that, not with the fact that they cut it with Carly Rae Jepsen?

        You don’t like Nine Inch Nails?

        I have eclectic taste. I love NIN and Nick Cave, but I’ll listen to pretty much anything. I like Townes Van Zandt a lot.

        I think you need to expand your horizons. There’s a whole world out there.

        1. Shit, I thought the version of Oh My Lord by Nick Cave i posted above was this one.

          ^That’s my favorite version of the song. I especially like the violin going nuts starting around 4:00. Warren Ellis, the violin player, is an utter stud – here’s Ellis being a pimp with his band The Dirty Three.

        2. “I have eclectic taste. I love NIN and Nick Cave”

          That is really like the funniest sincere line since this one

    2. Nothing personally against NIN, but they’re like somebody strung together the least remarkable parts of Nirvana and Pearl Jam. They have some playable hits, which is why the 90s-era contemporaray stations have wrung two decades of play out of them.

  22. Another NIN/Jepsen mashup, squirrels permitting:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Lm1FL7gWl4

  23. I’m trying to understand what is at play here. There are groups of people who obviously want very badly to paint a false picture that campuses are unsafe places where all forms of rape abound. The sad thing is, from what I’ve seen nobody has even answered the most basic question of all, which is, are campus sexual assault rapes any higher than off-campus. Perhaps they finally have in this study with the 1% forcible rate. But is all this saying that off-campus rape victims are less important and a less urgent problem to deal with because there seems to be nonexistent focus on that.

    What is the motivation to this? Is it just click-bate journalism ? Folks on the left hoping to score some lucrative “programs”? Man hating feminists? One rape is too many but its just bizarre how unobjective the whole conversation has been, with even Obama mentioning this past year in a speech that 25% of college women are going to be raped. It borders criminal irresponsibility to terrorize parents of college students like that with no real stats to back it up.

    1. Good stats seem to show that there are fewer rapes on campus.

      As for why, it’s leftists and feminist playing political games to defeat the capitalist white male patriarchy. Some will land paid positions, others get some power and fame, everybody gets to feel superior and self-righteous and bond with the other members of the SJW Team.

    2. It’s female supremacists thinking they can drive men out of universities like the left drove conservatives out. Deprived of college education, they’ll be helpless second class citizens. They’re just too stupid to understand what the consequences will be; it will likely be a death sentence for college as we know it.

  24. Dear Gods! I’ve just realized my Great Aunt Donna raped me every single time last time I ever visited that horrible lavender scented old biddy.

    1. /The previous comment was hyperbole. In point of fact, Great Aunt Donna liked to hug and kiss all her nieces and nephews, and indulged in far too much gratuitous cheek pinching for my taste, but was actually really rather sweet. Please do not exhume her corpse and put her on trial.

  25. Re: “a closer look reveals that that figure includes everything from unwanted touching and kissing to being guilted into having sex.”

    See:

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

    This may be the most exhaustive analysis you can find of what I think is the sexes’ most alienating and destructive behavioral difference, which I believe is responsible for much of what is called sexual assault of women.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.