Sexual Assault

This UNC Rape Victim Became a Title IX Activist Leader. But Does Her Own Story Hold Up?

Andrea Pino's gruesome campus rape report jump-started national reforms, but even other activists are asking questions.

|

Jonathan Alcorn/MCT/Newscom

A case that helped jump-start a wave of campus sexual assault activism across America has ended in a big win for the complainants. Last week the Office of Civil Rights of the Department of Education released its findings on the federal complaint four students and an administrator filed against the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (UNC) in January 2013. The office concluded that the school had failed to establish "grievance procedures that provide for the prompt and equitable resolution of student, employee, and third-party complaints" of sex discrimination, including sexual misconduct. While the university has not admitted wrongdoing, it has agreed to review its procedures and to submit to federal monitoring.

Among those celebrating this outcome was former UNC student Andrea Pino, the co-founder of the national organization End Rape on Campus and the best-known of the five women behind the complaint. "I was 20 years old taking on a 200-year-old university and today I can say that I won," Pino told ABC11.

But that victory comes with an asterisk. While Pino's role in the UNC complaint propelled the 26-year-old Florida native to national visibility—she has met with politicians, was showcased in the 2015 campus rape documentary The Hunting Ground, has co-authored a book of survivor narratives, and speaks frequently on college campuses—there are also serious questions, unanswered and largely unasked, about the credibility of her own story of sexual assault.

The Campus Rape Frenzy, a 2017 book by the Brooklyn College historian K.C. Johnson and the National Journal writer Stuart Taylor, critically examines claims of a neglected epidemic of sexual violence on campus. It describes Pino's complaint against UNC as "the highest-profile questionable Title IX claim." (Title IX is the statute that requires colleges to investigate sexual harassment and assault.) Johnson and Taylor point out a number of implausibilities and inconsistencies in Pino's accounts both of her rape and of her alleged mistreatment by the university. While they stop short of calling Pino's story a hoax, they note that it has some startling parallels to that of Jackie, the faux victim in Rolling Stone's retracted story of a brutal fraternity rape at the University of Virginia.

My own skepticism of Pino's claims goes back to the controversy over The Hunting Ground, when I decided to look up some information on the women who appeared in the film. Some things in a 2014 Vogue feature on Pino and her comrade-in-arms Annie Clark, and in Pino's own blog posts at The Huffington Post, leaped out at me as decidedly odd. I did some background research for a possible article questioning about Pino's credibility. Then I put it on hold for several reasons, from a lack of leads to qualms about suggesting that someone who claimed to be the victim of a brutal crime was lying. (Pino never named a suspect, so this was not a question of a possible false accusation against an innocent person.)

Last year, The Campus Rape Frenzy revived my interest in pursuing the Pino story. Even with no accused, the issue of Pino's truthfulness is important given her status as a central figure in the narrative of a pervasive "rape culture" on American campuses—a narrative that has created a damaging climate of fear and presumption of guilt. It is also relevant to related problem: The media's tendency to suspend normal journalistic skepticism when it comes to allegations of sexual violence.

My story on Pino was published in May 2017 in Heat Street; several months later, that website folded and all its archives were taken down. With Pino and the UNC case back in the news, this story deserves to be brought back—particularly since, after the publication of the Heat Street article, I was contacted by a person deeply involved in campus sexual assault activism who not only shared my skepticism but gave me some striking new details. This article incorporates both material from the Heat Street story and new information. Pino did not respond to my requests for an interview or a comment, either in 2015 or last year.

* * *

Unlike many disputed accounts of campus sexual assault, Pino's story does not involve a murky situation of excessive alcohol consumption and fuzzy memories, or blurred lines between seduction and coercion. She says that in her sophomore year at UNC, in March 2012, she was the victim of a terrifying, extremely violent attack at an off-campus party she attended with a friend.

The assault began, Pino says, when a young man with whom she was dancing ("he was really attractive and a really, really great dancer," she says in The Hunting Ground) suddenly pulled her toward the bathroom and dragged her inside. In a 2013 Huffington Post blog post, Pino gives a dramatic description of what happened next:

My head was slammed hard against shiny white tile….The white shone with his bright eyes, and the drops of my blood that dripped to a puddle. He held my wrist against the walls as his hands slipped with scarlet sweat, and his eyes followed my buttons as he ripped them off my jeans. My mouth couldn't say "no," my eyes were blinded by the tiny red dots on my contact lenses. His fingers slipped through my hair, and I felt his fingernails digging into my head, pulling me in closer to his unzipped black Levis.

At some point, Pino has said, she "blacked out," then regained consciousness and returned to the party to try to find her friends; failing to do so, she returned to her dorm on her own, still in a state of shock. The next morning, she writes, she "woke up in a pool of blood," her body covered with "marks and blisters"; as the horrific memories came back, she realized that she had been raped. She considered reporting it, but hesitated because she had no name for her attacker and no witnesses: "Would the police make me take a lie-detector test? Would they think that I hurt myself?"

Pino writes that when she tried reaching out to friends to talk about the assault, "I quickly learned that it was 'my fault.'" The friend who had invited her to the party, she told Vogue, reacted by asking, "Maybe you just had a bad hookup?" And so, according to Pino, she suffered in silence for months while depression and anxiety took their toll on her coursework and university staffers treated her as a slacker.

This harrowing tale has many elements that are uncannily similar to Jackie's story in Rolling Stone: a Prince Charming who abruptly morphs into a monster; a brutal rape during a party; a victim who flees the house dazed and bleeding but never goes to the police or to the hospital; insensitive, victim-blaming friends and indifferent authority figures who shrug off the assault.

None of that, of course, proves that Pino is another Jackie. But while Pino's story does not have a smoking gun like Jackie's catfishing scheme to impersonate the nonexistent rapist "Haven Monahan," it still has plenty of red flags. For instance:

* Even assuming that one can occupy the bathroom during a crowded party for an extended period of time without attracting attention, did no one notice the blood on the tiles after the rape or the blood on Pino when she returned to the party? (In her Huffington Post piece, she says she left bloody tracks on the path when running back to the dorm.)

* Pino claims she bled so profusely that her light-blue bedsheets turned "burgundy" and blood dripped from the bed onto the wooden floor. Such heavy bleeding would have left her extremely weak, especially since she also claims she sustained a concussion. How plausible is it that no one at the dorm or the school would have noticed her condition, or that she recovered without medical help?

* How plausible is it that students at a liberal university in 2012 would tell a woman who was dragged into a bathroom, viciously battered, and raped that it was her fault, or dismiss this as "a bad hookup"?

* In the 2013 Huffington Post essay, Pino says that when she told an academic advisor she wanted to drop a course due to "difficult personal trauma," the advisor called her lazy and suggested she couldn't cut it at UNC. Yet in an interview two years later, she attributes these comments to a professor who she implies had been informed of her rape ("I explained…what was happening and how it was affecting my grades").

* During a question-and-answer session after a screening of The Hunting Ground in Los Angeles in March 2015, Pino introduced a dramatic new detail into her narrative: While making the point that women cannot prevent rape by taking precautions and citing her own example as a woman who was raped even though she "did everything right," she claimed that she "had a taser" (and was presumably carrying it on the night of the attack).

* In her Huffington Post piece, Pino says she didn't go to the police because she had no name and no witnesses. (In fact, her description of the assailant—dark-haired, blue-eyed, wearing black denim pants and a black shirt—should have made it easy to find him). Elsewhere, however, she has offered a very different reason: that she did not immediately recognize what happened as a sexual assault. Thus, a 2017 account of Pino's and Clark's appearance at Penn State in the student newspaper, The Daily Collegian, quotes Pino as saying, "I didn't know what to do….That's because my assault didn't look like what I thought sexual assault looked like it was (sic) in Law and Order SVU or what it was in movies….I didn't consider myself a victim, much less a survivor." This assertion not only contradicts Pino's earlier claims but is quite far-fetched, since what she describes—a violent attack by a stranger that leaves the victim badly injured—closely resembles the classic stereotype of "real rape." Pino seems to be channeling a standard trope of campus rape narratives: The victim who doesn't realize she has been raped. But that trope generally applies to far more ambiguous situations involving minimal physical coercion.

* Pino's claim that she initially did not recognize her experience as sexual assault is especially odd considering that—as the Collegian article notes—she was active in a bystander intervention program that focused on prevention of sexual assault and partner violence. (Most media accounts omit this detail.) According to Pino's LinkedIn résumé, from August 2011 onward she was a "peer educator" for One Act Carolina & Helping to Advocate for Violence Ending Now (HAVEN). Her involvement in this program also makes it all the more difficult to believe that she could find no one to talk to, or that no one encouraged her to seek help.

There is another startling part of Pino's story that has been almost completely overlooked. In the 2013 Huffington Post piece, Pino asserts that the rape in March 2012 was the second assault she suffered on campus. The only other reference I could find to this claim (unmentioned in The Hunting Ground) was in an obscure October 2014 blog post about a talk she gave at a conference, which says that "Pino was sexually assaulted twice" while at UNC.

The first incident, according to Pino, happened "a few weeks" into her first year on campus:

I found myself in a fraternity brother's room, pinned to a door, and given a drink that didn't taste right. Within minutes, my eyes shut, and the morning after, I woke up on my dorm floor, scratched and bruised, and with a note from a stranger that said "We found you by the road."

Pino writes that the experience left her "terrified" and so shaken that she had trouble passing her classes, but she eventually managed to move on. Later in the post, she notes that her memories of this assault "resurfaced" after she went public as a rape survivor and began to hear other students' stories. It's unclear whether she is claiming that she repressed the memory of her first assault or simply pushed it out of her mind.

If Pino's account of her rape and its aftermath has some improbable details, the first assault is even less plausible. Why did the mysterious strangers decide to take her home instead of calling the police? How did they get inside her residence hall, which requires an electronic key fob called a flex pass? Even if they had found Pino's flex pass and room key on her, how would they know where to take her? (Rick Bradley, the associate director of housing at UNC-Chapel Hill who has worked at the university since 2002, told me in an email last year that "none of our keys or flex passes show the building name or room number.") An alternative scenario is that Pino was brought to her room by her assailant and that he left the note as a diversion. But a sexual predator who tries to cover up his crime by dragging an unconscious woman around a university campus—and remains undetected—is even more improbable than good Samaritans who find an unconscious woman by the side of the road and somehow manage to drop her off inside her dorm room.

Additional questions about Pino's credibility are raised by her claims about being targeted for harassment in retaliation for the Title IX complaint. Her account of an incident that she has described as particularly threatening has major discrepancies with coverage in the local media.

An April 2013 Huffington Post story for which Pino was a principal source criticized UNC's inadequate response to "vandalism directed at [a] victim"; it said that Pino's door was defaced with offensive graffiti that and "a fake bloody knife was left at the scene." The 2014 Vogue feature makes this episode sound like even more like a direct threat: "Somebody broke into Pino's dorm on campus, leaving behind a fake bloody knife just outside her room."

But the same incident of dorm vandalism was reported quite differently in the UNC student newspaper, The Daily Tar Heel. Someone who probably got inside the dorm by "tailgating" a student with a flex pass spray-painted graffiti on the building's first floor. The door of Pino's room was indeed spray-painted, but so were several hallway mirrors and other surfaces. Pino, who was the dorm's resident adviser, insisted that the vandalism was directed at her personally because of her anti-rape activism; at least one other student agreed. However, reports by the Tar Heel and the local news station WRAL say that graffiti vandals had also struck at other campus locations in the preceding weeks.

As for the knife: Yes, there was a (small) knife on the scene. But it was found on the stove in the dorm's communal kitchen, not by Pino's door—and there was no fake blood on it. A photo used in a report on WRAL shows a streak of red or hot pink spray paint on the stovetop that also runs across the blade of the small knife. (It's unclear whether the knife had already been there or was placed there by the intruder.)

This vandalism may or may not have been connected to Pino's activism, but it seems fair to say that her account portraying it as a personal, terrifying message of intimidation was considerably embellished.

* * *

Two days after my Heat Street article appeared, I received an unexpected email from a name I immediately recognized as someone who works closely with Title IX activists advocating for campus sexual assault survivors. This woman, who asked to remain anonymous—I'll call her Danielle—wrote that while she disagreed with me on some issues related to campus rape, she wanted to thank me for the article on Pino: "There have been some of us who have been frustrated for years by her web of lies." After an email exchange, Danielle volunteered to speak to me on the record, albeit anonymously (her current position precludes her from going public) if I ever revisited the subject. Shortly after the DOE decision on the UNC case, she answered a few questions by email.

Danielle, who has interacted personally with Pino on a number of occasions, told me that she began to suspect her of being untruthful shortly after the Title IX complaint was filed. "I noticed that her 'story' became more and more graphic each time she told it to the press," Danielle wrote. "She also loved being 'in the limelight' so much more than other survivors. And then other students began to tell me discrepancies in her story, such as the fact that the date she says it happened was when the dorms were closed for a break, so she could not have returned to her dorm room. Several students shared that her story was a 'mash-up' of three other students' stories."

While there was no single "gotcha" moment, and while Danielle knows that 100 percent certainty is impossible, over time she came to believe that Pino's story is most likely fake—something she found particularly troubling given Pino's role as one of the most visible spokeswomen for the movement against campus sexual assault. (It should be noted that, for various reasons, Danielle herself is not in contention for such a role, so her criticism of Pino cannot be dismissed as stemming from rivalry or resentment.)

Danielle believes there is a "conspiracy of silence" that shields Pino's credibility problems. "Many people in the movement are aware," she wrote, "as well as some in the press whom I've spoken with." She says that "there are powerful pressures to keep silent about potential hoaxers, and this hurts the movement in the long run."

* * *

Ultimately, no one knows what, if anything, actually happened to Pino in March 2012. If she was in fact raped at a party near the UNC campus, surely the real lesson of her story is that rape should be reported—not only for the victim's sake, but for the safety of other women who could be at risk from a violent sexual predator. Yet the only action Pino took was to drop an anonymous report in a box, a largely useless option created at a number of schools at activists' behest. (While there may have been problems with the handling of Title IX sexual assault complaints at UNC, it is hard to see how the school let down Pino since she never brought such a complaint.)

The Pino story is also a textbook example of shoddy journalism. Even after the collapse of the Rolling Stone story, the media are still failing at the most basic fact-checking when covering claims of sexual assault—even when those claims clearly call for critical scrutiny. Instead, the operating principle seems to be the title of Pino's co-authored book on sexual assault survivors: We Believe You.

One could argue that there is no harm in allowing a lie to go unchallenged in a case like this, while exposing it would make people less disposed to believe real victims. But no good cause can be advanced by a culture of dishonesty. "The ends don't justify the means," Danielle told me in our email conversation. "Ethics and truthfulness are important in all movements."

NEXT: Google Shuts Down Political Ads in Two States Due to Difficult Reporting Guidelines

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. Is she demanding alcohol be banned from campus?

    Is she demanding single sex dorms and strict controls on the comings-and-goings of the students?

    If not, then she is not serious about wanting to end “date rape” as it is defined at college.

    I think it’d be a stupid idea and violating the rights of people…but she feels it is serious.

    And I don’t buy her story as is anyway.

    1. I quit working at shoprite and now I make $30h ? $72h?how? I’m working online! My work didn’t exactly make me happy so I decided to take a chance on something new? after 4 years it was so hard to quit my day job but now I couldn’t be happier.Check it out here? >> https://howtoearn.club

    2. Is she demanding alcohol be banned from campus?

      Is she demanding single sex dorms and strict controls on the comings-and-goings of the students?

      How would that prevent a rape at an off-campus party?

      Not that her story seems very credible, but your points seem to be bullshit as well.

      1. Is there a curfew?

        There certainly needs to be to stop this.

        Hey…I am not the one claiming an epidemic.

        1. Those parties need chaperones too.

      2. Short of taking such measures, what is the University supposed to do about this? How are they supposed to stop this from happening? And if they can’t, how are they responsible for it?

        1. Mandatory chastity belts, cryptologically secured by a university managed key.
          Think of the jobs!

          1. Women are just too fragile to go to college I guess.

          2. Oddly enough, that’s also a common sexual fantasy.

          3. Mandatory gps microchips. No interactions with anyone who is not chipped.

          4. That would make at least as much sense as Pino’s whopper of a rape tale.

            Cathy Young is far too gentle to state the plain truth: Pino is a liar. She belong’s in the group of roughly 50% of all rape complainants who are ALSO liars.

            No doubt rape happens. But a large percentage of women making such complaints are covering things as varied as failure to prepare for a test, oversleeping, lack of effort or ability in a college course or curriculum (there seem to be hints of that with Pino), appeals for attention (Pino again)… even as an excuse used by a military trainee for returning late to her post from an evening’s liberty. Women lie about rape for revenge, for drama, to inspire jealousy. It shouldn’t be surprising given that there’s rarely any legal repercussion, and a common fantasy is rape by “Sir Lancelot”.

            1. A common thread is also developing a career. Pino has essentially dropped out of school because it was hard and giving seminars about Title IX is easy.

            2. It’s also a common thread in these false allegations that the alleged victim wanted a more serious relationship, but was spurned by the alleged attacker.

          5. Solution: Magic force fields!

        2. I cannot get an answer from the “campus rape is an epidemic” crowd about what, precisely, do they want done?

          They seem to think that women will be able to get blacked-out drunk with strangers and never have any negative issues. And, while it’d be nice, it is not realistic. Their wants are not helped by reality.

          Want to insure women cannot be raped on campus? Either ban women entirely or bring back the rules of the 1950’s and enforce them far more harshly.

          That a rape culture could even exist on campuses that are all majority female as is defies any logic.

          1. They seem to think that women will be able to get blacked-out drunk with strangers and never have any negative issues.

            “1 in 5 women will be robbed of all their cash, phone, and other valuables while blacked out drunk at college.”

            1. That seems like a far more likely probability than the “rape” stat. It’s a lot faster to empty someone’s pockets than to strip their pants off and fuck them.

              1. Let’s start the races.

                1. lol

          2. Seems to me certain activists want a platform to rant and rave, and the federal government gave them a sandbox to play in. Not to make light of anyones problems or bad things that do take place, but the more I know about title IX, the more I ask myself “wtf?”. It seems to be constructed as a little trap door for left wing feminists to pop out of no matter what any schools policy is [good or bad]. Do we really have to compartmentalize upholding the law or maintaining a code of ethics in such a segregated fashion? It’s broken in a similar fashion to the old jim crow laws, which American society disposed of because ‘separate but equal’ was crap from the word go and everybody knew it. Title IX doesn’t quite arrive at unequal application of the law, but it manages to provide a similar stumbling block attitudinally. It’s one thing we should probably scrap and start over with a fresh sheet of paper.

      3. I really don’t like the fact that we’ve come to the point where every story about rape on colleges needs to be micro-analyzed because of the kangaroo system that colleges have constructed. Seems like there was more privacy for rape victims when the police handled these matters. Some accusations are true and yet people have become so jaded that the first inclination is to disbelieve the accusation, because of the insanely illiberal system that colleges have established to adjudicate these questions.

        1. While I get your overall point, the only cases that I have seen “micro-analyzed” are from those individuals that are going “all in” on activism and public face time. This is what happens when you go into the limelight.

          1. I suppose that’s true

        2. People have become jaded because the majority of high profile cases have been false. Fabricated from whole cloth. The first inclination is not to disbelieve. The first inclination is to lynch the man responsible. But if your going to do that, you need to be sure the accuser is not psycho.

        3. Keep in mind the majority of the Bill of Rights is exclusively with the rights of the accused.

          If you are going to bring the power of the state to bear, you had better have a compelling case. Micro-analyzing should be the least of your concerns.

          And beyond a formal investigation, why should anyone put anymore stock into a rape allegation than a claim of seeing bigfoot? It is appalling enough how sex crimes are treated differently than any other. What compels that they should have a different standard?

          1. Progressive propaganda………and feelz?

          2. Chivalry?

        4. Seems like there was more privacy for rape victims when the police handled these matters.

          Overwhelmingly complainants in stories we can read about aren’t looking for privacy, they are the ones publicizing their own stories.

          1. ^This

            In an era when victims have elevated status, privacy is the last thing some people want. And Pino has taken this to the next level, gaining elite victim status from a fabricated story.

            1. See: “Mattress Girl.”

  2. …so glad Past Me went during the Bush years.

  3. Also, any woman who actually is raped and doesn’t go to the police is worthy of no respect. She’s sentencing other women to similar treatment.

    See the women who STILL protect Hollywood bigwigs while professing how brave they are.

    1. “Also, any woman who actually is raped and doesn’t go to the police is worthy of no respect. She’s sentencing other women to similar treatment.”

      I’m sure if you were raped in the ass, you would go to the police immediately and make as much of a big, public case as you could about your ass getting raped. Or else you deserve no respect.

      On the other hand, I strongly disagree with throwing people in jail based on one-sided accusations, since that gives an enormous amount of power to people that they just shouldn’t be trusted with.

      However, I can, somehow, understand rape victims who pretend it didn’t happen. At least for a long, long time.

      1. I’m sure if you were raped in the ass, you would go to the police immediately and make as much of a big, public case as you could about your ass getting raped. Or else you deserve no respect.

        Of course not. I’d wait years then demand a college pay me money. That would fix the problem. I’d then bemoan the rape culture and all.

        I am sorry that stating “you know, there are resources to go to when you’ve been a victim of a crime” is such a foreign concept.

        However, I can, somehow, understand rape victims who pretend it didn’t happen. At least for a long, long time.

        I can understand it also.

        They lied.

        1. You should show a little more compassion in this context. That’s all I’m going to say.

        2. You are holding people to an unreasonable standard, I think.

          Rape can be very hard to prove in court, and people know it. That’s how it should be given how many cases come down to one person’s word against another’s. But it does make it really shitty for a legitimate victim in those circumstances. I know more than one person who was raped (and I’m quite sure they aren’t making it up) who didn’t go to the police because they made the judgement that doing so would cause them more additional trauma than not doing so. I’m not in a position to tell them they are wrong.

          1. Murder is no easier to prove than rape. And the investigation tends to be less friendly.

            If your loved one got murdered, would you not pursue justice? Why is rape the crime too hard to prosecute?

            1. Murder is no easier to prove than rape.

              It’s quite a bit easier, actually.

              1. Actual rape has a wealth of evidence. Hair. Blood. Saliva.

                1. All of that evidence can also exist in consensual sexual encounters. And not all actual rape involves actual direct violence. Threats are often sufficient.

                  The big reason why rape is harder than murder to prove is that it is usually obvious that a death was murder (or homicide anyway). Unless there are witnesses, you have to not only prove that a particular person committed rape, but also that a rape occurred at all. DNA, saliva, hair, blood, none of those actually definitively demonstrate that rape occurred rather than consensual sex.

                2. No, it’s rape if there isn’t consent. And if someone is too drunk, she (and sometimes he) cannot give consent.

              2. Wait… are you saying that murder victims don’t usually consent to being murdered? Huh?

                You must be some kind of psychic! Hey, fellas! Look over here! We got us a psychic! He can tell whether or not that guy wanted to get shot in the head and robbed of his car. Ooooh… Lookie here! Psychic-boy knows everything!

            2. There is quite a bit of evidence in a murder typically. Also, consensual sex is a thing; consensual death…not so much.

            3. “Murder is no easier to prove than rape.”

              Haha, I’m calling total bullshit on this one.

              1. Yeah, I don’t think there’s ever been a false claim of murder from a survivor. That would make it a little easier to prove.

            4. It’s a million times easier! How many people go to a bar looking for someone to kill them but then when they meet something that they don’t want to kill them, that person goes ahead and kills them anyway. Are they even bars for people who want to find people to kill them?

              In your life, how many people have ask you for your consent to being killed?

            5. Well, in the case of murder, there is a corpse. In the case of rape, there is a person who has had sex, which there also is if people have had consensual sex.

      2. These women are actively making their stories public. On their own accords. Why no police?

      3. “I’m sure if you were raped in the ass, you would go to the police immediately and make as much of a big, public case as you could about your ass getting raped. Or else you deserve no respect.”

        I would go straight to my Glock .40 cal and use it to decide the case.

    2. That’s not entirely fair. Many people are victims of crimes and they do not go to the police for many varied reason. And I can imagine that such a horrible and personally violent crime such as rape would be difficult to report to police.

      I understand your logic, but I think it’s cruel. Nonetheless, I agree that in order to punish someone for a rape the legal system must be involved.

      1. I think the wider issue is two-fold:

        1. You don’t have to go to the police and, in fact, you *should* go to an ER. Lying to them about what happened only doesn’t get anyone prosecuted or not prosecuted one way or the other but it does help guarantee that you won’t get the treatment you need had you been raped. The assumption that every police station, health clinic, *and* hospital is full of assholes waiting to out you as a rape victim, says a lot about your personality.

        2. If the story is to be believed, much like with the mass shooting incidents, these women are (presumably) sensationalizing the exceedingly heinous acts of men still at large. Of course, silencing them isn’t an option, but as other indicate elsewhere, unless slamming women into the bathroom sink is part of the attacker’s MO, the inclusion of such details (outside a courtroom) is almost laudatory and should/could certainly be seen as undermining these women’s cause.

        1. I think that there is a lot of rightful anger over the fact that false rape accusations are rarely, if ever, prosecuted. And the anger over this situation has calloused some people on this issue. Which is not to say that your points are wrong.

      2. In this case the answer is very simple, and is the key to all of these fake claims: Police require evidence or witnesses. Title IX requires neither.

        1. Comment winner for this article.

  4. If she was the victim of a violent attack off campus, why didn’t the police do anything about it? Who cares if the people who did this get kicked out of school. If they really did this, they should go to prison. The fact that this woman is demanding justice from the university and not the state of North Carolina is pretty strong evidence that she is lying or nuts. What woman who is violently raped wants the man or men who did it to them kicked out of school but doesn’t bother with wanting them to go to prison? That makes no sense.

    1. That streak for a few years where women claimed these horribly violent attacks in bathrooms at parties with a startling lack of evidence to bolster their claims got old quick. It’s like she read the claims of Crystal Mangum and decided to make them more plausible.

      I wonder: How does somebody cross the campus bleeding horribly and nobody seems to notice?

      1. The entire idea of a woman being raped and demanding justice from a university rather than the state is absurd. If you are raped and the guy who did it, gets away with it, you want the state to put him in prison. Your beef is going to be with the state. If it is not, then something is seriously wrong. The woman is either lying or she somehow was raped but thinks having the guy kicked out of college is an appropriate punishment.

        1. Assuming the unknown assailant was even a student at the college.

          1. Yeah, that is the other issue. What was the university supposed to do when she didn’t even know for sure another student did it. I guess they were supposed to expel some poor bastard regardless of his guilt as some kind of ritual sacrifice to make this woman feel better. That seems to be what she actually wanted.

            1. What she wanted, and got, was massive publicity and a national platform.
              Mission accomplished.

          2. The word is ‘unsub’–at least it is on Criminal Minds, one of the shows, like Law and Order SVU that is HUGE with college girls.

            1. You know who else was huge with college girls….

              1. Of course– Hitler. It’s why they say ‘heil!’

      2. Granted, it’s been a while since I’ve been to a college party, but when I did, at almost all times there were a number of people waiting by the door(s) of the bathroom(s) to use them. Beer and bathrooms tend to go together, after all.

    2. Especially since it was off campus. It’s ridiculous that colleges are taking primary roles in investigating any serious crimes, but if it happened somewhere not under the school’s control, it’s even more absurd. And if you go to the police in the condition she claimed to be in, I’m pretty sure they are going to take you seriously.

      1. You would think so. And if she wasn’t, she has one hell of a beef with the police there. Yet, she instead goes after the University? That makes no sense.

        If the police ignored her, what good does it do to go after the University? Moreover, doesn’t she care about the other women who are not students whose rapes the police are presumably also ignoring?

        The other mystery is how did this woman become such a big deal without anyone asking her these questions?

        1. Because asking questions like that is blaming the victim and part of the problem of rape culture, John.
          POE’S LAW NOTICE: ABOVE IS SARCASM.

          1. Sadly, it is not really sarcasm. It is what they actually believe. Anyone who asked this woman even the most basic and obvious question about her story would have totally been branded a rape apologist. These people are beyond satire.

        2. She goes after the University because her goal is to bulk up middle management in the administration. This is for offices like ‘Diversity’ and ‘Compliance’ and ‘Inclusion’ and such. One of their jobs is to determine when students are ‘improperly disrupting’ scheduled, public events. So you might be on the wrong side here.

        3. “The other mystery is how did this woman become such a big deal without anyone asking her these questions?”

          That was a rhetorical question, right?

      2. And if you go to the police in the condition she claimed to be in, I’m pretty sure they are going to take you seriously.

        This seems like a fairly reasonable point. Let’s assume for a moment that she wasn’t raped, and didn’t even have any intentions of claiming so; If you show up at a police station with a bleeding head wound and possible concussion, and say “This dude at a party smashed my head into a sink”, I suspect they’ll investigate even just the simple battery for you.

        1. Even that story doesn’t sound like “simple battery”. If the story was “pushed me and I fell into a sink and got injured” you might escape with a simple battery charge…. but pulling someone into a bathroom and smashing their head on the sink, drawing blood – lots – and causing a concussion? Nah, for that you might be lucky to skate by without an attempted murder charge.

          An aggressive prosecutor would also pile on kidnapping or false imprisonment type charges for keeping you in the bathroom against your will, mayhem or other similar charge for “grievous bodily injury”… there’s a long list of felonies that a creative prosecutor could pile up, even without a rape charge mixed in there.

          1. Fair enough. I probably used the wrong term. My point was mostly just that even if one fears the police won’t believe that you’ve been raped, a bloody head wound will probably pretty quickly convince them that you’ve been assaulted.

            1. Seriously.

              This is sort of the problem with reporting and activists that Cathy Young seems to be highlighting.

              Normally a reporter would bring “healthy skepticism” to any story. So one would expect that the glaring holes in some of these stories would have been examined earlier. The fact that nobody expressed any doubt or looked in to the possibility that the story was at least a little embellished is telling.

              But then again, media criticism is part of the patriarchy….

  5. So she was raped at an off campus party by someone she did not recognize. So where is the connection to the University? Except for her own enrollment in the university I don’t see how it is the university fault. Especially when she did not ever report the attack to the university or police.

    1. I think it’s the ridiculous notion that universities have some kind of in loco parentis role/obligation. If 18 year olds are supposed to be adults, then they should be treated as such, even if enrolled in a residential university program. The college should have no more legal responsibility for what happens in student housing or at student organized events than any landlord. If they want students to agree to other conditions, that’s fine.

      1. “in loco parentis role/obligation”

        Which everyone thought had ended after the 1960’s until activists were able to resurrect the concept for their new pet issue

  6. Thank you for this expose. Where are the kids getting these stories from? 13 Reasons Why was published in 2007 and contains many of these details. Then there are the orientation video programs that basically teach the kids how to reinvent sexual experiences as rape. The goal is to get everyone into ‘treatment’ (drugs, alcohol, sex, aggression, etc) and ultimately institutionalize everyone as either victim or perpetrator.

  7. Reading the text of Title IX, it is far from obvious that it should apply in any way to sexual assaults. The biggest problem here seems to be that it has been interpreted that way. I suppose that women who are raped are subjected to discrimination (assuming that the rapists have a preference for raping women). But it’s a bit of a stretch to claim that that is part of a program or activity receiving federal funds, or that that is the kind of discrimination they have in mind. One could also claim that having separate bathrooms for men and women is discrimination, because it is, but it’s certainly not something title IX meant to ban.

    Here, I believe, is the text of Title IX:

    No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.

    Are off campus parties really an education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance?

    1. It is not obvious to anyone else either. It sure as hell wasn’t what the people who drafted the law intended. Somehow a law that said you had to treat men and women students equally was turned into a mandate for universities to launch witch hunts against their male students every time a female student claimed she was raped. Insane is putting it mildly.

      1. Yes, exactly. Totally f’ing insane. A law that is supposed to prevent discrimination based on gender is now used to not only discriminate but persecute based on gender. Totally f’ing insane. If you are a male, you are presumed guilty until proven innocent beyond a reasonable doubt.

        1. And even if proven innocent beyond a reasonable doubt, you are still guilty and expelled.
          How about we deny any federal funding of any kind; research grants, student loan guarantees whatever, to every institution that has trampling due process as part of its official administration actions?

    2. You forgot “the memo”.
      All laws are subject to complete change in scope and direction by a memo. They teach that in law school, the first year.

      1. Not having been to law school, I take the absurd position that laws mean what they say.

        1. Yeah, I take the same position on the Constitution, and boy howdy, does it get me some funny looks.

        2. Right you are; that position is absurd.

    3. One could also claim that having separate bathrooms for men and women is discrimination, because it is, but it’s certainly not something title IX meant to ban.

      Just you wait.

    4. That is not even close to the complete text of Title IX. In fact, Title IX is specific that schools may maintain separate facilities such as bathrooms, locker rooms, dorms and dorm rooms, and specific athletic teams (e.g. womens’ basketball) based on sex.

  8. http://twitchy.com/samj-3930/2…..tchywidget

    Shatner remains awsome.

  9. “One could argue that there is no harm in allowing a lie to go unchallenged in a case like this, while exposing it would make people less disposed to believe real victims”

    The harm is to every falsely accused and punished student. There is further harm in allowing / encouraging this abuse of due process; no one now gives a damn what fantasies get ‘reported’ to the university. The immediate assumption is the bitch is lying, and the guy is getting lynched.
    The real victims file police reports.

  10. my eyes were blinded by the tiny red dots on my contact lenses

    Bull. Fucking. Shit.

    This is, without a doubt, some sensationalist bullshit. I say this as someone who’s had blood, sweat, aftershave, gasoline, alcohol, and a number of solvents in his contacts both by accident and as the result of violence. When the shit shouldn’t be there, is actually blinding, and is in/under your lenses the lenses are your A-1 priority. You don’t see anything else until you get the lenses and the contaminant out. When it’s “OK”, if the shit is there (tears, sweat, blood), you aren’t blinded by it unless there’s a fountain of blood running down your head.

    Either way, the fact that you’ve been blinded by head trauma but can see both the blood in your contacts and the eyes of your attacker as his eyes chase buttons around the room is grade A bullshit. You may still have been raped, but this part of the story is nothing short of outright fabrication.

    1. Agreed. I have a certain prejudice against ultra-flowery prose in criminal allegations — it leads one to wonder just how much of what’s being claimed occurred in any objective sense, and how much of it was confined to the person’s own head. Their trauma may be real, but was it essentially self-inflicted?

      Also gives me flashbacks to Ted Kennedy’s account of that night at Chappaquiddick…. Though I don’t have any specific reason to believe that Pino’s account was actually written as a collaboration between a defense attorney and a campaign staffer.

      1. Yep. I was waiting for her to describe the perp as a young Fabio.

    2. Her statement sounds like something from a cheap romance novel gone awry.

      1. Or something written for rape-fantasy erotic. Honestly, the words she was using made me think that this girl might have a fetish for it.

        1. The red dots on exposed eyeballs certainly does have a distinct horror fiction ring to it. Like she’s too into Creepypasta.

    3. Indeed. I’m a contact lens wearer and I can say definitively that it would be impossible to see ANYTHING, let alone dots of any kind, on a contact lens that one is wearing at the time. That’s not how the eye functions or how contact lenses function.

      Furthermore, blood or any other liquid would be blinked away.

      So when it comes to the question of Pino’s truthfulness, res ipsa loquitur.

  11. More Cathy is better, especially if it means less Robby.

    1. Yes. Cathy Young, unlike Robby, is an actual reporter who knows something and has a maturity level above that of an earnest high school student trying to impress his leftist English teacher.

      1. Cathy Young is also a neocon, unlike Robby. There are good and bad aspects of both writers.

        1. How is Cathy Young a “neocon”, whatever that means?

        2. And other than his professional use of hair gell, what good aspects are there to Robby’s writing?

          1. I think he’s been getting a lot better. He’s young, he can still learn.

            1. You are such a kind man Zeb.

            2. “I think he’s been getting a lot better. He’s young, he can still learn.”

              I called him out for making two anti-free speech statements in a pro-free speech post. What he means by “free speech” isn’t what anyone here means by free speech.

              You can lead a horse to water but you can’t make him a duck.

              1. “[Last week], I called him out for making two anti-free speech statements in a pro-free speech post. ”

                Fixed!

            3. Zeb, when you say that, why do I picture Robby with you in the background wearing a gimp suit?

          2. Robby is pretty good on a lot of speech questions. I think people get hung-up on his phrasing, which I agree can sometimes be annoying. Cathy Young is a little more bold in taking the libertarian position on these questions regarding colleges, but she is also the one who wrote a front page article arguing for tariffs against Russia after the election for lolz.

            Young’s foreign policy is far more hawkish than mine, but probably sits right with you.

            1. He is pretty good in the sense that he at least claims to support free speech. There is that. He is the kind of the false equivalence. Basically, Robby sees two things, when the right is wrong and when the left is wrong but the right just as bad. Robby has never seen a case where the left was wrong without the right also being wrong. He is so blatant about it and so tortured in his logic to somehow make the right always as bad as the left, that it is comical.

            2. It isn’t phrasing. You’re just projecting.

              I’ve seen him differentiate between provocative speech and free speech as if they were two different things.

              ENB thinks she here to educate us libertarians about how prostitutes are actually sex workers. Robby thinks he’s here to explain to libertarians that provocative speech isn’t really free speech.

              1. prostitutes are actually sex workers

                Well, they are.

                1. So what?

                  1. Why did you bring it up?

            3. Libertarianism isn’t about where you land. It’s about how you get there.

              Cathy Young may be wrong about this or that aspect of foreign policy, but I’ve never questioned her libertarian creds based on how she gets there.

              Robby has no way to get to any position. He like this policy or that policy for the same reason other people like strawberry rather than chocolate chip.

              1. To be sure, strawberry is preferred by many. But chocolate chip has been doing the “sweet thing” for decades…..

            4. Tariffs aren’t exactly ‘hawkish’. It’s not like a bombing run.

  12. Don’t worry even if it is not the truth the Dan Rather “Fake but True” defense will come up. Remember Nifong and the taxpayers are the only people to ever see consequences for railroading the Duke Lacrosse players. The 80+ professors who took out a full page add attacking the players still had their jobs. The media and activists were never punished for the faulty reports and rhetoric. Heck even the Rolling Stone case has seen very little action.

    1. And how/why should one be punished for “faulty rhetoric”? Being an ideological lemming isn’t a crime.

      1. “Being an ideological lemming isn’t a crime.”

        I like that turn of phrase.

        And no, it isn’t criminal. But if you are casting about looking for a reporter or someone to write an opinion piece or be an expert on your talking head show, being an ideological lemming should be a disqualifying characteristic, not a definitive qualification.

    2. Those professors should have been sued into financial oblivion. Or at least had their houses egged.

  13. Her story sounds very sketchy, such that even a neophyte lawyer would likely get ti thrown out at arraignment i[f there was a suspect to face the charges]. [SARC on] But no matter; the bigger picture here is, fake or not, she stands for victims of sexual abuse, and to cast doubt upon her in any way makes you a rape apologist and part of the culture of rape, in a broader sense. [SARC off]

  14. Work of fiction.

  15. “My head was slammed hard against shiny white tile?.The white shone with his bright eyes, and the drops of my blood that dripped to a puddle. He held my wrist against the walls as his hands slipped with scarlet sweat, and his eyes followed my buttons as he ripped them off my jeans. My mouth couldn’t say “no,” my eyes were blinded by the tiny red dots on my contact lenses. His fingers slipped through my hair, and I felt his fingernails digging into my head, pulling me in closer to his unzipped black Levis.”

    If somebody slams your head to the floor, do you really notice that its tile is “shiny white”? That the white tiles “shone with his bright eyes”? What sort of cut had she received from which blood did not ooze but dripped, and how high from the ground was the cut that she could see drops drip to form a puddle? How could that would bleed so profusely as to drench his hands and make them slippery? “Scarlet sweat”? Seriously? If blood is falling into her eyes, how can she see that there are “tiny red dots” on her contact lenses? If her eyes are blinded, how can she see that he’s following the buttons? In order for him to pull her head towards his crotch, he must be on his knees?is he no longer holding her one wrist against the wall? This isn’t dramatic recollection?it’s Harlequin trash.

    1. Harlequin trash

      Excellent summation, though there are people who naturally write, and even think that way. Certainly makes me wonder about the objective reality of her claims, though.

    2. Evidently she did not drop creative writing; probably got an A.

  16. normal journalistic skepticism

    HA HA HA and doubel HAHA

  17. According to Pino’s LinkedIn r?sum?, from August 2011 onward she was a “peer educator” for One Act Carolina & Helping to Advocate for Violence Ending Now (HAVEN).

    Andrea Pino – HAVEN
    Jackie Coakley – Haven Monahan

    COINCIDENCE?????

    1. You just raped my mind.

      1. Will you be reporting this to the police, or the university administration? I’d like to know if I have a fighting chance.

  18. The amusing/damning part of this story is that the girl first made these rape claims when she needed an excuse for dropping all of her classes one semester (she says “a class” in one of the stories, and all of them in another).

    How about a Title IX lawsuit alleging that colleges are unfairly discriminating against men by letting women get away with this crap?

    1. Apparently she used or tried to use this as an excuse for dropping twelve classes.

      http://www.espn.com/espnw/athl…..ing-ground

      1. Twelve classes? A normal class load is 4 or 5 classes per semester, depending on credit hours per class. She claims she dropped most of her classes in three semesters.

    2. Actually, the men use the real courts, and win a lot of money.
      However, the women who falsely accuse pay no price beyond the internet holding the truth forever.

  19. They’re taking a phenomenon that I think is more common in cases of domestic abuse – cases where there is a long and difficult relationship between the victim and the victimizer – such that the victim has convinced themselves that the person actually loves them, has forgiven them, or has been victim to continuous manipulation such that they have been led to see their abuse as something different from what it is – and then applying that to their stories to explain away the fact that they are talking about incidents that happened months or years ago (another convenient detail that protects them from scrutiny) and yet were never reported to anybody let alone the police. The problem is that sort of response doesn’t make any sense when we’re talking about a senselessly violent and seemingly random attack from a complete stranger. I’m sorry but you have to be mentally and emotionally stunted to be a victim of something so violent and genuinely have allusions about what happened. The minutes or possibly even hours after the trauma can lead to confusion and disorientation, sure, but days? Weeks? Months? Years? That’s nonsense. That sort of victim is the outlier, not the norm. But if we’re to believe all these stories we’re seeing, that’s the most common way women respond to rape, apparently.

  20. How plausible is it that students at a liberal university in 2012 would tell a woman who was dragged into a bathroom, viciously battered, and raped that it was her fault, or dismiss this as “a bad hookup”?

    This is the same problem which made the UVA rape impossible. Activists are so caught up in one-upping each others’ stories they can’t maintain logical consistency. Rapists known to their victims must be able to credibly assert the sex was consensual. It’s totally unbelievable police (or anyone) would conclude being punched in the face or having your head slammed into a sink was voluntary.

    1. About as plausible as a woman being drugged, dragged into a bathroom at a party and raped, and no other woman at the party noticed anything at all.

      1. doesn’t even have to be another woman. Contrary to post progtard propaganda, most men wouldn’t stand for that. Hence the complete unpopularity of rapists and pedos in prison.

  21. Blisters?

  22. The common theme is that she wasn’t doing well in school, so my guess is that she figured out enough of other people’s stories at her part-time teaching gig to put together a faux story using elements of other peole’s real stories and then rode that horse into that good night to avoid flunking out of school.

    Young adults lie like a motherfucker to get out of anything they don’t really want to do, at least in my experience. They’re not old enough to tell good lies, so they tell big one’s instead.

    Of course, I could be way off base but I have seen no evidence of ‘rape culture’ during my life so these are isolated incidents and the result of a pervasive culture that instructs women on rape game theory inadvertently under the guise of prevention and education.

    1. I could be way off base but I have seen no evidence of ‘rape culture’ during my life

      Rewatch 16 Candles. I was pretty skeptical of the whole “rape culture” thing (and I still don’t think it’s anywhere near as bad as its main proponents make it out to be) but I saw that movie again a few years ago, and, well, yeah… A very popular mainstream movie that features, as a major plot point, the main love interest of the protagonist handing his blackout drunk girlfriend off to the comic relief character and basically saying “have fun fucking her while she’s out!” A culture in which that is an acceptable message might concievably be legitimately referred to as a “rape culture”.

      1. The 80s also produced Howard the duck. We don’t live in a duck culture.

        1. Don’t tell that to Lea Thompson. She’s really committed to the lie.

      2. Re-watch? You presume too much, sir.

      3. So the main love interest

        1) did not rape her
        2) handed her off to a Beta that totally never take advantage of her.
        and
        3) mocked the Beta because let’s face it, that’s what Alphas do.

        and somehow 1+2+3=rape culture?

  23. So maybe she hasn’t actually felt the D, but in today’s leftist disreality world, someone merely needs to identify as a rape victim to actually be one.

  24. With rape being so common on campus that there is a “culture of rape” I would have thought there would be plenty of survivors around who could at least keep their story straight. I mean no offence to anyone but when you are trying to raise awareness to a serious problem it would be best to use examples which actually sound believable.

  25. Imagine going to a party off-campus and getting robbed. You don’t tell the police. You then leave a note for the university telling them you were robbed and you don’t know who did it. How would the university respond? A nice pat on the head and a “gee, that sucks.” I just can’t fathom how anyone would hold the university responsible for this in any way. People always want to compensate victims because of sympathy, so they search for someone to pay. Just another reason why the jury system is so foolish.

  26. Women should be sent home if they wear makeup or heels exceeding 1/4 inch. Females should not be allowed to speak to strangers unless given written authorization by Dwight Schrute. All bananas should be removed from the kitchen.

    Desperate times call for desperate measures.

    1. I agree, makeup exceeding 1/4″ thick should be banned.

  27. my eyes were blinded by the tiny red dots on my contact lenses.

    Um, no. When you get blood in your eyes while wearing contacts, you don’t get dots on the lenses.

    -jcr

  28. (Title IX is the statute that requires colleges to investigate sexual harassment and assault.)

  29. “(Title IX is the statute that requires colleges to investigate sexual harassment and assault.)”

    Where in the statute does it require that?

  30. “(Title IX is the statute that requires colleges to investigate sexual harassment and assault.)”

    Where in the statute does it require that?

  31. “(Title IX is the statute that requires colleges to investigate sexual harassment and assault.)”

    Where in the statute does it require that?

  32. “(Title IX is the statute that requires colleges to investigate sexual harassment and assault.)”

    Wait, where in the statute does it require that?

  33. Holy shit, sorry.

  34. She says that in her sophomore year at UNC, in March 2012, she was the victim of a terrifying, extremely violent attack at an off-campus party she attended with a friend.

    In what way is a rape at an off-campus party part of a “campus rape culture”? In what way is it the university’s responsibility to prevent such crimes?

  35. My comments about accusations of rape in Missoula, MT. Part 1.

    In considering this case, a couple of very basic facts need to be considered. First, there is no rape epidemic. The overall incidence of rape has fallen (not risen) dramatically in recent years. Second, college campuses are not exactly hotbeds of sexual assault. The overall incidence of rape on college campuses is somewhat lower than society as a whole.

    For anyone who cares about “facts”, consider all of the following from “New DOJ Data On Sexual Assaults: College Students Are Actually Less Likely To Be Victimized” […]. In case, you aren’t inclined to believe The Federalist (a conservative web site), the data is actually form Obama’s Department of Justice (www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/rsavcaf9513.pdf).

    “A new report on sexual assault released today by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) officially puts to bed the bogus statistic that one in five women on college campuses are victims of sexual assault. In fact, non-students are 25 percent more likely to be victims of sexual assault than students, according to the data. And the real number of assault victims is several orders of magnitude lower than one-in-five.”

    1. First, there is no rape epidemic.

      There is when women consider “geez, I wish I hadn’t hooked up with that creep at the party a few months ago” to be rape.

  36. My comments about accusations of rape in Missoula, MT. Part 2.

    That’s actually wrong, “several orders of magnitude” would have to be at least 100 fold. The data shows that the incidence of rape is roughly 30 fold less than “one-in-five”. Quote

    “The full study, which was published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics, a division within DOJ, found that rather than one in five female college students becoming victims of sexual assault, the actual rate is 6.1 per 1,000 students, or 0.61 percent (instead of 1-in-5, the real number is 0.03-in-5). For non-students, the rate of sexual assault is 7.6 per 1,000 people.”

    Figure 2 from the same DOJ report shows that overall incidence of rape has fallen by at least 50% since 1997.

    Why then is America is wracked with accusations (some of them clearly hoaxes) of a “college rape epidemic”? Several reasons come to mind. The first is the most obvious. Colleges may not be hotbeds of rape (they aren’t), but they are certainly hotbeds of radical feminism. Conjuring up a mythical “college rape epidemic” gives power, authority, and a (bogus) legitimacy to radical feminists who might otherwise be simply ignored.

  37. My comments about accusations of rape in Missoula, MT. Part 3.

    Perhaps the best way of understanding this is the history of McCarthyism. There certainly were communists in the U.S. government in the 1930s and 1940s (including a few highly places ones). See the Venona project for details. However, by the time McCarthy launched his crusade, the era of large-scale communist influence in government was over. His anti-communist campaign might not have been factually based, but it certainly game him and his supporters considerable power and publicity before it crashed down upon itself.

    Like it or not, today’s radical feminists are using the same tactics, the same methods, and the same distortions as Joe McCarthy more the 50 years ago. Hopefully, there fate will be every bit as miserable.

    1. There certainly were communists in the U.S. government in the 1930s and 1940s (including a few highly places ones). See the Venona project for details. However, by the time McCarthy launched his crusade, the era of large-scale communist influence in government was over.

      Aren’t you mixing up HUAC and McCarthy? McCarthy was concerned with internal security in the US government and the Venona project suggests that his charges were on target; furthermore, while it was clearly wrong for HUAC to investigate private citizens, why should anybody have a problem with a thorough investigation of the political beliefs of government employees in sensitive positions? Finally, McCarthy was mainly active in the early 50’s and he died in 1957; are you saying that by then, communists had been largely eliminated from the US government?

  38. My comments about accusations of rape in Missoula, MT. Part 4.

    While the above observations are well substantiated. There is clearly more to the story. Any reading of the history of recent rape accusations shows that they are being used for ethnic politics as well as sexual politics. Stated directly, they are being used to vilify a class (the dreaded, much feared, and generally terrifying “middle-class non-minority male”) irrespective of the facts. The UVA and Duke rape hoaxes were obviously (and in the UVA case admittedly) motivated a political agenda. By contrast, the terrible Vanderbilt case (where the defendants were found guilty on all charges and in some cases don’t deny them) has attracted almost no national interest. The even worse UVA case where the victim (Hannah Graham) was raped and murdered has attracted almost zero publicity.

    If radical feminists really cared about rape and rape victims (for reasons other than how they can be exploited to advance a political agenda), they would focus on non-college, lower-income women who actually more likely to be attacked. Of course, the attackers in those cases would also be less likely to serve the PC agenda, making such a course of action unthinkable.

  39. My comments about accusations of rape in Missoula, MT. Part 4.

    Overall, this is a poorly timed and very ill-considered case, particularly given that the core factual premises are simply wrong. There is no rape epidemic. There is no college rape epidemic. There is no credible evidence that Jack Montague did anything wrong. There is however, an epidemic of rape hoaxes of late. This observation is not based on any statistics and may not be correct. However, after the University of Virginia rape hoax, the Duke rape hoax, the fraudulent charges against Julian Assange (who is clearly a sleaze, but not a rapist), and the very questionable accusations of Emma Sulkowicz. This case probably won’t enjoy the credibility it once might of. Of course, if any told the truth, that the crime of rape is in decline and not centered on college campuses they would be crucified by the vengeful gods of Political Correctness.

  40. So once again I am confused. I should (and try to) treat women* as equals because they are as competent as men*, but women* need special consideration under the law because they are not as competent as men*.

    *Binary sex classification intentional. If you do not agree, then you figure the fuck out where you fit in the victim-oppressor categories.

    1. Best bet – stay away from women on college campus and in the workplace.
      Use a professional. You will get better treatment from the cops if you get busted than from the star chambers of campus “investigations” or HR.

      1. Best bet – stay away from women on college campus and in the workplace.

        The solution is obviously gay marriage with egg donations and surrogate moms.

  41. Didn’t finish it yet, but a quick point:

    The questions Ms. Young poses about the case illustrate well why campus feminists and admins don’t want rape reported to the police. Under Obama’s “Dear Colleague” letter, campus “courts” stack the deck heavily against the accused, virtually always male students. This way, activists can be assured of higher numbers of “rape.”

    But they are driving men away from Democrats:

    “Republicans don’t have near as big a woman problem as Democrats have a man problem.” -Wall Street Journal
    http://www.wsj.com/articles/ki…..1412900814

  42. It is obvious she is a liar, even without confirmation from “Danielle”. Psychos like this woman are a cancer to those who are genuinely trying to be constructive.

  43. “How dare you question a victim?!”

  44. Of course she is a liar. What some will do for Instagram celebrity knows no bounds.

  45. Sounds like BS to me. I think she just likes the media attention. She’s another man hater.

  46. “My head was slammed hard against shiny white tile?.The white shone with his bright eyes, and the drops of my blood that dripped to a puddle. He held my wrist against the walls as his hands slipped with scarlet sweat, and his eyes followed my buttons as he ripped them off my jeans. My mouth couldn’t say “no,” my eyes were blinded by the tiny red dots on my contact lenses. His fingers slipped through my hair, and I felt his fingernails digging into my head, pulling me in closer to his unzipped black Levis.”

    I’ve spent a decade as Client and Community Representative in a very large rape crisis service. Over a couple of decades I’ve had contact with hundreds of victims, both female and male. I have never encountered a verbal OR written description like this. Suspect Pino is a fantasist who has read a few too many bodice rippers.

  47. I am clouds from manchester, i hear how people are talking about The powerful spell caster called DR Ewan in regard of how he bring back ex lover, Winning lottery, getting pregnant and getting married to their dream lover and i also contact him to help me cast a spell in regard of my ex lover whom i love so much that left me 2yrs ago, but today my ex is back to me and we are happily married with 3kids and i am so much happy for the help i found in you DR Ewan. I and my family are very much happy and we are living large now, i am grateful and appreciate your good work . Thank you and may you live long to help people in problems. if you are going through any problem at all he will help you contact him on his email is covenantsolutiontemple@gmail.com or add him on watsapp +2349057353987 check out his webpage http://besthelptosaveyourmarriage.simplesite.com

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.