Rape

Policing Students' Sex Lives Costs Colleges Millions, But Nobody's Happy With Results

When stopping sex discrimination requires more sex discrimination, how can anyone win?

|

University of Kansas/Facebook

In order to fall into compliance with federal anti-discrimination law, the University of Kansas (KU) should segregate male student athletes to special dorms and immediately suspend anyone accused of sexual assault, argue the lawyers of a former student who says she was raped in the KU dorms. The young woman, Daisy Tackett (who has chosen to be public with her name and identity), is now suing the university in federal court. 

According to Tackett's claim, the school's failure to take reasonable steps to prevent the assault and to adequately address the situation afterward created a "hostile" educational environment, in violation of the federal statute known as Title IX. The original aim of Title IX was to combat institutional sex discrimination in education, but it has since morphed into "a lever by which the federal bureaucracy monitors schools' policies and procedures regulating sexual behavior," as Harvard law professors recently put it. These days, schools are increasingly finding themselves under investigation by the Education Department's Office for Civil Rights (OCR) and on the receiving end of student lawsuits over perceived inadequacies in addressing sexual harassment and assault on campus.

Tackett's lawsuit against KU epitomizes the shortcomings of this system. But that isn't a condemnation of Tackett nor her parents, who have also filed their own suit against KU under Kansas consumer protection law. Tackett has provided no reason to disbelieve her accusations against "John Doe G," a fellow student and member of the KU football team who was expelled from KU this March. It's understandable for Tackett and her family to feel upset, betrayed, or whatever emotions are motivating their current actions. And while I think the Title IX lawsiut is misguided, I'm not here to judge or express scorn toward people trying to handle a tough situation in the best way they see available. No, the problem is with the options and incentives that are available to begin with.

This piece is not about calling out vulnerable people for failing to react perfectly. It's about the Title IX takeover of U.S. universities and its wide-reaching detrimental effects. 

Daisy's Story

On Halloween night of her freshman year, Daisy Tackett and her friends wound up at a post-party gathering at the Jayhawker Towers, an upperclassmen residence hall on the KU campus. According to Tackett's lawsuit, John Doe G—who also lived in Jayhawker Towers—showed up at that gathering and "appeared inebriated." Eventually, Doe invited Tackett back to his room "to watch a television show and then sexually assaulted her." Tackett "remained in his apartment in a state of shock and horror until John Doe G said he needed to leave in the morning for football practice," the lawsuit states.

Tackett "chose not to report the sexual assault at the time, although she did confide in a teammate" on the school's rowing team, according to the suit. Around a year later, in October 2015, another woman on the school's rowing team with Tackett confided that she, too, had been sexually assaulted by Doe, and had reported it to the school and the police. That's when Tackett decided to come forward. Initially confiding to a rowing-team trainer, Tackett eventually reported Doe to KU's Institutional Opportunity and Access (IOA) Office, which opened an investigation.

After the IOA meeting, Tackett "was departing class at Blake Hall on the KU campus, a low-traffic area of campus, when she encountered John Doe G, whom she had never seen at that time and location of campus, staring her down," the lawsuit states. Later that week, she saw Doe in front of the library, where he "stared her down and called her a derogatory name." Tackett reported both events to the IOA office, which assigned an escort to walk her between Blake Hall and her next class. 

Around this same time, Tackett started having "panic attacks and anxiety," especially when rowing workouts were held in or near the football stadium. In November, her rowing coach said she couldn't attend an upcoming training trip to Florida, which he later claimed was because she had skipped workouts. But Tackett alleges that the coach—who had a history of what some team members viewed as problematic comments about their weight—excluded her from the trip in retaliation for speaking up about the coach's commentary and with disregard for the reason why Tackett was skipping workouts. Soon thereafter, Tackett "reported Coach Cathloth's retaliation against her" to the IOA. 

After returning from winter break in January 2016, Tackett remained in school for one week before dropping out and moving back home to Florida. In March, Doe was expelled from KU. 

Catch IX

In a statement, Tackett's lawyers claim that the University of Kansas created "a hostile educational environment when it chose to house KU football players in the Jayhawker Towers, despite knowledge of a high rate of sexual assaults." Further, the school "had reason to know she might be retaliated against, but … failed to protect her from retaliation by the KU football player."

Tackett's lawsuit accuses KU of knowing "that sexual assaults were occurring at a high rate at Jayhawker Towers" and yet failing "to provide adequate supervision, warnings, training guidance, and education to its athletes and KU football players in particular." The "likelihood of such misconduct was so obvious that KU's failure to supervise amounted to deliberate indifference to the rights of Daisy Tackett," it states. The suit further alleges that implementing a few "simple, reasonable policies" could have "lessen(ed) the chance of rapes occuring, harassment occuring, or retaliation occuring." Yet KU "failed to immediately issue a 'no contact' order to John Doe G after receiving two independent reports of sexual assaults involving him," "failed to immediately suspend John Doe G pending the outcome of KU's investigation," and "failed to ban John Doe G from campus pending the outcome of KU's investigations." 

University of Kansas/Facebook

Putting aside for a moment whether these claims are reasonable, let's look at what Tackett's lawyers think the school must do to be compliant with Title IX, the law that says schools can't discriminate on the basis of sex. First, they assert that KU should single out one class of students—male athletes—for special, segregated housing and anti-rape training. But of course, this itself could be a violation of Title IX. Tackett's lawyers also say that in order to create a safe and non-discriminatory educational environment for victims, students should be suspended from school and banned from campus upon any accusation of a sexual assault. But not only would this seriously violate the rights of anyone accused, it could also open the school up to yet more Title IX lawsuits.

Accused students who feel they have received an unfair shake from campus administrators during sexual-misconduct hearings have begun realizing that they, too, can use Title IX to their advantage. A slew of recent cases pits colleges against male students who say that they were the real victims of sex discrimination in their cases, and some have already won. 

But universities can't win, not with the hand they've been dealt by the Office for Civil Rights. Inevitably, the interests of opposing parties in cases of sexual-misconduct—a category broad enough to include rape and offensive comments—are going to conflict to some degree, and striking the right balance between the rights of both parties isn't easy under any circumstances. Now schools also face the prospect of losing all direct and indirect federal funding and spending hundreds of thousands of dollars fighting lawsuits because OCR has defined missteps made by schools in individual misconduct complaints as institutionalized sex discrimination. Any student—accuser or accused—who doesn't like the way things play out can now re-litigate the matter in federal court.  

Campus Housing "Obviously Not Safe"

The things Tackett's lawyers ask of KU in the name of Title IX compliance are simply not reasonable from a legal standpoint. But that's not their only flaw. What makes these requests especially ridiculous is that they're not rooted in the reality of rape on the KU campus, nor would they adequately prevent sexual assaults like what Daisy Tackett describes.

Tackett's claims hinge in large part on the idea that "sexual assaults were occurring at a high rate at Jayhawker Towers." And yet the lawsuit pinpoints just one incident of sexual assault and three incidents of sexual battery (defined as "unwelcome contact with or touching of another person's genitals, breasts, buttocks, or other unwelcome physical contact of a sexual nature) at the dorm building from 2013 through early 2016. 

According to KU crime report data, the school received 14 reports of on-campus rape in 2014, with 10 occurring in residential facilities. Ten forced fondling incidents were reported that year. With around 25,000 students attending KU's main campus, that means that around 0.096 percent of students each year will report being sexually assaulted in some way while on the KU campus and around 0.005 percent will report being sexually assaulted at the Jayhawker Towers. 

Crime data from previous years show similarly low levels of sexual assault reports. In 2013, a total of 13 on-campus sex offenses were reported, including nine that occurred in residence halls. In 2012, three on-campus incidents were reported. In 2011, there were two and in 2010 there were five. Obviously not all victims will report incidents, so these numbers don't necessarily reflect the full scope of sexual assault at KU. But they also highlight the absurdity of claiming that the likelihood of Tackett being raped in Jayhawker Towers was "so obvious" that KU was somehow negligent in not preventing it. And they add a hollow ring to the advice from Tackett's dad about how other parents can protect their kids at KU: "Move them out of the housing because it is obviously not safe." 

And yet, some 1.3 assaults per year were reported as occuring at Jayhawker Towers. Are there "simple, reasonable" steps the university is forgoing that could be contributing? Tackett's lawyers say yes: the school failed to provide adequate security at Jayhawker Towers and adequate "warnings, training guidance, and education" to students about prohibited conduct and personal risk.

The claims are dubious. Jayhawker Towers is one of at least 25 dorms on KU's main campus (which also includes 14 sex-segregated dorms). It's a coed dorm for upperclassmen, transfer, and nontraditional students, with about 200 suites and a wait-list to get in for the 2016-2017 year. A key is required to enter the building 24 hours per day, and security cameras can be found around all entrances and exits. Resident assistants and other staff are in the building at all times, and campus safety officers make nighttime rounds.

In a residential life handbook, KU instructs student residents that they are beholden to all local, state, and federal laws and university policies and regulations and reminds them that "residents should be mindful of personal safety." It defines offenses including sexual assault, rape, sexual battery, and sexual harassment, states clearly that these are prohibited, and reiterates that KU is "committed to preventing, correcting, and disciplining incidents of unlawful harassment, including sexual harassment and sexual assault." It has reported student sexual-assault data years before the federal government required it and has a number of programs dedicated to training students, staff, and professors about sexual harassment and assault. 

Risk and Retribution

External security features like those at Jayhawker Towers make little difference when it comes to the vast majority of campus rapes, which aren't a matter of nefarious strangers getting into student residence halls but happen between students who willingly enter one another's dorm rooms. Such was the case with Tackett and Doe. And short of enforcing a total ban on students entering each other's rooms, I'm not sure how KU could preemptively thwart these sorts of assaults.

Throughout Tackett's lawsuit, it is alleged that KU football players were housed in Jayhawker Towers because it has less strict rules and security than do some other residence halls. Yet, presumably, none of the dorms are so strict as to totally prohibit students from inviting another student in (and enforcing this ban). So how would housing Doe (or all male athletes) in a different dorm have prevented him from inviting Tackett to his room? Or her from accepting the invitation? By Tackett's own account, Doe was the one who was "inebriated," not her, and she went with Doe to his room of her own accord. 

There's no reason to fault Tackett for that decision, or to assume that it relieves Doe of some responsibility. People should obviously be able to enter private spaces with other individuals—to watch TV or whatever else—and maintain an expectation of bodily autonomy. The bulk of dating is based on placing this trust in one another. But people do violate this trust sometimes. Sadly, Tackett (and many others) have to learn this or the first time at a point in their lives when they're already confused and vulnerable, having just entered college and started coping with a lack of parental restrictions and an influx of personal responsibility for the first time. 

The small but real risk in being behind closed doors with someone you barely know is not one that can be collectively dealt with, however. Short of some sort of constant surveillance from authorities, there's just no way a third party can preempt sexual assaults of this nature. What we can do, however, is hope that perpetrators of violence will be held accountable and victims find some measure of retribution in the criminal justice system. 

Yet with the extra-legal justice system encouraged by Title IX, students are instructed and incentivized not to go to police with rape or sexual battery claims. Police are bad at handling rape, young women are told, and thus it's better to appeal to campus administrators. There is no "right" response to being raped, advocates argue, and thus no imperative to even discuss with vulnerable populations (like college women) how their post-assault actions might matter. We need to believe and support victims, which means not burdening them with things like statutes of limitations for bringing criminal charges or biased questions about why they wait to come forward.

Who are we helping with this all or nothing attitude? While it may not be ideal, there's no getting around the fact that certain steps—preserving DNA evidence, getting a medical examination post-assault, reporting the matter to authorities in a timely manner—can go a long way toward successful prosecution. This sort of officialized justice may not be important to all victims. And these steps won't guarantee success. But if we're serious about reducing sexual violence, one of the best ways is by reducing the population of sexually violent people who go unpunished. And this requires not just creating a safe space for victims to speak up (something campus/women's groups have been good at fostering) but creating the conditions where arrest, prosecution, and conviction are actually possible. 

Promoting greater compassion and less victim-blaming in sexual assault situations isn't at odds with empowering people to know their options and act accordingly if they are victimized. What we can't continue doing is pretending that a victims' actions don't matter in any way. From a moral perspective, that might be true, but it's simply not true from a practical or legal perspective, and we fail future victims when we don't acknowledge that. 

The Cost for Colleges and Students

In encouraging students to seek recourse not from cops and courtrooms but from Title IX coordinators and settlements, we've set up a system that doesn't seem to bring either security or justice for sexual assault victims, violates the rights of the accused, and fails to punish the guilty in a way that might prevent future assaults. It also ends up consuming a lot of university resources. At a time when everyone's worried about inflating college costs, this ought to give people pause. The New York Times recently reported that between hiring Title IX lawyers, investigators, peer counselors, victims' advocates, case workers, etc., colleges have been spending millions of dollars addressing sexual misconduct complaints. 

"Title IX coordinators … can earn $50,000 to $150,000 a year," according to the Times. The estimated cost of "lawyers, counselors, information campaigns and training to fight sexual misconduct ranges from $25,000 a year at a small college to $500,000 and up at larger or wealthier institutions." 

The University of California, Berkeley has increased Title IX spending by at least $2 million since 2013, officials there said. The University of Oregon recently authorized $500,000 in new spending to hire additional Title IX staff. 

School lawyers are tasked with defending colleges against both federal government investigations—210 and counting, up from 55 just two years ago—and a growing number of student lawsuits claiming sex discrimination. This is expensive and time consuming even when a university wins. "There's so much more litigation on all sides of the issue," Brett Sokolow, executive director of the Association of Title IX Administrators (founded in 2011), told the Times. "This has very much created a cottage industry." Responding to a lawsuit "can run into the high six or even seven figures, not counting a settlement or verdict," Sokolow said.  

Wade Robinson, KU's vice president for campus life and university relations, told KWCH 12 last year that preventing and punishing campus sexual assault is a topic that "dominates our time … through the conduct process and education process. This has exploded. This is the top issue at this point." 

Wouldn't it be better for all parties if universities could go back to seeing students' education as their "top issue" and let sex crimes be handled by parties we specifically designate to handle criminals?

Alas, that doesn't seem likely any time soon. Senators are currently seeking an additional $138 million for federal investigations of campus sexual misconduct. The money would go to the Office for Civil Rights and the federal Clery Act Compliance Team, which handles campus crime-reporting data. The Clery team's complaints were up from 16 in 2012 to 87 complaints in 2015. OCR reports that Title IX complaints have skyrocketed from just a few in 2009 to 106 complaints in 2014 and 165 complaints last year.

NEXT: Free Speech and Comedy Documentary Can We Take a Joke? Gets Distribution From Samuel Goldwyn, Hits Theaters This Summer

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. The bureaucrats are winning, as is the idea of the total state.

    1. Which is the reason for the non-adversarial process of suing the college to provide a more reasonable amount of protection – with the emphasis on “more”. You sue Walmart to force them to take “reasonable” steps and they’re going to fight because that’s a cost to them. You tell a government agent he’s got to hire new personnel and expand programs and spend more money and you think he’s going to fight that edict?

  2. Yet with the extra-legal justice system encouraged by Title IX, students are instructed and incentivized not to go to police with rape or sexual battery claims. Police are bad at handling rape, young women are told, and thus it’s better to appeal to campus administrators.

    The police have that unfair ‘proof beyond a reasonable doubt’ hurdle accusers have to clear. It’s better if a male student is instantly expelled when a woman claims to have been assaulted.

    1. Yeah,innocent till proven guilty is a bitch,huh.

    2. If the male student isn’t immediately expelled the female student will have to carry a matress on her back for an entire semester (and receive credit for doing so). It is like this will be a crotch 22 for the administrators.

      1. crotch 22

        beautiful, whether it was you or autocorrect.

        1. Yeah, I am jealous of this one. Nice.

    1. That’s the tackett! And ain’t it a daisy?

  3. Tackett “remained in his apartment in a state of shock and horror until John Doe G said he needed to leave in the morning for football practice,” the lawsuit states.

    Seriously, would one of the thousands of sex coaches suggest to the women who take “training” that they should get out of the place when they think they’ve been assaulted? Sitting around there, pondering whether it was good sex or bad sex over making him breakfast, then having more sex with him to be better able to compare and re-evaluate reallly does not make things believable.

    Further you are imposing costs on others, by making it hard to figure out what happened, and by increasing complexity to a degree that can’t be negotiated. You are responsible for making – and thus reasonably preparing – a convincing case, because any accusation imposes costs on others. It’s not a strict obligation, but failing to take reasonable steps would prevent a right to accuse/sue.

    Lastly, get rid of title IX, as far as it concerns the behavior of students outside of immediate education. Without federal conditions, allow private universities to come up with different standards of safety and freedom. As for public colleges. Model them after the distribution observed in these private universities. Pluralism.

    Those who want freedom of sex and romance do not get to opportunistically and inconsistently claim a lack of safety.

    1. We need to believe and support victims, which means not burdening them with things like statutes of limitations for bringing criminal charges or biased questions about why they wait to come forward.

      This is cynically amusing. What you are dealing with is not “victim blaiming”, but “victim claiming”. Feminists claim the entitlement of determining – a priori – who the victim is. (Spoiler: it’s women.) Normally, there’s a process to determine guilt, to find out whether the accused is guilty. In feminist world, that process is a) a nuisance or terrible injustice, and b) to “empower” the accuser and to formally confirm the a-priori feminist verdict of violater and victim. Can you disagree?

    2. Further you are imposing costs on others, by making it hard to figure out what happened, and by increasing complexity to a degree that can’t be negotiated. You are responsible for making – and thus reasonably preparing – a convincing case, because any accusation imposes costs on others.

      For the man, the process is the punishment.

      1. The way is the goal.

      2. Stan: So this Hogtown place? Is it dangerous?
        Prince: No… Yes. It’s not their actions that kill you, but the ‘process’ will certainly finish you off.

  4. 8″Once I saw the draft of 6274 bucks,,, I admit that my friend’s brother was like really generating cash in his free time with his PC. His uncle’s neighbor has done this for only 9 months and by now repaid the loan on their home and bought a new Car …
    JD!66
    ??
    ??? http://www.alpha-careers.com/?…..-in-home-/

  5. Ah, Title Vagine.

    1. And yet The Vagina Monologues is becoming taboo because the author is white.

      1. Never fear = it is being decolonized

        1. I don’t want to live on this planet anymore

        2. “If my vagina were a historical figure…it would be Michelle Obama’s arms.”

          WHAT THE ACTUAL FUCK?!?!??!!

          This is why I hate being a millenial.

      2. No, these days it’s because it’s offensive to women without vaginas.

        1. Nevermind the fact that it was written by a woman who wanted not to write a thing about /women/, but wanted to write a thing about /vaginas/, and people with vaginas. Regardless of one’s views on the author or the piece (the piece itself is kind of disgusting, in that it views an older woman raping a thirteen year old girl after getting her drunk as a good thing…), the point of the thing was to celebrate not people, but a body part. It shouldn’t even /matter/ to women without vaginas. It’d be like saying it was offensive to men without vaginas. It was never about women, it was about vaginas.

  6. “… the federal statute known as Title IX. The original aim was to combat institutional sex discrimination in education, but has since morphed into “a lever by which the federal bureaucracy monitors schools’ policies and procedures regulating sexual behavior,” as Harvard law professors recently put it.”

    Obumbles is responsible for this yet I rarely see mention of that. Of all the horrible shit he has done, which is legion, this may be the most damaging.

    1. Another reason the election is important. This shit will continue under a Hillary Clinton administration but not under a Gary Johnson administration.

      1. Feel the Johnson?

        1. That’s a microagression, please report to the nearest re-education facility.

        2. Love it!!

        3. That… is an amazing slogan…

  7. Ladies and gentlemen, the Air Force’s newest program to combat sexual violence, Live The Green Dot.

    Ugh.

    1. Is the sexual assault reduction initiative somehow also environmentally friendly?

      1. I’m sure they’ll figure out some way to tie it to the environment.

        1. The color green. I don’t get it.

          1. Your guess is as good as mine.

          2. green means go? all i got.

  8. Government intrusion into the housing arrangements and sexpolicing at college campus only seem ridiculous. However, these are essential preparatory steps before the establishment of a Junior Anti-Sex League.

  9. There is so many holes in this whole idea that a semi could drive through it. Moreover it appears that justice be damned in the process. If a woman is assaulted, it should be understood by all involved that the first stop should be the police, where evidence can be gathered and an investigation can be instituted. Short of that it becomes a she said, he said incident, where neither party can prove their guilt or innocence. With that all kind of creations come into play including revenge, malicious intent, and any number of other possibilities. In this case the tables could be turned to say that she took advantage of an ” inebriated” male, and then had after incident remorse, and took the stance that a rape occurred, when nothing or something may have happened, but just what is left to be defined by the college and the students involved, with little or no evidence to prove what really happened, and who is innocent and who is guilty.

  10. College administrators desperately need to start telling young women “Bring charges or shut up”. Sadly, that would involve growing a spine.

    1. It would also involve the current crop of feds coming after the administrators.

      It’s horrifying that it’s considered perfectly normal that accepting $.01 of FedGov money (in, say, the form of subidized student loans) means FedGov can control due process, or the genital quotas in the athletics departments, even at non-State schools. But, if you suggested that accepting that $.01 meant the private schools had to uphold the First Amendment free speech rights, or even more if you suggested they had to uphold 2A, people would look at you as though you’re some sort of freak.

      (Not that I necessarily believe that acceptance of subsidized student loans means private schools should be bound by 1A since it’s a policy that would ultimately be abused in all sorts of bad ways.)

      1. Subsidies, providing the worst of both worlds.

    2. College administrators, and parents for that matter, need to teach their sweet innocent flowers that “come over to watch some TV” after some drunken partying means something entirely different from “come over to watch some TV”. Maybe in sex-ed, they should focus less on the mechanics, and more on such simple social interactions.

    3. No, they need to tell women not to sequester themselves with large drunk men late at night, unless they intend to have sex with him.

      This is idiotic.

      How much sympathy would you have for me if I walked through the ghetto at 2am with a stack of cash in my hand?

      BLAME THE VICTIM

      1. How much sympathy would you have for me if I walked through the ghetto at 2am with a stack of cash in my hand?

        trick question, racityracists don’t get sympathy. silly rabbit.

      2. I got the impression that if this was rape, he didn’t seem aware of that, which creates a weird situation. If she didn’t want to have sex but she went along with it anyway and gave no indication that she didn’t want to, then she can’t very well call that rape. But if that is what happened, then what is wrong with her to just lie there and allow that to happen without any protest?
        On the other hand, if she did protest and he knowingly forced her against her will, then what kind of world does he live in where he thinks he can rape a girl and it’s so not a big deal, so much so that he just sleeps next to her and then wakes up and goes about his business.
        Either way, something is very wrong here.

  11. OT: What’s at stake going forward, another KDW home run:

    http://www.nationalreview.com/…..-amendment

    1. From the article:

      This week, Senator Elizabeth Warren bemoaned the fact that businessmen have “become accustomed to saying whatever they want about Washington policy debates,” and she is pressuring the Securities and Exchange Commission to file fraud charges against businesses that lobby against regulations that they believe would hurt them. Senator Warren charges that the businesses in question exaggerate the costs of regulations when lobbying against them in public and do not do so when communicating with investors and shareholders ? which is to say, she wants to make a felony out of what amounts to at most hyperbole or political spin.

      Does that mean we can have politicians arrested when their cost projections for their pet boondoggles end up higher than they were advertised? Can we impeach the President for telling everyone how much money Obamacare would save them?

      1. No, see exemption clause.

        1. I’ll bet Jonathan Gruber is on the list of exemptions too.

      2. What the fuck? Political suppression much?

      3. The progs really hate free speech.

        1. Not true, only that “others” have it.

        2. For progressives, free speech means being free to agree with them. Any disagreement is intolerant and must be punished, because tolerant people don’t tolerant intolerance.

      4. “Does that mean we can have politicians arrested when their cost projections for their pet boondoggles end up higher than they were advertised?”

        Stop it. My leg is tingling at such a possibility.

        1. Seek medical attention.

      5. This is possibly one of the most chilling and evil things she has said yet.

        Go fuck yourself Warren you totalitarian cunt.

        1. She’s a very, nasty piece of work and I’m as sure as anything waiting in the wings for…

        2. THE most dangerous person in American politics. She would kill people in great numbers to enforce her ideology.

        3. No no, it’s cool man. She’s totally a Native American so really it’s all good.

      6. These greedy businesses only care about profits. They put profits before people. This is why we need these regulations. They force businesses to put people before profits. So any criticism of these wonderful regulations is born of greed. These greedy businesses don’t want to pay their fair share, nor do they want to put people before profits. That makes them evil, and for this they must be punished.

        1. She’s more dangerous than Palin could ever be.

          1. That is, an academic with a sense of self-righteous populist egoism bestowed with power is not a good mix.

            1. A fake protected class wannabe academic that only got to the upper tier of academia after exaggerating her ancestry. When she was flipping houses I wonder if she exaggerated the pre-restoration condition and/or the money spent in rehabilitation.

        2. Bernie, is that you?

        3. You left out that they must hate children.

  12. I swear, if we import Title IX up here, I’m gonna go Medieval on your asses.

    1. As a re-enactor at ye olde medieval faires, I find your comment offensive. Fair thee anon, good sir.

  13. Government sponsored helps from over the pond for using social media:

    http://www.nationalreview.com/…..ice-online

    1. That would never happen here in the US.

      1. Already been tried:

        https://reason.com/reasontv/201…..tic-tweets

        1. Montana values.

          1. Yeah, WTF Montana though, expect this kind of crap from MA etc. but Montana!

          2. As I’ve said before, Montana is no libertarian paradise.

            1. Just out of curiosity, what would you all say is the most libertarian state in the US?

              1. I think its a mixed bag and with all the necessary qualifications; TX.

                1. I just moved to Texas and truth be told, I felt freer back in California of all places. It seems like everything here is restricted or illegal or run by the state. At least in California, I could buy a bottle of whiskey, at Walmart, on a Sunday.

  14. My solution: double the funding for the Office of Civil Rights.

    1. We can measure justice by the amount of money government agencies receive.

  15. Given that she was sober and he was drunk shouldn’t he be the one suing since she obviously took advantage of him?

    1. Everyone knows men are responsible for their actions no matter what their state of mind it. He could have been an immobile vegetable on life support and she would still be the victim here!

    2. You can’t rape the willing, and men are always willing. Therefore men cannot be raped.

      1. God, I would laugh but that’s seriously the argument made. Because stereotyping based on Gender isn’t allowed; unless it’s a stereotype about how terrible men are. Because patriarchy. Because privilege. Because if you don’t believe the woman, you yourself are now a rapist too.

        If you put the arguments in a blender, one could say every woman wanted the rape because they had a hole. They really should have sealed it up with wax if they didn’t want any sex from that guy.

  16. The “likelihood of such misconduct was so obvious that KU’s failure to supervise amounted to deliberate indifference

    How many assaults happened at this place? They make it sound really bad.

    1. It’s in the article…

    2. Never mind, didn’t read enough.

    3. And this logic right here is the exact reason why every time the police don’t stop a crime from happening they are charged with deliberate indifference and the victim receives a payout.

      /sarc

  17. when they’re already confused and vulnerable, having just entered college and started coping with a lack of parental restrictions and an influx of personal responsibility for the first time

    This case aside, that this is true explains so much about what is wrong with millenials.

    1. “…started coping with a lack of parental restrictions and an influx of personal responsibility for the first time…”

      Good god, really? So from the age of 10 to 18 these kids have basically been feral, with no restrictions? No guidance? No responsibility? No consequences? I think I’ve found the problem.

      1. No, she’s saying that they did have parental restrictions and interventions up untin age 18 and are now for the first time experiencing independence. I think Lynchpin’s point is that teenagers aren’t given enough independence and responsibility before they go off to college.

      2. No, it’s worse: the author is alleging that college students had parental restrictions before college but no “influx” of personal responsibility, i.e., before age 18 they had little to no personal responsibility.

      3. On the contrary, they’ve had almost every aspect of their lives completely micromanaged and structured by their parents. They’ve never been gradually introduced to freedom and responsibility. It’s when they’re suddenly taken out of that environment that they go feral.

      4. As an 18 year old who was raised partially according to millenial values albeit tempered with those of my native culture’s, I can confirm the ill-effects. My parents never really did let me have as much responsibility as my peers did and this left me lacking in social growth and a terrible work ethic. Probably because I never suffered any consequences for my actions.

      5. As an 18 year old who was raised partially according to millenial values albeit tempered with those of my native culture’s, I can confirm the ill-effects. My parents never really did let me have as much responsibility as my peers did and this left me lacking in social growth and a terrible work ethic. Probably because I never suffered any consequences for my actions.

    2. that this is true explains so much about what is wrong with millenials.

      One of the more notable generational differences is that “Employment participation 16-19” (i.e. “summer/after-school jobs”), was in the 40-50% range in the 1980s-1990s and is now headed below 20%

      they measure it like 3 different ways, which is annoying (*’unemployment rate’ isn’t an accurate measure as most are still dependents/students; changing ‘percent of workforce‘ is fine but i think it is skewed by the shrinking of family sizes)

      anyway, i’ve been fixated on this point because i think it has such significant ramifications for the way young people think/act.

      basically, the idea that kids “develop a desire for independence” in their early teens, and then fulfill that desire by getting a job and depending less on parental direction and funding… seems to be going the way of the dodo.

      And college is treating them as though this process never happened anyway… in fact, its responding to students *demands* that colleges ‘take care of them’. Leaving students responsible for their own behavior and decisions has become ‘unthinkable’. So much of their contemporary behavior is just an advanced form of stamping their feet and crying, demanding someone “do something”. I think all this is tied together.

      1. then fulfill that desire by getting a job and depending less on parental direction and funding

        I *hated* my after-school & summer job (boring work in my mom’s office) but I didn’t have a choice in the matter…. I retrospect I can see it had some value.

      2. One of the arguments against teen emoyment by helicopter parents is that this takes away time from their studied. And that means lesser grades, lower SAT score, fewer scholarships, attending a lower tier college, etc.
        And like the sports parents that think,act, and make decisions based on little Johnny becoming the next Tiger Woods or Derek Jeter they think they can shoe-horn an avereage or above average student to elite status.

        1. 90% of the shit you study in school is useless and is forgotten shortly after you’ve “passed the tests”/”written the paper”

          Which is an entirely secondary issue, but maybe relevant.

          One other detail which i’ve been nuts about for years and years is the lack of “skills”-focused training in primary schools. Education these days is mostly simply “information” spat at kids, then expected to be spat back in some recognizable form.

          Even math and physics applications are rarely utilized in practice so much as simply ‘tested’ to see if they are understood.

          a lot of both of these issues is something that comes to me from my own (*admittedly weird) high school… where “working” was actually part of the school program (you took a month off during the school year to work in some novel area), and where the whole ‘mastery of skills’ within topics was emphasized as more important than test-scores.

          1. That sounds like an interesting high school curriculum. Where/when was that?

            1. Without getting too specific = its one of these

              http://essentialschools.org/common-principles/

              although it and its weird-approaches predated this actual organization by like 2 decades. it was a school in NY where a bunch of ex-harvard proteges of Lawrence Kohlberg were given free rein to design an experimental education program based on his ideas about cognitive development.

              the school joined the Brown Coalition (above) in the 1980s, just before i got there… which shared a lot of the same basic experimental ideas (“student as worker”, “development of mastery/skills”, mentorship) , but the Brown thing was more about implementing a template which could be applied to any kind of school, not just some hippy-dippy experimental ones.

              We had to take a course before we graduated where we learned all the educational theory behind our own experimental program (as well as the history of pedagogical philosophy). Which was funny – because while i was in college i could basically lecture Education Master’s Students on stuff they were just learning for the first time. I still find the topic interesting and think its appalling that so few people ever bother to critique HOW kids are being educated. (i.e. the basic methods and practices)

              1. a little clearer background info on the Brown Coalition

                1. Let’s be clear our education system was based on the Prussian model. The Progs needed to make good little soldiers.

                2. The school’s goals should apply to all students, while the means to these goals will vary as those students themselves vary

                  This. This x 1000. It’s such an important point, not just in regards to schools and students, but to so many issues of diversity.

              2. There are some parts of the technical curriculum that are taught that way. Some of the robotics and computer science courses are basically large project based courses. There are some HS’s that do it that way. In college stuff like Formula SAE is extremely successful at producing useful, productive engineers.

                1. There are some parts of the technical curriculum that are taught that way

                  There needn’t be any distinction between STEM and Humanities in the approach to teaching basic shared skills. Anyway we’re talking about primary (HS) education, which isn’t about producing differentiated end-products like ‘engineers’ but rather equipping people to be “good students”.

                  an example = “formal logic & rhetoric” applies equally to any argument you make in English/History/Humanities as it does any technical paper. Yet notably…. no one actually *teaches* it in HS as an actual ‘skill’ but simply assumes it is supposed to develop on its own through making people ‘write lots of papers’.

                  ‘Public speaking & presentation’, as another example, is something no one is ever specifically taught in High School school = yet is something people are frequently called upon to do in different contexts.

                  “Math” is similarly cloistered as a ‘topic’ rather than a skill. Why is competency w/ statistical numeracy – something required across all disciplines – never specifically focused on in high school?

                  i could go on.

                  The point is to stop seeing education as “boxes” of discrete topics, and rather as a toolbox of skills.

          2. “One other detail which i’ve been nuts about for years and years is the lack of “skills”-focused training in primary schools. Education these days is mostly simply “information” spat at kids, then expected to be spat back in some recognizable form.”

            What makes this especially frustrating is that we live in an age where you’re never very far from a computer or a smartphone, so something like the capital of Kentucky can be looked up in two seconds. So why spend three months making kids memorize every state and capital?

            I think some basic classes in logic and rhetoric would do wonders. Too many people go through life with zero understanding of basic shit like propositions, common logical fallacies, etc.

            Then again, I guess the point of mandatory government education is to indoctrinate kids into obeying the TOP MEN.

            1. The capital in Kentucky is moonshine, .22LR cartridges, and phone numbers of underage relatives. Oh wait. You said of . My mistake. Frankfort.

            2. 3 months? My daughter learned the states and capitols in a few hours when she was six playing Stack the States

          3. Even math and physics applications are rarely utilized in practice so much as simply ‘tested’ to see if they are understood.

            Not quite true. Students are tested to see if they have *memorized* facts. Understanding never comes into it. That’s one of the reasons the tests are so terrible: They don’t test for anything important like understanding, just memorization of boring facts.

      3. Jesus, really? I worked 30 hours a week at least every summer since I was 15, and even before that I worked maybe 10 hours or so for part of the summer. Granted, I was a life guard, which isn’t exactly the most demanding of jobs, but I still had to show up on time, clean the grounds at the end of the night, and maintain certification. I worked some evenings and weekends during the school year, too.

        It’s really sad. I rather enjoyed it, made good friends (some of whom I’m still in touch with) and went into college with money in the bank. What’s wrong with *parents* that they aren’t basically forcing their kids to get a job?

        1. There are also fewer jobs.

          1. FIGHT FOR FIFTEEN

          2. I used to top seed corn and block beets, (farm labor) in my youth. Guess who does it now?

            1. Hitler?

            2. Me, too, detassled corn, picked weeds in bean fields when I was around 12, though you had to be 14 to detassle hybrid corn. It’s how the gals where I lived paid for their school wardrobes back in the 60’s and 70’s.

              Most parents (we had 6 kids then) didn’t have the disposable income to buy shit like bikes and baseball gloves. Owned their house and food was a far bigger expense as a percentage of income than 50 years later. We always ate good food and had the basics, but if I wanted a new pair of shoes I bought them with my own money.

              You do learn the value of a dollar in those circumstances, something kids have lost over the last 4 decades. Free shit was never an option back then and I was a cheapskate, never bought shit at full price, only on sale. 50 years later, I’m still the same, I don’t buy shit unless I need it.

              Sadly the free shit brigade has changed the narrative. If you grow up thinking you are entitled to free shit and you don’t have to work for what you want to be, it won’t end well for society. It seems 50% of of society exists on free shit and the numbers are rising. At some point those that are productive and are paying for the free shit are going to go….wtf am I working to give free shit to those that don’t work when I don’t make much more than the free shit brigade.

              Incentives, how do they work?

        2. What’s wrong with *parents* that they aren’t basically forcing their kids to get a job?

          A lot of it has to do with Chumby’s point above = parents are terrified that their kids need to be ‘competitive’, and insist they spend all their time on issues related to getting into the best colleges.

          its also a social-class thing. i think a lot of people see ‘kids working’ as something that people did in the ‘old days’…and, aside from the odd pizza delivery gig or lifeguard job, there are few opportunities which parents think are ‘suitable’. (which is also the fault of small businessess being dis-incentivized from hiring young people)

          1. The obsession with getting into the best colleges is understandable given what messages are hammered into parents and kids, but it’s just, so, wrong. The difference in the quality of undergraduate education between Harvard and Big State U is really very small. Harvard gets you access to a valuable network, but if you’re good enough you’ll still succeed. And success for most people is a solid upper middle class lifestyle, anyway. You don’t need Harvard for that.

            1. The difference in the quality of undergraduate education between Harvard and Big State U is really very small.

              Agreed, but the bragging rights and social-status matters more to most.

          2. My dad ran a small manufacturing plant (about 50 employees). I worked in the shittiest parts of the plant from the time I was 16 till I was a junior or so in college. Every summer. I hated it at the time but was a beneficial and formative part of my personal development. Also the fact that I was given the worst job in the factory gave me some cred with the other workers.

            1. This started in about 1974 through 1980 or so. Seems as though I was among the last group of that missed massive political correctness in the educational system.

        3. OK, maybe I exaggerated the 30 hour/week thing. That was probably true after 17 or 18. But still.

  18. I love how the SJW answer to these problems is far far worse than the prudish conservatism of yesteryear.

    The total bureaucratic control of life necessary to right all these wrongs is a horror freak show. I fear that college oreontation five years from now will include “how to fill out your sex contract” training.

    1. I’m calling for an extension of title IX procedures into Internet comment threads so that I can take you to federal court.

      1. If that’s what you want, just move to Scotland.

        1. Expect a call from my attorney, sir!

      2. I don’t think you know how this works. Invoking T9 against someone usually gets you into federal court as a defendant.

    2. I suppose going back to having to figure out how to have fun with doors open and one foot on the floor would be better than this.

      1. This must be one of those euphemisms that recently invaded the safe space of HnR.

    3. One “affirmative consent” advocate (I forget who, but it was sometime after the UVA rape fiasco) actually said with a straight face “consent for sex needs to be more like consent for a surgical operation.”

  19. Freedom may have measurable benefits, but it’s ultimately a qualitative preference.

    There may be good reasons to think the incidence of rape wouldn’t necessarily decline if we got rid of jury trials, the right to counsel, the right to confront witnesses, the right not to testify against yourself, etc., but ultimately, that’s beside the point.

    The fact is that I prefer living in a free society with laws that respect all of those things–even if respecting people’s rights did mean that there would be more rapes than there would be otherwise.

    I also oppose violating the rights of Muslims even If doing so would mean less terrorism. I oppose torturing known terrorists even if refusing to torture them would mean more innocent victims. I would oppose violating the Second Amendment rights of AR-15 owners even IF IF IF violating their rights meant fewer school shootings. I would oppose violating the First Amendment rights of neo-Nazis, the Klan, et. al. even if violating their free speech rights would mean less stupid racists in the world.

    1. Agreed 100%, but doing all of those things doesnt have to mean more victimization in the world. Removing the awful incentives that law enforcement operates under currently would go a long way towards having them go after people who victimize others.

  20. A qualitative preference for freedom despite whatever quantitative benefits of its alternative–this is what makes me libertarian. And I’m starting to suspect that people’s unwillingness to accept whatever downsides to freedom there are is what we’re really talking about when we talk about being “tolerant” or being politically correct. Political correctness is a qualitative preference that denigrates a free society–if respecting people’s rights means things like that rapists will sometimes get away.

    It’s really as simple as that.

    I’m also starting to think that forcing certain people to accept that there will be downsides to freedom may be a necessary prerequisite to a free society. Instead of only denying that school shootings are tied to our lack of gun control, maybe we should respond with the observation that even if school shootings were the price of freedom, we’re willing to pay it. Same thing with campus rape–sorry, having fewer rapes on campus just isn’t worth compromising on our Constitutional rights–not by one iota.

  21. Yeah, questioning the qualitative value of stopping rape is extremely anti-PC, but if political correctness amounts to a qualitative preference for violating people’s rights, then capitulating to political correctness while being libertarian may not be possible. If you think Christian business owners should be free to discriminate against LGBTI, don’t think of yourself as politically correct because you don’t use the word “faggot”. It’s the same thing with campus rape.

    We’re here. We’re libertarians. We care more about Constitutional rights than rapes. Get used to it!

    1. It is a mistake to think the SJW cares more about rapes than constitutional rights, or cares about rapes at all. They care about constitutional rights, just not in the way that you do. See above in the thread about the frontal assaults on 1st A by proggies.

      If they could kill the bill of rights at the price of making their 1 in 4 raped stats come true, they would not hesitate.

    2. Absolutely correct. And also why Libertarians are lucky to get 1% of the vote. My god, do you want dogs living with cats too?

      1. But the idea that we should tolerate a certain amount of evil on principle is actually very mainstream.

        It’s just that people are afraid to be specific about it.

        They’ll say, “It’s better to let a hundred guilty people go free than to convict one innocent man”. They’re just shy about making those guilty men rapists specifically. Mainstream America actually believes in free speech–they’re just ashamed to be specific about saying they believe in it for Nazis.

        It’s like Americans who believe in abortion rights. Just because they’re pro-choice doesn’t mean they go around bragging about their own abortions or all the abortions their daughters have had.

        Maybe they should get over that.

        Maybe it’s like LGBT rights depending on gay people being willing to come out of the closet and be seen in obnoxious pride parades. Maybe free speech, Fifth Amendment rights, Second Amendment rights, etc. is something people should come out the closet for. Yeah, I think the Fifth Amendment is more important than campus rape–and if you think that’s obnoxious, then fuck you. There are millions of people just like me. We’re all over the country, and we won’t be quiet about it.

        We’re here. We’re not queer. We believe in individual rights. Get used to it!

  22. Eventually, Doe invited Tackett back to his room “to watch a television show and then sexually assaulted her.”

    Given the new kind of Title IX Victorianism, I think colleges should simply adopt strict rules that if a male and female student choose to be alone in a college dorm room, they should both get expelled, independent of whether any sex took place.

    1. You jest, but…why not? It worked. At one time, if a jock asked a girl he just met at a party to go to his room, she would have said indignantly, “I’m not that kind of girl!”, and that would have ended the matter.

      1. What makes you think I’m jesting?

  23. Just to clarify, was she actually raped or is “raped” being by the attorney as a catchall term for any inappropriate sexual behavior? I ask because it appears from this article from the Kansas City Star that the assault never moved above “inappropriate touching”, and since the term “rape” seems to be coming from the attorney there’s a good chance it’s being done to further the lawsuit against the University of Kansas.

    If the university is liable for what happened, they can sort that out in court, but from my understanding “rape” actually has a specific meaning and I’ve noticed that it’s a term that’s been appropriated by SJWs along with “racism”, “sexism”, “fascism”, and many other words and phrases, to describe things those words aren’t meant to describe, in order to make an emotional appeal meant to discourage rational discussion.

    http://www.kansascity.com/spor…..06647.html

    1. As for the incident itself, my own personal opinion (being a University of Kansas alum) is that the problems stem mainly from having athletes housed in separate facilities from the rest of the student body. Athletics programs in revenue sports often admit a lot of people who are simply not academically suited for college life, many of those coming from unstable or dysfunctional upbringings, and are there only because of their ability to catch, throw, dribble, or shoot a ball. I don’t doubt the numbers claimed on sexual assaults, or that they could be higher…we were hearing similar stories about the athletic programs at KU back when I was a student a couple of decades ago.

      Kansas has always tended to keep those students in Jayhawker Towers because they’re perceived as more exclusive than the dorms (and they’re moving them to even more posh digs soon) and the reason for this is that it’s a hook for recruiting…that the athletes won’t have to mix with the regular student body and will get their own special accommodations. Seems to me that an institution treating people from that background as if they’re special and above the rest of the student body will usually yield poor results. It would probably function the same, to varying degrees, for people from any background.

  24. Once sex has been banned these issues will go away, and then everyone can feel safe.

    #nogasm!

    1. At least TSA searches would take less time.

  25. Twenty-five years ago I was wrongly accused by a female subordinate of sexual harassment. Her claim was proven to be a hoax through re-enactment of the alleged crime, and was not in dispute by either side. But the West Virginia Civil Rights commission refused to drop the charges. My accuser, for all her ‘scarred for life’ claims, settled fora paltry $10K.

    Her true intent was to get back at me for refusing to transfer her to corporate headquarters, where she wanted to continue her affair with a married staffer working there. The lawsuit came as an equity distribution scheme was being discussed for a second company we were forming. Even though it was unequivocal that I did not sexually harass the woman, I was squeezed out of the deal, costing me over 2 million dollars, and left the company I helped start a year later.

    To this day it is difficult for me to believe any woman claiming sexual harassment. That may be wrong, but it’s true. And the disturbingly high number of false claims being made by those seeking simply to ruin someone’s life doesn’t help.

    1. Her claim was proven to be a hoax through re-enactment of the alleged crime

      This happens?

      1. In my experience you get a phone call from HR telling you that there is an anonymous accuser, they have interviewed other anonymous people, and you need to sign a document promising never to do it again.

        They can’t tell you the details because then you might know who accused you and retaliate against them.

        1. Not my experience. My accuser was known, as were those interviewed (the other employees present). And I did not sign any document promising not to do it again: my accuser agreed to drop the charges for the $10K settlement. Additionally, as an officer of the company, I knew all the details.

      2. Her accusation was that I exposed myself to her at work.The re-enactment showed that, for her accusation to be true, I’d have had to been standing on the desk inside the manager’s office – a room with three glass walls – for her to see me in the act described. That, coupled with the fact four other employees present, as well as the few customers milling about the store, failed to see what she alleged.

        So yes, this happens.

    1. Look at his puppydog eyes in that photo! Awww.

    2. And I thought that Stewart had already been castrated years ago.

    3. What a humananimalatrian that Stewart.

    4. This is what they want for all of us!

      — Magneto

  26. I just realized that the woman was a freshman athlete, living in the upperclassman dorm. I take it from an earlier comment that this is a perk of being an athlete.

    So, her real complaint is that instead of assigning her to a freshman dorm for females, they gave her what she wanted…

    Yes means no?

    1. “The small but real risk in being behind closed doors with someone you barely know is not one that can be collectively dealt with, however. Short of some sort of constant surveillance from authorities, there’s just no way a third party can preempt sexual assaults of this nature. What we can do, however, is hope that perpetrators of violence will be held accountable and victims find some measure of retribution in the criminal justice system”.
      What was the rape stats for segregated dorms? In my day the only coed dorms were married housing and no males allowed in female dorm at any time and vice a versa.

  27. before I looked at the receipt of $8884 , I have faith …that…my cousin woz like they say realy receiving money in there spare time at their computer. . there dads buddy haz done this for only about 14 months and just repaid the mortgage on their place and got themselves a Honda . try this…GHT002.

    ==== http://www.alpha-careers.com

    1. $8884 pays off your mortgage AND gets you a Honda? Does Bernie Sanders do your books?

  28. “When stopping sex discrimination requires more sex discrimination, how can anyone win?”

    That’s easy – the people who win are the ones who now have the power that goes along with being able to command some part of the state apparatus with its monopoly on violence.

    1. You see, it is really just sex discrimination, all the way down.

      Now what matters isn’t that, it is WHO is on top!

  29. College is a racket anyway. Close ’em down.

  30. Policing Students’ Sex Lives Costs Colleges Millions, But Nobody’s Happy With Results

    The Apparatchiks on whom the money was spent are likely happy with the results.

  31. Accused students who feel they have received an unfair shake from campus administrators during sexual-misconduct hearings have begun realizing that they, too, can use Title IX to their advantage. A slew of recent cases pits colleges against male students who say that they were the real victims of sex discrimination in their cases, and some have already won.

    This is what men need to be doing across the board for all the misandry from faculty. Record the lectures. Collect the sexism. Make a Title IX complaint. Tens of thousands of complaints. Besides actually winning a few, it’s a Denial of Service attack.

    The best way to fight back is “in kind”.

  32. I haven’t gone through all the comments yet, but I will, with an eye towards finding any post that acknowledges the elephant in the room. An elephant that make this whole complex, contradictory mess even messier, more contradictory and more complex.

    That would be the unmentioned fact that the football team is comprised of what? 80% black “students”?

    Yeah, take this stenchy stew of fedgov overreach, political correctness, ignoring reality, and the burgeoning “victimhood culture” and plop the race card into it. Then call BLM.

    The situation on campuses has gotten bad enough that the entertainment value is almost (ALMOST) totally suppressed by how tragically ill-served the poor students are and how much money is being transferred to truly horrible people with the goal of enforcing these truly horrible interpretations of Title IX.

  33. ?After I been earnin $8768 this-past/five weeks and-a little over, $10k lass-month. it’s realy my favourite work I have ever had. I actually started 7-months ago and pretty much straight away was earning at least $87… p/h. I follow
    this website,
    ???? http://www.BuzzMom90.com

  34. Start making more money weekly. This is a valuable part time work for everyone. The best part work from comfort of your house and get paid from $100-$2k each week.Start today and have your first cash at the end of this week. For more details Check this link??

    Clik This Link inYour Browser
    ? ? ? ? http://www.MaxPost30.com

  35. Start making more money weekly. This is a valuable part time work for everyone. The best part work from comfort of your house and get paid from $100-$2k each week.Start today and have your first cash at the end of this week. For more details Check this link??

    Clik This Link inYour Browser
    ? ? ? ? http://www.MaxPost30.com

  36. Title Nein

  37. Start working at home with Google! It’s by-far the best job I’ve had. Last Wednesday I got a brand new BMW since getting a check for $6474 this – 4 weeks past. I began this 8-months ago and immediately was bringing home at least $77 per hour. I work through this link, go to tech tab for work detail.
    +_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+ http://www.net-jobs25.com

  38. just before I saw the receipt that said $7527 , I accept that my mom in-law woz like actualey making money in there spare time from there pretty old laptop. . there aunt had bean doing this for less than twentey months and at present cleared the depts on there appartment and bourt a great new Citro?n 2CV . look here…….
    Clik This Link inYour Browser.
    ???????? http://www.net-jobs25.com

  39. “Sexual assault” and “rape” can be two offenses that are worlds apart. Rape is penis in vagina (or perhaps butt area)…sexual assault can be accidentally rubbing across a woman’s breasts area, through her clothing. Or slapping her on the backside (through clothing).

    So to only be accused (not convicted) of slapping a woman on her butt (through clothing) and being suspended or expelled from college for that is obviously absurd and unjust.

    But just another battle in the War on Men that the feminists are winning.

  40. RE: Policing Students’ Sex Lives Costs Colleges Millions, But Nobody’s Happy With Results

    When stopping sex discrimination requires more sex discrimination, how can anyone win?

    1. The only way to stop sex discrimination is through sex discrimination. Every nanny running our meaningless lives knows this.

    2. If a male student “doesn’t measure up to standards,” will he be persecuted by the feminazis on campus?

  41. “When stopping sex discrimination requires more sex discrimination, how can anyone win?”

    If you’re a university bureaucrat, the answer is obvious.

  42. Max . true that Gregory `s st0rry is impossible… on wednesday I bought Aston Martin DB5 since I been bringin in $9774 this last five weeks and more than ten/k this past-month . it’s by-far the best-job Ive ever had . I began this 4 months ago and practically straight away was bringin home minimum $81, per hour
    +_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+ http://www.earni8.com

  43. I’ve made $76,000 so far this year working online and I’m a full time student.I’m using an online business opportunity I heard about and I’ve made such great money.It’s really user friendly and I’m just so happy that I found out about it.

    Open This LinkFor More InFormation..

    ??????? http://www.selfcash10.com

  44. Start making more money weekly. This is a valuable part time work for everyone. The best part work from comfort of your house and get paid from $100-$2k each week.Start today and have your first cash at the end of this week. For more details Check this link??

    Clik This Link inYour Browser?

    ???? http://www.selfCash10.com

  45. my step-mum just bought a new cream Toyota Highlander only from working off a pc… browse around this website

    ??????www.paypost50.com

  46. til I saw the draft which was of $6881 , I didnt believe that my mother in law had been realy taking home money part-time on their laptop. . there best friend has done this 4 only twelve months and at present took care of the mortgage on there condo and got a top of the range Subaru Impreza . Learn More ….

    Click This Link inYour Browser….

    ?????? http://www.Reportmax20.com

  47. I’ve made $76,000 so far this year working online and I’m a full time student.I’m using an online business opportunity I heard about and I’ve made such great money.It’s really user friendly and I’m just so happy that I found out about it.

    Open This LinkFor More InFormation..

    ??????? http://www.selfcash10.com

  48. before I saw the bank draft which had said $9426 , I didnt believe that…my… brother woz like actualy earning money part-time at there labtop. . there uncles cousin has done this 4 less than fifteen months and by now repaid the dept on there place and got a great new Mini Cooper . read the full info here …

    Clik This Link inYour Browser??

    ? ? ? ? http://www.SelfCash10.com

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.