Academia, Bizarre, Media, Politics, Society

Faculty Members Denounce The “Rape Culture” At St. Lawrence University As Part Of Its Calls To Rescind Sen. Collins’ Honorary Degree

I wrote a column yesterday in The Hill newspaper on the effort to strip away the honorary degree awarded to Sen. Susan Collins (R., Maine) in 2017 in retaliation for her vote to confirm Justice Brett Kavanaugh.  One of the letters seeking the rescission was from roughly 100 professors from virtually every department within St. Lawrence University.  What was most surprising was the assertion of these faculty members that St. Lawrence University has a “rape culture” and that Sen. Collins’ vote was in furtherance of that culture. Notably, there are only 217 full-time and part-time faculty at the university.

There were two letters submitted to the school, including  letter co-signed by more than 1,300 alumni.

However, it is the letter of the professors that stood out. The letter is a thinly veiled act of retaliation against Collins for taking an opposing view on the Kavanaugh matter.  However, one passage stood out in its description of the university itself:

“Yet, actions have consequences, and the actions taken by Senator Collins on October 5, 2018, cannot be taken lightly and cannot go by without comment. As we clarified in the Faculty Statement of Values, “We value putting our knowledge into action to benefit our communities.” Senator Collins herself called for action. She stated, “If any good at all has come from this ugly confirmation process, it has been to create an awareness that we have underestimated the pervasiveness of this terrible problem. […] We must listen to survivors, and every day we must seek to stop the criminal behavior that has hurt so many. We owe this to ourselves, our children, and generations to come.” The Kavanaugh hearings were evidence of the pervasive rape culture in the United States, a culture from which St. Lawrence is certainly not immune. We exist in a culture that devalues survivors; a culture that too regularly blames survivors for the violence done against them; and a culture that doubts survivors when they bravely come forward. Rescinding her honorary Doctor of Humane Letters for her words and deeds which reinforce this culture would be a symbolic act that illustrates St. Lawrence University’s strong commitment moving forward to continue dismantling rape culture on our own campus.”

While most of us agree that much more should be done in combatting sexual assault and supporting alleged victims, it is not clear what these professors are relying as evidence of a “pervasive rape culture” in the United States where we “too regularly blame[] survivors for the violence done against them and a culture that doubts survivors when they bravely come forward.”  Hundreds of high-profile individuals have been identified and often denounced as part of the MeToo movement. The Kavanaugh hearings cited in the letter were extended to allow for additional investigation of the underlying allegations.  As I stated earlier, I would have preferred that the Democrats had confidentially disclosed the allegations earlier and that, despite the belated disclosure, the Republicans would have allowed for a longer investigation.  However, as I wrote previously, alleged victims have the right to be heard not the right to be believed.  Again, while I wanted a longer investigation, the record supporting Dr. Christine Blasey Ford’s allegations was very limited and largely unsupported.  Reasonable people could come to opposing conclusions on the available evidence.  Yet, the results were not the product of any “rape culture.”

It was equally surprising to see roughly half of the faculty accuse St. Lawrence as still needed to “dismantle[e] rape culture” on its campus.  St. Lawrence University is viewed as one of the most liberal universities in the country with a long-standing commitment to the protection and advancement of its female students.  I would be very surprised to learn that the university has a “rape culture” that is still prevalent on campus.

The problem here may be the nomenclature.  For many of us, a “culture” reflects a prevalent and often tolerated set of social or behavior norms.  In many journals however the meaning seems more fluid.  For example, there was a article by Helen Wilson  in the Journal of Feminist Geography that drew widespread ridicule in arguing that her study of dog parks in Portland, Oregon found them to be “microcosms where hegemonic masculinist norms governing queering behavior and compulsory heterosexuality can be observed in a cross-species environment.”   After 1000 hours of viewing, she found “one dog rape/humping incident every 60 minutes” and that “oppressive patriarchal norms reach a zenith in dog parks, rendering them not only gendered spaces but spaces that exhibit and magnify toxic  . .  . themes intrinsic to gender binaries.”

That article received a torrent of criticism on conservative sites.  My interest is the reference to a “dog rape culture” as a matter of nomenclature.  It may be that there is a disconnect in how some of us read such references and their intended meaning.  It is hard for me to believe that almost half of the faculty at St. Lawrence University seriously believe that the university continues to foster or failure to combat a rape culture on campus.  The point could be lost in the translation of public discourse in how these words are meant and received.

I do not believe that, as suggested, that Sen. Collins acted knowingly or unknowingly in facilitation of a rape culture in voting for Justice Kavanaugh. She delivered a thoughtful and detailed explanation of her vote.  One can easily disagree with her points but reasonable people can disagree on the evidence without being representatives of a rape culture.

The professors then return to the “rape culture” problem and suggest that Collins could be used as some type of useful “symbolic act” — ignoring the demeaning impact for Collins in being the first person ever stripped by the university of an honorary degree:

“The Kavanaugh hearings were evidence of the pervasive rape culture in the United States, a culture from which St. Lawrence is certainly not immune. We exist in a culture that devalues survivors; a culture that too regularly blames survivors for the violence done against them; and a culture that doubts survivors when they bravely come forward. Rescinding her honorary Doctor of Humane Letters for her words and deeds which reinforce this culture would be a symbolic act that illustrates St. Lawrence University’s strong commitment moving forward to continue dismantling rape culture on our own campus.”

I have criticized the letter of the faculty on various grounds, including its open hostility to someone who simply comes to an opposing conclusion on a public controversy.  I find the letter to be deeply disturbing from academics who seem to allow for little range of disagreement on such issues while painting people like Collins as virtual rape apologists.

Strangely, after labeling Collins as a virtual rape apologist, the professors then add “We continue to be grateful for her willingness to be a regular speaker who inspires our students at DC-Connect events.” In other words, you may be a rape apologists but we appreciate your free appearances with our students in D.C.”

My greatest concern about this letter is the damage that it will do to the national reputation of this wonderful institution that counts as graduates not just Collins, but suffragist Olympia Brown, diplomat Owen D. Young, Fox anchor Martha McCollum, actor Kirk Douglas, and others.  St. Lawrence has a rich intellectual history that is not represented well by this letter.  More concerning, it will not long be held in its rightfully high regard as a world-class institution if this is an indication of the intellectual honesty and tolerance of its faculty.

Here are the signatories from a wide array of departments at St. Lawrence University.

 

157 thoughts on “Faculty Members Denounce The “Rape Culture” At St. Lawrence University As Part Of Its Calls To Rescind Sen. Collins’ Honorary Degree”

  1. If the intelligent, virtue signalling, (mostly) “good whites” of this institution were SERIOUS about attacking the rape culture in the US, these same individuals would discuss and condemn the high rates of black on white rape. There are about 40,000 black on white rapes yearly in the United States, compared with less than 100 white on black rapes. Of course, I will not hold my breath waiting for this to occur.

    antonio

  2. “microcosms where hegemonic masculinist norms governing queering behavior and compulsory heterosexuality can be observed in a cross-species environment.” After 1000 hours of viewing, she found “one dog rape/humping incident every 60 minutes” and that “oppressive patriarchal norms reach a zenith in dog parks, rendering them not only gendered spaces but spaces that exhibit and magnify toxic . . . themes intrinsic to gender binaries.”

    This woman must be a delight in everyday conversation. This word salad means what exactly? Dazzle them with brilliance? Nah, let’s go for baffle them with bullsh!it.

  3. Universities are releasing increasingly ignorant published works and statements.

    A “rape culture” is one in which rape is encouraged and normalized. The Vikings had a rape culture. They raped and pillaged so often it is now a cliche for Vikings. Their sex slaves had shorn hair, signifying they were available for rape by any male. If St Lawrence has a rape culture, then that’s a problem. It needs to be shut down, all the rapists arrested, and all the faculty and staff who normalized, encouraged, and participated in rape investigated and arrested. If true, this is going to be bigger than the Catholic Church scandal.

    What I suspect is that, like any other place in America, it is the antithesis of rape culture, with emergency call boxes scattered throughout campus, rape awareness literature, rape support groups, campus security, and a more heavily weighted credence to females claiming rape than males, who probably lack due process in defending themselves from such.

    One can also assume that if they are wiling to strip Sen Collins of her honorary degree, then Kavanaugh’s case is the low standard of evidence they use to expel male students under similar accusations. Let’s say a female St Lawrence student announced that a male raped her, 36 years ago, by a student from St Lawrence, but she does not remember where or when or what month or even year. First, she claimed it was 1987-1989. She’d remodeled her house a few years before, installing a second front door for a separate entrance for interns to whom she rented rooms. Quarreling with her husband over an interminable remodel, she went to therapy and discovered a repressed memory. Apparently, a student from the university had attempted to assault her, and she’d had amnesia this entire time! (If the university has a psychology department, they would be fully aware of all the published studies demonstrating that “repressed memories” were debunked as false implanted memories.) The university asked for her testimony, and she refused to give it under any circumstances, at first demanding that the alumni be stripped of his degree. Finally, the moment before her case was to be dismissed, she showed up, citing her fear of flying due to the assault. She barely functions due to anxiety. Only, it turns out she flies all over the world, including to remote locations, for her adrenaline junky sport of surfing. The second front door she claims she needs as an escape route to calm her claustrophobia is actually a second entrance to rented rooms. The 3 people she named as eye witnesses, including her own lifelong best friend, have absolutely no idea what she’s talking about. She changes the date from 1987-1989, her tale teens, to when she was 15, based only on her inability to recollect how she got to or from the party. You see, after she got her license, she liked to drive herself. Since she has no idea how she travelled, she must have been pre-license, at 15. Oh, and after not naming anyone when she first miraculously discovered this repressed memory, she named a prominent alumni from a political party she loathed, against whom she was stridently activist. In fact, upon naming him to her husband, she remarked that he was in a position to be honored by the university, and promoted at work, which bothered her greatly.

    That’s it. That’s the extent of her case. Refuting this flimsy story was the alumni’s calendar, which showed he was bespoke virtually that entire summer, and of course out of state thereafter. In addition, no less than 65 women who’d known him for more than 36 years signed a letter stating that in all those years, they had never seen or heard of such behavior from him. For decades, he had hired more female clerks than male, and literally every single one of them spoke highly of him. In all those years, he had zero complaints of such behavior. There was no history of similar abuse that would have lended any weight to her accusation.

    In this thought exercise, if the university had punished this alumni by stripping him of his degree and spoiling his promotion, he could have sued the pants off them. However, since this is against Collins, one can assume that an honorary degree can be conferred and rescinded for capricious reasons.

    Universities behave in this politicized manner, becoming madrassas hostile to conservatives, because they get away with it. It does not affect their bottom line as a business. It needs to become clear to conservative parents which schools are safe for their children, and which will harass them and their affiliations. Do not support grievously unethical behavior with your wallet.

    I also believe there needs to be due process for sexual assault allegations in universities, and that they should get out of police work altogether. Kavanaugh underwent an investigation by the committee, 7 FBI background checks, and an exhaustive, desperate search by the mainstream media to try to prove Ford’s case. No one could. That should lay this matter to rest in the mind of anyone with any sense of justice. I would never, ever, support a rapist or sexual abusers, regardless of how it may benefit me. I feel entirely satisfied that Kavanaugh was cleared of any wrongdoing. Continuing to portray him as a rapist is a miscarriage of justice and slander. Such ire is better directed at actual abusers and rapists.

    The country is certainly capable of understanding the facts and turning against someone it favored. Case in point is Bill Cosby. He was almost universally admired, and is now just as universally condemned based on the facts of his case. Not an unsubstantiated single accusation. Not by amnesia suddenly reversed under hypnosis to a convenient new memory against a political enemy. By facts. Both case were fairly judged based on the evidence. I suggest that universities do the same.

    2. One can also assume that if they are wiling to strip Sen Collins of her honorary degree, then Kavanaugh’s case is the low standard of evidence they use to expel male students under similar accusations.

      Good point. And an indication that the people who signed that letter must not occupy positions wherein they are responsible for evaluating anyone.

  4. Reasonable people could come to opposing conclusions on the available evidence.

    Bullsh!t! What reasonable person would conclude a sexual assault occurred without any evidence to support the allegation? That’s a suicidal standard that no reasonable person would agree to. However, I will state that would be a standard consistent with those that believe there are no rights that do not come from government.

    So let that sink in for a moment as we are approaching election day. We have people that believe allegations of crimes do not require evidence to convict. These folks also believe that our government has the power to create every right we have. What could possibly go wrong?

    1. The constant and contrived straddling by the moderator is annoying.

    2. I agree. How could any reasonable person look at the facts and declare that Ford proved her case? What would be the legal analysis if a jury convicted a suspect on murder based on similar evidence?

      1. My comment was in answer to “What reasonable person would conclude a sexual assault occurred without any evidence to support the allegation?”

  5. Dog park paper was a Sokal hoax. As reported in Atlantic, Chronicle, NYT etc. Turley, you need to get out more.

  6. If you want to understand the letter, then read this hilarious article from Zerohedge.

    https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-10-16/4chan-sparks-mass-triggering-npc-meme-twitter-responds-ban-hammer

    The pictures are hilarious! And frightening. The meme takes the position that the Left is a bunch of NPCs. Which ” ” The “weaponized autists” at 4Chan have done it again, because they can; a new meme suggesting that liberals are soulless idiots who can’t think for themselves has gone viral. The concept compares Democrats to “nonplayable characters,” or NPCs – the recurring characters in video games with repetitive lines and limited knowledge. Lack of an “inner voice” is a dead giveaway that someone may be an NPC.”

    Plus, the Twitter ban on this would make a great story for here.

    Squeeky Fromm
    Girl Reporter

  8. “It is hard for me to believe that almost half of the faculty at St. Lawrence University seriously believe that the university continues to foster or failure to combat a rape culture on campus. The point could be lost in the translation of public discourse in how these words are meant and received.”
    *****************
    Why so hard to believe? The signatories have already established themselves as blithering idiots. They accept the Maoist world view of oppressed versus oppressor and we all know the universal bogeyman is white and straight. Just like Susan Collins. Believing in the rape culture fantasy isn’t that big a leap when you’re already crested the cliff’s ledge.

  9. If I was Collins, I would give back the damned degree. What does the faculty of St. Lawrence think their school is anyway, Oxford? Half the country never heard of the place. No, make that more than half.

    1. It’s one of about eight private colleges in Upstate New York which are selective in their admissions and have a certain amount of cachet.* Not sure about St. Lawrence specifically, but the one such school I know recruits about 70% of its student body from out of state and about 45% extraregionally. The notable gap in their recruitment is the South. Leaving aside Texas and Florida, maybe 3% of their student body is drawn from the South. Diversity anyone? Academe is a great collecting pool of shifty liars. Although you see it in other parts of the country, that sort of school is abnormally concentrated in New England and the easternmost portion of the Rustbelt. Enrollment in baccalaureate granting institutions in this country is now approaching 10 million, of whom about 3% are in schools like St. Lawrence. They’re expensive, located in out-of-the-way places, and don’t offer the sort of vocational majors that most youths prefer to study.

      *Vasser, Bard, Union, Skidmore, St. Lawrence, Hamilton, Colgate, and Hobart & William Smith.

  10. “pervasive rape culture” in the United States where we “too regularly blame[] survivors for the violence done against them and a culture that doubts survivors when they bravely come forward.”

    Again, this is a social fantasy. It does not exist outside the imaginations of faculty. These people have comprehensive job security and are paid handsome salaries, and this rubbish is what those pampered pets serve their constituents.

  11. The notion that St. Lawrence County, New York is groaning under the burden of violent crime is frankly risible. The five population centers in the County have seen about a dozen homicides in the last 15 years, for a rate somewhat shy of 2 per 100,000 per year. The number of homicides in Canton, where St. Lawrence is located, has been 0.

    1. This is the one in Canton NY? Oh I know the place. I got drunk at a beer party, and got laid there numerous times, back in the 80s. They really knew how to party. Potsdam too. And trust me nobody was getting raped not even close. It was a red carpet welcome at every venue, so to speak.

      oh and i didn’t see a single black or mexican in the county back then and I spent several weeks there

      short trip to Cornwall Canada too, across the river, and up there, laissez le bon temps roulez! talk about too much drinking and overly abundant casual sex, wow!

      the 80s were great.

      1. In Potsdam is a generic state college and Clarkson, a private institution which is foundationally a polytechnic but has added other things. In Canton is a state technical college and St. Lawrence. St. Lawrence is private and pretty strictly arts and sciences. The state technical colleges in New York tend to have an institutional personality and signature programs. IIRC, I think Canton and Cobleskill are oriented toward ‘girl trades’ like early childhood education, but you’d have to check. The four schools run the gamut in terms of type, range of recruitment, the academic competence of the student body, and the social class of the modal student. More than anything else, it’s what St. Lawrence County has going for it these days. That areas has been in a mild economic depression for decades, suffering slow but unabated demographic decline. Canton’s a pleasant town. Ogdensburg’s the saddest place you ever seen.

        1. the girls up there in that neck of the woods were pretty hot back in the day. feminism may have ruined that, I would not know how it is now

          and it seemed like there was a lot of them bored, looking around looking for entertainment
          but that was before cell phones, like i said back in the 80s.

          still lots of “higher ed” in that neighborhood

          https://www.collegesimply.com/colleges-near/new-york/potsdam/

          Is St Lawrence really worth $52,000 in tuition? No way. Seriously?

  12. “If any good at all has come from this ugly confirmation process, it has been to create an awareness that we have underestimated the pervasiveness of this terrible problem. […] We must listen to survivors,

    What this tells you is that 1/3 of the faculty at St. Lawrence despise their male students, and, indeed males outside their class in society. What that tells you is that they should not be teaching the young or have authority over anyone.

  13. You realize that an institution the size of St. Lawrence likely has only about 300 faculty. Fully 1/3 of them signed this deranged and silly piece of nonsense. St. Lawrence is a pricy private college with a certain amount of cachet. What this letter tells you is that the stakeholders aren’t getting their money’s worth, the reputation of the institution is inflated, and the faculty hiring is systematically corrupted. St. Lawrence as an institution deserves to die. It would be hard on the town of Canton if it did, of course, but that’s the only regret you’d have were the college to disappear.

  14. Sociology and anthropology are defendable as important disciplines of knowledge. I so defend.

    1. David Benson is the King of Making Stuff Up and owes me sixteen citations (one from the OED) and the source of a quotation, after nineteen weeks, and needs to cite all his work from now on. – do you have a cite from a hard science to back up your opinion?

    2. 7 of the top 10 most cited humanities book authors are sociologists, from Wikipedia.

      1. David Benson is the King of Making Stuff Up and owes me seventeen citations (one from the OED) and the source of a quotation, after nineteen weeks, and needs to cite all his work from now on. – Wikipedia is not a scientific journal. And on that note, do you consider Gender Studies and Queer Studies faculty to be sociologists? If you do, they incestually cite each other.

  15. Congratulations to making the case easy for any future rape victim who might be assaulted on campus or by a campus official. You just made the plaintiff’s case in a future tort against the college by declaring in no uncertain terms that the school recognizes it fosters a hazardous environment that facilitated a future rape.

    Congratulations to your future bottom line when prospective students acquire the belief that you will revoke their degrees if they say or do anything in the future the college disagrees with. Why would a student consider investing their time, effort or money in a college that will arbitrarily revoke your degree? Not worth the risk when there are other institutions available.

    1. Congratulations to your future bottom line when prospective students acquire the belief that you will revoke their degrees if they say or do anything in the future the college disagrees with. Why would a student consider investing their time, effort or money in a college that will arbitrarily revoke your degree? Not worth the risk when there are other institutions available.

      Good point.

    2. “You just made the plaintiff’s case in a future tort against the college by declaring in no uncertain terms that the school recognizes it fosters a hazardous environment that facilitated a future rape.”
      ****************
      Not really. The bleatings of disgruntled employees are not binding on an institution; just the bleatings of managers or admistrstors which are conspicuously absent on the signature line. It might have evidentiary value but the school isn’t captured because some wild-eyed faculty are loving a Maoist dream. Theirs is an opinion, not fact, and not particularly expert in any real sense. St. Lawrence can still rebut with real evidence like statistics, etc.

      1. prejudicial effect of stupid remarks by feminists clearly outweighs any probative value on any worthy topic whatsoever. objection sustained.

    3. Except that this situation only involves an honorary degree, not an actual earned degree. I doubt they could rescind a real degree.

      1. I doubt they could

        No one knows where the bottom is anymore, in higher education, in the media, or in and among the Democratic Party.

        1. “No one knows where the bottom is anymore, in higher education, in the media, or in and among the Democratic Party.”

          No one knows where the bottom is anymore, in higher education, in the media, or in and among the Rape denier Party.
          There, I fixed that for ya ;P

          1. There, I fixed that for ya ;P

            No, you made an adolescent a** of yourself.

          2. So you changed Democratic Party to Rape Denier Party. Alrighty then. Are they still the party of slavery too?

            1. OLLY – the Democrats have always been the “keep them on the plantation” party.

          3. @Becka G

            I only deny rape if there is no evidence that a rape occurred (or sexual assault for that matter) based upon the evidence presented. SORRY! Chrissy did not have a right to be BELIEVED, only heard.

            antonio

  16. What rape culture? It is a liberal dog whistle. It is truly sad when they drag out the emeriti and the adjunct to sign the petitions.

  17. I commend readers who are interested in exploring the youth subculture of coercive sex co-mingled with social-network status to read Peggy Orenstein’s “Girls and Sex”.

    I agree with JT that “rape culture” is a clumsy and hyperbolic (sensationalistic) phrase. Perhaps that’s a reflection of how repressed adults are about confronting youth deviant sexuality patterns…you need a sharp-tongued word to cut through the escapism.

    The word “culture” is overstatement in its implication that every young person is involved.
    But, there is a definite subculture among youth, well documented in Orenstein’s book, involving the use of binge-drinking as an escape route into the realm of coercive, or at least ambiguous-consent, sexual behaviors. It starts as young as middle school, hits its stride in high school and freshman-soph college. Don’t cringe. In this subculture, the boys model their sexual goal-setting after what they see happening in online porn videos. The boys share their goals and exploits with male peers, a game of status-seeking aided and abetted by social media. The idea that sex is a private activity between two consenting persons — chalk up another “wall” tragically demolished by Silicon Valley’s maniacal pursuit of “connecting people”. Sex gossip has always been part of the human condition, but not the way it is served up on steroids to the point where, the young person defending traditional notions about sexual privacy is ridiculed as a prude.

    In the current sexploitation-subculture, boys feel unabashed in asking a girl they hardly know to give “head”. If she complies, it’s a notch on the totem pole. The next notch to ask for is anal sex. For different reasons, both the boys and girls have rationalized that neither of these activities qualifies as “having sex”. The girls are trying to “fit in” socially, and give head to placate a demanding boy, hoping to get him “off her case”. The logic of this decision is sound – the boy is only interested in a one-time act to move up his score on the status chart, while avoiding any emotional risks or commitments. The girls are usually not interested in a partner relationship — they too are wrapped up in a spider’s web of social approval and acceptance gaming. To not be invited to a party, even if it is a platform for binge-drinking and hedonistic, regrettable sexual acts, is perceived as worse than giving a bj.

    I hope readers will take the time to read more about the subculture I’m describing. Maybe I’m wrong to not accept the term “culture” to describe it. Why? Because the refusenik youth who defend their self-respect, their agency, and preference for more traditional rules of dating and sex are mocked by the students who “play the game”. If the social power positions are in the hands of the deviants, then they have the power to define “normal”. Isn’t that the machinery of culture at work? I use the phrase sub-culture because adults need a way to discuss the youth subculture without being implicated as “enablers”. You don’t confront deviant youth sub-culture by including responsible adults as inextricably woven into that same fabric. That’s the mistake media sensationalists are making with the term “rape culture”. They are enlarging the phenomenon to include everyone, aggrandizing the problem beyond the reach of the larger culture to solve.

    That said, parents and adults who work with youth need to understand how perverted youth sex subculture has developed, and the extent to which all young people are at least thrust into a social quagmire by it. At the same time, we need to value positive, proactive approaches to nurturing young people into sexual beings with agency and character.

    Superficial, politicized, symbolic gestures such as stripping Sen. Collins of her honorary degree are not going to help solve a complex problem. And we have a complex problem to solve in our middle schools, high schools and colleges. A serious problem with multidimensional factors underlying it.

    1. I hope readers will take time to look at actual crime statistics and not be delving into this generation’s Reefer Madness.

      1. “I hope readers will take time to look at actual crime statistics and not be delving into this generation’s Reefer Madness.”

        Yes, the moral panic and self-righteousness takes its own shape every generation. I would have thought this latest ridiculousness would have run its course by now.

        This guy is from the UK, but he does a great analysis of the ridiculous nature of “rape culture.”

      2. Tabarrok, the statistics deserving attention emerge from the highly personal interviews Peggy Orenstein did with 57 teen girls. 56 out of 57 reported being socially coerced into unpleasant, undesired sexual acts by a boy. Your notion that “crime statistics” would capture the full extent of such immature deviancy is a typical escapist reaction. Why would a 15-year old girl report such a humiliating experience as sucking dick to the police, let alone her parents? The overwhelming instinct of a teen girl is to keep it secret, in order to preserve social harmony and status. The boys know this, and exploit it as part of their sexual-status gaming.

        1. Tabarrok, the statistics deserving attention emerge from the highly personal interviews Peggy Orenstein did with 57 teen girls. 56 out of 57 reported being socially coerced into unpleasant, undesired sexual acts by a boy.

          The smart money says:

          1. She collected an invalid convenience sample

          2. Fiddled with her definitions

          3. Asked leading questions

          4. Found young women of a common type: they have a truncated sense of personal agency and no one insists they develop a better one by holding them accountable.

          Personal interviews are of no consequence without a scaffolding you can only get from probability samples.

          That aside, this woman is a sex writer. She has no background in disciplined interviewing techniques or in participant-observation. You take her seriously because you feel like it, not because she merits it.

  18. As you said a large chunk of the staff is admitting to or claiming to or alleging there is a rape culture which impies and embedded group and an on going activity and is now using that statement to remove their Senator.. I’m assuming they hoave filed complaints with some law enforcement organization but it sounds like they are condoning it for other reasons

    Delete pro-abortion insert rape culture delete DNC insert St. Lawrence University.

    So how many did file an allegation or present any evidence or are they guilty as accessories as well.

  19. What does rape have to do with either Susan Collins or Judge Kavanaugh?
    Mad cow disease has struck academia. But, I’m just an old housewife/granny so, hopefully, I’m immuned.

    1. It is about the discussion (or lack thereof) of the discrepancy of power between actors in a forced situation. And the acceptable ante by those same players in outcome.
      And most importantly, it’s about consent.

      1. You’re talking gobbeldygook. Christine Blasey made an accusation for which there was no evidence. Susan Collins didn’t believe her, for about the same reasons no person of integrity would believe her.

      2. You clearly have no idea of the damage you are doing to actual victims of sexual assault by ignoring the actual victims of false allegations. It’s one thing to pursue justice for sexual assault victims, but that pursuit should never disregard the rules of evidence; when doing so would leave other victims in it’s wake.

      3. But Justice Kavanaugh did not know Chrissy Ford. So what does consent have to do with Brett Kavanaugh?! p

      4. I’m tired of hearing all this crap. Let me say a few things you won’t like Miss. just common sense stuff but we all know feminists don’t have much of that.

        sex and power are very much related.
        sex in nature is the source of the power of life itself
        women find power alluring, naturally so
        women also fantasize about rape commonly
        women, some unethical women, also like to fake rape accusations to gain their own power
        remember “To kill a mockingbird”?

        and there’s plenty out there

        women also like to tittilate men with sexually provocative dress and behavior and get money and power from that.

        ever heard of Kim Kardashian?
        It’s very annoying and obnoxious behavior but you will never heart too much condemnation coming from feminists about that.

        no the only “slutshaming” that feminists ever do is against women sex workers to criminalize and punish them as much as possible such as Hillary and Kamala Harris who have made hay out of socalled “human trafficking” a thinly disguised label for anti-sex-work laws

        although to be fair there is a small minority of feminists who have the common sense to advocate legalizing sex work

  20. Higher education needs more regulation. If they can’t regulate themselves in educating the young they clearly need more guidance. And their unAmerican, anti-white male disposition is stale and tiresome. You wanna be treated like adults? Quit acting like kids the grownups need to discipline. Academics used to be responsible, now they’re not.

            1. Freedom of speech means that you can freely express falsehoods.

              I must say that you are well versed at it.

              1. Providing honest services means colleges don’t hire social fantasists and don’t maintain them on salary. These faculty want to go out an howl at the moon, that’s their privilege. They just don’t get a salary and benefits for so doing.

      2. DBB:
        Maybe your idea of free speech is the freedom to teach insurrection but it would be an interpretation not shared by any other sentient being except insurrectionists and their sentience is questionable. The professors are employees. They can’t teach anything they damn well please lest the Stork Theory be inculcated as an explanation for human reproduction. A real administrator would sue the entire herd of them for defamation in permitting “rape culture.”

    2. 1. Co-ordinate federal and state law which provided for the election of trustees by alumni resident in state would help. Quadrennial election by postal ballot supervised by the state board of elections or secretary of state; candidate registration via the placement of a monetary deposit with the state board or secretary of state, ordinal balloting, &c. An end to nominating committees, self-regenerating boards, unwieldy boards with scores of members &c.

      2. Co-ordinate state and federal law limiting continuous tenure to older faculty, circumscribing the use of part-time faculty (leaving aside clinical faculty employed by occupational schools), and providing for mandatory retirement of faculty.

      3. Co-ordinate federal and state law which provides a glossary of permissible degree programs and concentration programs within degree programs.

            1. You continually strike these poses because you cannot argue a position, because what you actually want is indefensible.

    3. The patterns of immature sexual deviancy begin in middle school and high school.
      Kids are showing up at college with already-established deviancies. The boys model sexual goal-setting from what they see in online porn videos and what will elevate their status among peer males. The use of binge-drinking as a “platform” for coercive, manipulative sex acts like fellatio is one such ingrained pattern brought with the student to college. Think of what’s going on as socially-pressured favors of “head” and “anal”, where boys are not interested in a trusting relationship with intimacy, but more scoring notches on a totem pole that is shared with male friends via social networking. It’s immature, and it’s deviant. The girls aren’t looking for a relationship either, but are vying for social inclusion. It’s basic primate behavior, put on steroids by alcohol overconsumption, and made excruciatingly public via social media. We have a problem, Houston. Let’s not get hung up on the awkward term “rape culture”. Let’s rather call it a youth subculture of alcohol abuse and immature sexual deviancy with coercive social pressures. We have no chance of fixing this problem unless we can get accurate with our words, and stop escapist reactions.

      2. “The use of binge-drinking as a “platform” for coercive, manipulative sex acts like fellatio is one such ingrained pattern brought with the student to college. Think of what’s going on as socially-pressured favors of “head” and “anal”, where boys are not interested in a trusting relationship with intimacy, but more scoring notches on a totem pole that is shared with male friends via social networking. It’s immature, and it’s deviant. The girls aren’t looking for a relationship either, but are vying for social inclusion. It’s basic primate behavior, put on steroids by alcohol overconsumption, and made excruciatingly public via social media.”

        You make college parties sound like they are a requirement. You seem to discount a young person’s ability to be responsible for their actions. I don’t feel responsible for people who put themselves in those types of situations to begin with. If you get to one of these parties, and feel uncomfortable with the situation, it seems to me it would be in your best interest to leave. Isn’t it really that simple? I don’t count “societal pressures” as being an excuse to be present where poor behavior is being displayed.

Comments are closed.