There are two separate controversies this week over rape stories that have been challenged by critics. Both stories involve leading U.S. universities. Unlike the Duke Lacrosse controversy, neither school is accused of wrongdoing. Rolling Stone magazine has apologized for shocking failures in reporting a sensational rape story where a woman named Jackie alleged that she was gang raped at the Phi Kappa Psi fraternity house, but the Washington Post reported on discrepancies in the account, including the fact that no party was held at the fraternity on the day in question. In the meantime, Lena Dunham’s story of being raped in college has been challenged as containing discrepancies and the man who has faced the most accusations is now considering a libel lawsuit against the author and director.
The Rolling Stone Controversy
Rolling Stone magazine ran the story containing detailed accounts of the rape of Jackie, but it agreed to a demand by the alleged victim not to interview with accused man. It was an astonishing lapse of journalistic principles and the magazine also failed to fully investigate the details of the alleged rape. Notably, however, the magazine issued an apology but then removed this line: “In the face of new information, there now appear to be discrepancies in Jackie’s account, and we have come to the conclusion that our trust in her was misplaced.” That line was replaced with this line “These mistakes are on Rolling Stone, not on Jackie.”
The story “A Rape on Campus” by Sabrina Rubin Erdely, discussed how Jackie was a freshman in 2012 when she was forced to perform oral sex by seven men at the prestigious Phi Kappa Psi fraternity house. Various people raised questions over the reporting, including the fact that some of Jackie’s closest friends questioned her account despite Erdely’s insistence that her friends’ accounts were “consistent” with her story. These inconsistencies include Jackie’s initial claim, according to friends and the Washington Post, that she had been raped by 5 men and then later claiming it was 7. Other friends said that there was an absence of any physical injury despite the claim of the magazine that she emerged bloodied and battered. The fraternity also said that there was no party on the day identified by Jackie and that her identification of “Drew” did not match anyone at the house and that in conflict with her claims, no one at the house worked as lifeguards at the pool. One of the named attackers was from a different house and no one by his name is a member at the Phi Kappa Psi. The man named said that he never met Jackie.
The fact that the magazine agreed not to interview the accused was widely condemned. The magazine stated that “[b]ecause of the sensitive nature of Jackie’s story, we decided to honor her request not to contact the man who she claimed orchestrated the attack on her nor any of the men who she claimed participated in the attack for fear of retaliation against her.” A Rolling Stone editor claimed that it could not reach some of the men, though others including the Post were able to do so.
The Post details clearly identified individuals who were never contacted by the magazine. The Post reported that the person identified in the Rolling Stone story as “Cindy” told it that Erdely’s version of events was “completely false.”
The story of the brutal rape is still available on the Internet with the addition of the apology.
The Lena Dunham Controversy
A man named “Barry” is reportedly considering a libel lawsuit against Lena Dunham for her account of being raped at Oberlin College. She supplied details of the rape by a “mustachioed campus Republican” named Barry. Dunham’s widely acclaimed memoir, Not That Kind of Girl, included an identification of Barry as the rapist and describes him as a 19-year-old student who was known as a “poor loser” at poker with a flamboyant mustache who worked at the campus library and hosted a radio talk show. She also stated that Barry was the “campus’s resident conservative.”
The seemed to reduce the suspects to one man named Barry who was on the campus at the time and named Barry who claims that he has been hounded by the allegation that he is a rapist and that Dunham has refused to speak with him or clear his name.
Dunham’s high visibility has made the rape allegation international news and that has magnified the alleged injury to Barry. She received a $3.7 million advance for the memoir and is a leading producer, writer, and director, including her celebrated work on on the HBO series Girls.
Dunham not only claims that Barry raped her but gives highly graphic details of the encounter. She also quotes a friend who said that after she “once her friend Julia woke up the morning after sex with Barry, and the wall was spattered with blood. Spattered, she said, “like a crime scene.” But he was nice and took her for the morning-after pill and named the baby they weren’t having.”
The conservative website Breitbart has investigated the claims and identified what it says are clear discrepancies. The Washington Post blog has said that those discrepancies offer a solid basis for a libel action.
It is difficult to judge the merits of the claim. However, a libel lawsuit could force a response from Dunham and discovery into her account. Such an action could be based on not just libel but false light. The latter tort is defined
in Restatement (Second) of Torts, Sec. 652E as:
(1) the portrayal must be found to be “highly offensive to a reasonable person” and
(2) the actor had knowledge of or acted in reckless disregard as to the falsity of the publicized matter and the false light in which the other would be placed.
The risk for Dunham is that there may be enough details — and alleged discrepancies — to get such a case to discovery and possibly trial. Discovery could result in depositions of an array of acquaintances and Dunham herself under oath. “Barry” has reportedly set up a donation site to pay for “costs and related fees associated with defending Barry’s reputation including, but not limited to, potentially pursuing Lena Dunham and Penguin Random House for harm caused to Barry’s reputation from the publication and sale of Ms. Dunham’s memoir.”
Teach your sons not to rape.
Inga – I think it would be better to teach your daughters not to accuse rape when then hasn’t been one or lie about it and accuse the wrong people. The entire Greek system at UVa has been shut down because of this false story.
People are more than willing to excuse a rapist based on the victim not following some nonsensical rules to prevent rape, and ignore the fact that the only reason women, and men, are ever raped is because someone chose to rape them.
No one is willing to excuse a rapist. What people are UNwilling to do is to accuse someone(s) of being a rapist based on no evidence whatsoever. Unwilling to jump on the bandwagon of blame without some facts. That is not excusing a rapist. That is being a rational thinking human being.
No one is excusing a rapist. Raping is a crime and should be punished.
As to the “nonsensical rules” I have no idea what you think those are. But….as a woman who has been in some pretty dicey situations in my lifetime and has never been raped, I can attest that there ARE things that a woman can do to prevent the chances of being assaulted. Chances……not necessarily the event but the chances. Like wearing a seatbelt reduces the chances of being hurled through the windshield, so do some common sense actions reduce the CHANCE of rape and assault.
None of those things are nonsensical but rather common sense rules to protect yourself and rules that I learned from my mother and she probably from her mother and so on.
Taking personal responsibility for your actions and being aware of your surroundings is not nonsensical. The world is FULL of danger. If you walk through it thinking you are protected by yours special snowflake status as a young woman, you are just setting yourself up to become prey from those very few men out there who are actual rapists.
None of these are to blame the victim. But they ARE common sense. And not just for women either. Men need to pay attention as well.
1. Don’t get falling down drunk or do drugs. It puts you in a vulnerable position and labels you as an easy mark for rape or robbery.
2. Don’t go out with people who you don’t know and who you haven’t had some sort of previous interaction with. AKA. Strangers
3. Don’t go to parties with strangers in locations where you can’t get away easily if you are cornered Go in a group with girl friends or guy friends who will have your back.
4. Dress and act appropriately. People judge your character and your “availability” based on your appearance. Just like a job interview, you are judged by your demeanor and your dress…….so will the guys out in the wild wild world do the same and they WILL act on the clues you give them. If you are a guy you might also draw unwelcome attention by your appearance and actions.
5. Don’t walk down dark streets or alleys alone at night. Putting yourself into a dangerous situation. Predators DO exist who might want to rape you….or worse. Think Ted Bundy.
6. ALWAYS be aware of your situation, of the people around you, how they are acting……. of your own actions. Be prepared.
7. People are not always “nice” and you’d better remember that. You are not protected by your sex, social status, or anything else. You are responsible for YOU.
If you can’t follow common sense rules then you probably shouldn’t be walking around in public without a keeper.
Will bad things happen even IF you are diligent and careful. Yes. This is why we have police and procedures to get justice when an ACTUAL incident happens. Protect yourself. Take responsibility for your life.
Karen, when you’re asked if you have preconceived ideas about the innocence or guilt of the accused, you won’t be serving on that jury if you say yes to either question.
A claim of rape cannot be dismissed out of hand as false because there may be repercussions for the potential perps. AGAIN, we DO NOT have all the facts. I suspect more will be forthcoming in the days and weeks to come.
Michael H:
How often do people like Inga serve on a jury? How often have people like this ignored evidence, like in Michael Brown, or the evidence of faulty testimony in the above topic, but just felt like a crime had still been committed, facts be damned?
Who knows, maybe a completely different man or men assaulted her at a completely different time and place. But that does not excuse falsely naming people as gang rapists. So far, not a single detail has proven accurate. That is considered an unreliable accuser.
Oh, and for reference in my above link, Inga was posting as Annie at that time.
Inga – yep. They can see comments like mine:
“Have you never examined a male rape victim, as a nurse? I followed the Catholic priest pedophile scandal, and it is my understanding that many of the victims felt guilty and ashamed, because they responded in some way to the actions of their rapist. So, no, I do not blame the victim, or assign him any responsibility, of a sexual predator on the grounds that he ejaculated.
Very young boys are capable of erections, and ejaculations are possible at young ages. Do we blame these children for “enjoying it” when a predator grooms them and victimizes them?
Not in an ethical society.”
Now compare them to yours, above, and see who’s truly compassionate about rape victims? Who is more just, me, above, showing compassion for men wrongfully accused of rape, who have been PROVEN not to be involved, and for actual rape victims of any gender, or you, with your snide comments about frat boys?
Inga:
Do YOU hear yourself? An unproved claim of rape, a claim with no evidence, is an okay thing because it maybe happened, and even though there is exactly zero proof, we can just go ahead and ruin the lives of the wrongly accused men.
Horrible.
Daniel:
Let me get this straight. If you were named as someone who gang raped a girl at college, and in fact you had never met her, and your frat didn’t even have a party that night, and no non-frat members were there, and every single one of the details was wrong, you would tell the online community not to question her story??? Because although this story was full of holes, it revictimizes real rape victims and makes them afraid to come forward if a scandal breaks about false allegations?
Karen, I’m glad you posted the link to the thread. Now folks can read the ENTIRE discussion.
Michael, do you hear yourself? “Her claim of rape is false” so you hav supernatural powers of discernment Haz? Or is it so because YOU say so. Unreal. Way to go conservatives, revictimize a possible rape victim.
Inga:
Here is your comment from 9/4/14:
“And Squeeky, I bet he didn’t get raped kicking and screaming. Something enjoyable must’ve happened for an ejaculation to have occurred.”
And here is the entire thread on a man who had to pay child support to his pedophile female rapist who groomed him at 14, to see the entire thread:
http://jonathanturley.org/2014/09/04/statutory-rape-victim-ordered-to-pay-child-support-or-face-jail/
Hear Hear! Daniel @12:19.
Inga, are you even paying attention? Her claim of rape is false. Rolling Stone has backed away from it. They have called Jackie’s story “not reliable”.
Jackie’s on-campus support group has backed away from it. Her friends have backed away from it. There is no evidence, no police report. Nothing.
That you wish it was true does not make it so.
Inga:
“However, you have an issue with mischaracterization of other people’s comments here on RIL,”
Please provide an example of where I have either lied, or mischaracterized your, or anyone else’s comments. Mischaracterization is saying someone said or implied something that they did not, or taking a quote entirely out of context. It’s impossible to take your quote out of context because I reposted it in its entirety.
I copied your ENTIRE comment above and pasted it. I told you what I thought of it. What did you mean to say?
I tire of your repeated declaration that I do not tell the truth. Because you have never once proven it, because it didn’t happen. You can disagree with my opinion, but I am no liar, nor have I ever pretended to be anyone else.
What you see is what you get with me, and if I have an opinion, I say it.
Haz, as other’s have said. We do NOT know if Jackie made a false claim of rape, despite you trying to say she did. Conjecture is not reasonable doubt.
Inga – you clearly are tone-deaf on this issue. All the facts reported by Rolling Stone about the rape are wrong. If she was raped, she was not raped by these guys, at this place, at this time. That could not be clearer. It would seem to me that, unless she was concussed during the incident, she would have a clear memory of the time and place and would give those facts to Rolling Stone, who would then report them. Even if she was concussed she would have some memory of the event, at least the place and some of the people. This is beginning to look a lot like Twana Brawley. Where is Al Sharpton when we need him?
So, now the question is, who led whom down the garden path? Jackie or Rolling Stone? Who made up the ‘facts’?
Make sure that you make such a huge issue over these two claims that no genuine victim will ever come out and report the crime in fear of what the goon squad will do to their character.
And who is/are the genuine victim(s)? Show the evidence. The facts.
The genuine victims are the men who have been wrongly accused of committing a crime, and not Lena Dunham, or Jackie. Were they actually genuine victims, neither Random House nor Rolling Stone would be backpedaling away from the stories at full speed.
Karen, do whatever you want. If I regret what I said, I usually own up to it. However, you have an issue with mischaracterization of other people’s comments here on RIL, THEY have noticed it also, not just me. I will not allow you to mischaracterize my words. Won’t happen.
Paul:
Your comments about the actual reported rapes being very low compared to the 7500 expected reminded me of a psychology class that I could. The topic was preconceived notions and our inability to recalibrate them with the facts. In the exercise, participants were asked how many murders they thought happened in NYC every year. The answer was really high. Then they were given the actual figure, which was quite a bit lower. After a little time passed, the participants were asked the same question, how many murders happen annually in NYC. They again gave grossly inflated numbers, only slightly lower than the first time.
Yes, rape really happens. No, half the women on campus are not tackled on their way to class. You get a cross section of society on campus, and you’re bound to have low characters. Combine that with alcohol and opportunity and there will be problems. Not everyone at college is a great guy. But not everyone is a rapist, either. Parents should teach their daughters how to stay safe at parties, or any situation, just like how to change a tire. And boys should be taught not to take advantage of girls who are sloppy drunk and making bad decisions.
Karen – ASU is an open campus served by light rail with plenty of parking and bike racks. Prime hunting grounds for a rapist, I would think. However, the numbers do not fit the ‘feminist’ numbers.
“I would have never guessed that people would condone false accusations.”
Haz,
Interesting thread and that is my takeaway from it as well. To abide by false accusations all in the name of “compassion” completely discredits the point and the person making it. It is quite possible to be both compassionate and reasonable. Our compassion should be towards LEGITIMATE victims and our passion should be for justice. I’ve seen nothing in this case demonstrating the victim isn’t actually the accused and I have not seen them receive the justice they deserve.
That’s my compassionate take.
For example, it’s annoying to once again see the conversation being moved off of the actual topic, false claims of rape. So we now have orange boxes and Paul’s abundance of comments presented to divert comments for a while.