<p>I resent that remark directed at me. You have no idea what I think, pizza. I had a friend raped while babysitting. Of course she went to police and The guy was convicted. She was in high school so I do not understand a college woman not doing so. Anna’s story has much, much more corroboration than Jackie and she eventually did go to police. </p>
<p>I don’t understand any call for lynching anyone without due process of law. </p>
<p>@TatinG wrote: “You have no idea what I think, pizza”. </p>
<p>That is a rather silly comment considering that you have had dozens of posts on how you feel about this subject. </p>
<p>And I am curious who it is that is left commenting on this thread that you think wants to lynch people without due process? I’ve read every comment and off the top of my head I don’t remember anyone since the first day or two that has expressed an opinion like that. </p>
<p>Lynch as in assuming guilt without a fair hearing or trial.</p>
<p>Where I am from, we are very careful about throwing the word “lynch” around. I respectfully ask you reconsider your choice of language. No one accused here is in danger of being lynched as far as I can tell.</p>
<p>No, no one is going to be “lynched” ,but some people are “in danger” of having their reputations ruined or at least questioned. With the internet these days, even unproven allegations are probably going to show up for years. Our generation did not face that. Once your name is connected to any controversy, whether male or female, whether you made an allegation or an allegation was made against you, . it will increase your possible exposure. </p>
<p>Fair hearing? Tell that to Anna.</p>
<p>
</a></p>
<p>So now Swarthmore does this:</p>
<p>“Now, a retired state Supreme Court justice hired by the school hears all sexual misconduct cases, and the college determines punishments for those found guilty.”</p>
<p>Is this enough, though? </p>
<p>No, of course this is not enough. There should be both a criminal investigation by the police and an administrative/disciplinary process by the university. Putting one in place does not remove the need for the other.</p>
<p>On many campuses you effectively get neither, so this would be a step forward, not a complete solution.</p>
<p>"So now Swarthmore does this:</p>
<p>“Now, a retired state Supreme Court justice hired by the school hears all sexual misconduct cases, and the college determines punishments for those found guilty.”</p>
<p>Is this enough, though?"</p>
<p>This makes more sense than what most schools do. But I still think it is the wrong way to go. Even a high quality faux college court is still faux. When it comes to rape and murder, colleges need to support and coordinate with the real criminal justice system. Not try to operate their own system.</p>
<p>As a UVA grad, I know that there are some very serious problems with how its famous Honor Code courts work. And that is with lots of resources, focus and prestige behind that system. Even though the real criminal justice system has its own issues dealing with rape, for high level felonies like rape you need to leave it to the pros. Not Dean Wormer. </p>
<p>The mere idea that rape is a scholastic conduct problem (while well meaning) is a big part of the problem. In a faux college court, good luck getting perps to cooperate or be truthful (which any court system needs to function) if the consequence is expulsion (i.e. academic death penalty). So you invariably wind up with mediation, slaps on the wrist and all those other weak sauce outcomes that greatly diminish the seriousness of the offense. </p>
<p>
Yes, that’s what I think, too. But Swat thinks it’s a big improvement. I guess time will tell.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes, they should. Change in the way the student body views drinking and sexual assault is the only way that actual systemic change is going to take place on campuses everywhere, with and without Greek systems. </p>
<p>And in some places–such as Dartmouth–they are taking strong steps to do just that. Of course, as has been pointed out many times, the fraternities and sororities there are generally quite different from those at Tailgate U, as one poster likes to describe her alma mater.</p>
<p>Regarding who lived in the house and who was and was not a pledge: a) there is no reason to think that those involved actually lived in the house, b) there is no evidence that ALL of them were actual members, c) Cantor’s younger son could easily have been there since he was a legacy from a very prominent family who was a shoo-in for a bid, d) any other kid who was being dirty-rushed could have been there too, and e) the phrase Jackie reported about “don’t you want to be a brother” could easily have applied to a dirty-rushee as well as a pledge, or even someone’s kid brother visiting from HS. It can be viewed as implying an initiation rite, but it can just as easily just be generalized “I dare you” trash talk.</p>
<p>Again, to those who continue to present this as either you deal with law enforcement OR the school, no. This is a problem on college campus. The colleges need to address and clean up the absolute fact that at the very least half of their incoming class is in danger from predators on campus. The colleges have a crime problem and they need to get it cleaned up. </p>
<p>Law enforcement and criminal proceedings need to be followed and supported as well. I consider providing people to go with to the hospital, the police station, to facilitate humane and rational treatment of the survivors to be the best course of action. Telling an 18 year old rape victim her options and leaving her to her own devices is insane. There are states where getting a rape kit done can take all day. If you really want to clean the criminals out, you will do what it takes to get it done. </p>
<p>“Telling an 18 year old rape victim her options and leaving her to her own devices is insane.” If someone doesn’t even report an alleged rape to their school until months after the fact, all the rape kits in the world are useless.</p>
<p>As I’ve said before, in the 70s there was a big push to get women to go to the police immediately, not destroy evidence by bathing, to have specialized police officers, and so on. There was a big outcry against the typical “try the victim” tactics that discredited things such as implying that because she would have sex with one man, she would have sex with another, etc. IIRC, there was a significant uptick in the reporting rate. (I’ve also said that this was before the idea of “date rape” was widely discussed.)</p>
<p>What happened to all that? Was it effective? Did it make a difference?</p>
<p>A thoroughly researched, sourced story on campus rape at Oregon State. The players were only suspended one game. The victim did not press charges and is sorry for her decision now. The alleged assailants did talk to the reporter.</p>
<p><a href=“Canzano: 16 years after Oregon State football gang-rape allegation, Brenda Tracy steps from the shadows - oregonlive.com”>Canzano: 16 years after Oregon State football gang-rape allegation, Brenda Tracy steps from the shadows - oregonlive.com;
<p>“Again, to those who continue to present this as either you deal with law enforcement OR the school, no. This is a problem on college campus.”</p>
<p>Totally agree. I just think it is dumb for colleges to run a parallel faux court system for rape prosecutions. We would never let a school do that for murder or armed robbery. Why should they being doing that for rape? It is a class A felony! Not an academic misconduct issue!</p>
<p>The schools should focus on bystander intervention, awareness, risk reduction, victim support and criminal justice system support (i.e. rape kits and trained nurses at the student health center on call on Saturday night). Maybe pay to have the local police station an SVU investigator there too.</p>
<p>But only real detectives and real prosecutors for rapes. And real due process for the accused too. Not Dean Wormer. </p>
<p>Tailgate U - On one of the many MIT threads, someone used the phrase “almost Tailgate U” as a comparison to “elite university.” It may not have been the intent, but I understood it as a pejorative. So, naturally, I decided to reclaim it. As well as “special snowflake” also used on those threads. I am using as one of my models the young women who have reclaimed “slut.” FWIW</p>
<p>My kids went to schools like Dartmouth, and to be honest, the campus culture seemed no different to me than at Tailgate U. I did think the campus culture at Swarthmore was very different.</p>
<p>I suggest we avoid mentioning any names of UVa fraternity members at this time, until there has been a real criminal investigation.</p>
<p>I’d hate to be a UVa student right now named “Drew.” (That probably was not a real name anyway.)</p>
<p>I read this article on Red State earlier today that is arguing that the RS article is not credible because it does not have enough facts/evidence and attacking “Liberals” for thinking the facts do not matter. <a href=“http://www.redstate.com/2014/12/04/uva-rape-case-liberals-dismayed-learn-facts-matter/”>http://www.redstate.com/2014/12/04/uva-rape-case-liberals-dismayed-learn-facts-matter/</a></p>
<p>As an lifelong independent, a couple of things struck me about this.</p>
<ol>
<li><p>I did not thing that this could be made into a Conservative vs. Liberal issue. Apparently that was naive.</p></li>
<li><p>I was aware that some Conservative commentators like George Will have argued that rape victims are just faking it to gain status, but I did not generalize it to be a Conservative in general thing. </p></li>
<li><p>The most conservative members of my family seem to take pride in their fact-free views, and proudly announce that they base their views on faith and not on facts, so when did the lack of facts come to concern conservatives?</p></li>
</ol>
<p>Can someone help me understand the politics of this? I am baffled. </p>
<p>If we decide to abolish rape culture, it upsets the status quo. Everything has been fine up to now, why on earth rock the boat? If we decide to admit everything hasn’t been fine, then we have to take responsibility and acknowledge our complicity. It is easier to believe this is all a hoax, a feminist vendetta, a liberal agenda.</p>
<p>If you are looking at the world through white male heterosexual eyes, why would you want to change anything? It’s all good. And some women just don’t support other women. They want to be part of the male power structure. Of course, there are many men who understand the issues and are fighting for change. I am grateful. Many young people don’t see this as a party issue, but they do understand it is political. It’s a challenge to patriarchy.</p>
<p>adding after reading your link: If you want to maintain the status quo, it is useful to shift attention. You can discuss whether the Rolling Stone article is true, how true, whether innocent UVA boys will be harmed, whether some hypothetical boys may be falsely accused, instead of …</p>
<p>What in the world are we going to do about the continuing horrific problem of campus rape?</p>