Search Results

THE SELECTIVE ARGUMENT THAT POLITICAL RHETORIC LEADS TO VIOLENCE: Jim Geraghty lists “The On-Again, Off-Again Arguments About ‘Dangerous Rhetoric’ Leading to Violence,” before concluding:

Do I have all that right? And does that make sense to anyone?

Wouldn’t Occam’s Razor suggest that those already driven by a desire or compulsion to kill other people are going to do so, and will merely latch on to whatever “reason”, justification or excuse is at hand or is most convenient? Isn’t it ridiculous to expect sane people to watch what they say and restrict what thoughts they express in order to prevent a rampage by someone with an inherently illogical, literally unreasonable, not-sane thinking process?

Isn’t “don’t say what you think, because it might set off a crazy person” the most insidious form of censorship, because none of us can really know what prompts a crazy person to go on a violent rampage?

Ace of Spades adds:

The Colorado governor says that the Planned Parenthood shooting is due to the rhetoric of “talk radio” and “bloggers.”

Ed Morrissey catches the Washington Post saying the same thing.

He notes an example where the left does not find its own hot rhetoric linked to a murderer’s rampage — the Family Research Council shooter. I can name another one — the Discover Channel Shooter, a shooter the left seized upon initially because they assumed he was rightwing, then discarded quickly when his manifesto indicated that he was so left-wing on climate change he thought the Discovery Channel was too soft in its climate change propaganda.

Gabriel Malor has documented the left’s “incurable” disease of blaming shootings on right-wing speech.

But never, ever on leftwing speech — obviously! Leftwing speech never inspires violence. Except when it does. And there’s an interesting argument to explain why, and that argument is complete media silence.

I find this part of the left’s broader mission of shutting down any thought of which they don’t approve. The left routinely — reflexively — links any sort of political thought they don’t like into a dire real-world consequence or crime.

If you deny the fake 1-in-5 claim, you’re encouraging rape.

If you publicize the fact that baby organs are in fact being harvested at Planned Parenthood, you’re encouraging shooting.

If you call a woman “bossy,” you’re both fostering an anti-woman “atmosphere” and encouraging violent crimes against women.

And so on. As I say, the left’s own hot rhetoric — that we need to reduce the human population to save us from global warming; that anyone who disagrees with this is a “denier” like a Holocaust denier; etc., etc. — is never, apparently, linked to any violence.

Well, that doesn’t help advance the DNC-MSM narrative; when it comes to their coverage of the other side of the aisle, as Andrew Klavan noted in 2009, all of their memes can be boiled down to two words:

Related: “These are some astounding facts about violence this year in Chicago,” Betsy Newmark notes:

As of November 23, there had been 2703 shootings which resulted in 440 deaths year-to date in heavily gun-controlled Chicago.

That is an increase of approximately 400 shootings over the same time last year.

And remember that Chicago has some of the most stringent gun control measures in the nation in a city that has been under totally Democratic control for decades.

Doesn’t fit the narrative; makes Obama and Rahm look bad. Thus memory holed in order to continue “defining deviancy downward,” to coin a phrase.

JOEL KOTKIN: Jerry Brown’s Insufferable Green Piety.

Outsiders think of California as a prosperous place that mints billionaires, but overall the state’s economic recovery has done little for many, if not most, state residents. Even with the boom in Silicon Valley, roughly one in three Californians live check to check, the state has [a] higher rate of poverty than Mississippi, as well as one-third of the nation’s welfare recipients. Among the emerging Latino majority, a prime Brown constituency, the state’s cost-adjusted poverty rate is more than 33 percent, compared to just 22.7 percent in Texas, a state often derided as unenlightened and cruel.

During this “boom,” most California blue-collar workers in farming, fishing, and forestry have experienced actual average wage decreases. Employment in fields such as construction and manufacturing remain well below their 2007 levels. Much of this has to do with environmental regulation, which has raised energy costs almost twice those of nearby competitors and also helped raise housing prices to an unsustainable level.

Once the beacon of opportunity, California is becoming a graveyard of middle-class aspiration, particularly for the young. In a recent survey of states where “the middle class is dying,” based on earning trajectories for middle-income cohorts, Business Insider ranked California first, with shrinking middle-class earnings and the third-highest proportion of wealth concentrated in the top 20 percent.

Most hurt, though, are the poor. California is home to a remarkable 77 of the country’s 297 most “economically challenged,” cities based on levels of poverty and employment, according to a recent USC study; altogether these cities have a population of more than 12 million. Some stressed cities exist cheek-to-jowl with the state’s uber-rich—Oakland, Los Angeles, as well as Coachella, near Palm Springs. Most others are in the poorer, more heavily Latino interior, places like Riverside, Stockton, and Vallejo. Journalists who come to California to praise the governor may think it’s still “California Dreamin’” but for all too many, particularly away from the coast (PDF), it’s more like The Grapes of Wrath.

Of course, there’s a long history of such bifurcated society, where people tend to stay in their class and the poor depend largely on handouts from their spiritual “betters.” It’s called feudalism.

And that’s what our “betters” want for all of us.

LIARS GONNA LIE: Wikipedia founder advocates for updating policies following ‘The Hunting Ground’ controversy.

Wikipedia co-founder Jimmy Wales is looking to tighten his website’s rules about editors altering pages with which they have a conflict of interest.

Wales renewed interest in the policies follows a Washington Examiner report that a crewmember of “The Hunting Ground,” a one-sided film about campus sexual assault, had been editing Wikipedia pages to promote the film and conform facts to its narrative.

“I have long advocated that we should deal much more quickly and much more severely with [Conflict of Interest] editors,” Wales wrote after citing the Examiner. “The usual objections (from some quarters — I think most people agree with me) have to do with it being hard to detect them, but in this case, the COI was called out, warnings were issued, and nothing was done. Now the editor has been called out by the media embarrassing him (he deserves it), his employer (who may not), and Wikipedia.” . . .

Another Wikipedia editor, KirkCliff2, chimed in on the thread by suggesting that the crewmember didn’t break just COI rules but also Wikipedia’s rules against gaming the system and neutrality. This editor also noted how Edward Patrick Alva, “The Hunting Ground” crew member, “has also been fairly disingenuous about his actions” and had been “shamelessly plugging the movie and the ‘stars’ thereof.”

Alva had made multiple edits to the Wikipedia pages of subjects from his film, including former Florida State quarterback Jameis Winston, who was accused of rape by fellow FSU student Erica Kinsman. Some of Alva’s edits included removing information that cast doubt on Kinsman’s story and made the Tallahassee police look worse — in line with how the movie portrays the situation.

KirkCliff2, who wrote that he is “a veteran editor who rarely even weighs in on such issues” believes Alva “must be banned.”

Banned or not, his sleazy conduct should be widely publicized.

TEACH WOMEN NOT TO RAPE! (CONT’D): Female teacher jailed for 10 years for sexually violating boy. “The starting point for Reriti’s punishment should be 14-15 years in jail, the prosecutor said. He suggested Reriti’s gender shouldn’t mean she should escape the sort of punishment a male teacher found guilty of child sex offences would face.”

WELL, ACCEPTING THAT WOULD LESSEN THE OPPORTUNITIES FOR GRAFT: Women’s group can’t accept that ‘rape culture’ just might not be a thing.

When you’re committed to perpetuating the myth of a rampant “rape culture” on college campuses, evidence to the contrary becomes baffling.

And so it goes for the American Association of University Women, which analyzed 2014 reporting data from colleges and universities across the country and found that 91 percent of schools had no reported incidents of rape. Most people would see that number and cheer. Hooray! College women aren’t being raped in the U.S. at rates on par with the Congo!

But not the AAUW. Accompanying that percentage on a chart on its website are the words: “What’s wrong with this picture?”

Read the whole thing. Today, as we saw with the UVA scandal, a feminist is someone who’s horrified at the thought that a woman might not have been raped.


WHY ARE UNIVERSITIES SUCH HOTBEDS OF RAPE, RACISM, AND POLICE-STATE TACTICS? The whistleblowers: Employees claim retaliation in campus rape cases.

TEACH WOMEN NOT TO LIE ABOUT RAPE! (CONT’D): Body camera helps discredit accusation against Knox deputy. “This allegation was said to have taken place at the side of the vehicle. Prior to body cameras, we would have had no video at the side of the vehicle. We are very pleased with what we have right now.”

I’ve praised Knox County Sheriff Jimmie Jones for adopting body cameras before, but I’m sure his deputies are glad he did it now.

CATHY YOUNG: The dangers of going too far to curb online harassment.

Too often, the progressive activists who dominate initiatives against cyberabuse — and advise major companies — openly advocate favoritism based on identity politics. One model code of conduct for digital communities that has served as a basis for companies such as Google, Yahoo and Facebook takes a tough anti-harassment stance but explicitly “prioritizes marginalized people’s safety over privileged people’s comfort” and rejects complaints about “reverse racism,” “reverse sexism” or being attacked for “oppressive behavior or assumptions.”

Indeed, Internet “social justice” activism with its culture of “call-outs” and pile-ons can itself be a harassment machine. Recently, a 19-year-old comic artist reportedly attempted suicide due to bullying by bloggers who relentlessly attacked her for perceived “fatphobia,” racial stereotyping and other sins. In May, film director Joss Whedon left Twitter after a nasty backlash against supposed anti-feminism in “Avengers: Age of Ultron.” (While Whedon denied he was driven off, he certainly faced a barrage of ugliness.)

Yet most discussions of Internet harassment omit such toxic behavior and even more egregious abuse with a “progressive” face. Two years ago, there was much media sympathy for a so-called hacktivist facing legal trouble for cyberattacks targeting residents of Steubenville, Ohio, to bring attention to the rape of a teenage girl. Never mind that the online vigilantism hurt many innocent people who had their records exposed and were threatened or smeared.

Like most lefty campaigns, it’s all about exacerbating power differentials while pretending to address them.

POLITICAL SCIENCE: More problems with a famous campus sexual assault study.

In 2002, Michael Finkel was fired from the New York Times after the newspaper discovered that his feature story was not about a single victim of the African slave trade, but actually a fake character made up of several men he had interviewed in the region.

It appears that same tactic has been used by researcher David Lisak, whose theory about serial rapists on college campuses has heavily influenced campus sexual assault policies and who was featured prominently in the film, “The Hunting Ground.”

Lisak gives a presentation about sexual assault that includes a video “reenactment of an interview conducted by Dr. David Lisak … as part of a study of men who had raped but were never reported or prosecuted for their crimes.” The video shows Lisak interviewing “Frank,” an actor purported to be reading a transcript from an interview Lisak actually conducted as part of his research.

“Rather, he is an aggregation of several interviews from Lisak’s dissertation research, which raises the level of concern by an order of magnitude,” wrote Reason’s Linda LeFauve. “Material cut-and-pasted is material at risk of serving an agenda. Had Lisak described the video as intentionally designed to make a point, it might — might — even be an understandable agenda were it not for the two problems already noted: It is based on material decades out of date, and it is edited to make a point about serial predators not backed by research.”

It’s as if these people start out with a narrative, then just make stuff up to support it or something.

ACTUALLY, HER WHOLE CAMPAIGN IS BASED ON THAT PREMISE: Adam Carolla: Hillary Win Will Spark Sexism Protests: “Here will be the shift, everybody … you will watch the nice transition on our nation’s campuses go from the systemic racism to the systemic sexism. That will then become the theme. We can then enjoy … a nice four-year block of that.”

We’ve already been enjoying a few years of that at least as battlefield preparation. Just ask Rolling Stone, Lena Dunham, and Emma “Mattress Girl” Sulkowicz — and it’s not even 2016 yet.

TEACH WOMEN NOT TO RAPE! (CONT’D): Teacher jailed for sexually abusing students. “The 31-year-old confessed to sexual assault and admitted that she had taken advantage of her position of authority. She took videos and photos with her mobile phone of her having sex with the children, who were boys and girls aged between 13 and 14.”

IS SHE TRYING TO TELL US THAT RAPE IS SOCIALLY CONSTRUCTED? ‘Mattress Girl’ to participate in TEDx talk on ‘socially-constructed borders.’

TEACH WOMEN NOT TO RAPE! (CONT’D): Teaching assistant who groomed schoolboy jailed after suspended sentence deemed too lenient; Judges say Caroline Berriman, 30, should not have been spared jail after sleeping with the boy on 80 occasions over three to four months. “The boy, who believed he was in love and in a normal boyfriend/girlfriend relationship, eventually moved in with Berriman but when the situation deteriorated, he rang ChildLine and said he was thinking of taking his own life. . . . She knew her initial contact with him was entirely wrong but persisted and then enabled and allowed it to develop into a legally prohibited sexual relationship.” It seems as if courts are beginning to treat sex offenses by female offenders with at least some degree of seriousness.

A PERFECT EXAMPLE OF PROGRESSIVE FREE SPEECH ILLOGIC:  A writer in the Guardian exemplifies muddled progressive thinking about the meaning and value of free speech:

The American university system is currently the battleground for what looks to be our next great culture war: free speech versus political correctness. On one side are the ever-harrumphing Reasonable White Men, such as New York Magazine’s Jonathan Chait, who fretted extravagantly over “political correctness” in an interview with National Public Radio: “I would define PC as a new ideology that is completely intolerant of dissent on issues relating to race and gender. So, it’s an illiberal kind of politics that does not grant any political legitimacy to criticism on identity issues. So, even if it’s made in response to legitimate racism and legitimate sexism that people have every right to be concerned about, it shuts down democratic politics in a way that we should be concerned about.”

The other side – which is not really a “side” at all so much as a vast, multifarious crowd of marginalised people all advocating for their own humanity with varying degrees of success and silliness – includes trauma survivors requesting trigger warnings, feminists criticising rape jokes, people of colour trying to explain cultural appropriation to white people who think the earth is their toy chest, and black students sick of universities gobbling their tuition money but treating them like dangerous interlopers. . . .

After setting up her false dichotomy between “ever-harrumphing Reasonable White Men” and “a vast, multifarious crowd of marginalised people all advocating for their own humanity,” the writer then draws a (predictable) false conclusion:

But here is the thing: white students parading around campus in blackface is itself a silencing tactic. Telling rape victims that they’re “coddled” is a silencing tactic. Teaching marginalised people that their concerns will always be imperiously dismissed, always subordinated to some decontextualised free-speech absolutism is a silencing tactic.

Framing student protests as bratty “political correctness gone mad” makes campuses a hostile environment for everyone except for students who have no need to protest. . . If you’re genuinely concerned about “free speech”, take a step back and look at what’s actually happening here: a bunch of college students, on the cusp of finding their voices, being publicly berated by high-profile writers in national publications because they don’t like what they have to say. Are you sure you know who’s silencing whom?

So basically, her argument is this: If individuals–mostly “white students”–express their disagreement with the views of the “marginalised people” (who may well come from very privileged backgrounds, but that doesn’t matter of course)–is a “silencing tactic” that is antithetical to free speech. She believes, in other words, that it is imperative to silence some speech so that others’ voices may be heard.

The writer has obviously not been schooled on the Constitution’s First Amendment, which is grounded in the theory that a robust–even offensive–marketplace of ideas is necessary to individual liberty and the quest for truth. But then again, I’m certain the writer does not care much for the pesky Constitution, which is precisely why her perspective is so dangerous.

UPDATE:  Just to be clear: the writer of this Guardian piece is an American journalist, not British.

UPDATE: C. Bradley Thompson points me to an open letter he and some colleagues at Clemson recently penned to Clemson students, pledging their opposition to any unconstitutional attempts by the university to suppress free speech, including speech that makes others uncomfortable. We need more faculty like this, but I won’t hold my breath.

GOOD: Ashe Schow: Students Starting To Push Back Against Campus Lunacy.

Across the country, college campuses are abandoning their purpose of education and expanding the minds of young people in favor of “safe spaces” and witch hunts. And some students are tired of being silent.

Voices of dissent to this politically correct culture began popping up sporadically several weeks ago, before the campuses of Yale and the University of Missouri (and many more sense) became engulfed in protests, in the area of anti-male campus sexual assault activism. In mid-October, George Lawlor of the University of Warwick refused to attend a “consent class” because, as he put it, he didn’t need to “be taught not to be a rapist.”

“That much comes naturally to me, as I am sure it does to the overwhelming majority of people you and I know,” Lowler wrote in his school newspaper. “Brand me a bigot, a misogynist, a rape apologist, I don’t care. I stand by that.”

Lowler was followed by a female pre-med student in California who wrote a response to “rape culture” hysteria in her public health class. She was lucky in that the person who graded her assignment actually welcomed her countercultural viewpoint, unlike so many others on college campuses and in the media who define any dissent as being “pro-rape” or “rape apologia.”

Another student, Thomas Briggs of the College of William and Mary, penned his own opposition to the hysteria, suggesting that what we face in America is a “hookup culture” and nothing like the “rape culture” occurring in the Middle East (despite what Ms. Magazine thinks).

While it took so long for students to begin speaking out against the suggestion of a “rape culture” — the answer to which has been creating kangaroo courts to oversee witch hunts against innocent young men — opposition to the current campus protests has been swifter.

Let the resistance commence. The campus “activists” are in fact a tiny minority whose impact stems mostly from being noisy and unopposed. They’ve bullied the large number of other students who have different views into silence, but that needs to stop.

MIZZOU AND THE MASTER OF OUR UNIVERSE: “Ironic his name is Wolfe. The incidents surrounding University of Missouri president Tim Wolfe’s resignation following protests of racial insensitivity on campus might as well be plot points in a novel by Tom Wolfe. They are certainly as funny,” Matthew Continetti writes at the Washington Free Beacon: 

The graduate student on hunger strike against oppression is the son of a millionaire railroad executive. The administrators who gave in to the radicals’ demands did so not out of sympathy or solidarity but out of fear of a football strike. The professor who called for “muscle” to help her expel a reporter from a protest held a “courtesy post” in the department of journalism. The details of the saga—including, and I am not making this up, a “poop swastika”—read like a missing chapter of Wolfe’s 2004 novel I Am Charlotte Simmons.

I don’t know if he invented it, but it was through Tom Wolfe’s 1973 anthology The New Journalism that I discovered the phrase “Muggeridge’s Law,” named after British author Malcolm Muggeridge. As Wolfe wrote, “We live in an age in which it is no longer possible to be funny. There is nothing you can imagine, no matter how ludicrous, that will not promptly be enacted before your very eyes, probably by someone well known.”

And that’s happened to Wolfe as well. As he noted a couple of years after Bonfire of the Vanities was published in the fall of 1987, Al Sharpton, who became notorious almost concurrently with Bonfire’s release for ginning up the Tawana Brawley fable makes Bonfire’s fictitious press-hungry shakedown artist Rev. Bacon look like “a little divinity student” in comparison.

Similarly, having reread 2004’s I Am Charlotte Simmons a few months ago, I was struck by how its nonstop sex and booze debauchery now almost reads like the good ol’ days of “higher learning,” in comparison to the past couple of years. Not the least of which, the false rape accusations by Rolling Stone, followed concurrently by Emma Sulkowicz wandering around the Columbia campus with a mattress — all the way to graduation! — before releasing her own sex tape; a real life walking self-satire Wolfe would have never dared to have dreamed up.

Charlotte also contains this mock “Who’s Who”-style biography on one of that novel’s fictitious professors, which helps to describe one aspect of today’s college craziness:

Victor Ransome Starling (U.S.), Laureate, Biological Sciences, 1997. A twenty-eight-year-old assistant professor of psychology at Dupont University, Starling conducted an experiment in 1983 in which he and an assistant surgically removed the amygdala, an almond-shaped mass of gray matter deep within the brain that controls emotions in the higher mammals, from thirty cats. It was well known that the procedure caused animals to veer helplessly from one inappropriate affect to another, boredom where there should be fear, cringing where there should be preening, sexual arousal where there was nothing that would stimulate an intact animal. But Starling’s amygdalectomized cats had gone into a state of sexual arousal hypermanic in the extreme. Cats attempted copulation with such frenzy, a cat mounted on another cat would be in turn mounted by a third cat, and that one by yet another, and so on, creating tandems (colloq., “daisy chains”) as long as ten feet.

As Mickey Craig and Jon Fennell wrote in “Love in the Age of Neuroscience,” their review of I Am Charlotte Simmons in the New Atlantis in 2005:

The setting of I Am Charlotte Simmons is truly “postmodern” — a world dominated by Nietzsche and neuroscience, a world which has jettisoned the moral imagination of the past. Not only is God dead, but so is reason, once understood as the characteristic that distinguishes man from the rest of nature. We now understand ourselves by studying the behavior of other animals, rather than understanding the behavior of other animals in light of human reason and human difference. We learn that it is embarrassing for any educated person to be considered religious or even moral. Darwin’s key insight that man is just another animal, now updated with the tools and discoveries of modern biology, has liberated us from two Kingdoms of Darkness. Post-faith and post-reason, we can now turn to neuroscience to understand the human condition, a path that leads to or simply ratifies the governing nihilism of the students, both the ambitious and apathetic alike.

And the rush to nihilism really has been this week’s leitmotif hasn’t it? Welcome to “A New Age of Antiquity,” as John O’Sullivan of National Review dubbed the 21st century, based upon his perceptive reading of Back to Blood, Wolfe’s most recent novel.

ASHE SCHOW: No, feminists, college campuses are not like ISIS.

Ms. Magazine, a feminist media outlet, posted an article (archived here so you don’t have to give them traffic) by Global Rights for Women attorney Amy Lauricella on Tuesday titled “Institutionalized Rape; It’s Not just an ISIS Problem.” The article claimed that, just as the Islamic State endorses rape, “college administrations similarly facilitate and perpetuate the rape of women on campuses.” . . .

What activists have wanted is the “listen and believe” strategy, where accusations are all that matter; facts and context are irrelevant. And the federal government gave in to their demands.

The most troubling aspect of this, and indeed of Lauricella’s article, is the obvious disconnect between what is happening in the U.S. and overseas with the Islamic State.

Would Lauricella ever suggest that her daughter or her female friends go to an Islamic State-controlled region? Most certainly not, but it is absurd to believe she would tell other women not to go to college in America.

Indeed. Plus: “Comparing things to the Islamic State seems to have replaced Hitler comparisons from the Left. And it is exactly this kind of ridiculous rhetoric that keeps people from taking the alleged problem seriously (well, that and the false accusations).”

MS. MAGAZINE: “While ISIS endorses rape, American college administrations similarly facilitate the rape of women on campuses:”


Huh. I know everybody at Ms. Magazine would qualify as Democratic operatives with bylines, but I believe that in an effort to please both Obama and Hillary, they may be taking his “Jayvee” comparisons just a little too literally.

On the other hand, back a few years ago, when frequent PJM contributor David Solway was exploring “The ‘Unholy Alliance’ Between Islamic Jihad and Utopian Socialism,” and the American Spectator was running pieces on Mohamed Atta, socialist critic of capitalism, some on the left might have found these comparisons a tad extreme, so it’s good to see Ms. Magazine lending bipartisan support to these conservative critiques. As military historian Mackubin Thomas Owens wrote in September of 2002, “9/11 revealed an emerging geopolitical reality: that the world’s most important fault line is not between the rich and the poor, but between those who accept modernity and those who reject it,” which as Ms. Magazine noted last night, sums us both anti-modern ISIS and postmodern academia as well.

So why are monolithically Obama and Hillary-supporting “Progressive” enclaves such as academia such hotbeds of rape, sexism, and racism, anyhow? I’m sure Ms. Magazine will be getting on that topic any moment now.

GOOD: 19 Harvard Law Professors Pen Letter Denouncing The Hunting Ground.

“We believe that Brandon Winston was subjected to a long, harmful ordeal for no good reason. Justice has been served in the end, but at enormous costs to this young man,” the professors wrote. “We denounce this film as prolonging his ordeal with its unfair and misleading portrayal of the facts of his case. Mr. Winston was finally vindicated by the Law School and by the judicial proceedings, and allowed to continue his career at the Law School and beyond. Propaganda should not be allowed to erase this just outcome.”

The 19 professors include feminist icon Nancy Gertner; outspoken critics of campus rape hysteria Elizabeth Bartholet, Janet Halley and Jeannie Suk; as well as President Obama’s former mentor Charles Ogletree.

They are to be commended for standing up this way, especially in today’s nasty climate of academic repression.


“Missouri Football’s Rape Culture ‘And So On And So Forth’”

—Headline,, September 9th, 2014.

“CNN’s Rachel Nichols Compares Missouri Football Team to Jackie Robinson.”

—As spotted by NewsBusters, yesterday.

(H/T: John Schindler.)

THERE’S A BULLSHITTER IN THE WOOD: Ashe Schow: If bears killed 1 in 5 people.

Late last week, College Humor (partnered with the Obama administration) released a video asking: What if bears killed one in five people? It was supposed to be a humorous attempt at getting people to consider just how dire it is that “one in five women will be sexually assaulted by the time they finish college.”

Except there’s no evidence that one in five women are sexually assaulted during college. That statistic has been debunked again and again and again. Only the most incredulous (or calculating) media outlets still print it as a fact without noting what it actually refers to or that it has been disputed.

The statistic comes from surveys of college students who are asked whether they have ever experienced a broad range of sexual activity. The students are also asked if they have ever engaged in said activity while drunk or on drugs. Based on answers students give to these questions, biased researchers hoping to prove “rape culture” exists determine that these students have been sexually assaulted. . . .

But what if it were true, as the video implies? Then the response from the Obama administration and activists would be wholly inadequate.

Using the bear analogy, if people were being killed by bears at such a high rate, how would we respond? I’ll tell you how, we, as a society, wouldn’t respond. We certainly wouldn’t be asking our condo boards, homeowner’s associations or the Housing Department to take care of the problem simply because the problem was occurring in our homes or on our property.

No, we’d be calling animal control, the people trained and dedicated to the problem. And you can bet we’d be telling people how to protect themselves from bear attacks.

I’ll believe it’s a crisis when the people who tell me it’s a crisis act like it’s a crisis.

ASHE SCHOW: College spokesman says rape didn’t happen, loses his job.

A spokesman for Hocking College has been fired for telling media outlets that a reported rape did not actually occur.

Investigations from the Athens County prosecutor’s office as well as the school’s Title IX office both determined that the alleged rape did not occur.

A female student reported to police on Sept. 1 that she had been gang-raped by several male students several days earlier, on Aug. 27. She claimed she had gone to a party and consumed a lot of alcohol. She said she didn’t remember returning to her dorm, but somehow she did and couldn’t find her keys, so she asked several other students to help her get into the building.

She then said she woke up hours later, naked, with five naked men. The school’s counseling center had referred her to the school’s advocacy center, which referred her to the college police. Now, more than a month later, the prosecutor’s office is concluding its investigation without charging any of the accused men.

“After pursuing all leads and following all investigatory protocols, the Athens County Prosecutor’s Office determined there was no evidence to pursue an indictment in rape allegations against five Hocking College students,” the release states.

The school also closed its own investigation into the claim, even as national attention puts intense pressure on colleges and universities to steamroll ahead with accusations, often without much evidence.

“Investigators at Hocking College did not find enough evidence to support a Title IX violation,” the school’s president said in a statement.

Yet the spokesman, Michael Brown, has been fired.

Related: When evidence is allowed, Stanford changes its verdict on an alleged campus sexual assault.

In 2013, Elise Clougherty accused her ex-boyfriend of a year, Joe Lonsdale, of abuse and sexual assault. She reported her allegations to Stanford University, where she was a student and he was her mentor. Stanford found Lonsdale responsible for sexual assault and banned him from the campus for 10 years.

In early November 2015, Stanford reversed the ban, citing “new evidence” in the case.

That “new evidence” was apparently emails sent from Clougherty to Lonsdale during their relationship that raised doubts about her accusations. The emails were not included in the original investigation against Lonsdale, and were only brought to the attention of Stanford administrators due to a New York Times article about the case.

Also: Third lawsuit filed against Rolling Stone for gang-rape hoax.


Screen Shot 2015-11-09 at 7.19.49 PM

GOOD: Phi Kappa Psi Sues Rolling Stone Over UVA Rape Hoax.

AND THEY SAID MATRIARCHIES WERE FAIR: College spokesman says rape didn’t happen, loses his job.

GOOD: U-Va. fraternity files $25 million lawsuit against Rolling Stone.

The Phi Kappa Psi fraternity chapter at the University of Virginia filed a $25 million lawsuit Monday against Rolling Stone magazine, which published an article in 2014 that alleged a freshman was gang raped at the house during a party.

The lawsuit focuses on a Rolling Stone article titled “A Rape on Campus,” which detailed a harrowing attack on a freshman named Jackie at the Phi Psi house on Sept. 28, 2012. The article, written by Sabrina Rubin Erdely, described how Jackie was raped by seven men while two others watched in a second floor bedroom while a fraternity party raged downstairs. The article alleged that the attack was part of a hazing ritual at the long-time U-Va. fraternity.

The Washington Post found significant discrepancies in the Rolling Stone account, including that the fraternity did not host a party that night in 2012 and that a student identified by Jackie as her main attacker was never a member of the fraternity and did not attend U-Va.

Other than that, the story was accurate.

I’M BEGINNING TO DISTRUST ALL SOCIAL SCIENCE ON RAPE: Pentagon ‘gay’ rape debacle: Report alleging male-on-male sexual trauma retracted.

The American Psychological Association has taken the extraordinary step of retracting an in-house journal article that asserted the rate of rape and other sexual trauma among military men was as much as 15 times higher than the Pentagon’s own survey.

In a press released posted Sunday night, the APA said outside scholars had examined the study, “Preliminary Data Suggest Rates of Male Sexual Trauma May be Higher than Previously Reported,” and determined the method for randomly selecting and surveying male combat veterans was flawed.

“Although the article went through our standard peer-review process, other scholars have since examined the data and raised valid concerns regarding the design and statistical analysis, which compromise the findings,” said Gary R. VandenBos, APA’s publisher, in announcing the retraction.

I mean, you know.

A VOICE OF SANITY: Female student pens scathing review of ‘rape culture’ for college course.

A pre-med student attending college in California has penned a scathing review of the current climate surrounding sexual assault on college campuses.

The student, who wishes to remain anonymous, wrote her essay in response to a public-health class assignment asking students to watch a video in which Emma Sulkowicz, the former Columbia University student who carried a mattress around protesting what she claimed was rape, discusses her mattress project. Students were asked a series of questions pertaining to the video, including “What do you think of her approach in responding to her case of rape?” (notice the absence of “alleged”) and “Look into her story and see how her alleged rapist responded. How do you think the university handled this delicate situation?”

The student responded by condemning Sulkowicz’s behavior as “a parody of all the worst parts of radical or ‘Tumblr’ feminists” and said she was “ashamed to even belong to the same species as her.” The student was outraged by Sulkowicz’s accusation, especially after having followed the accused student’s side closely.

“Not only was Emma’s false accusation abhorrent and did she inflict physical and emotional trauma on Paul [the man Sulkowicz accused], but her response to the widespread media attention is the most immature and attention-seeking action she could’ve possibly taken,” the student wrote.


ASHE SCHOW: College student speaks out about ‘rape culture,’ ‘hookup culture.’

A student at the College of William and Mary took to the opinion pages of the student newspaper to express his views about so-called rape culture.

The student, sophomore Thomas Briggs, insisted that America doesn’t have a “rape culture,” but it does have a “hookup culture” where students get drunk and engage in sexual activity. Briggs described what he sees as rape culture in the Middle East, and provided an example of a Saudi gang-rape victim who was sentenced to 200 lashes for being in a car with a man. She was punished for her suffering on the false pretext that she had caused her own rape.

“What aspects of our society lie within the realm of a rape culture?” Briggs wrote. “There is simply no systemic tolerance for rape, no prosecution of victims and the general disgust for rape and rapists may only be trumped by the general disgust for pedophilia or murder; indicating that it is not, contrary to what many say, an institutionalized part of our ‘culture.'”

Briggs wrote that by redefining hookups as rape, society has started to “overlook the true contributing factors in these instances: alcohol and the disregard for personal responsibility and safety that hookup culture so shamelessly advocates.”

The comments section on Briggs’ post is exactly what you would expect, with some vehemently denying his premise and insisting that rape culture exists and is prevalent, with others supporting his article.

Much of the dissent seems to focus on “victim-blaming,” the act of supposedly telling a victim they are at fault for the crime perpetrated against them. This is an abhorrent thing to do, as everyone can agree, but what gets labeled as victim-blaming these days includes a broad range of issues, including common-sense crime prevention techniques such as being aware of one’s surroundings. These prevention measures are still suggested for every other crime, but when suggested as techniques to prevent rape, they’re called victim-blaming.


TEACH WOMEN NOT TO LIE ABOUT RAPE! (CONT’D): Another high-profile rape accusation falls apart.

Chicago Blackhawks ice hockey star Patrick Kane will not face criminal charges over a rape accusation made against him earlier this year.

Prosecutors in the case cited “significant material inconsistencies” between what the accuser said and what other witnesses said.

“The totality of the credible evidence — the proof — does not sufficiently substantiate the complainant’s allegation that she was raped by Patrick Kane and this so-called ‘case’ is rife with reasonable doubt,” District Attorney Frank Sedita III said in a statement on Thursday.

The district attorney won’t even convene a grand jury to hear the evidence collected during a three-month investigation. Part of the reason the case will not go to the grand jury is that DNA evidence contradicted the woman’s allegation.

The woman claimed she was raped by Kane in his home this past summer, and while Kane’s DNA was found on the woman’s shoulders and in her fingernails, it was not found on her underwear or genitals. There was, however, DNA from other men found.


IF I HAD A DAUGHTER, SHE’D WRITE LIKE THIS: Female student pens scathing review of ‘rape culture’ for college course.

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE, SHAMELESS HYPOCRISY EDITION: University wants due process for itself, but not its male students.

The University of Virginia and Virginia Democrats lobbied the Education Department to provide the school due process, something not afforded to its own students.

Specifically, the university wanted due process and fair treatment from the Education Department as it investigated the school for violations of the anti-gender discrimination law known as Title IX. But when the school conducts Title IX investigations of students accused of sexual assault, such due process is nowhere to be found.

It’s a clear case of “due process for me, but not for thee.”

Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe, a Democrat, urged the department to be fair to the school, fearing that the university would be denied “very basic requirements of due process.” He also worried about an “unfair or unjust process,” according to documents obtained by the Washington Post.

Two other state Democrats, Sens. Mark Warner and Tim Kaine, also pleaded with the department and asked that it give McAuliffe’s concerns “careful consideration.” As these top Democrats were making their case, the university itself requested fairness.

It’s easy to see why the politicians and school officials thought the investigation would not be conducted fairly. At one point, the department’s Office for Civil Rights, which oversees Title IX investigations, drafted a resolution agreement for university officials to sign. This agreement is a commitment from the school to overhaul its policies and procedures relating to sexual assault, sexual harassment and other Title IX-related accusations.

The thing is, according to U.Va. President Teresa Sullivan, the agreement was sent for signing before the school even knew the results of the investigation. How was the school supposed to update its policies if it didn’t even know what it was doing wrong?

While OCR appeared to be playing a game of “gotcha,” it is rich that Sullivan, U.Va. administrators and Democratic politicians were harping about due process and fairness. . . .

And then there’s Sullivan. This is the woman who throughout the Rolling Stone gang-rape debacle treated the accused fraternity as guilty, even after she acknowledged that the story was false. She punished the fraternity even when she knew all along that the accusation in Rolling Stone was false. See, Sullivan had access to the report from the accuser in that story. She knew it was a lie all along, yet when the story came out, she rushed to punish the fraternity. She maintained that facade even as the story crumbled.

Tar. Feathers.

CULTURAL DIFFERENCES: Picasso’s muse sparks anger by claiming there are fewer rapes in France because women smile at wolf whistlers. “If a man whistles at you and you smile, that oils the social wheels and eases the tension between the classes and sexes … It’s a kind of give-and-take that acknowledges that the other person exists, so in that sense it’s not treating another person as an object. To take offence all the time makes every relationship disagreeable.”

TEACH WOMEN NOT TO RAPE! (CONT’D): P.E. teacher arrested on suspicion of sexual relationships with 2 students. “Lindsay Himmelspach, 33, was arrested Friday on suspicion of having unlawful sexual intercourse with two minors, communicating with them for the purpose of committing sexual acts and communicating with them to commit a lewd or lascivious act, according to the Butte County Sheriff’s Office.”

I HOPE IT SPREADS TO AMERICA: A New Sexual Revolt Is Underway at British Universities; Could this be the start of an uprising?

George Lawlor, a student at Warwick University, started a firestorm when he wrote a piece for a student newspaper called The Tab, headlined “Why I Don’t Need Consent Classes.” Not only did he tell the “self-appointed teachers of consent” to “get off your fucking high horse”—even worse, in the eyes of the raunch-allergic feminists who staff Britain’s students’ unions, he posted a photo of himself holding a sign saying: “This is not what a rapist looks like.”

Cue global media outrage. Pretty much every liberal broadsheet in Christendom asked, “Well, what DOES a rapist look like?,” hinting that Lawlor, by virtue of the fact that he has XY chromosomes, does look like a rapist. A Guardian writer suggested every man in the world, including the Dalai Lama, should post photos of themselves holding a sign that says “This is what a rapist looks like.” Because, yep, any man might be a rapist. Maybe every woman in the world should post a pic of themselves with a sign saying, “This is what someone who commits infanticide looks like”? No, best not — the women who do that are a tiny minority, as are the men who rape.

A few days later, another Warwick student, Jack Hadfield, announced that he, too, would not be attending campus consent classes. We are witnessing “the demonisation of men,” he said, the promotion of the idea that “men are dangerous sex pests.”

Then came The Tab’s poll on consent classes. Sure, readers of The Tab, Britain’s spunkiest student newspaper, which often raises a very arched eyebrow at the buzzkilling shenanigans of student unions, might not be completely representative. Yet it’s striking that of the 4,440 people who voted in its poll, 2,708 said they were against consent classes, with 1,732 in favour. That’s 61 percent who don’t think they need to be told how to have sex.

The big question is: Why didn’t this happen earlier?

In a just society, the first administrators to roll out these policies would have been tarred and feathered.

POOR WIRED. First they run a low, dishonest piece by Amy Wallace smearing Gamergate as racist rape fans on the way to writing about the Hugos. But worse, it’s basically the same piece that Entertainment Weekly ran, and retracted, months ago, though with extra dollops of pretentiousness.

So Wired isn’t just running with a bogus establishment narrative. It’s running with a behind the curve bogus establishment narrative, with extra dollops of pretentiousness.

I remember when Wired was a bunch of rebels ahead of the curve, but that was a decade or more ago.

ASHE SCHOW: Claire McCaskill’s Crazy Scheme: Can colleges adjudicate gun crimes as they would campus sexual assault?

In a statement that is truly baffling and frightening, Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., implied that colleges and universities can adjudicate gun crimes just as they adjudicate campus sexual assault.

Speaking on an Oct. 29 press call regarding national fraternity and sorority groups’ support of a bill that would put sexual assault crimes back in the hands of law enforcement, McCaskill implied that the groups were singling out sex assault.

“Keep in mind, they have only carved out this exception for sexual assault – not any of the other violent crimes,” McCaskill said, according to a transcription by the Huffington Post. “So a young woman could be robbed at gunpoint, decide she wanted to just try to get that person off campus and go to their university … but if she was raped, she would not be able to do that unless she went to the police.”

Slate quoted the senator as saying the woman robbed at gunpoint could “go to her university and they could take action under Title IX.”

Neither Slate nor HuffPo questioned the senator’s comments or explained them in any way.

Because what Sen. McCaskill appears to be suggesting is that colleges really are their own court system, adjudicating gun crimes the way they adjudicate sexual assault – and that the anti-gender discrimination law known as Title IX requires them to do so. Colleges and universities are required to adjudicate accusations of sexual assault and sexual harassment because of Title IX. The argument goes that these are gender-specific crimes and are therefore a form of gender discrimination.

That’s a stretch unto itself, as it implies that sexual preference is discrimination. It’s also problematic because schools are still required to adjudicate accusations of sexual assault when both parties involved are the same gender.

But even that is more plausible (the notion that sex crimes are a form of sex discrimination) than suggesting a robbery at gunpoint is a form of sex discrimination, even if the robber is a man and the victim is a woman. Even the Violence Against Women Act doesn’t include robbery in its list of crimes against women. . . .

The claims being made to sell the public on the need to create a kangaroo court system to provide separate justice for privileged college students are astounding.

Having ruined the regular criminal justice system, Democrats are now trying to set up a new, more protective, one for the enclaves they control.

GIVEN THAT BOTH OF THEM HAVE BEEN SUPPORTING EMMA SULKOWICZ’S FALSE RAPE CLAIMS WITH NO APOLOGY, SO WHAT? Senators Gillibrand and McCaskill Slam Fraternities That Lobby For Sexual Assault Due Process Bill.

Hey, when you’re a kangaroo, you don’t like it when people oppose kangaroo courts.

McCaskill and Gillibrand are Field Marshals in the War On College Men.

WHAT CITY JOURNAL WROUGHT: In honor of his magazine’s 25 anniversary, Myron Magnet, City Journal’s founder and editor-at-large looks back at the worst of New York’s Bad Old Days, and how the city gradually turned itself around, at least for a time:

In 1983, the Mobil Oil Corporation, to show Mayor Edward Koch why it was contemplating leaving New York, videotaped the sordidness around its 42nd Street headquarters, near Grand Central. The camera caught the rotting trash, the pee-filled potholes, the degradation of the homeless hordes—some crazy and some shiftless—through which Mobil employees had to pick their way into the then-shabby, billboard-plastered station to catch trains home to their orderly suburbs, fragrant with new-mown grass. After shots of corporate headquarters located in similarly bucolic suburbs, the wordless video closed with the written question: “What do we tell our employees?”

Mobil’s answer, in 1987, was to move to Fairfax, Virginia. More than 100 of some 140 Fortune 500 companies headquartered in Gotham in the 1950s asked the same question and reached the same conclusion, pulling out their tax dollars and leading their well-paid workers into greener pastures in those pre–Rudolph Giuliani decades. They were among the million New Yorkers, many of them the elderly rich and the well-educated young, who fled Gotham in the 1970s and 1980s.

The squalor was only one problem. Another was crime. Of course, much of the disorder—the open dope-dealing, the public drinking, the streetwalkers serving every almost-unthinkable taste, the three-card-monte cardsharpers and their pickpocket confederates preying on the crowds they drew, the window-rattling boombox radios—was itself against the law. But these minor crimes deepened as a coastal shelf into burglary, car theft, armed robbery, assault, rape, and murder—one killing every four hours every day of the annus horribilis 1990.

Read the whole thing. Though curiously missing from a CTL-F search of Magnet’s article is the word “Blasio.” Perhaps someone might want to convert Mobil’s 1983 videotape to DVD or upload it to YouTube, as everything old is new again in the Big Apple. (Don’t mind the maggots.)

THE PERILS OF “CONSENT ACTIVISM:” Telling potential date you’re a “consent activist,” know Chief of Police, and “don’t get creepy” inexplicably produces loss of interest:

Keenan herself, though, sometimes finds it hard not to go on the offensive. She’s so used to laying down the nitty-gritty details of consent that she’s been known to open romantic interactions with a spiel that feels straight out of a student handbook.

She animatedly tells a story about a recent Tinder rendezvous: “One time, I agreed to meet with this guy at 8 or 9 at night. Before we met, I said to him, ‘This is the work I do, I know the chief of police … so, don’t try and get creepy; I know all my rights.’ And five minutes later, he was like, ‘Actually, I’m really not OK with how you just assume I’m a bad guy. And I get very bad vibes from that, so we shouldn’t hang out anymore.’”

“I was in a rage. He was a total fuckboy about consent,” she said.

No. You were. Also, “fuckboy” is sexist hate-language. Report yourself to the Office Of Equity and Diversity immediately.

UPDATE: From Ashe Schow, some backstory. “It is easy to misinterpret text messages. Both sides here might have misinterpreted what the other was saying. Ultimately, as Keenan said, it was best they didn’t meet up — no harm, no foul. But it is another example of the importance of openly questioning what is being presented in the media, as even though New York Magazine was trying to write a positive story about these women, this quote still came across much differently than Keenan intended.”

THE SENIOR ANTI-SEX LEAGUE: National coalition in favor of campus censorship.

A large coalition of advocacy groups has asked the U.S. Department of Education Office for Civil Rights to pressure colleges to (1) punish students for their speech and (2) block student access to certain Web sites — especially sites such as Yik Yak, which allow students to anonymously post their views.

Yet another example of today’s Anti-Free Speech Movement for American universities — unfortunately, one that fits well into the Education Department’s attitudes. Fortunately, courts have firmly rejected these kinds of calls to restrict college student speech, though the OCR and the college administrations it pressures can get away with a lot of restrictions until the lawsuits are actually brought.

Here is the list of signatories to the coalition letter:

Feminist Majority Foundation
Advocates for Youth
American Association of University Women
Association of Reproductive Health Professionals
Black Women’s Blueprint
Black Women’s Health Imperative
Center for Partnership Studies
Center for Women Policy Studies
Champion Women
Clearinghouse on Women’s Issues
Digital Sisters/Sistas
End Rape on Campus
Human Rights Campaign
Institute for Science and Human Values
Jewish Women International
Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights
Legal Momentum
Media Equity Collaborative
Muslim Advocates
National Alliance for Partnerships in Equity
National Black Justice Coalition
National Center for Lesbian Rights
National Coalition Against Domestic Violence
National Council of Jewish Women
National Council of Women’s Organizations
National Disability Rights Network
National Domestic Violence Hotline
National LGBTQ Taskforce
National Organization for Women
National Women’s Law Center
SPARK Movement
The Andrew Goodman Foundation
Turning Anger into Change
WMC Speech Project
Women’s Media Center

Local Organizations
Atlanta Women for Equality
Collective Action for Safe Spaces
DC Coalition Against Domestic Violence
DC Rape Crisis Center
Democratic Women’s Club of Northeast Broward
Empowerment Center – Maryland
Lincoln County Oregon Democratic Central Committee
National Organization for Women – Akron Area, Ohio Chapter
National Organization for Women – Beaver Valley, Pennsylvania Chapter
National Organization for Women – Boulder, Colorado Chapter
National Organization for Women – Brevard, Florida Chapter
National Organization for Women – Central Oregon Coast Chapter
National Organization for Women – Florida Chapter
National Organization for Women – Greater Orlando, Florida Chapter
National Organization for Women – Indiana Chapter
National Organization for Women – Maryland Chapter
National Organization for Women – Middlesex County, New Jersey Chapter
National Organization for Women – Ni-Ta-Nee, Pennsylvania Chapter
National Organization for Women – Oregon Chapter
National Organization for Women – Palm Beach County, Florida Chapter
National Organization for Women – Pennsylvania Chapter
National Organization for Women – Rhode Island Chapter
National Organization for Women – Shore Area, New Jersey Chapter
National Organization for Women – Tacoma, Washington Chapter
National Organization for Women – Tampa, Florida Chapter
National Organization for Women – Thurston County, Washington Chapter
National Organization for Women – Virginia Chapter
National Organization for Women – Washington Chapter
National Organization for Women – Washington, DC Chapter
Network for Victim Recovery of D.C.
PFLAG Oregon Central Coast
Women’s Production Network (Florida)

It’s nice of the fascists to self-identify.

COMPARE AND CONTRAST: Sweden Opened Its Doors To Muslim Immigration, Today It’s The Rape Capital Of The West. Japan Didn’t.

NARRATIVE CONTROL: NY Times implies people are advocating for nonconsensual sex.

“Students advocate for consensual sex,” reads the current subhead of a New York Times article. The article’s URL indicates this was originally the main title, but was changed to “Making consent cool.”

The implication from the original title is that there are those out there advocating – or at the very least, tolerating – nonconsensual sex.

This is simply not true. No one is advocating for nonconsensual sex. The fact that that even needs to be said shows just how extreme and dishonest activists have become.

There are those out there, however, who are advocating against a narrow definition of consent that defines nearly all sex as rape by default unless a specific and unworkable set of rules are followed.

High school students can’t figure out those rules. The person teaching those high school students can’t figure out those rules. Vice President Joe Biden can’t figure out those rules.

And yet, those rules will be used to brand as rapists those students who fail to adhere to them perfectly. The Times article even addresses the difficulty students are having in parsing the new rules.

But if you don’t support an approach to consent that has no parallel in American history, it means YOU’RE IN FAVOR OF RAPE!!!!

HANS BADER: New York Times inadvertently reveals stupidity of “Yes Means Yes” sexual assault policies.

Unfortunately, there is one shortcoming in the New York Times story: it repeats the erroneous idea spread by the San Francisco Chronicle that all drunk consensual sex is already legally rape on campus under California’s “Yes Means Yes” law regulating campus sex. In reality, as defense lawyer Scott Greenfield, legal commentator Walter Olson, and I have all explained earlier, that law only bans incapacitated sex, not all drunk sex. . . .

Although California’s “affirmative consent” law does not ban all drunk sex, some campus “affirmative-consent” policies do, invading the privacy of students (there is no logical reason why a married couple should not be able to have a glass of wine before sex). But California’s law does heavily intrude into people’s private lives, and create a climate of fear, as some of its most outspoken supporters readily acknowledge.

This micromanagement of adult sex lives — and college students are adults, you know — is a violation of the right of sexual privacy protected under Lawrence v. Texas.

GLENN GARVIN: RIP Robert Conquest, Stalin’s Prosecutor.

To understand the moral and literary power with which Robert Conquest wrote, consider the second sentence in his book Harvest of Sorrow: Soviet Collectivization and the Terror-Famine, a study of the 14.5 million deaths that resulted from Joseph Stalin’s murderous takeover of his nation’s agricultural sector: “We may perhaps put this in perspective in the present case by saying that in the actions here recorded about twenty human lives were lost for, not every word, but every letter, in this book.” . . .

He wrote of a town in Byelorussia where a group of peasants stumbled into what may have been the perpetually depressed Soviet economy’s single growth industry: professional informing. They routinely partied after trials with the 15 rubles a head they were paid to denounce neighbors as spies, hoarders, and “wreckers,” as saboteurs were known. They even wrote an epic ballad about some of their most successful denunciations.

He wrote of the urkas, the labor-camp gangs of common criminals so violent and depraved that even the guards feared them and refused to make them work. The hideously tattooed members, sporting names like Hitler or The Louse, instead spent their days plotting mass rapes of female inmates and gambling for the clothing of newly arrived political prisoners; the losers had to strip it from the victims and deliver it to the winners.

He wrote of Stalin’s workdays, which usually began by leafing through hundreds of secret-police-recommended death sentences left in his morning inbox, perhaps with the help of his sycophantic adviser Vyacheslav Molotov. December 12, 1937, was a typical day, Conquest reported: “Stalin and Molotov sanctioned 3,167 death sentences, and then went to the cinema.”

Not that being a bloodthirsty dictator was all work and no play. Conquest described Stalin laughing until he cried as an executioner acted out the final, sobbing moments of his former crony Grigory Zinoviev. “Stalin was overcome with merriment and had to sign to [the performer] to stop,” Conquest wrote. . . .

As skeptics of the Cold War gained the upper hand in American academia, Conquest’s work was dismissed as reactionary fantasy and criminal libel. But in the years after the collapse of the Soviet Union, as Moscow’s archives began dribbling out to the public, his reporting was confirmed and judged by some even a bit too mild.

But Stalin gets a pass — basically, because he had so many supporters in media and academe that really acknowledging his horror would be uncomfortable.

ASHE SCHOW: NPR highlights struggle of wrongly accused students.

It’s taken five years, but National Public Radio finally seems to recognize the consequences of campus sexual assault hysteria.

In an article titled “For students accused of campus rape, legal victories win back rights,” NPR describes how the pendulum has swung against accused students.

“As colleges crack down on sexual assault, some students complain that the schools are going too far and trampling the rights of the accused in the process,” wrote Tovia Smith. “In recent months, courts around the nation have offered some of those students significant victories, slamming schools for systems that are stacked against the accused.”

One student who spoke to NPR said “Once you are accused, you’re guilty.” Another told the station that “We used to not be fair to women on this issue,” but now, “we’re on the other extreme, not being fair to guys.”

To many feminists, that’s not a bug, but a feature. Plus:

And while it’s great that NPR is starting to see how badly the pendulum has swung against accused students, it’s important to remember who started the media hysteria in the first place: NPR.

In 2010, NPR worked with the left-leaning Center for Public Integrity to produce a report about campus sexual assault. The report included the story of Laura Dunn, who was allegedly raped by two men she knew back in 2004. NPR and CPI present her story as clear evidence that universities and police — and the Education Department at the time — didn’t care about victims.

But the actual details of Dunn’s case present a different picture. She waited nearly a year-and-a-half to report her alleged attack (and even then she only did so after a feminist professor told all the female students in her class that they had probably been raped). At that point one of the accused students had graduated and there was no evidence to support her claim. Neither the police nor the university pursued the matter. How could they? It was a he said/she said situation from 15-months earlier with no evidence and no witnesses.

Dunn wasn’t happy, so she went to the Education Department, which sent her a letter saying there was “insufficient evidence to substantiate the allegations made in the complaint.”

The lack of prosecutions could have been the result of Dunn’s changing story. When she spoke to the dean nearly a year-and-a-half after the alleged attack, she said part of the encounter was consensual. But a few days later she told police she didn’t remember being raped by one of the men and only found out about it later after the men told her about the encounter. She also acknowledged that she continued to go to the residence of one of the accused students and engaged in “physical contact.” She even watched television with both men.

Conveniently, these details were left out of the NPR and CPI report on Dunn’s case. Philosopher and American Enterprise Scholar Christina Hoff Sommers noted back in January that the case was not accurately reported by NPR and CPI.

If journalists could be sued for malpractice, or if journalistic outlets faced product liability like pharma companies, things would be very different.

CHRONICLES OF THE RIDICULOUS: Does Washington Post’s Steve Elliot support Rape Violence?

TO BE FAIR, NEITHER CAN ANYONE ELSE: High school students can’t figure out ‘yes means yes’ sex consent policy.

High school students being taught the new “yes means yes” consent policies are asking better questions than the people who wrote the law.

The law, which requires students to view sex as a legal contract rather than a passionate or loving act, is so confusing and unworkable that high school students in San Francisco couldn’t figure out how to make it work.

“What does that mean – you have to say ‘yes’ every 10 minutes?” asked one student.

The woman responsible for teaching these students, Shafia Zaloom, responded: “Pretty much,” adding, “It’s not a timing thing, but whoever initiates things to another level has to ask.” . . .

“The yes-means-yes standard turns almost all of us into rapists,” the commenter wrote. “We have let the radicals hijack this issue, with disastrous results for innocent young people.”

Other commenters suggest “yes means yes” policies are not difficult, as people should be communicating through sex anyway. Talking during sex isn’t for everyone, and it shouldn’t be considered rape just because no one said a word. Nonverbal communication is just as valid as verbal, but because “yes means yes” policies consider it too ambiguous, it’s either outlawed or strongly discouraged.

In essence, “yes means yes” policies have been developed to regulate sexual encounters — the most intimate of all human experiences. If you don’t have sex the way the government tells you to, you’re a rapist. And the government-approved sex manual provides a very narrow set of instructions for what isn’t rape. Basically, everything is rape now.

Leave it to the government to take all the joy out of sex.

I think that this level of government interference is actually a violation of privacy rights under Lawrence v. Texas.

TEACH WOMEN NOT TO RAPE! (CONT’D): Student Activist Resigns After Admitting Nonconsensual Sex.

A student activist at Oxford University is resigning from her political positions after admitting in a since-deleted Facebook post that she “failed to properly establish consent before every act” when having sex during a National Union of Students conference, The Guardian reported. The student activist, Annie Teriba, apologized “sincerely and profoundly” in the Facebook post for her actions, explaining that “the other party later informed me that the sex was not consensual.”

You can’t make this stuff up.

CAMPUS FEMINISTS troubled by rape shortfall.


That’s right, parents of America: nothing says “heroic role model for your daughter” like an over-rated, oversharing untalented television hack with a penchant for describing humiliating sexual experiences in great detail, lobbing unfounded accusations of rape against real people, and potentially engaging in unlawful sexual contact with a minor child. Perhaps you can even train your Kindergartener to say ridiculous things like, “I think I’m the voice of my generation,” “I blame Republicans for my lack of self-esteem,” and “Planned Parenthood killed at least a third of my classmates.” For added effect, she could tear off all of her clothes and run around naked eating cake.

She probably does that anyway, since it’s acceptable behavior for a toddler.

Just as a reminder, Dunham’s show Girls is produced by and airs on HBO, a subsidiary network of Time-Warner-CNN, the corporation that’s serving as the stenographers for tonight’s Democrat debate.

TEACH WOMEN NOT TO RAPE! (CONT’D): Volunteer Rialto choir teacher held in sex crimes case. “Veronica Lopez, 44, a Rialto resident, was booked Saturday into the West Valley Detention Center in Rancho Cucamonga on felony charges of annoying or molesting a child under 18, oral copulation with a minor and possession of child pornography.”

STACY MCCAIN: Moving the Goalposts: What Feminist ‘Rape Culture’ Discourse Is About. “American women are now less at risk of rape than at any time in the past 40 years, and the emergence of a frantic hysteria about ‘rape culture’ on college campuses therefore seems contradictory — unless you understand how feminist theory ‘problematizes’ heterosexuality. . . . What Filipovic describes as feminist ‘disenchantment with the “No means no” framework’ amounts to an admission that the recent rhetorical fury about ‘rape culture’ is actually an attempt to move the goalposts, in such a way as to criminalize normal male sexual behavior. The confusion created by so-called ‘affirmative consent’ policies (also known as ‘yes means yes’) is understandable because most people would be shocked senseless if they stopped to consider what it actually means. . . . Filipovic’s suggestion of ‘a different social model’ as the basis for a legal standard where men are deemed guilty of rape if a woman later says did not consent ‘enthusiastically’ raises the question of how such a standard could be enforced. Preventing rape is a laudable goal, but that’s not Filipovic’s goal. Her goal is to make men responsible for women’s post-coital regret.”


Little wonder then, that so many Redditors accuse [Jason “David Wong” Pargin’s] comedy site of becoming little more than a knockoff version of Salon or Gawker. 

Once upon a time, the site knew few comedic boundaries. For example, this “Star Wars” parody, created by former contributor John Cheese contains racial stereotypes, rape jokes, and intensely vulgar language. It specifically advises the easily offended to stay away.

Today, things are different. In his AmA, Wong proudly proclaimed that his writers “try really hard to walk through the reasoning behind our criticism” and explain “why seemingly innocuous things can be toxic.” Readers waiting for a punchline were disappointed: Wong was being serious.

In one viral image, the website’s former content is compared to its current fare. On one side of the image is the site’s front page as it appeared in 2010, featuring articles about superhero identities, historical identities, and writing tips. On the other is the site as it appears today – plastered with headlines like “5 ways men are trained to hate women,” “The 5 weirdest things that can cause you to be racist,” and “5 shocking realities of being transgender.” Widespread accusations that the site has transitioned from comedy to identity politics appear to have a solid basis in reality.

In July of 2010, Kathy Shaidle wrote “It’s come to this: is the ‘paper’ of record.”  At the end of that same year, Aaron Worthing of Patterico praised their surprisingly evenhanded coverage of CNN’s distorted Tea Party reporting, in article titled “ Sets the Record Straight on the Tea Party (And Eight Other Major Stories).”

Based on the above article at Big Journalism, it sounds like Cracked has since jettisoned any effort at maintaining a bipartisan audience — and not at all coincidentally, replacing humor with angry left SJW proselytizing.

WELL, THAT’S BECAUSE THEY SHOULDN’T: Another op-ed suggests colleges shouldn’t handle campus sexual assault.

It seems at least once a week an opinion piece is published urging legislators, the media and anyone who will listen to stop giving in to the idea that campus sexual assault is at crisis levels and that the only way to fix the problem is to create pseudo-courts that eviscerate due process rights.

The most recent example comes from the Courier-Journal, the main newspaper in Louisville, Ky., and is written by attorney and blogger Bridget Bush. Bush argues that these campus kangaroo courts are not the right venue for accusations of sexual assault (a felony).

“Sexual assault, when it really occurs, is a crime. It should be investigated by professional law enforcement, not campus police. It should be prosecuted by actual prosecutors — not college administrators,” Bush wrote. “Expulsion from college is not a sufficient punishment for rape: jail is. To the contrary, merely expelling a true perpetrator just sets him free to rape non-students.”

Bush included a story about a friend’s daughter, who was (wrongly) accused of sexual assault. These cases almost always involve a woman accusing a man, but in this case, a woman accused another woman.

The woman’s parents hired an attorney, as every student who is accused of sexual assault in college should do. (Sadly, many students can’t afford to do this, and are at a disadvantage while the accuser has an entire school administration office in her defense free of charge.) The attorney was not allowed to represent her during the campus hearing. She was allowed only to accompany her client as an “adviser” but not make objections or cross-examine the accuser or witnesses.

The accused woman was lucky in that witnesses came forward to dispute the claims from the accuser, and she was found not responsible. Her college degree was not disrupted (though the degrees of many male accused students who are found not responsible are disrupted) and she graduated on time. Perhaps because the accused student was a woman, and this entire “epidemic” is predicated on the “war on women” narrative that women are victims while men are perpetrated, she received leniency.


WHEN NOT HAVING ENOUGH ACTUAL RAPES IS PROBLEMATIC: Sex assault activists upset reality doesn’t conform to their beliefs.

Activists on at least two college campuses are upset that their universities aren’t showing the “epidemic” levels of sexual assault the activists believe exist.

At the University of Albany, the director of the school’s Advocacy Center for Sexual Assault, Carol Stenger, bemoaned the idea of schools wanting zero reports of sexual assault. Shouldn’t schools want zero reports? At least if it means there weren’t any sexual assaults? Well, that’s not what Stenger wants.

“But how could we have a zero? There are 17,000 students here. We know the national statistics. It’s happening everywhere,” Stenger said. “If we increase that reporting, that means more people are getting assistance. And assistance is the fastest way to healing.”

On one level I can see Stenger’s point: More reports could mean more people feel comfortable coming forward.

And there weren’t zero reports at Albany in the previous school year. There weren’t the thousands of reports that Stenger seems to want in order to fall in line with debunked national statistics (the claim that 1 in 5 women will be sexually assaulted while in college), either.

In the past year, Albany had 28 reports of sexual assault, twice as many as it had before Stenger opened her advocacy center. To get the number in line with the national statistics Stenger mentions that there would need to be more than 1,700 reports (population of 17,280, about half being women, and a fifth of them allegedly being sexually assaulted). Oh, and all 1,700 of those reports would have to be true.

For the record, those 28 reports don’t break down to what alarmist national statistics say they should.

“Nine of them were from students who asked the university not to take action. Six resulted in disciplinary proceedings that led to two student expulsions and one persona non grata order against a nonstudent,” the Times Union reported. “Six were from third parties (when reached, the alleged victims either denied any violence occurred or declined to speak). Four involved assailants whose identities were unknown. Three were outside the university’s jurisdiction.”

What’s missing here is police involvement in what are, last time I checked, still crimes.

Remember, this is all about shaming men and empowering campus activists and educrats. It has nothing to do with actually protecting students:

A more alarming issue going on at Albany beyond the school’s desire for more reports is that the person responsible for carrying out an allegedly fair adjudication process, Title IX coordinator Chantelle Cleary, is also an advocate for accusers.

“Her duties include compliance, prevention and education around sexual assault, but her biggest task is investigating reports of assault and completing reports that help the university make a finding of responsibility,” wrote the Times Union. (Emphasis added.)

So, her job is to find students responsible? Not find the truth? Even the Education Department thinks that’s a conflict of interest. She’s supposed to investigate, not advocate. If this is the way she operates, then accused students at Albany should immediately hire a lawyer, because they probably aren’t getting a fair investigation or hearing.

That’s my advice to any accused student at any school. But doesn’t a pervasive system of male-targeting and denials of due process constitute a hostile educational environment based on sex? I think that it does.

DEFINING AMBIGUOUS SEX AS RAPE, as explored by Ashe Schow at the Washington Examiner:

And yet, colleges and universities across the country are being told to determine whether such a “dance of ambiguity” — as Tavris quotes from social psychologist Deborah Davis — is indeed rape. And they are being incentivized by the federal government to find that it is.

But Tavris also reminds readers that accusations born of such ambiguity may not represent malice on the part of the accuser. In these situations, both accuser and accused are providing “honest false testimony” and both believe they are telling the truth, even though their memories and interpretations may be wrong.

“When trying to reduce sexual assault, labeling all forms of sexual misconduct, including unwanted touches and sloppy kisses, as rape is alarmist and unhelpful,” Tavris concludes. “We need to draw distinctions between behavior that is criminal, behavior that is stupid and behavior that results from the dance of ambiguity.”

In response, Stacy McCain asks the most important question left unanswered by Schow: “So, what is this ‘ambiguous sex’ kids are having at college nowadays?”

To paraphrase Monty Python, I’ve heard of ambiguous sex, but I’ve never had it.

TEACH WOMEN NOT TO LIE ABOUT RAPE: Report: 1 in 5 campus rape reports are false.

It turns out the “one-in-five number” is correct, but it’s not the one-in-five the media are reporting. Harvard University released its sexual assault statistics as part of federal regulations, and it turns out 18.1 percent of reported rapes on campus are “unfounded,” defined by Harvard police as “any report of a crime that is found to be false or baseless.”

If this number is reported anywhere in the media that’s so eager to report every faulty survey purporting to show 20 percent of women are sexually assaulted in college, you can bet they will add in all the caveats they leave out in reporting incidences of sexual assault.

They’ll say it’s “heavily edited.”

Related: One in 375 Women May Be Victims of Campus Rape at Harvard. Nearly one in five Harvard rape reports determined to be unfounded.

TEACH WOMEN NOT TO LIE ABOUT RAPE: Teen’s suicide after false rape claim.

And yet they still don’t publish the name of the false-accuser. “He was a wonderful young man with a great love of history.”

WAR ON MEN: Media ignores accusation of sexual harassment in Congress.

Normally, an accusation of sexual harassment — especially harassment from a boss to an employee in our nation’s capital — would garner massive news coverage.

That is, unless the accuser is a young man and the accused is female superior.

So far Roll Call is the only major media outlet to report the case, focusing on a male accuser alleging harassment from his female chief of staff. The man, an anonymous user of the Capitol Hill social media app The Cloakroom, identifies himself as a 26-year-old male staffer and claims to have been harassed by his 40-year-old female chief of staff.

“She has slapped my ass, talked about her vibrator, and has asked me sexual questions,” the male user posted on the app. “I have ignored them but I am thinking about going to the member” — i.e., his boss.

The male accuser had shared his story on a day when several other users posted questions asking what to do if they were being sexually harassed. The male accuser was the only one that provided specific details of harassment. There were at least 30 responses in the thread, which were provided to the Washington Examiner by another user of the app. Many suggested the accusers document the harassment and report it to an appropriate ethics committee.

One user warned that if the harassment were reported the accusers would “need to accept that your career on the Hill will be over.” One user said they were also working in a “toxic office.” Another user made a comment suggesting the male accuser should be happy about being hit on by an older woman.


MY USA TODAY COLUMN: The Unilateral War On College Men: An assistant secretary of education thinks she can rewrite rape law by writing a letter. (Bumped).

NAOMI SCHAEFER RILEY: The myth of the college ‘rape culture.’

MY USA TODAY COLUMN: The War On College Men: An assistant secretary of education thinks she can rewrite rape law by writing a letter. With a guest appearance by a surprisingly macho Lamar Alexander.

WHEN THE CLOCK STRIKES 14:59: Career Crash: Rape Hoaxer Lena Dunham, Announces End of ‘Girls,’ Flees Twitter.

In 2013 When Alec Baldwin (remember him?) was in one of his periodic “you won’t have me to kick around Twitter anymore” phases (in between kicking around photographers), Nick Gillespie described what was really driving this particular aspect of Baldwin’s rage, which seems limitless at times:

Baldwin sputters that the very tools he can use to bypass “the mainstream media and talk directly” to his audience also empowers all those dim people out there in the dark. What’s more, his followers have minds of their own. They may enjoy his turns in Glenngarry Glenn Ross and 30 Rock and guest-hosting on Turner Classic Movies but not really find his views on fracking to be worth a damn. It’s a real kick in the pants for a celebrity to be reduced to asking, “Do you think I’m really changing anybody’s mind?”

“Remember the good old days,” Gillespie added, “not just when there were only three national TV networks and one or two national newspapers, but when Hollywood studios could virtually completely control the image surrounding their contract players like halos on a saint’s shoulders? Those days are over, Baby Jane.”

As Dunham discovered herself, all that pushback from those horrible non-One Percenters starts to take its toll — seemingly one pebble at a time.

TEACH WOMEN NOT TO RAPE! (CONT’D): Teaching assistant forced schoolboy to sleep with her more than 50 times and told him she was pregnant. “If it was a man and a 15-year-old girl I’m sure the prosecution would have been harsher.”

MASS RAPES AND SEXUAL SLAVE-MARKETS IN THE MIDDLE EAST, BUT the United Nations has decided to devote its resources to studying “just how rough it is being a woman on the Internet in North America.”

There’s no doubt that internet harassment, threats and bullying are real and persistent problems. But online nastiness is a problem for both genders: While women may be subjected to particularly vile types of harassment, a Pew survey suggests that men are targeted just as much, if not more. And no matter how severe the problem is, it is absurd to suggest, as the report does, that online harassment of women in the West is comparable to the actual, physical brutality inflicted on women regularly in many parts of the world. (For example, the UN body that issued the report includes commissioners from China, where sex-selective abortion and female infanticide are notoriously widespread; from India, where the rape rate is rising so quickly that several countries have issued travel advisories for their citizens; and from the United Arab Emirates, where women who violate provisions of Sharia can be subjected to flogging or stoning).

The UN report, while surely well-meaning, represents a typical moral panic—a sense of crisis and fear blown far out of proportion. As with most propagators of panics, the authors of the report want to crack down on civil liberties.

The UN report is not “well-meaning.” It’s an effort to use the hysteria of privileged Western women to slip through global censorship in service of autocrats and oligarchs at home and abroad. The people pushing it are not good people who are going too far. They’re awful, horrible people exploiting useful idiots.

IT’S LIKE THAT WAS THE GOAL: Rape Numbers Rise Along With FBI’s ‘More Inclusive Definition’ of Rape.

SIMPLE JUSTICE: The Department Of Education’s Office Of Civil Rights Gone Rogue.

Even McIntosh, despite her dodging and weaving, concedes that Catherine E. Lhamon, Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights and head of the DoE Office of Civil Rights has gone off the reservation. She has no lawful authority to mandate colleges and universities adhere to her political whims, as reflected in her “guidance,” upon pain of losing federal funds.*

When asked (see 1:37 in the video) who gave Lhamon the authority to impose her personal will upon the nation’s colleges and universities, she responded, “with gratitude, you did when I was confirmed.”

The United States of America did not confer upon a person named Lhamon the authority to recreate Title IX in her image, to impose threat of the loss of public monies upon failure to adhere to her vision, to force a fundamental and systemic change that created a wholly new authority to rid the nation’s higher educational system of anything that might adversely affect the feelings of “marginalized” students, ascertain and punish students who are alleged to have engaged in conduct that caused such unpleasantness.

While much of the discussion, and dispute, addresses the fringes of this system of adjudication, ranging from what conduct is subject to collegiate condemnation to how it’s determined, to what’s to be done about it, precious little thought has gone into the government’s authority to do any of this in the first place.

There is none. Lhamon took it upon herself to send out a letter to her “dear colleagues,” and the nation’s higher education system chose to read her letter and say, “well, okay then.” The “dear colleague” letters are not, and never were, of binding authority upon anyone. They are not the law, and anyone asserting that this creature devouring innocent students on campus is mandated by law is wrong. Title IX does not create authority for colleges to adjudicate rape and sexual assault on campus.

You know, Administrative Law is a nice field. But in this fundamentally-transformed America, there’s a lot more administration than there is law.

IT ALLOWS FOR GREAT SELF DRAMATIZATION: From women who never faced adversity.  The Myth of the College Rape Culture.

TEACH WOMEN NOT TO RAPE! (CONT’D): Rutgers Professor Accused Of Raping Disabled, Nonverbal, Diaper-Wearing Black Man Takes The Stand In Her Own Defense.

During cross-examination, philosophy professor Anna Stubblefield, 45, insisted she and the victim – a 34-year-old African-American man who is unable to speak or eat on his own – were in a consensual relationship.

Under questioning from her lawyer Wednesday, Stubblefield explained the man could express himself through a technique known as facilitated communication in which she used her hands to help him type on a keyboard.

But the prosecution Thursday questioned the method and how the man could communicate if he wanted to stop having sex in her Newark office in 2011.

Stubblefield said he could bang on the floor.

So to be clear: A woman who’s had a single sip of alcohol is unable to consent to sex. But a profoundly retarded man who can’t speak or eat on his own can. More of that Male Privilege at work, I guess.

BY “DENYING ABORTIONS” THEY MEAN “NOT PAYING FOR ABORTIONS:” The US Just Decided to Continue Denying Abortions to Rape Victims Worldwide. By this logic, the U.S. government is also denying Corvettes to middle-aged men worldwide.

THE CAMP OF THE SAINTS IS JUST A NOVEL, RIGHT GUYS? RIGHT? GUYS? Rape and child abuse ‘are rife in German refugee camps’: Unsegregated conditions blamed as women are ‘seen as fair game’ in overcrowded migrant centres.

A culture of rape and sexual abuse is being allowed to take hold in asylum centres across Germany as Europe struggles to cope with the migrant crisis, it has been alleged,

Women’s rights groups and politicians have highlighted assaults against women and children in at least one camp.

And they suggest such incidents may be widespread, with many going unreported to the police.

Campaigners also claimed some men saw unaccompanied women as ‘fair game’, and also blamed conditions in which occupants were unsegregated by gender or nationality.

To paraphrase Chrissie Hynde, when you let in a big chunk of the bloody Third World, the rapists just come with the scenery. But hey, “it’s their culture.”

TEACH WOMEN NOT TO LIE ABOUT RAPE: Prosecutor: NHL Rape Accuser’s Mom Lied. “The Illinois district attorney handling the Patrick Kane rape investigation said Friday that a bag found at the accuser’s mother’s home—which prompted allegations of evidence tampering—was really just an ‘elaborate hoax’ by the mother. ‘The evidence in the case wasn’t tampered with nor was it compromised,’ the district attorney said. The drama around the bag included the accuser’s lawyer saying that it had been left anonymously at the mother’s home, and then retracting that claim. The lawyer subsequently resigned after saying that he no longer believed the story spun by the accuser’s mother.”

ASHE SCHOW: How schools can stop ‘civil rights’ trampling due process.

The civil rights of accusers — this right to an education in an environment where they don’t have to see men they accuse — can probably be protected without trampling the civil, legal and constitutional rights of accused students. Unfortunately, that’s not how things are currently done.

One way to accomplish this would be to let police and prosecutors handle the issue, as many in the criminal justice system have advocated. The justice system ensures that those found guilty of rape are removed from society, instead of just kicked off campus and left to prey on other victims. If police and prosecutors handle these cases, the real-world court system will protect accused student’s rights. It will also mete out punishments that are appropriately severe. Sexual assault is, after all, a crime. Perpetrators need to be held legally accountable.

But this logic falls apart if the real reason for the current ad hoc campus court system is to expel more students for political reasons rather than to actually combat a crime.

Maatz testified that by using a lower standard of evidence than at criminal trials — a preponderance of evidence, allowing administrators under federal pressure to be just 50.01 percent sure an assault was committed — is acceptable, because that’s the standard used in civil trials. But what Maatz failed to note is that civil trials also provide rules of evidence, discovery, right to effective counsel (not just a lawyer sitting silently in the background), subpoena power and sworn testimony. In civil court, there are safeguards against wrongful accusations. But such safeguards make it more difficult to convict without evidence, and so the activists are not fans of that system, either.

Nope. It’s a war on college men.

#RAPECULTURE: Not on college campuses, but in prisons. Which, I should note, are run by the government.


I thought Rich Lowry’s unstoppable tirade about El Trumpo’s figurative emasculation at the hands of Carly Fiorina would be hard to top, but the South Park guys have never been one to shy away from a challenge. In last night’s episode they showed a Canadian politician mocked up to look like Trump literally being raped to death. It was pretty fantastic.

That being said, it’s the sort of thing that’s worth stopping to think about for a second. I mean, Trey Parker and Matt Stone went there. They showed a (lightly fictionalized representation of a) major American presidential candidate being f—ked to death onscreen by one of the show’s beloved characters.

And yet, episodes of South Park have famously been bowdlerized by parent company Viacom when the show attempted to display an image of the Prophet Muhammad. This censorship occurred because of violence committed by Islamist savages in response to past displays of Muhammad.

So, to recap, at this point in American history you can show a major American political figure being anally raped until he expires but you cannot show an image of a historical figure from Islam. Why? Because Muslim radicals do not want the image shown and threatened violence if South Park exercised its freedom of expression.

My advice: If you don’t like your media coverage, behead a few people. That’s the incentive system they’ve — more or less knowingly — created.

If I were Trump, I’d tweet their home addresses. Because people who create such incentives should have to live with them. And if you don’t appreciate liberal bourgeois values, maybe you should try living without them for a while. . . .

IF YOU CAN’T STAND THE HEAT, GET OUT OF THE TV STUDIO: Is Trump Ready for Truman’s Kitchen?, asks Roger Simon:

Truman was one tough dude.  He was, it’s worth remembering, the man who told us of politics and the presidency “If you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.”  He also opined, “If you want a friend in Washington, get a dog.”  Wise word those.

Barack Obama has been a kind of anti-Truman, hardly ever living up to his word.  Two easy examples are the phony redline to Assad regarding chemical weapons and the now silly-seeming claim that the Iranians would have to allow “anytime, anywhere” inspections in order for us to sign the Iran deal.  Compared to Harry, Barack’s a wimp. That Putin has (literally) pushed him all over the map – first Ukraine, now Syria- is no accident.

So where does The Donald fit in this equation? Superficially, he seems a macho guy, but I’m not sure Truman would approve of his thin skin.  Right now Trump’s announced he’s “boycotting” Fox News because he says he’s not been treated fairly.  Megyn Kelly and Bill O’Reilly have been mean to him.  Maybe so, but at least from my vantage point, Sean Hannity’s been acting like Trump’s virtual press secretary.  You gotta take the good with bad.  Fox News is no perfect news organization, but I never heard of one that is. And if Trump is trying to play Fox against CNN, I have got bad news for him.  Get in bed with CNN and they will cut your heart out and feed it to all the wolves from here to Alaska when the general election starts.  These are the self-interested creeps who lied about Saddam’s rape rooms, remember, to keep access with the dictator. (Well, maybe Trump doesn’t.  He’s not always up on foreign affairs.)

Trump’s also angry at the gang from the Club for Growth for running commercials in Iowa pointing out that he, in the past at least, has not exactly been Grover Norquist when it comes to lowering taxes.  Well, he wasn’t. But The Donald called out CFG for running ads that were not only ”disingenuous, but replete with outright lies, false, defamatory and destructive statements and downright fabrications which you fully know to be untrue.”  The CFG, from their side, told him to “Stop whining.”

Read the whole thing.



As author of the enormously influential book Against Our Will: Men, Women and Rape, feminist writer and activist Susan Brownmiller has done more than almost any living person to combat the scourge of sexual violence. So when she critiques the excesses of today’s rape-crisis activists, you might think the activists would listen—that is, if today’s anti-rape movement were actually an open-minded, reality-based effort to combat a very real social problem rather than, as Christina Hoff Sommers memorably described it, “a panic where paranoia, censorship, and false accusations flourish.”

In an interview with New York magazine last week, the 80-year-old Brownmiller suggested that the campus rape movement is narrow, elitist, and “doesn’t accept reality.” Asked what advice she would give activists, Brownmiller said, “extend your focus to the larger percentage of women and girls who are in danger of being raped. They are more important than the college kids.” She also violated the well-known taboo against drawing a connection between sexual assault and the campus culture of binge drinking: “If you drink you lose your sense of judgment. Everybody knows that. You should know that when you are going into a fraternity party, something can happen.”

The rape crisis crusaders contemptuously brushed Brownmiller’s views aside. . . .

Ironically, Brownmiller’s swift exile from the shrinking tent that is third-wave feminism confirmed one of her other critiques of the current movement: that modern activists “think they are the first people to discover rape, and the problem of consent, and they are not.”

No, but they’re both vicious and tedious at the same time, which is surely some sort of accomplishment.

HILLARY CLINTON’S EMPIRE OF DIRT: Victor Davis Hanson writes, “The more she castigates others, the more she convicts herself:”

Hillary Clinton has developed a strange but habitual tic of railing and remonstrating about hot-button issues and egregious behaviors that offer windows into her own plagued soul, past and present. It is as if Hillary has become an ailing Johnny Cash singing “Hurt” — draped in black at the end, a faint simulacrum of his once combative self, seeking new resonance through a rocker’s lyrics for the confession of his own sins: “I wear this crown of s— / Upon my liar’s chair.”

In her Freudian calls for solutions to the sort of ethical and moral transgressions that have defined her own long career, near the end of it, Hillary Clinton seems to be asking in vain of her dissipating cadres of true believers, “What have I become?”


As she limps along, wounded, on the campaign trail, her flat, half-hearted sermons are best translated as, “You could have it all, / My empire of dirt. / I will let you down. / I will make you hurt.”

Read the whole thing — though, I must admit, I’ll still trying to wrap my brain around the notion of VDH quoting Trent Reznor…

OF COURSE IT DOES: New sexual assault survey suffers same problems as others.

A new survey released Monday purports to prove that 1 in 5 women (or more) will be sexually assaulted while in college.

The survey, conducted by the Association for American Universities, included responses from 150,000 students at 27 colleges and universities, including many Ivy League schools. Despite this large number of responses, the survey still suffers from the same problems as so many others trying to prove the existence of “rape culture” and scare colleges into expelling innocent students based on no evidence (or evidence to the contrary).

The researchers who developed the survey acknowledged fairly up front in their report that a “non-response bias” may have resulted in estimates that are “too high because non-victims may have been less likely to participate.” The researchers also acknowledged the large difference in estimates across the 27 schools, meaning that “1 in 5” is not the national percentage of victimhood, despite what every other news outlet will be claiming.

“[M]any news stories are focused on figures like ‘1 in 5’ in reporting victimization. As the researchers who generated this number have repeatedly said, the 1 in 5 number is for a few [institutions of higher education] and is not representative of anything outside of this frame,” the researchers wrote. “The wide variation of rates across IHEs in the present study emphasizes the significance of this caveat.”

Next, the survey’s developers “specifically avoided” using the words “rape” and “assault” so that, as they said, “respondents would use a set of uniform definitions when reporting on the types of events that were of interest.”

A skeptic might see this as an attempt to get higher responses by avoiding such harsh words. Indeed, that’s what the Washington Post did, as they admitted, to get “dramatically” higher results.

The other major problem with this survey and all others is the expansion of the definition of “sexual assault” to include everything from a stolen kiss to forcible rape. When broken down, 11.7 percent (about 1 in 9) of students across all 27 universities “reported experiencing nonconsensual penetration or sexual touching by force or incapacitation” since enrolling in college.

While on paper forced kissing sounds bad, think of how this has been employed in movies without it appearing to be sexual assault. (Remember when Indiana Jones sexually assaulted someone? Neither do I.) Again, on paper this seems bad, and we can all imagine a scenario where a forced kiss is indeed sexual assault, but it seems absurd to assume that all of them are.

Well, it’s not absurd if your goal is to inflate the numbers in support of “War on Women” agitprop in support of Hillary’s floundering campaign, and to create more power and positions for campus educrats.


And that brings us to the next problem with this and other surveys: Respondents not believing they were victims of sexual assault. Nearly 60 percent of students who had responded to what researchers defined as sexual assault said they did not report the incident because they did not consider it serious enough. Vast majorities of students gave this as the reason for individual classifications of assaults, including harassment (78.6 percent), sexual touching due to physical force (75.6 percent) and sexual touching due to incapacitation (74.1 percent). These were the types of “sexual assault” most students said they had experienced.

That might imply that students themselves don’t believe what they experienced was sexual assault in the way that the media and the White House want them to believe.

Hey, you can’t have phony solutions if you don’t first have a phony crisis.

GRADUALLY, AND WITH MALICE AFORETHOUGHT: Scott Greenfield: How Did Title IX Turn Into A Rape Law?

I’D LIKE TO SEE SOME PRANKSTER AMEND THIS BILL SO THAT IT ALSO APPLIES TO MICHIGAN LEGISLATORS: Michigan lawmakers to introduce ‘yes-means-yes’ consent bills.

Michigan has had a rough month so far when it comes to campus sexual assault.

Earlier this month, the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights determined that Michigan State University had violated the federal anti-discrimination law Title IX in part because the school didn’t open an investigation into an alleged sexual assault, even though the accuser didn’t want one.

And just last week, the University of Michigan agreed to throw out its sex assault finding against Drew Sterrett, who had sued the university alleging his due process rights had been violated and that he had not committed the assault.

But despite what should be a wakeup call to rethink the way the state treats accused students, Michigan lawmakers have decided to introduce a bill that would result in more lawsuits like Sterrett’s, and maybe more investigations from OCR. “Yes-means-yes” — or “affirmative consent” — bills broaden the definition of sexual assault while narrowly or vaguely defining consent.

It labels drunk sex as rape, in some cases even if the woman (men are not absolved from drinking, but women are) had only one drink. In fact, under these laws, the only kind of sex that isn’t rape is question-and-answer-style sex, where each person in the encounter must ask and answer constant questions about consent. “May I touch you here?” “Yes, may I touch you here?” and so forth. Of course, an accuser never has to prove that she also asked such questions, or that the questions weren’t asked, or that consent wasn’t given.

No, the burden of proof is on the accused student, after the fact.

These bills are unAmerican, and in a just America their sponsors would fear tar and feathers.

OF COURSE SHE DOES: Hillary Clinton pushes campus sexual assault myths. If she told the truth, that rape on and off campus has been plummeting for over 20 years, her whole War On Women campaign would collapse.

MILO YIANNOPOULOS: Sexbots: Why Women Should Panic.

Another reason men might be enthusiastic about female-free sex is obvious: the sociopathic, man-hating feminism we see so much of on television and in our newspapers today is turning men off dealing with women altogether. Constant whinging about “toxic masculinity,” “manspreading,” “mansplaining,” the bogus gender pay gap and the absurd campus rape culture myth are pushing the sexes apart, fostering mistrust and fear.

The fact that wacky, misandrist intersectional feminists are an unpopular minority — as a result of their horrid influence, just 18 per cent of women now call themselves feminists — doesn’t matter because they hold court in the media and on campuses, and young women are starting to parrot discredited and absurd nonsense about the “oppressive patriarchy,” picking up on a victimhood script they believe they can leverage for social and professional advantage.

In response, men are simply checking out, giving up on women and retreating into porn and video games. I call it the “sexodus,” and its immediate victims aren’t men, but women, who are being consigned to singledom as men lose interest in them or are simply too exhausted or fearful of the social consequences of approaching girls romantically. The truth is, men get along okay without women, unlike women, who become shrieking, neurotic messes if they’re still single in their 30s.

Sorry, no offence, but it’s true: women have been getting steadily unhappier since the Second World War, when they first entered the workplace in large numbers. It sounds bizarre, but ever since the rise of feminism, every decade has seen another slump in female morale. Women now report themselves more generally depressed and more likely to think about suicide than at any time in history. (The vast majority of suicides are still men, by the way. Women talk about it endlessly, but rarely pull it off.)

Gee, somebody should write a book on this.


A collection of previously censored films made by women will be shown in Washington, D.C., in November. The films — part of the Censored Women’s Film Festival — highlight the plight of women around the world who face genital mutilation, “honor killings” and child marriages.

The films have caused a backlash in various parts of the world. “India’s Daughter,” a film about the gang-rape of a young girl, was banned in India after the filmmakers revealed they had interviewed one of the rapists in prison. “Honor Diaries,” another film to be shown at the festival, received a negative reaction from the Council on American-Islamic Relations, which tried to keep the film from being screened across the U.S.

“Persepolis,” a graphic novel published in 2000 documenting the childhood of an Iranian girl during the 1979 Islamic Revolution, was banned from Chicago Public Schools in 2013. A film adaptation of the novel, which was nominated for an Academy Award, will be included in the festival.

CAIR’s efforts at censorship, of course, are no surprise.

OF COURSE, HIS REPUTATION WILL NEVER FULLY RECOVER: A Campus Rape Ruling, Reversed: The University of Michigan has vacated its findings against a student accused of sexual assault, after he sued the school for violating his civil rights.

The sexual encounter in question took place in March 2012, in the spring semester of Sterrett’s freshman year. Legal documents described how the female student, CB, who was a friend of Sterrett’s, asked to stay in his room because her roommate was having guests. He expected her to sleep on a mat on the floor and was surprised when she got into his bunk bed. Soon the two were kissing, then more; CB asked Sterrett about a condom, and he got one. Their encounter went on for so long, and was so loud, that Sterrett’s roommate, who was trying to sleep in the top bunk, sent Sterrett an annoyed Facebook message about being kept awake. The roommate later gave a sworn statement that he was close enough to the pair that he would have heard, and intervened, if CB had said no or objected.

The semester ended, and Sterrett and CB left school. The events that prompted the university investigation of Sterrett are described in an affidavit sworn on his behalf by LC, a friend of CB and her sophomore-year roommate. While CB was home for the summer, her mother discovered her diary, in which the young woman described her drinking, drug-taking, and sexual encounters. (In her own deposition, CB confirmed the contents of the diary.) After confronting her daughter with her discovery, CB’s mother drove her to campus, where CB made her accusation. She never reported it to the police.

During the summer, campus officials informed Sterrett via Skype that a student had made an allegation against him. When the tone of the interview turned hostile, he asked if he should retain a lawyer. He was told if he ended the interview this would be reported to the university and the investigation would go on without him. He continued to talk.

Sterrett was never provided with the charges against him in writing. The Skype interview turned out to be his sole encounter with the campus officials investigating and deciding his case. He never had a chance to question his accuser. He was not told the names of the witnesses the university interviewed in its inquiry. In November of his sophomore year he received a “Sexual Misconduct Investigation Report,” which concluded he was responsible for the accusation against him.

Everyone involved in this travesty should be fired, and the University of Michigan should have to pay a large damage award. Vindication is nice, but not enough. And since the rape charges are unfounded, shouldn’t the “victim’s” name be public now?

Meanwhile, male students, and parents of male students, have a reason to be suspicious of the University of Michigan, which costs at least $27,812 per year in-state and $57,432 per year out-of-state.

WHEN YOU’VE LOST ANDREA MITCHELL: White Women ‘Abandoning’ Hillary Clinton ‘in Droves,’ Mitchell Reports:

During Tuesday’s edition of NBC’s Today morning program, news anchor Andrea Mitchell addressed a trend that probably has former secretary of state Hillary Clinton and her campaign staff feeling “trumped:” White women are “abandoning” the Democratic front-runner in the 2016 presidential campaign “in droves.”

The host of Andrea Mitchell Reports — which airs at 12 noon weekdays on the MSNBC cable channel — started her report by stating: “Hillary Clinton is reaching out to that group that she’d always counted on: white women voters who are now abandoning her in droves during the last two months. “

Gee, I can’t imagine why women would be turned off by the Clintons.

RELATED: In Shift, Hillary Clinton Says Rape Victims Have Right to Be Believed.

IT’S COME TO THIS: Liberals bemoan new campus rape law which could involve police in prosecuting crimes.

ALEX GRISWOLD: No, Hillary: Rape Victims Don’t Have A “Right To Be Believed.”

Does Hillary Clinton believe her husband is a rapist?

Now before you bite my head off, the question is a fair one given what the Democratic candidate said in a speech before a “Women for Hillary” event earlier today:

“To every survivor of sexual assault…You have the right to be heard. You have the right to be believed. We’re with you.”

The vast majority of conservatives and liberals who are deeply concerned about sexual assault will agree with Clinton’s larger point. I don’t think anyone would disagree that victims of sexual assault who come forward have a right to be heard, a right to be taken seriously, and a right to have their claims thoroughly investigated. But Clinton goes a step further and says they have “the right to be believed.”

Well, as it happens, her own husband has been accused of sexual assault. Not once, but several times. And contrary to Clinton’s bold new standard, the media and Democrats alike elected not to believe a single accusation. “In media accounts, [Paula Jones] tends to be portrayed as a trailer-park floozy digging for money and celebrity,” Newsweek admitted back in 1997. Clinton’s own stalwart ally James Carville was just as blatant: “Drag a $100 bill through a trailer park, there’s no telling what you’ll find,” he said.

Accountability is for the little people.

UNEXPECTEDLY! Sanctuary City enjoys skyrocketing rates of murder, rape.

MORE ON REP. JARED POLIS (D-CO): Mothers of sons falsely accused of rape hammer congressman who called for expulsion of innocents. “Being expelled from college does not simply lead to transfer to another college, as permanent disciplinary records with ominous findings make it difficult or impossible to enter another institution or find employment. Furthermore, the profound and lasting emotional trauma associated with a false accusation, just as for victims of assault, is not a matter to be taken lightly. Many victims of false accusations suffer from PTSD, depression and other health issues as a result of their experiences.”

If you watch the video, Polis’s laugh (at about 1:54) is rather creepy.

REMEMBER, SHE ALSO HAD A WHITE HOUSE CONNECTION: Woman who introduced Rolling Stone to Jackie leaves UVA.

Emily Renda, the sexual assault activist who introduced Rolling Stone to “Jackie,” a woman who lied about being gang-raped, has left the University of Virginia.

Her reason for leaving is the fallout from the now-discredited Rolling Stone article. The unraveling of the article, coupled with the attacks on Renda in the media, have led to a year of “all hell and hopelessness.” Renda has decided to go to law school far away from U.Va., and told Vanity Fair that she has abandoned her work with sexual assault survivors.

“I don’t want to say it’s been the worst year of my life, but it has been the worst year of my life,” Renda said.

Renda met Jackie in the spring of 2014, while working as an activist. Jackie told Renda her story of being gang-raped by fraternity members at a party (parts of this story appeared differently in the story Jackie told Rolling Stone). Renda would later share Jackie’s story during testimony before the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions committee, omitting Jackie’s name.

Well, it was a pretty bad year for the falsely accused frat guys, too, who suffered a sort of University-sanctioned lynching.

More on the White House connection here:

Emily Renda, a UVA advocate for sexual assault victims, has been identified as the person who helped steer the author of the Rolling Stone article to the student identified in the story only as “Jackie” who said she was gang-raped by seven university students. Ms. Renda had previously met with the White House Task Force to Protect Students Against Sexual Assault, a committee created by President Obama. The administration says it sought her input as a “stakeholder” on the issue. . . .

The U.S. Department of Education has declined to answer Freedom of Information requests for telephone logs and other information that might show to what degree, if any, the White House orchestrated the rape story at a time when it was pushing hard to expand the role of the federal government in combating sexual violence on college campuses. The Institute on Government and Media Integrity has asked Congress to further inquire.

So far, I don’t think UVA is talking, either. In fact: Review of Univ. of Va.’s debunked gang rape to remain under wraps.

An independent review of the University of Virginia’s handling of a student’s gang rape allegations will not be publicly released because of privacy concerns.

The review focuses on the Charlottesville school’s handling of an alleged gang rape that was reported in graphic detail by Rolling Stone magazine. The piece was later retracted.

In an email from the school’s Freedom of Information Act officer late last month, U.Va. rejected a request from The Associated Press to publicly release an executive summary of the review.

The officer cited a letter from a U.S. Department of Education official who said its release would violate the Family Education Rights and Privacy Act.

How convenient for all concerned. Was the official Catherine Lhamon, by any chance?

TEACH WOMEN NOT TO RAPE! (CONT’D): Another female coach with a female student. “I want you to 50 Shades me.”

Remember, male teachers are rare because people fear they might be sexual predators.

TEACH WOMEN NOT TO RAPE! (CONT’D): Woman gets prison time for sex assault of teenage girl.

USA TODAY: ISIL haunts 9/11 anniversary: 14 years ago, Americans learned they can’t ignore the terror of extremists.

SIL represents the embodiment of evil in the modern world, and it mustn’t be allowed to establish a foothold from which to plot attacks against the United States or to inspire so-called lone wolf sympathizers to do so. But the U.S.-led effort to “degrade and ultimately defeat” ISIL has shown underwhelming results.

The effort’s seemingly deliberate pace is of little comfort to those being raped, shot and beheaded while the West figures out how to take on a group that has attracted an estimated 20,000 fanatical foreign fighters and defied predictions that it would never get this far.

It’s almost as if Obama doesn’t really want to stop them.