UN Betsy DeVos to end Title IX - And feminists are pissed

http://fortune.com/2017/09/07/betsy-devos-title-ix-sexual-assault/ (http://archive.is/O3Ktm)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...8a4366-6b36-11e7-9c15-177740635e83_story.html (http://archive.is/x4MLL)

https://www.usatoday.com/story/opin...debra-katz-hannah-alejandro-column/536000001/ (http://archive.is/wqj4v)

Betsy DeVos, the Secretary of Education, has announced plans to roll back the infamous Title IX regulations put in place by the Obama Administration. This news was not received well by feminists.

 

[Jubileus]

This whole shitshow isn't about Title IX itself, it's about the April 4, 2011 "Dear Colleague" letter from the Department of Education's Office of Civil Rights and the subsequent "guidance" from OCR that made it pretty clear the expectation was acquiring scalps to claim victory on their "War on Campus Rape" by any means necessary.

Which is utter bullshit that is trampling students underfoot and then turning around and draining university funds, not only on mandatory Title IX Coordinator sinecures but on lawsuits and settlements as people fight back against it. The schools themselves are trapped between going full Kool-Aid and getting their asses sued off and hiring even more useless fucks or else ending up on OCR's very public shitlist and all the attendant bullshit the "investigation" causes.

Saying that if you don't like this shitshow demonstration of banal evil then you're for rape is a false dichotomy, but one a few select groups are indulging in because they (a) hate Trump and DeVos and categorically oppose anything they do no matter how good it is, (b) are on the payrolls these initiatives have created, (c) are still sucking Obama's cock and refuse to admit his administration fucked this one up hard, (d) actually buy into or otherwise benefit from the bullshit "campus rape epidemic" hysteria that's determined to be this decade's satanic panic.

The root of this particular bullshit lies with the Department of Education. Betsy DeVos is the Secretary of that Department. Various outlets have been covering this shitshow since it emerged (FIRE was on it from the "Dear Colleague" letter's issuance, for example, and there's extensive coverage over at Reason if you don't recoil from "muh libertarianism") and now she's listened and is doing something about it. If you categorically oppose her efforts with the evidence on hand, you are pretty much condoning the continued ruination of students and education for the sake of appeasing people who think Mike Nifong did nothing wrong and Sabrina Rubin Erdely should be praised for writing "truthily" enough in Rolling Stone.

What DeVos replaces it with, if she replaces it with anything, is another story entirely. After all, the schools are able to decide their own means for handling malfeasance on campus, provided they put some fucking effort into handling it with due process, something these OCR-guided star chamber proceedings are failing to do (N.B. see the case law following Dixon v. Alabama for both the necessity of a modicum of actual due process in proceedings leading to expulsion as well as the erosion and eventual removal of in loco parentis as an understood responsibility for institutions of higher education). I'd prefer to get pissed off about an enforced-embroidery-circle-and-Bible-study policy once it's actually unveiled rather than pissing myself at the hypothetical, and I'd rather not keep something around that's straight up broken and harmful just to be said to be "doing something". Nifonging our kids to jerk off social justice boners is crap policy, period.

 

[Shugo]

If a school finds that one of their students is breaking school rules

Breaking what school rule? You mean the school rule that says "Thou Shalt Not Sexually Assault?" And who is going to prove guilt in that case?

These tribunals don't have the high standards for evidence like courts of law. They shouldn't be used to try students for sexual assault because the accused doesn't even have access to council or other basic legal protections required to defend yourself.

The only "school rule" they're being expelled for is being accused of sexual assault with no burden of proof on the accusing party.

 

[Ineedahero]

Sounds more like a shitty excuse for a poor claim, but what ever.

Don't be pathetic.

The best source I could find is from the FBI, which stated:
"Eight percent of forcible rape complaints in 1996 were “unfounded,”

So what's the proof against this?

Ah, the fbi study, let me finish that sentence for you - "Eight percent of forcible rape complaints in 1996 were "unfounded", while the average for all index crimes was 2 percent." according to the fbi rape cases turn out to be bullshit four times as often as any other crime. Of course none of these title ix cases are included, nor is any other case that doesn't make it to the police. And a case is only declared unfounded when the accuser admits she made it up, which also increases the percentage. What's the real percentage? Nobody knows. And given the current climate on campuses, we probably won't know for a long time.

Yeah, there are a few problems with this study.

1. Given how small the sample size is, it seems a little odd that the actual sources used to gather this evidence aren't listed. Is there a citation page anywhere? Because I can't find one.

2. No authors for the study are listed. Which is odd, because looking at the "People" section of their website, a lot of these people seem to have a bit of a conflict of interest with this, and I'm really struggling to believe that their personal biases would not have had an impact on this study.

3. The allocation of points is kinda... bad. I checked Lehigh University, and the first thing they say is that the accused is presumed innocent. However, the only received a 1 for this. The next two points regard written notification and notification of time to prepare, but the study you linked put both of those down as a 0.

I could go through each and everyone one of these, but I'd be here all night and I really don't want to be here all night. But needless to say, this raises quite a number of questions in regards to this study.

It's not a study, it's a survey. The top 50 colleges were surveyed (4 tie for 50th). And the points system is from 0(totally fucked) to 2(cool beans). And the issue, as demonstrated by the fact that the survey lists Lehigh twice with a second rating for sexual misconduct, is that institutions follow different procedures for sexual misconduct than they do for regular misconduct.

In other words, you don't know what you are talking about.

Edit: And your thoughts on changing culture are just straight up preposterous. Good luck getting 'we need colleges to be less zealous in prosecuting sexual assault because too many women are lying about it' into the zeitgeist, your impending lynching should be a blast o_O

 

[Somsnosa]

The fact your colleges even are a microcosm by themselves is not a good idea. You can have a college code for things like nepotism, disrespecting a teacher or faking a test, but all serious matters need direct involvement of state law and police, from property damage to rape. It's insane anyone thought this law would work fine

 

[Shugo]

all serious matters need direct involvement of state law and police, from property damage to rape. It's insane anyone thought this law would work fine

Some high schools also do the same. They cover up theft and assault and drug and gang-related crimes within their schools and simply suspend students instead of having to call the police and have them deal with it, because then your district looks better because there's a lot less reported crime.

 

[Hatoful Dandy]

I'm sure someone will bring up this recent case as being one of the worst case scenarios of Title IX abuse

https://www.dallasnews.com/news/arl...led-ut-arlington-wrongfully-punished-gay-slur

 

[SwanDive]

Ah, the fbi study, let me finish that sentence for you - "Eight percent of forcible rape complaints in 1996 were "unfounded", while the average for all index crimes was 2 percent." according to the fbi rape cases turn out to be bullshit four times as often as any other crime. Of course none of these title ix cases are included, nor is any other case that doesn't make it to the police. And a case is only declared unfounded when the accuser admits she made it up, which also increases the percentage. What's the real percentage? Nobody knows. And given the current climate on campuses, we probably won't know for a long time.

Eh, fair enough. I'll admit this topic isn't something I'm super well read on, and the only source I could find was from the FBI, so more data would no doubt be necessary to come to an accurate conclusion on the matter.

The top 50 colleges were surveyed (4 tie for 50th). And the points system is from 0(totally fucked) to 2(cool beans). And the issue, as demonstrated by the fact that the survey lists Lehigh twice with a second rating for sexual misconduct, is that institutions follow different procedures for sexual misconduct than they do for regular misconduct.

Except if you look at both sexual misconduct and just standard cases, you'll see that both "written notification" and "time to prepare" are both listed at 0, despite those being the second and third points respectively in the pdf I posted. So this is just outright dishonest.

Looking at another example. Penn State University recieved an F (3/20). For right to counsel, they received a zero. Their student code of conduct however, says:

Respondents have the right to be accompanied by an advisor.

Advisor being defined as:

Spoiler

The term “advisor” is defined as any person selected by the respondent or complainant to assist and accompany them through the University conduct process (including Conduct Conferences, University hearings, Sanction Reviews, and Appeals). Parties may choose from a list of trained advisors available at the Office of Student Conduct website, or person of their choice, or may choose to proceed without an advisor. A party shall not select an advisor with the actual or effective purpose of disrupting the proceedings, causing emotional distress to the other party, or otherwise attempting to disrupt the process. The advisor, upon request may (1) accompany the party in any conduct proceeding, (2) advise the party in the preparation and presentation of sharing of information, and (3) advise the party in the preparation of any appeals or sanction reviews. The advisor shall not perform any function in the process other than advising the party and may not make a presentation or represent the party. The parties are expected to ask and respond to questions on their own behalf, without representation by their advisor. The advisor may consult with their advisee quietly or in writing, or outside during breaks, but may not speak on behalf of the advisee. Delays in the conduct process will not normally be allowed due to scheduling conflicts with advisors

Of course, given that the advisor may not represent the respondent, they may still advise them. That should at least warrant a 1, but PSU received a 0.

As for written notification, PSU recieved a 1. As for time to prepare, PSU recieved a 0. Their student code of conduct states:

Spoiler

5. If the acquired information reasonably supports a Code of Conduct violation, the Case Manager may recommend charges and sanctions to the respondent. If the acquired information does not reasonably support that a violation of the Code of Conduct occurred, then the case will be closed without charges. All charges shall be presented to the respondent in written form. The decision to charge is based on a low standard of evidence and does not indicate whether or not a respondent will be found responsible in a hearing, should the respondent contest the charges.

6. The respondent will then decide whether to accept responsibility for the charges and/or sanctions assigned. The respondent may take 3 business days to make a decision whether to accept the charges and sanctions or contest. Failure to respond, in writing, in the 3 days allotted will result in the charges and sanctions being implemented, unless the Case Manager has approved an alternative timeframe.

7. If the respondent contests the charges (i.e., denies responsibility for the violations), the matter will be referred to a hearing. The hearing will take place as soon as reasonably possible but not less than five business days after the respondent has been notified of the charges, unless the respondent waives the five day notice and the University can accommodate a shortened timeframe.

And that's not even touching the other two points. Those being the lack of any citations or sources, which makes fact checking this info rather hard. And the potential conflict of interest on the behalf of the authors.

And your thoughts on changing culture are just straight up preposterous. Good luck getting 'we need colleges to be less zealous in prosecuting sexual assault because too many women are lying about it' into the zeitgeist, your impending lynching should be a blast o_O

lmao wut? i said that legislative stances would not have an impact on the overall reaction to cases of rape and sexual assault.

Breaking what school rule? You mean the school rule that says "Thou Shalt Not Sexually Assault?"

Yes. Most colleges have rules putting that down as a bit of a no-no.

And who is going to prove guilt in that case?

The college. Or are we seriously going to call in the police for every infraction against the school's code of conduct?

If it happened on their campus. If it breaks their rules, then the school should be allowed to administer punishment.

These tribunals don't have the high standards for evidence like courts of law

Yes, and I've already gone over why this is the case.

They shouldn't be used to try students for sexual assault because the accused doesn't even have access to council or other basic legal protections required to defend yourself.

Many schools seem to allow students to have access to council and legal protections. That FIRE survey linked earlier is pretty fishy.

The only "school rule" they're being expelled for is being accused of sexual assault with no burden of proof on the accusing party.

If that were the case, many schools wouldn't even conduct an investigation. Just "listen and believe".

 

[Marvin]

I won't deny that. But like calling into question both party's sexual history, it can be very emotionally demanding or even damaging. Cross examinations can be pretty brutal and that would be a major deterrent for actual victims reporting their case.

That being said, I wouldn't be against cross examination so long as it would be handled in a way that wouldn't make possible victims fearful.

Getting rid of the right to confront your accuser shouldn't be up for consideration in the first place.

Staring down at an anonymous tribunal is unacceptable given the seriousness of the crimes.

The school cannot restrict you from seeing an attorney, only keep you from having one represent you, which applies to both the accused and the accuser.

The accused is being represented somewhat by the school. Having an attorney on hand at these meetings is important, especially considering all the watered down protections you're being subjected to.

I don't see what the problem is here. If the accused feels that they were wrongly convicted, wouldn't it be a good thing that they are able to appeal it? Are you saying that they shouldn't be allowed to appeal their conviction?

I left out "not". I meant to write that a "not guilty verdict" can be appealed, exposing the student to double jeopardy.

Ultimately, nitpicking all these points is missing the greater point: I don't think it's right that, when it's in in the government's power to do so, to be intentionally attempting to water down constitutional rights. Building a parallel, inferior version of the existing court systems takes money, time and effort. Why is this even being attempted?

Not that attending a public university is a right. This is all legal, technically. Just incredibly shitty.

For example, another thing that might be technically legal would be if universities suddenly just decided to ban all protests on public campuses. Like, just started refusing to give people permits, and require people to travel between classes at acceptable walking speeds (ie you can't stand in one place for too long), to prevent people from standing around and protesting. (Like curfews are legal, for example.) I'm not a lawyer, but I have a feeling that there's a way to implement that and have it be constitutionally acceptable. As long as the restrictions are content neutral (not biased for/against any one side), they could probably pull it off.

But I'd be asking the same goddamn questions: Why? Why the fuck are you doing this?

And tying the legal justification for these "dear colleague" monkeyshines to gender equality is pretty shitty. The existing legal system is already gender neutral. It feels to me like a bad excuse to... I don't know, micromanage the "rape epidemic" on campuses? I don't know. What's their motivation? Just to look good?

While we're at it can we ramp up the punishment for women who falsely claim rape? Considering how damning it is for a man to even be accused of rape, there should be severe consequences.

What's the current punishment?

 

[Somsnosa]

What's the current punishment?

1-2 months of jail time at best, or a fine for defamation. It depends on the state and how much jailtime the person accused of rape had to make

 

[Marvin]

1-2 months of jail time at best, or a fine for defamation. It depends on the state and how much jailtime the person accused of rape had to make

Interesting. When it's not defamation, what is usually the charge?

 

[Dr. Boe Jangles Esq.]

Eh, fair enough. I'll admit this topic isn't something I'm super well read on, and the only source I could find was from the FBI, so more data would no doubt be necessary to come to an accurate conclusion on the matter.



Except if you look at both sexual misconduct and just standard cases, you'll see that both "written notification" and "time to prepare" are both listed at 0, despite those being the second and third points respectively in the pdf I posted. So this is just outright dishonest.

Looking at another example. Penn State University recieved an F (3/20). For right to counsel, they received a zero. Their student code of conduct however, says:


Advisor being defined as:

Of course, given that the advisor may not represent the respondent, they may still advise them. That should at least warrant a 1, but PSU received a 0.

As for written notification, PSU recieved a 1. As for time to prepare, PSU recieved a 0. Their student code of conduct states:

And that's not even touching the other two points. Those being the lack of any citations or sources, which makes fact checking this info rather hard. And the potential conflict of interest on the behalf of the authors.



lmao wut? i said that legislative stances would not have an impact on the overall reaction to cases of rape and sexual assault.



Yes. Most colleges have rules putting that down as a bit of a no-no.



The college. Or are we seriously going to call in the police for every infraction against the school's code of conduct?

If it happened on their campus. If it breaks their rules, then the school should be allowed to administer punishment.



Yes, and I've already gone over why this is the case.



Many schools seem to allow students to have access to council and legal protections. That FIRE survey linked earlier is pretty fishy.



If that were the case, many schools wouldn't even conduct an investigation. Just "listen and believe".

I think we can have 12 more pages of inane sophistry on this, but the objection boils down pretty simply:
People don't feel that their careers, education, and reputation should be able to be instantly obliterated by the first angry gash who decides she wants you gone.
Some people feel that the presumption of guilt and the focus on protecting the victim at all costs essentially removes any ability the accused has to defend themselves, and that private institutions need some kind of accountability before acting as judge and jury.
It's very easy to have these lofty ideas about how this should work if you've never stuck your dick in crazy, man, but you cannot hand a college freshman the ability to permanently ruin anyone they please with zero accountability or expectation of proof and then expect they won't abuse it.

 

[Coldgrip]

Eh, fair enough. I'll admit this topic isn't something I'm super well read on, and the only source I could find was from the FBI, so more data would no doubt be necessary to come to an accurate conclusion on the matter.



Except if you look at both sexual misconduct and just standard cases, you'll see that both "written notification" and "time to prepare" are both listed at 0, despite those being the second and third points respectively in the pdf I posted. So this is just outright dishonest.

Looking at another example. Penn State University recieved an F (3/20). For right to counsel, they received a zero. Their student code of conduct however, says:


Advisor being defined as:

Of course, given that the advisor may not represent the respondent, they may still advise them. That should at least warrant a 1, but PSU received a 0.

As for written notification, PSU recieved a 1. As for time to prepare, PSU recieved a 0. Their student code of conduct states:

And that's not even touching the other two points. Those being the lack of any citations or sources, which makes fact checking this info rather hard. And the potential conflict of interest on the behalf of the authors.



lmao wut? i said that legislative stances would not have an impact on the overall reaction to cases of rape and sexual assault.



Yes. Most colleges have rules putting that down as a bit of a no-no.



The college. Or are we seriously going to call in the police for every infraction against the school's code of conduct?

If it happened on their campus. If it breaks their rules, then the school should be allowed to administer punishment.



Yes, and I've already gone over why this is the case.



Many schools seem to allow students to have access to council and legal protections. That FIRE survey linked earlier is pretty fishy.



If that were the case, many schools wouldn't even conduct an investigation. Just "listen and believe".

Calm down fag.

 

[LocalFireDept]

I don't think it's a good idea to have someone who has a >50% chance of being guilty of sexual assault kept on campus.

What would be the ideal probability for you?

100% guilty as determined by due process

 

[Somsnosa]

Interesting. When it's not defamation, what is usually the charge?

They're never alone but charges can be mental damages, bitch you made me waste money to defend myself from your bullshit, blackmailing (some of these cases come from gelosy or 'if you refuse to stay with me I'll call you a rapist', women can be so insane) and wasting police resources. Heavier cases are when children are involved, aka the state taking away children from a person falsely accused of rape.
I know this only from reading articles though, since I knew someone who was falsely accused of abuse and got interested in the whole phenomenon. If we have a lawyer kiwi who's more documented on this stuff I'd appreciate their input and corrections.

 

[I-chi]

How's about letting the policing of campus assaults be done by the actual fucking police. You know, the people who are actually trained to respond to and gather evidence of a crime and can present said evidence to a prosecutor who can actually do something.

But that would mean most of those lying cunts-I mean mature, feminist, political agitators would be forced to own up to the fact that they're wasting the time of their fellow students, the money of their schools and the justice system, and unfairly condemning the straight, white, male shitlords to restricted educational opportunities, if even they're allowed back, just because they're so thin-skinned and miserable about their own lives that they get a kick out of ruining it for the rest of us.

 

[Feline Darkmage]

The coward made his account private.

Update: he full-on deleted it now.

 

[NIA-DOA 2.0]

It's not a study, it's a survey. The top 50 colleges were surveyed (4 tie for 50th). And the points system is from 0(totally fucked) to 2(cool beans). And the issue, as demonstrated by the fact that the survey lists Lehigh twice with a second rating for sexual misconduct, is that institutions follow different procedures for sexual misconduct than they do for regular misconduct.

In other words, you don't know what you are talking about.

Edit: And your thoughts on changing culture are just straight up preposterous. Good luck getting 'we need colleges to be less zealous in prosecuting sexual assault because too many women are lying about it' into the zeitgeist, your impending lynching should be a blast o_O

As someone who goes to Lehigh, Ineedahero is correct. The methodology for recording these type of things varies from each to university to university. Our campus police are an actual police force with actual experience from neighboring PD's. That is only reason many students have been thankfully spared from being part of a witchhunt, but they have told me in private this policy could and probably has been abused by both male and female students and has set back both accused rights, victim rights, and combating sexual assault a good couple of decades.