MENU

Reason.com

Free Minds & Free Markets

Sexist Chanting at Party Leads to Punishment for Students Who Weren't Even There

When you've lost Jezebel...

RugbyRugbyThe University of Mary Washington permanently cancelled its student rugby team after evidence surfaced that team members had engaged in sexist chanting at an off-campus house party. All members of the team were also required to attend sexual assault training.

But while UMW's rugby team has 46 players, only 8 of them were even in attendance at the party—meaning that not only did a public university punish a few students for engaging in inappropriate (though constitutionally-protected) speech, it also punished other students who had nothing to do with said (again, constitutionally-protected!) speech.

The microaggression unfolded last November at a house party near the Fredericksburg, Virginia, campus, according to Jezebel's Erin Gloria Ryan. Some students, likely drunk, sang a demeaning song about raping corpses and "wiggling it" inside whores—inappropriate stuff, to be sure, though not really targeted at a specific entity in a threatening way. The chant apparently has its origins in rowdy "pub" songs. It's a curious tradition, though not one intended to inspire actual malice, it seems.

But someone at the party recorded the chant; eventually, UMW's Feminists United on Campus found out about it and made sure university administrators were informed. This led to an investigation, and eventually, the end of the rugby team. The location of the party was said to be a "rugby house"—even though only two members of the team actually lived there—and so the entire team had to pay the price. The university's formal condemnation reads:

At an off-campus party at the close of the fall 2014 semester, several members of theUMW men's rugby club engaged in a chant that contained sexually explicit, derogatory, and violent language. Some students have now been exposed to those offensive and lurid lyrics due to posting by others on social media.

No student on this campus should feel unsafe, ostracized, or threatened. Understanding that the offensive chant is antithetical to UMW values, and will not be tolerated, the University pursued action against the men's rugby club. At the beginning of the current semester, sanctions were imposed on the rugby club for willful violations of UMW's code of conduct for club sports.

After an appeal by the accused, the disciplinary process concluded on March 18 with this ruling: All rugby club activities have been suspended indefinitely. Further, each member of the men's rugby club is required to participate in education and training sessions regarding sexual assault and violence. UMW's Statement of Community Values informed the process and response to this situation.

As I stated yesterday, the University will not stand for such behavior. It not only violates our community values, it is not how members of this collegial campus live, and it is not reflective of the Mary Washington we all know and love.

University policies prohibit discrimination, harassment, threats, and derogatory statements of any form. We pride ourselves on being a diverse, accepting, caring community, and we must live up to that ideal.

I urge anyone on campus who feels unsafe, ostracized or threatened to immediately contact campus police or Dr. Leah Cox, Special Assistant to thePresident for Diversity and Inclusion. She may be reached at lcox@umw.edu or 540-654-2119.

Richard V. Hurley

President

I fail to see how the chanting could be deemed discriminatory, harassing, or threatening. And the university has no right to outlaw derogatory statements, if the First Amendment means anything on campus.

To her credit, Ryan readily acknowledged this in her piece for Jezebel, expressing concern that UMW was making an unwise decision:

But in avoiding one kind of legal trouble, University of Mary Washington administrators may have gotten themselves in another. Rugby chants about sexually violating dead prostitutes likely aren't what the Founding Fathers had in mind when they wrote the Constitution, but the way the University of Mary Washington punished its rugby program for speech at an off-campus, private residence is the sort of thing that raises flags for organizations like The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education.

Certainly, nobody has a constitutional right to play for a rugby club in college and to be exempt from standards of behavior, and schools should be able to require athletes to act respectfully. A rugby team getting disbanded isn't the same thing as an SAE member getting kicked out of school for yelling the N-word. All of the school's punishments have been on the team without singling out individuals involved. But when I filled Creeley in on what details of the incident I knew—that it wasn't an official team event, that only eight members of the team were present, and that the audio couldn't establish who was and wasn't singing—he responded that he found the case "troubling."

The comparison to the University of Oklahoma's treatment of Sigma Alpha Epsilon is apt. SAE's chant, at least, was obviously and specifically offensive, and indicative of a deep and abiding undercurrent of racism—and, possibly, illegal racial discrimination. The expression of such speech, however, is clearly constitutional.

UMW students may not have a constitutional right to be on a rugby team, but it's hard to conclude that their speech was anywhere near as offensive as SAE's. It's also hard to show that the entire rugby team was complicit in the speech to the same extent as SAE.

Ryan, by the way, is no friend to Reason, but I must applaud her for writing such a balanced and nuanced article. When Jezebel takes the side of the alleged sexists (or at least gives them a fair appraisal), we must recognize that either campus hyper-offendedness has truly gone off the deep end, or the end-times are upon us.

Photo Credit: Dreamstime

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.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    ...though not really targeted at a specific entity in a threatening way.

    Tell that to the zombies.

  • Zombie Jimbo||

    I, for one, am feeling othered.

    BRAAAAIIINSS

  • mauricegirodias||

    Oh for fuck's sake, has no one here played Rugby? Obscene songs and chants have been part of the tradition for a couple of hundred years. Mary Washington is insensitive to my culture.

  • Warren's Strapon||

    Yeah. The pearl clutching around here is getting a bit excessive.

  • Drake||

    I played. Our pre-game chant would probably get us arrested now. The post-game songs would likely now carry the death penalty.

  • SFC B||

    I dig her up every now and then...

  • morganovich||

    me too.

    hell, i played at brown university and OUR songs were the sort of stuff that would get you deported today.

    but you know whose were even worse?

    the women's rugby team.

    talk about derogatory to men... (and also very funny)

    oddly, we took it as a challenge, not a traumatic event, but then, we lacked proper education about all the negative stereotypes these women were perpetuating and all the hidden trauma they were triggering, so maybe we missed it.

  • Drake||

    When our schedules merged, the joint men's / women's rugby parties became a competition of insults and denigration - and drunken dizzy-izzies.

  • SFC B||

    My team played a tourney in King of Prussia, PA and the local college's rugby team served as the host. Their women's team consisted of a few dozen of the most profane, offensive, and down right disturbing people I've ever partied with. Between willful suppression of the horrors I'd seen, and how blisteringly drunk I got, I can barely remember how the evening went. However, as a result of that party I can state I've seen someone attempt a ping-pong ball trick and I've seen someone play red rocket. KofP is also the only possible town where a bastard SFC B could possibly be from.

    It was one of the best times in my life. This university can go fuck itself.

  • Robert||

    I'd be hard pressed (heh) to recall a single rugby song or chant that did not fit that description. Maybe 1 or 2, but probably only because I don't know the meanings of certain words or phrases in them.

    Anyway, what effect does this have? All the college can do is disavow the club. The club can go on existing & playing.

  • mauricegirodias||

    Trigger warning, 170 obscene rugby songs.

    Pussies.

  • Drake||

    Yep. The S&M (think Sammy Davis), Barnacle Bill the Sailor, Bestiality's Best, I Used to Work in Chicago (the Women's team had their own version of this one),... Good times.

  • morganovich||

    drake-

    at the old department store?

    what a coincidence. i used to work there too.

    i don't work there anymore though.

    not after that lady came in for a ruler...

  • SFC B||

    A ruler from the store?

  • Furburguesa||

    A ruler she wanted, my twelve inches she got!

  • SFC B||

    I don't work there anymore!

  • Libertarian Joe||

    I, and many others, know first hand that there is no such thing as rights on college campuses, public or private

    that is, unless its a right that liberals agree with

  • TheZenomeProject||

    When public entities start to punish people that did not even directly participate in the questioned activity, they've truly reached North Korean levels of suppression. I'm almost believing that the logical progression of the college SJW crisis will somehow end in "punish the families!", in ways I've yet to fully think through, admittedly.

  • Cloudbuster||

    Like how protestors surrounded the houses of SAE students and targeted their families? Yeah. Already there.

  • mauricegirodias||

    UMW only had around 5k students, total, of whom 2/3rds were female. It's likely that this "club" of rugby players only included a few undergraduates, alongside a number of men as old as 35 or so, who liked to get drunk and pound the crap out of some other town. School probably did very little to support the team in the first place.

    That's how it was at my campus (UMBC, about 100 miles north, though this was 20 years ago, and we have 9 girls for every 11 boys.)

    Again, Rugby's a subculture in the U.S. The older guys who played it were usually local finance types--stockbrokers, mortgage officers, that kind of thing. Somebody had to pay for the beer, and they were good dudes to know if you wanted a job. We'd go up against other towns or small schools, once or twice a scrimmage against Hopkins or MD, which did have teams. Little bit above intramurals, in our case.

  • Drake||

    My small college had an all-student club team that played a fall schedule. In the spring, those who weren't playing lacrosse usually played as the B-side of a local city team.

  • mauricegirodias||

    Ahh. Lacrosse was a varsity sport for us. They weren't allowed, as I recall.

    (It's a Baltimore thing.)

  • Drake||

    It was for us too - but many of them played rugby in the fall.

  • mauricegirodias||

    Hell, we're still club level at my school. Thought I heard different.

    http://umbc-rugby.com/?page_id=362

    They actually recruited me from the gym. I used to be the strongest guy with the worst form there, and they would not take no for an answer.

  • R C Dean||

    Yes, collective punishment is always where totalitarianism goes.

    Because its about inflicting pain on as many people as possible, when all is said and done. And you can't really get to the industrial levels of sadism that they obviously crave on an individual basis.

    No, you have to go after entire groups collectively.

  • WTF||

    Kulaks, hoarders, wreckers, patriarchy, libertarians, privileged white people, etc. etc.

  • TheZenomeProject||

    It always seems to be about the ends, not the means, when talking about progressives. It's a true contradiction to refer to them as "progressive", because the last thing that they seem to advocate for is for society to move forward. It's always about paying for past "transgressions" done by others before you, much in line with the Kim family.

  • SusanM||

    FUC is the feminist group?

  • All-Seeing Monocle||

    They're taking the word back!!1!

  • Charles Easterly||

    "I'm not eating something that was cooked by some cracker-ass hatemonger!"

    "I will. Baby, you can't taste racism!"

  • MJGreen||

    Porch monkey is a pretty good term. It'd be nice if it could be used.

  • Charles Easterly||

    Wouldn't you think they would have realized this ahead of time?

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    When Jezebel takes the side of the alleged sexists (or at least gives them a fair appraisal), we must recognize that either campus hyper-offendedness has truly gone off the deep end, or the end-times are upon us.

    They did get bit in the ass recently. Maybe they're developing some intellectual curiosity.

  • mauricegirodias||

    Maybe one of them fucked somebody on the rugby team. We'd even let a future Jezzie in to be our whore*. Serenade, spill booze on them, and send them safely on their way.

    (That was the official title: "Rugby Whore.")

  • Restoras, OWG and RWC||

    Well, we used the sobriquet Rugby Queen, but yeah...

  • mauricegirodias||

    It was a state school...

  • Drake||

    Does she the sloped forehead...
    Yes she has the sloped forehead,
    Sloped forehead..
    Sloped forehead...
    Kinky hair...
    Kinky hair,
    Furry brow...
    Cross-eyed eyes...
    Broken nose...
    Blowjob lips...
    Cum stained teeth...

  • mauricegirodias||

    Now that I think about it, Jezebel's conduct in the UVA matter may have exposed Gawker Media to the inevitable lawsuits. You gotta think that frat was just lying low until the police investigation concluded before the time came to open up a can of legal whoopass on everybody. Banzhof's theory, that they can go after administrators and others personally under Title IX, might make for a lot of fun.

  • Restoras, OWG and RWC||

    I agree. I am quite sure there are several former fraternity brothers that are now lawyers, are thoroughly infuriated, and absolutely champing at the bit to fuck over everyone they can that had a hand in the fiasco.

  • mauricegirodias||

    The Regimental Sergeant Major leads a miserable life,
    He can't afford a mistress and he doesn't have a wife,
    So he puts it up the bottom of the Regimental Fife,
    As he revels in the joys of fornication.

    When you find yourself in springtime with a surge of sexual joy,
    And your wife has got the rag on and your daughter's rather coy,
    Then jam it up the arse hole of your favorite choirboy,
    As you revel in a smooth ejaculation.

    The ostrich on the pampas is a solitary chick,
    Without the opportunity to dip its wick,
    But whenever it does it slips in thick,
    As he revels in the joys of fornication.

    The elephant's dong is big and round,
    A small one weighs a thousand pound,
    Two together shake the ground,
    As they revel in the joys of fornication.

  • mauricegirodias||

    One night I was riding way down by the falls,
    One hand on my pistol, the other on my balls,
    What should I see but Charlotte using a stick,
    Instead of the end of a cowpuncher's prick.

    One night on the desert her legs opened wide,
    A rattlesnake saw it and climbed up inside,
    Now all the cowboys on Saturday night,
    Come see the vagina that rattles and bites.

    I leapt from my saddle and reached for her crack,
    But the damn thing was rattling and bit me back,
    I pulled out my six gun and aimed for its head,
    But the damn thing misfired and shot Charlotte instead.

    I caressed her, undressed her, and laid her down there,
    And parted the tresses of curly brown hair,
    Inserted the penis of my sturdy horse,
    And then there began a strange intercourse.

  • ||

    Isn't the whole purpose of rugby songs to be as lewd, gross, and offensive as possible?

  • mauricegirodias||

    Only if they're sung right.

  • ||

    Yes, which is part of the reason it's impossible to treat the song as some sort of genuine expression of misogyny. It's like thinking South Park is racist because Cartman uses racial epithets.

  • Dweebston||

    It's worse than that. Cartman is an obvious caricature of racism, and far less likable as a human stand-in (although more humorous as a character) than Kyle. Cartman is clearly not meant to be liked or respected, much less emulated. He's as often the villain or general antagonizer as he is a bit character.

    It's like, despite knowing that, someone still insists that giving voice to certain verboten ideas legitimizes antisemitism. It's such a flat, incurious view to take.

  • ||

    I've noticed this weird habit of many progressives in that respect, that in order to treat everyone equally, one is forbidden from applying any nuance. Racism, sexism, homophobia, etc. they are all equally bad, and all expressions of such are equally banned. Nobody is allowed to interpret subtler shades meaning or to make fine distinctions because that supposedly allows people to introduce their subconscious prejudice.

    It's basically a set of rules that tell you that in order to be fair to everyone, you have to be purposefully stupid.

  • tarran||

    Nuance leads to discrimination. Literally:

    Discrimination: noun
    1. an act or instance of discriminating, or of making a distinction.
  • ||

    And thus, out of fear of dicriminating, we're all required to give ourselves lobotomies. We can't discriminate if we're mentally incapable of telling the difference between people.

  • Rhywun||

    I didn't even know "rugby songs" were a thing. These boys really need to get some.

  • mauricegirodias||

    Most of them date back to the 16-1700s. And, btw, we did get quite a bit.

  • Rhywun||

    Oh I bet. Lots of ladies like the rugged caveman type.

  • mauricegirodias||

    Yep, and we'd mix in a few more family-friendly tunes about loss and regret to show we could be sensitive men, despite the cuts on our face and legs.

  • Swiss Servator... Switzy!||

    You have obviously never been to a post game party...

  • Swiss Servator... Switzy!||

    Many women despise athletic men ages 18-32.

  • Rhywun||

    I'll just leave this here as evidence that is someone for everybody.

  • Rhywun||

    "that THERE is"

  • Swiss Servator... Switzy!||

    Nobody says you have to like, approve or date rugby players.

    Others may differ, believe it or not.

  • Furburguesa||

    In tight shorts.

  • Drake||

    After college, I played for a club team. We would hit a bar after Thursday night practice. Some ladies were were repelled by our filth, sweat, and bruises. Others were on us like bees to honey. The ones who liked sweaty young men were more fun anyhow.

  • TheZenomeProject||

    At what point will the outrage start to switch the other way? If Ryan represents the majority of progressives, right now the criticisms have just started to reach the "unintended consequences" phase. The next step up in thinking should be "Aren't public universities like Oklahoma and Mary Washington violating the First Amendment by persecuting actions protected by freedom of speech? Isn't the First Amendment designed specifically to promote speech that is unpopular to the general public?" Of course, I don't think "peak SJW" has really come yet, and possibly never will.

  • Mainer2||

    The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all.
    H. L. Mencken

  • TheZenomeProject||

    I may be overthinking it, but I get the feeling that much of this originates from the dangerous precedent set way back in 2007 when Morse v. Frederick ruled that school districts had the right to suppress speech that promoted illegal drug use. The one difference is that these universities are suppressing speech that promotes completely legal thoughts, however unsavory that they may be. It should terrify most people that a person like me, a below-average geology/physics major, seems to have a better idea of political law than the average pol-sci major. That really shouldn't be the case.

  • Mainer2||

    We used to sing songs about a character named Barnacle Bill the Sailor.
    Dirty dirty songs.

  • mauricegirodias||

    'Cos I'm young enough, and ready and tough.
    Cried Barnacle Bill the Sailor.

    Will you take me to the dance?
    To hell with the dance down with your pants.

    You can sleep upon the floor.
    I'll not sleep on the floor you dirty whore.
    You can sleep upon the mat.
    Oh, bugger the mat you can't fuck that.
    You can sleep upon the stairs.
    Oh, fuck the stairs they haven't got hairs.
    What's that running up my blouse?
    It's only me mitt to grab yer tit.
    You can sleep between my tits.
    Oh, bugger your tits they give me the shits.
    You can sleep between my thighs.
    Bugger your thighs they're covered in flies.

  • Drake||

    What if my parents should return?
    I'll fuck your Mom and blow your Dad
    - Said Barnacle Bill the Sailor!

  • mauricegirodias||

    Bestiality's Best

    (Sung to the tune of "Wallaby Song")

    CHORUS:Bestiality's best boys, bestiality's best.
    Fuck a wallaby!
    Bestiality's best boys, bestiality's best.
    Fuck a wallaby!
    Blow your rocks in an ox boys, blow your rocks in an ox.
    Fuck a wallaby!
    Blow your rocks in an ox boys, blow your rocks in an ox.
    Fuck a wallaby!
    In the spunk of a skunk boys, in the spunk of a skunk.
    Fuck a wallaby!
    In the spunk of a skunk boys, in the spunk of a skunk.
    Fuck a wallaby!
    In the rear of a deer boys, in the rear of a deer.
    Fuck a wallaby!
    In the rear of a deer boys, in the rear of a deer.
    Fuck a wallaby!

  • Charlotte Falcon||

    Why does the following need to be said: "inappropriate stuff, to be sure"?

    For once I want to see an article on this website that isn't afraid of the left-wing thought police. Just say that they have a constitutional right to free speech. Don't say that you disagree with, it's repugnant, etc. I could care less what you think of the speech, to be honest. But I do care about stopping the totalitarian left.

  • Zeb||

    Yeah. It's dirty and obscene, but a rowdy party with rugby players seems like an appropriate context for that.

    I can forgive Reason a lot of that sort of thing. They want to reach a broader audience and not just preach to the choir. But in this case it seems silly. I don't think there is anything wrong about carrying on a tradition of singing dirty songs that are obviously humorous and not a threat to anyone.

  • mauricegirodias||

    No, it is not obscene. These recitations of public domain texts. Since the 1973 ruling in Miller v. California, nothing of that sort has ever been obscene. The UK, which does censor texts, wouldn't in a million years dream of censoring rugby songs.

  • Dweebston||

    I've seen English rugby players. I wouldn't want on their bad side, either.

  • Swiss Servator... Switzy!||

    A piece of advice I got from a Cornishman player-coach about 20 minutes into an increasingly dirty match.

    "Okay boys, time to give 'em the boot".

    I think he raked a guys forearm open within 5 minutes.

  • morganovich||

    believe me, you have not seen dirty rugby until you have played in the southern hemisphere. i played for a touring team out of sydney for a season. the southern folks are a whole new level of nasty, and i have played all over the US, Caribbean, UK, and europe.

    many of the men's clubs i played against in wales were some of the nicest guys you'd even wanna meet. the saint mary's royal college of surgeons team in london were also fantastic guys and played a nice, clean game. they even came over to our sideline afterwards to stitch us up before the party.

  • Swiss Servator... Switzy!||

    Oh, yeah. I played with Argentinians - cheap shot artists extraordinaire!

  • Zeb||

    I mean obscene in an informal sense, not a legal one. I think a song about sex with dead whores counts. I'm not saying that's a bad thing.

  • Bill Dalasio||

    I can forgive Reason a lot of that sort of thing. They want to reach a broader audience and not just preach to the choir.

    Perhaps. But, honestly, how fertile a target for convincing of the merits of libertarianism do you think the kind of people who need a trigger warning over a rugby song are?

  • Puddin' Stick||

    the kind of people who need a trigger warning over a rugby song

    You mean the type that probably should leave their parents' basement?

  • Warren's Strapon||

    If Robby finds that stuff offensive, then surely he isn't reading the comments section here. I'd suggest he shouldn't, anyway.

  • R C Dean||

    Why does the following need to be said: "inappropriate stuff, to be sure"?

    Yeah, Reason writers recently have been grinding my gears pretty regularly with their uncritical and unthinking acceptance of lefty/proggy tropes and assumptions.

  • Warren's Strapon||

    How else are you going to get a gig at Salon?

  • Zeb||

    I'm not sure how calling a dirty song inappropriate is lefty or proggy. I think the song was appropriate in the context, so the statement is wrong. But I can equally imagine a conservative saying the same thing.

  • ||

    I would expect a conservative to respect the traditions of the sport.

  • Zeb||

    I expect a lot of things that don't happen.

  • Emmerson Biggins||

    Ya, plainly he was sucking up to Sean Hannity when he said that.

  • KyzerS||

    Group think; Major characteristic of lefties.
    Membership based punishment; Major judgement method for lefties.
    Absence of a target victim; (aka fabricated victim). More leftism.
    Need more?

  • Francisco d'Anconia||

    eah, Reason writers recently have been grinding my gears pretty regularly with their uncritical and unthinking acceptance of lefty/proggy tropes and assumptions.

    Robby has done it a couple times in the last week or so.

    Youth? Perhaps a bit of insecurity?

  • Warren's Strapon||

    I think he's angling for an eventual TV gig, so he doesn't want to bomb-throw too much.

  • ||

    Yeah, Reason writers recently have been grinding my gears pretty regularly with their uncritical and unthinking acceptance of lefty/proggy tropes and assumptions.

    Insert cocktail parties joke here.

  • ||

    COCKTAILZZZZ!

  • Mickey Rat||

    A number of the Reason staff become downright walking on eggshells prissy when talking about the outrage du jour from the social left. It seems that they do not want to disagree on the basic point just on the legal niceties. In away they did not when the FCC was giving out fines for celebrities f-bombing award ceremonies, for instance.

  • ||

    I think the contrast between the two songs is fascinating in all sorts of ways.
    I agree that the rugby song is much less offensive, largely because it is clearly meant to be humorous, while the SEA song .... there's not much that is funny about hanging "n----ers" from trees, or adamantly declaring that you hate them and will never accept them.

    Of course, you can quibble about a lot of this. Maybe there is something sexist about quasi-celebrating fucking dead whores. Or maybe there is something sexist about thinking there is something bad about being a whore. Or maybe the offense is in regarding a dead whore as a joke instead of a human tragedy. You could argue that there is something sexist about the fact that society considers one to be unbelievably shocking and unacceptable, and the other one just a silly joke song sung by some rowdy rugby boys, in the usual "boys will be boys" fashion.

    Still, I think there actually IS something that is unacceptable about song A, in a way that is not true about song B. Yet it seem like university administrator have trouble drawing these distinctions. If you're going to shut down SEA for racism, you must shutdown UMW's rugby team for sexism. No nuance allowed.

    Perhaps part of the distinction is that racism against blacks has a historical legacy of violence that is simply NOT on par with the legacy of sexism in the US, and as such, it is perfectly just that we take expressions of racism much more seriously than sexist jokes.

  • ||

    Er SAE ...

  • Rhywun||

    a historical legacy of violence that is simply NOT on par with the legacy of sexism in the US

    Good luck convincing today's feminists of that. 1 in 5, after all.

  • ||

    The number of black people in America descended from a slave who was raped is probably a lot greater than 1 in 5, just saying.

  • R C Dean||

    The number of white people with a slave, or a rape, in their background is probably a lot greater than 1 in 5, as well.

    It depends on how far back you want to go in looking for slaves. If we go back 150 years, why not go back 1,000, when slavery was not unknown in Europe?

    Tamerlane (I think) has more descendants than anyone else in history, on account of all the raping.

  • ||

    Well in the case of African Americans, it's near enough that many black families actually know which ancestors were raped as slaves and what their names were, and the names of their masters.

  • John Titor||

    Tamerlane (I think) has more descendants than anyone else in history, on account of all the raping.

    I'm pretty sure that statistic is for Genghis Khan, but Tamerlane did indeed get a lot of raping done himself.

  • Sudden||

    Slave rape was hardly a prevalent feature of American slavery. Sure it happened at times, but it was uncommon.

  • Calidissident||

    What? That's definitely not true. Black Americans didn't magically end up with 15-20% European ancestry magically.

  • R C Dean||

    Well, Cali, its been 150 years since there were slaves to rape.

    I expect a fair amount of voluntary, err, intercourse occurred during that time.

  • ||

    Seriously? They were slaves. There's no such thing as "voluntary" intercourse with a SLAVE. The slave doesn't really have a choice, and may have gone "willingly" only because of (a) fear of punishment, or (b) hope of favorable treatment. Legally, it's still rape either way.

    Calidissident is correct. It wasn't at all uncommon for slaveholders to have sex with female black slaves. In fact, I suspect it would requre almost superhuman restraint NOT to. You're talking about men with nubile females running around the plantation that they have complete power over. The probability that the owners (not to mention the foremen and bosses) would behave to absolutely propriety relative to their slaves is almost ludicrously absurd.

  • Calidissident||

    I think he was saying that the admixture is a result of mixing post-slavery. Which is still incorrect and contradicted by historical and genetic evidence. Did some voluntary race-mixing occur in the post-Civil War South? Sure, but not nearly enough to account for the significant amount of European ancestry found in almost all black Americans.

  • ||

    "... just a silly joke song sung by some rowdy rugby boys, in the usual "boys will be boys" fashion."

    "Boys will be boys" is almost illegal now. We really need to bring that concept back.

  • ||

    Upon further consideration, I think I actually do think there is something presumptous about a bunch of middle-class white liberal women attempting to claim victimhood status on par with blacks, especially when references to lynching are involved.

  • Trigger Hippie||

    Speaking of lynchings and tasteless songs, playing this little gem within earshot of certain members of the SJW crowd might induce a Scanners level of expulsion of grey matter.

    http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=qVpv2apwLcI

  • ||

    so they're offended by a song about whores. now comes the haggling over price.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    My mother once tried to punish me for a high school party I did not attend (I was sick that Saturday). My father, thankfully, put his foot down.

  • Mainer2||

    Regarding Traktor Pullz...That was MNG.

    He responded to my comment that I shop at Walmart with a sarcastic "Have fun on your way to the tractor pull." So i was the inspiration for the MNG to start the tractor pull meme.

  • mad libertarian guy||

    TRAKTOR PULLZ!!!!!!!!!!!

  • WTF||

    It was fun that MNG actually got irritated by the TRAKTOR PULLZ meme.

  • Stilgar||

    If the school has a personal conduct policy (or one specifically for athletes) that was broken, fine. Deal with those who were clearly in violation. But this blanket hatcheting of those who have nothing to do with incident X must stop.

    As to personal conduct policies, they should be, IMHO, strictly limited to actions taken while actively representing the school and not apply outside that timeframe.

  • Real American||

    speech isn't conduct.

  • Zeb||

    Some students, likely drunk, sang a demeaning song about raping corpses and "wiggling it" inside whores—inappropriate stuff,

    Seems quite appropriate for a rowdy party attended by rugby players.

    Why is it so hard for people to understand that singing a song isn't necessarily a personal statement?

  • Gleep Glop||

    I think Mr. Soave just wants to be accepted by people who got Master's Degrees In Journalism from Columbia!!!!!

  • Auric Demonocles||

    Are the rugby players going to be punished for the content of the alt-text?

  • Swiss Servator... Switzy!||

    "Penalty to Orange - alt-text deficiency - what will you have?"

    "Scrum, sir."

  • Robert||

    Yeah, don't you have to match the number of players with the number of words? Unless it's a quick alt-text, I guess.

  • Rebel Scum||

    Sexist Chanting at Party Leads to Punishment for Students Who Weren't Even There...while UMW's rugby team has 46 players, only 8 of them were even in attendance at the party

    Sure, but they were all thinking it because all men (especially white ones) are inherently sexist and are closet rapists. DUH! //sjw-feminazi

    if the First Amendment means anything on campus

    It does't.

  • Marshall Gill||

    SAE's chant, at least, was obviously and specifically offensive, and indicative of a deep and abiding undercurrent of racism

    Science Damn It, stop this shit Robby! Since there were not any minorities on the bus to be offended, it obviously was not. It is also not indicative of "deep and abiding racism". People of a certain skin color being able to use the word "nigger" while other people of another skin color can not IS obviously indicative of a deep and abiding undercurrent of racism. It is the very definition of racism. Since there were no black people to hear the chant, it also was obviously NOT "targeted in a threatening way".

    If I go into the forest and think I am alone and I say terrible things, thinking that no one can hear me and someone tapes me saying these things then I meant for them to be heard and mean to act upon them?

    Sticks and stones, Robby, didn't your parents ever teach you that one? Since children are not taught that then they are really harmed by words? Fuck that.

  • ||

    Yes, but don't you think there is something different about singing "there will never be a n----er in SAE", versus "well god damn son of a bitch we're gonna find a whore!" ?

    The former seems to be a rather absolute statement of racist intent. While the latter just seems to be an excuse to use a lot of bad words.

    Maybe you can help me understand what makes these two statements equally inoffensive.

  • Azathoth!!||

    There are black people in SAE.

    So, whatever this was, it wasn't an example of anything they act upon.

  • Rhywun||

    I'm going to posit that those boys are deeply racist, and at the same time it's not the university's place to give a shit about it.

    People of a certain skin color being able to use the word "nigger" while other people of another skin color can not IS obviously indicative of a deep and abiding undercurrent of racism.

    You are being deliberately obtuse about the context in which certain words are used. It doesn't work like that in the real world.

  • MJGreen||

    So if I overhear you muttering to yourself, "Those damn niggers, ruining this country," I shouldn't take that as evidence that you're racist?

    It was a racist chant. It is obviously offensive, as it is sung because it's offensive. It does call back to a more racist time and suggests that the students are comfortable with that racism.

    They did not target any black students, but that has nothing to do with what Robby said in your quote.

  • Rhywun||

    They did not target any black students

    And why would they? They know that the consequences would be unpleasant.

  • Bill Dalasio||

    It was a racist chant. It is obviously offensive, as it is sung because it's offensive. It does call back to a more racist time and suggests that the students are comfortable with that racism.

    Let me ask a question, then. If you play Grand Theft Auto III, does that mean you're comfortable with mass murder?

  • Bill Dalasio||

    It was a racist chant. It is obviously offensive, as it is sung because it's offensive. It does call back to a more racist time and suggests that the students are comfortable with that racism.

    Let me ask a question, then. If you play Grand Theft Auto III, does that mean you're comfortable with mass murder?

  • Calidissident||

    Playing a video game is the same thing as making up a chant about lynching "niggers" and excluding them from fraternities? I understand that many on the left have gone way too far with accusations of racism that are baseless or specious at best (e.g. "You're a racist if you oppose Obama!") but many on the right do the exact opposite. You're really arguing it's unfair to assume that a group of people making up and singing a chant about lynching niggers and not letting them into their fraternity are racist? Do they have to actually start lynching black people before we can safely conclude they're racist?

  • Bill Dalasio||

    You're really arguing it's unfair to assume that a group of people making up and singing a chant about lynching niggers and not letting them into their fraternity are racist?

    Except the frat actually has black members. Hell, that chapter has had black members. And my guess is that they didn't make up the song. It's probably been around for a while.

  • Calidissident||

    Admitting some black members doesn't mean you can't be racist. Especially since (from what I've read) it's been like 15 years since the OU SAE chapter had a black member. The SAE chapter at my school was known (before getting kicked off due to sexual assault incidents) for being the most racist at the school. They usually had 1 or 2 token non-white guys in a chapter of over 100 guys at a school that's 40% white. I also once overheard brothers of a different fraternity talk about how they were "really going to limit the number of Asians we give bids to." Do you seriously think that isn't racist just because they do give a couple Asian guys bids?

    They didn't make up the song, which is evident by the fact that someone posted the lyrics a month before the video came out and said they heard it from SAEs at UT Austin. But I'm not sure how that makes things any better. At this point, you're setting an absurd burden of proof and reaching for anything that might possibly make them not racist when the obvious conclusion is staring you straight in the face. If you don't want to be called racist, don't sing songs with your friends about lynching black people and not letting them into your frat. It's not hard, this isn't normal behavior. I'm sure it's hypothetically possible some KKK member just joined because he thought the uniforms were cool, but that doesn't mean I can't make a pretty damn reasonable assumption that KKK members are racist.

  • mlwjr||

    How about if you hear me rapping the words to one of the many racist and mysoginistic rap songs of your choosing. Does that mean I am racist?

  • MJGreen||

    No, and I'm not sure that comparison tracks.

    Did the frat members say that they repeated the chant because they like the melody? Or because it's ironic? I'm not saying they want to go lynch some people, or even that they'd be comfortable with that, but they clearly don't have much problem with shouting about lynching black people before they let them into their club.

    I'll loudly and proudly sing some fucked up songs. I'd love to sing "Piss Up a Rope" in a karaoke bar. But their chant does cross a line into something else. A fuzzy line, perhaps, but it is there.

  • MJGreen||

    And I hesitated to point it out, but now I think it's important: I did say "suggest." I won't say it's sufficient evidence to cast them down as racists, but it is evidence. If they all laughed and then said, "Man, that chant was fucked up.", the evidence would be less compelling.

  • Calidissident||

    Let me get this straight - the real racism here is not people chanting about lynching "niggers" and not letting them into their fraternity, but instead people not finding such chants equally offensive as a rapper saying "nigga" in a song?

  • Azathoth!!||

    No. There is no real racism here. That's putting it straight.

  • The Sego Sago Kid||

    raping corpses

    Woah, hey, slow down. You can't rape a corpse. It's not technically a person anymore, so it's fair game. It's like rubbing one out in between the couch cushions. Just because the couch can't say no doesn't mean I'm raping it.

    Also, I pray to our lord and savior Christ of Nazareth that no one with a feminist bent ever shared or will share an ice hockey locker room with me. Because I may end up in prison at this rate.

  • SusanM||

    Woah, hey, slow down. You can't rape a corpse. It's not technically a person anymore, so it's fair game. It's like rubbing one out in between the couch cushions. Just because the couch can't say no doesn't mean I'm raping it.

    A suspiciously well-thought out line of reasoning...

  • The Sego Sago Kid||

    Err.. That comment wasn't mine. I was just posting it for a friend, I swear!

  • SusanM||

    I'm sure you were just thinking about that old Sam Kinison routine.

  • mauricegirodias||

    I knew there was something wrong about you.

  • Viscount Irish, Slayer of Huns||

    You never disappoint me, Reason.

  • John||

    Once you give college Presidents the power to punish students for private speech they deem objectionable, there is no end to how much they will use it. Robby correctly points out that this chant is not as offensive as the one the SAEs at Oklahoma did. The next speech a university punishes will be less offensive than this.

    If you have any doubt about how far down this slippery slope goes, consider this. Twenty years ago when I was in college saying overtly racist or vulgar sexist things in class or public was likely to get you in trouble but even that unlikely to get you expelled. Today, law school professors are unsure how to teach criminal law regarding rape for fear that even talking about due process will offend their students. If the practice of punishing students for private speech isn't stopped, it is just a matter of time before any breech of the PC orthodoxy results in expulsion.

  • RBS||

    Your law school comment triggered a memory of my crim professor spending 30 mins of class time giving a trigger warning about the rape section we were covering the next week.

  • John||

    That is fucking pathetic. He should have said upfront, if you are morally unable to defend someone you know to be guilty of rape, get the fuck out and find a new profession. No one who doesn't believe in due process and the rule of law to a sufficient degree that they would defend the guilty, has no business being a lawyer. I don't care what kind of law they want to practice.

  • ||

    That's hilarious, my crim professor was a hardcore feminist who specialized in law dealing with women's issues, especially rape and sexual assault. She never once used the word trigger that I can remember. How the fuck are you going to prosecute a rapist or represent a victim in a civil trial if you get triggered by that stuff?

  • carameldare2||

    Have you read the lyrics? They are about raping and murdering a prostitute, and then further raping and defiling her body with things like urine. I'm sorry - you simply swap out the word whore for the n-word, and everyone would be screaming. Why is misogyny ignored or considered anymore acceptable? The lyrics are absolutely heinous. They cannot even be classified as "boys will be boys".

  • John||

    Because mysogony is not taken as seriously as racism. There are a lot of reasons for that but that is not the point. The point is that even if it shouldn't be, this is just another step down the slope.

  • ||

    Have you ever met a "boy"?

  • Rhywun||

    You might have noticed a lot of the lyrics revolved around bestiality too - do you seriously think these kids are running around fucking farm animals in their spare time?

  • mauricegirodias||

    you sound fat.

  • ||

    Maybe you can quote me the part aout murdering the prostitute, because the way I read the lyrics she starts off dead. The rape happens after.

  • Viscount Irish, Slayer of Huns||

    And it's actually anti-dead hooker rape since the last lyric makes it appear they caught an STD.

    If anything, it's a public service announcement about the perils of necrophilia.

  • ||

    The original version of the lyrics, it isn't even a rape, she's not dead, and she doesn't get murdered. It's just about fucking a whore and widning up with a sore dick, syphhilis and a baby.

  • RoughRugger||

    Actually, you do have one semi-valid point: it would not be classified as "boys will be boys"...because female ruggers sing the exact same songs. They're not running around screwing dead hookers either.

  • MariontheLibrarian||

    It's just a stupid song. As a woman, I am grossed out by, but not offended by, the song. To presume it's realistic in any way is to also assume a woman would choose to masturbate with a live rattlesnake. If Charlotte ends up dead (from what can be described as a shooting accident - he was aiming for the snake, after all) because she keeps a live, poisonous reptile in her lady parts, perhaps that's partially the result of choices she made for herself?

    I am not denying that misogyny exists, I just think songs like these shouldn't be taken that seriously. The focus should be on things like the misogynistic insanity that imprisons single moms for sending their kids to the park while the mothers are at work nearby.

  • Bill Dalasio||

    If the practice of punishing students for private speech isn't stopped, it is just a matter of time before any breech of the PC orthodoxy results in expulsion.

    Probably. But, I can't help but wonder, have these people thought about what happens when the screw turns?

  • Azathoth!!||

    The screw doesn't turn.

    If the other side even suggests that a lefty speaker is inappropriate they are met with a wave of SJW approbation--see Robby's article about Bill Ayers.

    The sane will always lose because they refuse to accept that they have to meet screeching moonbattery with screeching rationality--but it's the screeching that's important.

  • creech||

    I haven't been around the Army lately but the songs we used to chant as we marched and counted cadence would not be appropriate for today's gender integrated Army.

  • John||

    Sadly, they banned all of the fun ones, you know about throwing candy out on the playground to get the children to come out so you could napalm them or murdering people where they go to church and such, back in the 1990s under Clinton. It just became not acceptable to admit the Army's job is to kill people.

  • WTF||

    "I don't know but I've been told
    Eskimo pussy is mighty cold"

  • Road Warrior||

    +1 Full Metal Jacket reference.

  • carameldare2||

    There are good ways to make an argument for free speech here. This article did NOT do that.

    1. Do your research. The whole team was suspended because the individuals involved refused to take responsibility for their actions and the team chose to accept the punishment as a team rather than out the 8 individuals.

    2. "SAE's chant, at least, was obviously and specifically offensive, and indicative of a deep and abiding undercurrent of racism—and, possibly, illegal racial discrimination."
    Excuse me - have you READ the lyrics. The Rugby chant was obviously and specifically offensive, and indicative of a deep and abiding undercurrent of MISOGYNY.

    And regardless of where you fall on the issue of punishment, the fact that this is "Rugby Culture" is indicative of a deep seated misogyny to be found with rugby and its players, and frankly that is unacceptable.

  • RBS||

    the fact that this is "Rugby Culture" is indicative of a deep seated misogyny to be found with rugby and its players, and frankly that is unacceptable.

    Get the fuck out.

  • John||

    First, you first point doesn't help. The 8 shouldn't have been punished in the first place. The fact that the university made the team choose between unfairly punishing 8 people or just disbanding the team doesn't make the university look any better. In fact, it makes them look worse.

    Second, people have a right to say and think what they want. You don't punish people for private speech no matter how offensive it is. You totally miss the point here.

  • Swiss Servator... Switzy!||

    Feel free not to watch or play!

  • Viscount Irish, Slayer of Huns||

    "Do your research. The whole team was suspended because the individuals involved refused to take responsibility for their actions and the team chose to accept the punishment as a team rather than out the 8 individuals."

    They sound like upstanding young men who stood up to an unfair abuse of authority.

    "Excuse me - have you READ the lyrics. The Rugby chant was obviously and specifically offensive, and indicative of a deep and abiding undercurrent of MISOGYNY."

    Yeah. Clearly all purposefully offensive songs and jokes are indicative that the people actually believe the things they're saying. No one has ever jokingly said something he didn't actually favor and believe.

    Why, I bet these boys are out there right now, trolling for a dead prostitute to bang. You sound like a barrel of laughs.

  • Enjoy Every Sandwich||

    Who are you-or me, or anybody-to decide whether or not "Rugby Culture" is acceptable? Aside from the fact that assuming that someone who sings a rowdy song about sex hates women is freaking stupid, it's not up to you or me to decide who somebody should like or dislike. No doubt there are men who really do hate women (can't say I've met any, although maybe I just don't run in their circles) but that's none of my business unless they violate the person or property of another.

    If they try to hurt a woman in my presence there will be a reckoning twixt them and me. But if they simply don't like women? Their loss I'd say.

  • Warren's Strapon||

    There are good ways to make an argument for free speech here. This article did NOT do that....Excuse me - have you READ the lyrics. The Rugby chant was obviously and specifically offensive, and indicative of a deep and abiding undercurrent of MISOGYNY.

    Should misogyny be legally protected free speech?

  • WTF||

    No, because patriarchy, feelz, etc. etc.

  • Restoras, OWG and RWC||

    Excuse me - have you READ the lyrics

    So, are you equally all panties-in-a-wad over a crap ton of song lyrics that are regularly heard on the radio?

    No?

    Curious, that...

  • WTF||

    Rugby Culture" is indicative of a deep seated misogyny to be found with rugby and its players, and frankly that is unacceptable.

    Suck it up, cupcake, the fucking world doesn't revolve around you.

  • Beautiful Bean Footage||

    Who's the new troll? Is it a Botard sock? Because it has the distinct whiff of Botardation to me...

  • John Titor||

    Excuse me - have you READ the lyrics. The Rugby chant was obviously and specifically offensive, and indicative of a deep and abiding undercurrent of MISOGYNY.

    You are aware that RANDOM CAPITALIZING words is not an ARGUMENT, right?

    And regardless of where you fall on the issue of punishment, the fact that this is "Rugby Culture" is indicative of a deep seated misogyny to be found with rugby and its players, and frankly that is unacceptable.

    And what gives you the right to condemn an entire group of people based on your emotional reaction? What gives you the magical ability to peer into men's souls and determine that they hate women? Because they sang an offensive song in a sport that specifically and deliberately tries to make offensive songs? Might as well argue that every comedian who does an Aristocrats joke is a sex offender.

    Your entire argument is based off of vapid assumptions you've tailored around your emotional response. You're simply too reactive to take seriously in regards to this.

  • AuH20||

    Oh wel, now that you say misogyny in ALL CAPS, I have no choice but to agree with your stupid point. Touche

  • B.P.||

    Wait, doesn't this constitute an invasion of rugby players' safe space?

  • mauricegirodias||

    I'm triggered.

  • Ken Shultz||

    Middle of the night,
    so silently,
    I creep on over to the Mortuary.
    Lift up the casket,
    and fiddle with the dead.
    Their cold blue flesh
    makes me turn red!

    Do what I want,
    and they don't complain.
    ...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OpZJLjrb4vU

    If someone made a compilation of all the gross out songs from the early '80s, it might rank as a collection of some of the best American punk rawk ever--best of the genre.

    It was often a social commentary, too. Most people to seemed to completely miss what this song was about after the zombie movie:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xr9KRAMydf0

    Yeah, it's mock celebrating about the most horrifying thing there is--but it's also pointing out that the veneer of respectability pop culture lends itself to is what's truly obscene.

    Isn't it the appearance of inclusiveness, sensitivity, and respectability these schools project that makes things like the Sandusky scandal possible? Meanwhile, if there really are cases where coeds really are intimidated by college administrations into not reporting sexual assault--why are these guys so worried about someone singing songs somewhere? Why not focus on the real problem?

  • MJGreen||

    At an off-campus party at the close of the fall 2014 semester, several members of theUMW men's rugby club engaged in a chant that contained sexually explicit, derogatory, and violent language.

    So it's like most chants that have ever been sung.

    It's a college. Grow a pair, pussies.

  • Swiss Servator... Switzy!||

    A ruffians' game played by gentlemen.

  • Sunshine||

    Actually, to most women I know, those songs are cringeworthy. But just because I don't like them, it doesn't mean I think teams (or fraternities) should be disbanded, or that people should be kicked out of school. If I don't like the culture or practices of a particular group of people, chances are I won't hang out with them much. Freedom of association and all that.

    I fail to see much difference between the Rugby songs and the SAE chant. Both tasteless, and yes, offensive to some people, but no specific threat to any particular individual. An "undercurrent of racism" is no more or less displayed by the fraternity chant than an undercurrent of misogyny is displayed by the rugby songs.

  • John||

    It doesn't matter which you find more or less offensive. They are both just speech. The issue is should people be punished for saying something offensive. I and most other people on this board say no. If you are not free to say something offensive, you are effectively not free to say anything because there is no limit to what the authorities will at some point find "offensive".

  • Sunshine||

    You and I agree on this, John... note that I said I was against the severe punishments. I was responding to someone above who insisted that the rugby chant was fine, just boys being boys, but the frat chant was unacceptable racism.

  • Rhywun||

    I thought that branch of the frat was deliberately excluding blacks? Or maybe I misremember it.

  • R C Dean||

    No, that branch of the frat sang a song about excluding blacks.

    That is not the same as actually excluding blacks, any more than I will ride a sleigh festooned with bells because I sing "Jingle Bells" at Christmas.

  • Zeb||

    I have no idea what their intentions were or are. But if they wanted to exclude blacks, or at least discourage them from trying to join, singing racist songs would probably help with that goal.

  • Calidissident||

    I'm sure those gentlemen were totally racially blind when it came time to give out bids.

  • R C Dean||

    Your ability to divine people's innermost motivations, and subsequent activities, from a drunken song is impressive.

  • Calidissident||

    Yes, because it's totally normal for a non-racist fraternity to make up a chant about lynching black people and not letting them into their fraternity. Do you really think they made up that chant right there on the bus (they didn't, which is proven by the fact that someone posted the lyrics to it a month before the video got leaked and said they heard the SAE's at the University of Texas sing it)?

  • mlwjr||

    Do you think when sororities chant "drink slutty b$-#tch" they are all really slutty?

  • ||

    An "undercurrent of racism" is no more or less displayed by the fraternity chant than an undercurrent of misogyny is displayed by the rugby songs.

    I am not convinced this is true at all.
    This sounds like an example of the purposeful stupidity i was discussing upthread, wherein, in order to be 'fair" and "equal" to everyone, one is forbidden from seeing nuance.

    First of all, racism has a much broader and more violent historical legacy than sexism. There is no history of lynching uppity women, while the SAE chant specifically references the very violent history of lynching blacks.
    Secondly, it's pretty obvious that the rugby song is meant to be deliberately over-the-top crude for the sake of humor. Why are we not allowed to acknowledge that?
    Thirdly the SAE chant explicitly makes exclusionary staements of hatred towards blacks: "We will never let a n----r in SAE" It explicitly uses racial epithets directed at all blacks. The rugby song uses the word "whore" but it's pretty clear that's not meant as an epithet directed at all women, and it's certainly not a statement of "we hate women". In fact the conclusion of the song is "never fuck a whore", which is pretty much a wash in terms of sexist intent.

  • Paul.||

    But someone at the party recorded the chant; eventually, UMW's Feminists United on Campus found out about it and made sure university administrators were informed.

    Just a quick note to "tech savvy millennials":

    That retarded shit you're doing in public while cell phones are pointed at you? Yeah, it's going to be on half a dozen Facebook and instagram pages in about *looks at watch* 2 and a half minutes.

  • Free Society||

    All members of the team were also required to attend sexual assault training.

    Today children, we're going to discuss seizing opportunities like lurking in a parking garage or being the last sober person to remain awake at a drunken party.

  • ||

    Damn, I can't believe I missed that.

    +1

  • Enjoy Every Sandwich||

    The microaggression unfolded last November at a house party near the Fredericksburg, Virginia, campus

    So apparently we can't even say "fuck" in the privacy of our own homes without some goddamn SJW trying to stamp her boot in our faces. The time for a backlash is long past.

  • mauricegirodias||

    Yerp. But remember, it's a school that's 2/3rds female. The ones at the party were watching the boys be boys, laughing and playing along, much as women used to laugh and play along at things like those dueling piano shows, where gals always got Lucille'd, and the crowd would go:

    "You bitch! You whore! You slut! You suck! You swallow! You love it! You pay for it!"

    http://articles.philly.com/199.....ong-tables

    /I think they're missing a few lines, actually.

  • ||

    Full lyrics of the original song:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W.....nal_Street

    Walking down Canal street
    Knocking on every door
    Goddamn son of a bitch
    I couldn't find a whore

    I finally found a whore
    She was tall and thin
    Goddamn son of a bitch
    I couldn't get it in

    I finally got it in
    Worked it all about
    Goddamn son of a bitch
    I couldn't get it out

    I finally got it out
    It was wet and sore
    The moral of this story is
    To never fuck a whore

    Six weeks later
    I went for a piss
    Goddamn son of a bitch
    She gave me syphilis!

    Nine months later
    I'd forgotten what I did
    Goddamn son of a bitch
    She brought me home a kid!

  • Arcxjo||

    How is a sports team losing its status not equivalent to a student being kicked out? Many college athletes are only able to afford being there because of their participation and accompanying scholarships.

  • mauricegirodias||

    It's not even an actual sports team there, just a club that included undergrads, alumni, and people in the area who happened to like rugby. They got to use fields on campus for practice, and the woods for loudmouthed drunken satanic rituals.

    They probably only played other clubs in the area.

    No way they got 46 rugby players from 1300 undergrads.

  • Bill||

    Schools (like the one I teach at) are having
    a hard time getting students these days.

    Be nice if all 46 of them transferred to
    a different school.

  • Robert||

    If it's like most rugby clubs, there's nothing that can be gone after: no treasury, no property, not even the school name on uniforms.

  • Plàya Manhattan.||

    "I urge anyone on campus who feels unsafe, ostracized or threatened to immediately contact campus police"

    You can't make this up.

  • R C Dean||

    As part of an announcement that they are going to ostracize and threaten some of their students, the lack of self-awareness is epic.

  • John||

    Some of this is that we have yet to fully digest the rise of simple recording and the internet. If the team had marched through the center of campus singing this song, I doubt many people would have a problem with punishing them. The university does have an interest in maintaining order on campus and your free speech rights don't extend to your disrupting the campus like that.

    The problem of course is that they didn't do that. They sang the song at a private party in someone's house. Since everything can now be recorded and posted for all to see on the internet, their actions didn't stay private and became public and in reality had much the same effect of them doing it in the center of campus.

    In the past, we didn't see videos of what people did in private very often and thus didn't have to think much about what they were doing. We only got offended by what we saw people do in public. Now thanks to the internet we see the private things too and are just offended by them just like we are by what people do in public. This means people are either going to have to learn to ignore things that are done in private or be willing to live in a world where even the most private actions are subject potentially the same scrutiny as actions taken in public.

  • John||

    I think the latter option is going to be a nightmare. There are few things more horrible than the thought that everything I say or do in even my weakest moments could be subject to public scrutiny. I am fine with the idea of conforming my behavior to societal expectations in public. That is just part of getting along with people. All of the time, however, would leave everyone with no chance to ever relax and let their guard down and everyone subject to potential social ostracism. No thanks.

  • Rich||

    "Some students have now been exposed to those offensive and lurid lyrics due to posting by others on social media."

    "Therefore, UMW is immediately and permanently banning all use of social media, under penalty of expulsion."

  • Drake||

    I would be at a different school the next fall.

  • John||

    If a woman can object to being subjected to "lurid lyrics" on a social media site such that she can get the university to punish the author and force them to take it down, I fail to see why a religious Muslim can't have equal ability to object to any woman he sees in public not wearing a head scarf. How long before that happens?

  • mauricegirodias||

    And do they really expect guys to keep having their back when it does?

  • John||

    Good question. Moreover, they have called anyone who warned of creeping Muslim law in this country a racist nut. So if and when Muslims start making such claims, it will be very difficult for anyone to stand up against them since the Progs have granted Muslims the use of the race card.

  • Francisco d'Anconia||

    Some students, likely drunk, sang a demeaning song about raping corpses and "wiggling it" inside whores—inappropriate stuff, to be sure,

    Inappropriate why? If not appropriate at a drunken, private rugby party, off campus...I guess you are saying it would NEVER be appropriate?

    You don't have to qualify yourself to deflect criticism, Robby. Rugby players, fraternity members and fighter pilots (and probably many many more groups that I'm unaware of) get drunk and sing dirty songs. The shock value is the point. I have NO problem with it and in that setting it's perfectly appropriate. The feminists can SJWs can fuck directly off.

  • John||

    If not appropriate at a drunken, private rugby party, off campus...I guess you are saying it would NEVER be appropriate

    That is exactly what they are saying. See my post above about the internet making all conduct effectively public. These people want to control private speech and thoughts. They have thanks to our Constitution never been able to create a Stasi or KGB to do that. Now the internet has given them something better; an army of private spies making all private conduct effectively public. If people don't stand up and enforce a distinction between public and private conduct that exists regardless of how public that conduct becomes, we are going to face a pretty grim future.

  • Calidissident||

    Given the context, that seems like a major overreaction even for the players present. And punishing the guys who weren't even there and didn't say it is just stupid.

  • John||

    If you are associated with someone of the criminal class, you are also a member of that class. It is on the same level as the KGB arresting everyone whose names they found in a dissident's address book.

  • Drake||

    I shall no spend the rest of the day in the headquarters of a Fortune 500 company humming rugby tunes.

  • R C Dean||

    Do you mean "now" or "not", Drake?

  • Drake||

    NOW.

    "...balls to your partner, ass against... whoops... hmm mm hm mm!"

  • Strelnikov||

    He's Scottish.

  • GILMORE||

    "I urge anyone on campus who feels unsafe,"

    URGING IS PATRIARCHIAL

    ALSO, WE GO AT OUR OWN SPEED, THANK YOU

  • John||

    Since most rugby players are gay, I don't understand why this isn't a gay rights issue.

  • GILMORE||

    WHAT!!

    They said it was called a 'scrum'. And that those kinds of things happen.

  • John||

    And just because everyone gets naked at the nearly exclusively male after party, doesn't mean its gay. It is just team bonding.

  • Drake||

    And our hero is John "Brown Finger" Hopoate.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ata8F7liAx0

  • GILMORE||

    "it's hard to conclude that their speech was anywhere near as offensive as SAE's"

    See, now you're conceding that it *was* offensive, and that its a matter of degree which requires expert-victims to assess.

  • Marshal||

    I hope someone responds by infiltrating the FUC and recording their nonsense.

  • Mickey Rat||

    So I presume Bill Maher will never do a show on this campus, or most other stand up comedians for that matter?

  • MarkLastname||

    I distinctly recall Oberlin feminists putting up posters of random male students saying "BEWARE: RAPIST" or something like that. Unlike this little song, they targeted specifically named persons and slandered them. Funnily enough, the university took no action against the women who did it.

    #equality, right?

  • Strelnikov||

    I'll go with the end times drawing near.

  • Dr. Venture||

    Rugby teams are usually made up of mostly White males and the current meme is that all White males must be punished.

  • TxJack 112||

    So the team is punished for something they did OFF campus? Exactly when did schools acquire the power to punish students for actions not at school and they deem as offensive? This is as insane as the two boys suspended from school for playing with air soft guns in their own yard. Schools need to focus on education and cool it with all the social justice crap. American education is terrible because instead of learning the skills they need to compete in the world economy, our kids as drowned in the PC nonsense only important to achieve the progressive dream of converting the US into a socialist European society.

  • TimothyLane||

    In academia, the right not to be offended trumps all other rights, especially those only protected by that obsolete (to them) relic, the Bill of Rights. There is no standard of proof, and guilt by association is standard.

  • KyzerS||

    Your responsibility (guilty verdict) depends solely on your group membership (see ISIL). Punishment is likewise on the group, and perhaps its affiliates.
    -
    But a non-Leftist sees no valid identification of any villains, therefore no evidence linking the sin to an unproven quantity of mystery villains. They see no due process or appeal process for the mystery villains. An of course there's target victim, but a target group, taking shape, well after the sin.
    -
    This is 575% collateral damage, in another constitution free ideological battlefield.

  • KyzerS||

    Let's see, this really isn't microaggression,
    it's a second hand aggression melody (SHAM).

  • EverythingOffendsMe||

    Clearly the leader of this crusade is highly offended about anything that might talk bad about women. I get that. But if you are going to stand on that moral high ground it may not be the best idea to send requests via twitter to an internet radio show requesting "I'm Different" by 2 Chainz. Unfamiliar with that song? Let me enlighten you:

    [Verse 1:]
    Pull up to the scene, but my roof gone
    When I leave the scene, bet your boo gone
    And I beat the pussy like a new song
    2 Chainz but I got me a few on
    Everything hot, skip lukewarm
    Tell shawty to bust it open, Uncle Luke on
    Got the present for the present and a gift wrapping
    I don't feel good, but my trigger happy
    But the stripper happy, but they wish had me
    And I wish a nigga would, like a kitchen cabinet
    And me and you are cut from a different fabric
    I fucked her so good it's a bad habit
    Bitch sit down, you got a bad atti'
    Gave her the wrong number and a bad addy
    You ain't going nowhere like a bad navi
    Ass so big, I told her to look back at it
    Look back at it, look back at it
    Then I put a fat rabbit on the Craftmatic
    I am so high... attic
    I am so high like an addict

    Also on some of her online profiles, you can see that she has been listening to Tyga "Make It Nasty" you can look up those lyrics on your own, and you can see that she also listens to Chris Brown. Yes, a feminist apparently listens to Chris Brown. Let that sink in for a minute...

  • Reverend Draco||

    The sensation of my brain cells dieing made me throw up a little.
    Warn a guy before you post Retards Attempting Poetry.

  • Reverend Draco||

    That's pretty normal when you've got cretins and degenerates in positions of "authority" - one person does (or a handful of people do) something stupid. . . and everyone who didn't do it get punished.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online