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. here’s an interesting fact. more men are raped every year than women in America

    but it’s usually by other men so feminists dont care I guess

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/cifamerica/2012/feb/21/us-more-men-raped-than-women

    In January, prodded in part by outrage over a series of articles in the New York Review of Books, the Justice Department finally released an estimate of the prevalence of sexual abuse in penitentiaries. The reliance on filed complaints appeared to understate the problem. For 2008, for example, the government had previously tallied 935 confirmed instances of sexual abuse. After asking around, and performing some calculations, the Justice Department came up with a new number: 216,000. That’s 216,000 victims, not instances. These victims are often assaulted multiple times over the course of the year. The Justice Department now seems to be saying that prison rape accounted for the majority of all rapes committed in the US in 2008, likely making the United States the first country in the history of the world to count more rapes for men than for women.

  2. rape culture add that phrase to the NPC list

    no America does not have a rape culture

    you want to read about a rape culture, get some diversity under your belt here

    bride kidnapping, now THAT”S a rape culture

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bride_kidnapping

    but it conflicts with NPC meme “Refugees welcome” so maybe this won’t be noticed

  3. The rhetorical circularity of “believe survivors” is really quite stunning. The assertion is true because it has been asserted? We live in crazy times. To see so many faculty members sign onto a statement of this sort is discouraging.

  4. If the established pattern continues those most vocal denouncing the rape culture are most likely to be revealed as actual perpetrators.

    1. Rachelle – I just want someone to prove that it exists. Are you the one willing to enter the lists to prove its existence at St. Lawrence University? We will need to define our terms here, So, rape is the unwanted sexual penetration of the vagina or anus by the penis.
      From Merriam-Webster, culture is
      : the customary beliefs, social forms, and material traits of a racial, religious, or social group
      also : the characteristic features of everyday existence (such as diversions or a way of life) shared by people in a place or time

      So, Rachelle, can you prove that “rape culture” exists on St. Lawrence University or any other college for that matter?

      1. No, I cannot prove that it exists because I think the whole thing is pc balderdash.
        But if I were charged with actually finding the snipe-like perpetrator in my hunt those protesting most loudly would top my list of possible suspects.

        1. Rachelle – then that would have to include the women who are demanding the end of the “rape culture.”

  5. “Yet, the results were not the product of any “rape culture.””
    Yes, they were.
    The blatant display of that hearing and it’s unacceptable outcome were a perfect illustration of our rape-culture. As it stands now, the abuse of power is an acceptable avenue to accomplishing a goal. It is a perfect example. The outcries debased even by the President in his mocking of those involved and the entire #MeToo movement. There is no deviance in the perfection of the example…the deviance is in the behavior of those in power who choose violence, force, undermining, lies and sanctions against victims to get thier way. And let’s be clear (TAB the Pill), it is less about sex than about power…that powerful people get hung-up on sexual themes is just human. The rape of the powerful on those who they fear they can’t control….that is the real issue here.

    1. There was no ‘unacceptable outcome’. A woman who could not even provide secure evidence that she’d ever met Brett Kavanaugh made a half-baked accusation against him, contending he’d assaulted her in 1982. Her marriage counselor’s notes from 2012 did not match her letter to Anna Eshoo posted this year. None of her ‘witnesses’ could remember any such event. Her BFF has no memory of having known a ‘Brett Kavanaugh’ If this rubbish is the basis of decision-making, you’re really telling us that evidence is irrelevant and your feelz is king. No one should take that seriously. Or take you seriously.

    2. The blatant display of that hearing and it’s unacceptable outcome…

      Sure. The blatant disregard for due process on display by the ranking member and her Democrat colleagues during that Thursday hearing was appalling. The outcome on the other hand was awesome!

      🙂

      1. seriously? It’s not a football game you know…the undermining of our entire Constitutional Legal System is made complete by that ridiculous charade. You are happy why? No kids to suffer the consequences or maybe you can just pave their way with cash…despite what it does to their brains and their souls…..what Country are you from again???

        1. that ridiculous charade.

          The progenitor of the charade in question was Christine Blasey, aided and abetted by Dianne Feinstein, miscellaneous Democratic Senators, and the sorosphere lawyers to whom they referred Christine Blasey.

            1. Becksa…. You must watch soap operas to even suggest that Justice Kavanaugh and Chrissy Ford.ever met. They did not, at least in reality…In her imagination? Who knows and who cares.

                1. You can surmise that when person A can adduce no evidence she ever met person B (but claims to have had a regular acquaintanceship with person B), person A didn’t actually know person B. You can surmise that when someone demonstrably lies about three germane matters, her own testimony is not especially trustworthy.

                  1. Becka has an abortion a day to celebrate her freedom from life and all things procreative. She carries a coathanger with her to make sure life doesnt have a prayer in an expectant mother anywhere near her

                    1. Becka G – evidently you are not mature enough to handle adult talk about sex. That is just sad.

                  2. No, not at all….but if your brains ability to discern and understand information stops at the level of 13 years…well then you will see everyone you don’t agree with as a 13 yo and everyone you admire or who has something you covet as, well, a role model I guess. 😉

                    1. Becka,

                      If you believe the evidence supported Ford, then please explain in detail. The problems with the data have been described. If you discovered a solution to the systemic flaws in the story, then explain. Otherwise all you are doing is insulting a bunch of strangers on the internet without intelligently defending your position.

                1. Most certainly they did not. Ralph Blasey wasn’t enrolled at Georgetown Prep, Mark Judge’s sister wasn’t enrolled at Holton-Arms, and Brett Kavanaugh has no sisters. The Blaseys lived 6.5 miles from the Judges and 8 miles from the Kavanaughs. Do the math. A semi-circular area with a radius of 6.5 miles is about 66 sq miles. Given ordinary suburban settlement densities, that would encompass about 130,000 people and about 12,000 people born in the six birth cohorts which include Judge, Kavanaugh, and Blasey. There’s no reason to believe she ever met him. Other people have claimed (interesting, since their membership is confidential) that Kavanaugh’s father belonged to the Burning Tree Club along with Ralph Blasey. Chrissy’s family of origin hasn’t claimed to know the Kavanaughs and even Chrissy doesn’t claim any connection between the families via Burning Tree.

                  She insists she knew Christopher Garrett, but he has denied knowledge of any gathering of the sort she described and has issued no public remarks on any other subject. You and I both know that if his statement to the FBI was at all useful to the Democrats, they’d have leaked it.

                2. Becka, did you trouble to read your own article? Where did they know each other? Your article stated they socialized at the party where she claims he assaulted her. The party no one else remembers. If they socialized together why doesn’t her lifelong best friend remember him?

                  What we do know is that the fathers of both families were members of the men’s golf club, no women allowed. We know Ford resented that club because she was not included, according to her husband’s sworn statement. His mother prefixed over a case for her parents. This was years later and presumably Kavanaugh did not attend.

                  They could very well have crossed paths at some point. There must be thousands of people I’ve crossed in the street and forgotten. But how could they have socialized together often enough to be well acquainted if her best friend never met him?

        2. No kids to suffer the consequences or maybe you can just pave their way with cash…despite what it does to their brains and their souls…..

          WTF are you rambling on about? the undermining of our entire Constitutional Legal System was brought to bear by the Democrats on that committee. You apparently favor a justice system that does not require evidence of guilt, or the presumption of innocence. What country are you from?

    3. @Becka G

      You’re right, Becka, it really does not matter if Chrissy gave truthful and/or accurate testimony. What does matter is that she raised “consciousness” against the evil, patriarchal system. Kind of like the Duke rape HOAX and Tawana Brawley.

      In proper terms, certainly groups, (i.e. minorities, women, homosexuals, etc.) are presumed VIRTUOUS and have an ABSOLUTE right to be BELIEVED. Other groups (i.e. white males, heterosexuals, etc.) are presumed to be WRONG and DEFECTIVE. It’s called Cultural Marxism and you appear to be a true believer!

      Don’t worry, Becka, you will get your multi-cult, socialist utopia in another 20 – 30 years.

      antonio

      1. No sir. You are wrong. And you know it. Proclaiming innocence after thwarting a thorough investigation does not protect anyone, no matter how racist they may be. It will however engender the kind of anger and distrust that hurries the so-called “multi-cult, socialist utopia in another 20 – 30 years.”. Which is already mostly here btw, (and it’s not Utopian when Democracy is killed by elitism) and which will not likely tolerate more of this crap. You don’t even see how this weakens the Country you so disingenuously claim to support….

        1. Becka……There WAS a thorough investigation. You know nothing about how the FBI investigates, and because you’re ignorant of that knowledge, you believe it was “thwarted”.

            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. – yes, I suppose they could have interviewed you, You had fourth hand knowledge so you would have been a perfect witness.

          1. You know of my ignorance how?

            You are just like a rapist….push your ‘Gee I want it to be this way’ and then claim it so by victimizing all those you ran over in your greedy rush, regardless…..

            1. Becka, I have asked you substantive questions that you ignore. Here is your chance to debate your position and change minds. Will you answer my questions or are you just interested in ad hominem?

        2. racist
          believe women
          refugees welcome
          rape culture
          orange man bad

          NPC talk

          can we hire some Russian bots to deal with these types of posters because they bore me

        3. Becka, please explain how the investigation was thwarted.

          Committee Republicans asked Ford to testify on camera, off camera, in a private room with members questioning her one at a time, or with only one female questioning her. She rebuffed every offer. She finally agreed to testify at a very late date, and was indeed only questioned by Republicans’ female sexual assault prosecutor, who was very kind to her.

          Democrats demanded a 7th FBI investigation into Kavanaugh. They declared that the one into Clarence Thomas only took a week, so delay was not a valid objection. So Trump acquiesced. The only direction he gave was for the FBI to investigate any credible claim, and to complete it within a week. That was a reasonable timeline. I can’t imagine it would take long to investigate a party that she doesn’t know when or where it happened, and no eye witness she named knows anything about it. How long can you drag that out? It was up to the FBI to determine what it found credible and whom to interview. No one told the FBI not to interview Ford. Perhaps they only felt it necessary to investigate her detailed testimony rather than ask her to repeat it. They make no comment on their findings, as to whether they believe they were proven or disproven. She is not a terrorism suspect to be grilled at Guantanamo. They had her sworn statement. They did not find any corroborating evidence.

          What more did you want them to do?

        1. Becka you need to get laid. David Benson isnt up for the task and Tabby is a total bottom, so you might ask Hillary after Huma is done with her

            1. “Becka” you might be surprised how many men actually have been sexually assaulted

              usually by other men statistically speaking but plenty of women assaulting men…. and boys too

              not that feminsts care, no?

              https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/cifamerica/2012/feb/21/us-more-men-raped-than-women

              In January, prodded in part by outrage over a series of articles in the New York Review of Books, the Justice Department finally released an estimate of the prevalence of sexual abuse in penitentiaries. The reliance on filed complaints appeared to understate the problem. For 2008, for example, the government had previously tallied 935 confirmed instances of sexual abuse. After asking around, and performing some calculations, the Justice Department came up with a new number: 216,000. That’s 216,000 victims, not instances. These victims are often assaulted multiple times over the course of the year. The Justice Department now seems to be saying that prison rape accounted for the majority of all rapes committed in the US in 2008, likely making the United States the first country in the history of the world to count more rapes for men than for women.

              1. Kurtz:

                Rape in the penitentiary system is cruel and unusual punishment. If they cannot curb convicted criminals from preying upon each other, they might have to put everyone behind individual Plexiglass to avoid prisons being shut down for Constitutional reasons. Plexiglass to avoid solitary confinement for all, which is also cruel and unusual.

                Maybe prisoners have too much time on their hands. Perhaps they need to work until they are too tired to do more than sleep. Alone.

            2. Becka, hysterically demanding that a man get raped because he agreed with numerous legal analysts that Ford’s accusation was unsubstantiated is the type of mob justice one sees in the Middle East or banana republics. It is incredibly evil to wish sexual assault on someone who disagrees with you, but thank you for illustrating the double standard and threats on the Left.

        2. Becka:

          I will try not to be too graphic here.

          There is not a single motivation for all rapists. Also, a rapist cannot complete his crime of copulation without consent without sexual excitement. It is true that there can be a power component involved, but there is also a sexual one.

          Date rape can involve a consenting act that proceeds because a males does not stop himself when she puts on the brakes. Rape could also involve someone taking advantage of a drunk person. Or it can be a psychopath who drugs and rapes his victims or violently assaults them. The former is a purely sexual motivation. The latter includes a sexual motivation, and also involves a psychopath’s lack of empathy, and gratification from causing pain and fear in others. There are also disturbed individuals who cannot achieve sexual excitement without intense negative emotions in their victims. On the other side of the coin, there are people who cannot receive enjoyment unless they give up all power to others, such as those who become addicted to being strangled during sex.

          One of the few ways that rape can not involve any sexual motivation at all would be if the act was done without copulation, such as with a foreign object. Then, the objective is to cause pain and humiliation, and may not require sexual excitement.

    4. Becka, by your standard Hillary Clinton should go to jail for running a child trafficking scheme through a pizza parlor. Never mind evidence or credibility.

  6. What Senator Collins did was deny the accusations of four women, four, not one. She accepted that an investigation that questioned only nine people and did not include Dr. Ford nor Kavanaugh was a thorough investigation. She is not the only Senator who should be ashamed, and shamed for not being ashamed, but she is the one who made the speech condoning the boorish behavior of Kavanaugh, and we don’t need to go back to his high school or college days to claim boorish behavior considering his noxious attacks on senators whose job was to ask him questions. Collins also condoned his perjury about his involvement in the confirmation of two judges, his use of stolen documents, and his definitions of sexual terms as drinking games. I used to have respect for Collins, no more.

      1. A man claimed that Kavanaugh raped a woman he knew on a boat, and then admitted to his friends, and online, that he made the whole thing up. So, 3 women and 1 men. All rubbish.

    1. What Senator Collins did was deny the accusations of four women, four, not one.

      Unlike you, Senator Collins lives in the real world where facts and evidence matter. There could have been 1, 4 or 400 women making allegations. The rules of evidence remain the same. The standard of innocent until proven guilty remain the same. Now if you want to live in a world where an individual is presumed guilty based on the quantity of allegations and not evidence, then you are welcome to relocate to a country that supports that worldview. Bring your own cane.

      considering his noxious attacks on senators whose job was to ask him questions.

      The original process to question him on his suitability for the court had already been completed. Their job was to get to the truth on the allegations made by Ford. Instead, they conducted themselves befitting a hostile inquisition asserting the allegations against BK were credible without a hint of validity. His response was befitting a man facing a public execution of not only himself, but his family and the very system of justice he has devoted his career to.

    2. Okay, so I accuse you of raping a 10-year-old boy. I must believed by your standard. My accusation is sufficient in itself. Now you must prove it never happened. What a standard! Even the ‘afflicted girls’ in Salem offered some evidence adequate for the times to support their accusations. You, on the other hand, are prepared to hang the accused for even less–no evidence at all. I do hope our society recovers from these delusions.

    3. Bettycath:

      It was 3 women and 1 man. Law enforcement is well aware that unstable people or those looking for attention come out of the woodwork during dramatic popularized cases. For example, tip lines looking for serial killers get flooded with fraud. That is to be expected. They are deemed credible or not credible.

      Let’s take a look at the accusers. Dr Ford’s testimony fell apart as I have outlined in great detail on this and other posts. If you disagree with any of my points, please be specific and explain why. I believe her is not a reason. Ramirez called classmates and admitted that she had no idea if it was Kavanaugh or not after she made her accusation. She was questioned by the FBI, I believe. Swetnick claimed to have attended 10 gang rape parties in which she observed girls getting drugged and raped, did nothing about it, blamed no one, reported it to no one, and continued to attend gang rapes until, amazingly, she was gang raped. I watched an excruciating on camera interview with her in which she completely changed her story from Kavanaugh ran a gang rape ring openly, in public, that everyone knew about to, well, I did see him give out a lot of red Solo cups to girls. She also came forward about “Beach Week” after Kavanaugh’s calendar was made public, with “Beach Week” written in all caps. For her story to be true, hundreds of people across the political spectrum would have to remain silent on an open gang rape ring, and no one ever reported it to the police, or their parents, or a hospital, or anyone else. It was deemed non credible. Even the interview had a very difficult time during the interview. Oh, and of the eye witnesses she named, one was dead, others had no idea what she was talking about, and one didn’t know a Swetnick. The man accused Kavanaugh of raping a woman that he knew on a boat. He confessed to his friends, and online, that he made the whole thing up. Not credible.

      Now, let’s say that there was a serial rapist who was so good that he left no trace. You would have a series of victims who would have left footprints at the time, in chronological order. They would have talked about it at the time. Seen a doctor. Or maybe not a single victim told a soul, but you had diary entries, all by people who did not know each other, all written down in chronological order. They catch pedophiles that way sometimes. His victims tell their families about the abuse over the years, sometimes long after it occurred. But they eventually talk about it. And then investigators can compare and contrast the stories and the chronology of their development, among people who did not know each other, had no contact with each other, and never heard or read about each other. Or they can describe the private rooms of an adult predator, rooms they should have had no access to.

      I would never, ever support a rapist. Ever. Political affiliation is irrelevant. Based upon the evidence, I believe that Ford is either mistaken due to an implanted false memory because of the debunked theory of repressed memories, or she had something bad happened and applied it to Kavanaugh for political reasons, or nothing happened to her and she made the whole thing up for political reasons. In addition, there is a certain victim glamour among Liberals, rather like stolen valor. Ramirez, Swetnick, and the man were lying.

      Now, who did the FBI interview and why? When there is a nationwide manhunt, the FBI does not interview non credible tipsters. If anyone claims it was green aliens, there is no point wasting precious manpower. Swetnick was not credible and the man already admitted to lying. Ramirez admitted to classmates that she actually did not know if it was Kavanaugh. Ford already gave her testimony for hours before the committee. The FBI’s job was to investigate her claim. What the FBI does during one of these investigations is they put every piece of information they have into the file, credible or not, with no judgement. That accusation about Kavanaugh and the boat, as well as the retraction, is in there. Ford’s entire testimony is in there. Her boyfriend’s statement that she had no anxiety, lived in a studio apartment with a single door, stole from him, and flew without problem, is in there. The commmittee then looks at the record, with all the information, and it is their job to reach a conclusion.

      The only way for Ford to be telling the truth would be if she got her story wrong to her therapist (late teens, 4 boys, no Kavanaugh mentioned), wrong to subsequent people from 2012 on, but she got it right in front of the committee. Her only reason for thinking that she was 15 was because she didn’t remember driving to or from the party, and after she got her license she liked to drive. But she cannot remember if anyone else drove her, either. For her to be right, she would have had to install a second entrance for her rented rooms, but 4 years later to have intense anxiety and believe he separate entrance to her rented rooms was an escape hatch for her. She would have to have intense dread of flying because she was almost sexually assaulted, but it never occurred when she went on vacation around the world. She would have had to cry without tears or any eye moisture. Her trauma would have to make her speak in a baby voice, but only at times. A rapist and his accomplice would have to allow her to escape into a bathroom with a lock that would break if you leaned on it. Then, they would have to turn the music down for her to hear them laughing walking down the stairs, utterly unconcerned with what she might say to her best friend waiting below. And, for her to be right, her lifelong best friend would have to have no memory of her rushing down the stairs at a party, believing herself to have almost been raped and murdered, and run out into the night. Her friend would have had to not chase after her, let her walk 20 miles home without comment, and it would have not not have made any impression on her memory. A lot would have to happen for her story to be truthful.

      I absolutely understand how rape victims, and near rape victims, could forget all sorts of details except the encounter, or even not be able to pick out their attacker in a lineup years later. But trauma leaves a footprint at the time. There is some sort of trace. And without any evidence, then we would rely on contemporaneous similar accusations, of which there were exactly zero. There is no way that 65 women who knew him for at least 36 years, and all of those female clerks would have zero similar complaints about him if he was a serial predator. No way would someone be a rapist once and never again.

      1. Karen, you can explain something to bettykath. You cannot comprehend it for her. And she’s bound and determined to not understand something that’s fairly simple.

        1. I believe bettykath comprehends just fine. I believe she understands just fine. What I believe is going on with her and many, many others is they are stuck in the grief cycle. By stuck I mean they may have tried to accept the outcome of the 2016 election without completing the process of 1 of the first 4 steps.
          1. Denial and isolation
          2. Anger
          3. Bargaining
          4. Depression
          5. Acceptance

          1. I’ve tangled with bettykath at multiple sites over several years. At one time, you could pull up her disqus history. The best analogy to her is Parsons from 1984.

      2. If you’re not getting paid to post your ridiculously long screeds, then you’re definitely a fool, Karen. Time is much too precious, and there’s certainly a lot of it wasted in the comments section of this blog.

    4. Bettykath:

      Where did Collins excuse boorish behavior?

      Kavanaugh’s classmates have confirmed there were drinking games by that name.
      If you actually read the “spying” email you will understand that it talked about a leak regarding a Soros fund. No stolen documents were included or referenced. Leaks like the ones from the Trump Administration making the news all the time. Merely reading the email is sufficient to put that gossip to rest.

Leave a Reply