<p>Agree with consolation and earlier posters that the slate article,is well worth reading . It is important to try and understand what is known and what is not. The conventional wisdom about serial predators as the primary threat on residential college campuses is based on ONE study at an urban commuter college not a body of evidence. Campus rape is a real problem and we all should advocate for victims without simultaneously deciding to throw out constitutional protections for the accused. </p>
<p>Here is the complaint that leads the very good slate article and illustrates the due process issues at the heart of most of the discussions on these forums. UVa faces all these issues, every university does. They cannot simply assume guilt and punish. They cannot.
<a href=“http://www.avoiceformalestudents.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Drew-Sterrett-Complaint-against-University-of-Michigan-Ann-Arbor.pdf”>http://www.avoiceformalestudents.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Drew-Sterrett-Complaint-against-University-of-Michigan-Ann-Arbor.pdf</a></p>
<p>
</p>
<p>OMG, I have to say that is one of the funniest posts ever. Great time to add levity to the thread. Kudos. </p>
<p>I have to say I’m not impressed with that Slate article. It mainly focuses on one strange and seemingly egregious case. (Which only proves, once again, that colleges can be idiotic when investigating these things - it’s the Columbia investigator insisting about lube all over again… )</p>
<p>Also, it was written by the “Dear Prudence” columnist which just doesn’t reassure me. </p>
<p>Also, it questions Lisak’s findings of serial rapists but without any substantial scientific refutation. Let’s face it, we can all have gut feelings about how things are but unless you are a social scientist and have conducted a rigorous study, you just can’t be sure. You can take those questions and start another study, but to draw conclusions before that is accomplished is shaky. </p>
<p>Everyone who supported me, thank you. I really, really appreciate your kindness. Everyone who is unhappy with me, my sincere apologies over my form, if that offended you. But I stand by my content. I did go to party, sort of. I had some big leveraged exposures in the market today that I opened at noon, and when the day ended well, that was my true get out of jail free card. So I went and taught my ESL class, went to the gym, then had a nice dinner (the chef, as they say, had a way with beef), and washed it down with some fully body cabernet.</p>
<p>I think I have said all that I had to say on this topic, except for two things. At some point I will get my thoughts together about how to impact sexual assault as well. I do believe that this is something that is coachable and impactable, vs. trying to reduce alcohol intake and/or stranger sex. The last bucket is forcible rape without use of alcohol or drugs. This I believe is something that has a natural bottom, and it will go down no further, as this is done by true sociopaths. What that bottom is I do not know, but the BoJ statistics seemed to indicate that it still has not been reached, as the trend is still down. So, till that hits a trough, I would suggest leaving the current system unchanged as that is working well.</p>
<p>But then I have said that before.</p>
<p>This thread was educational to me. I never really paid much attention to men’s right groups as I was brought up to believe that it is simply reactionary. I thought due process is everywhere, and if people whine after that, it’s their problem. It seems however that some universities are moving away from due process. The Harvard letter from 28 law professors was exceptionally worrisome, as these guys are truly the best of the best. Administrations always take sub-optimal decisions as they try to please the public, but professors, in my experience, are generally logical and neutral. I hope that trend gets changed. Of course, boys can file discrimination lawsuits as well, so I believe the system will sort itself out.</p>
<p>Someone contacted me over personal message and asked me if I am truly as misogynistic as I seem. I think I am misanthropic instead, and treat men and women exactly the same way. My business partner and her wife certainly believe so.</p>
<p>Once again, sincere thanks to all that supported me. I owe you.</p>
<p>Greenwitch: The part about Lisak was taken from his own study which took place at one urban commuter college where the average age of the students was over 26 and 20% were over 30 years old. Not the same profile as many residential colleges or of fraternity houses. There have been no other studies that support or refute the findings that most rapists on college campuses are serial predators. Typically, scientifically valid findings have to be be duplicated to be accepted. If this is not true at most college, it may mean that trying to reduce rape by targetting serial predators may not be the most effective strategy. That is not to say that there aren’t serial offenders on campus, but that most of the sexual assaults may be committed by one-time offenders. I thought she did a good job explaining the various statistics that have been so readily accepted and yet are not really supported by good data analysis.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I know what you mean here, and the sentiment is appreciated,. However, for a second I will take it literally and respond by saying that you do not owe anyone squat.</p>
<p>Another bit of older person advice if I may, this time from the CEO corner of my brain - never, ever pay for anything you actually deserve to receive, as you have already earned it and paid for it. Therefore, accept it and run with it because you already worked for it.</p>
<p>You were supported not out of kindness, but because there was an error and you did not do anything wrong. And you paid in advance for that support by confidently writing lengthy posts that challenged everyone reading this thread. If anything, we owe you for presenting your side of things because it made everyone step up their thinking on the issues. We can only benefit from such challenges.</p>
<p>But, if you think you owe something, you could send a contribution to the Merriam Webster Foundation (if it exists) because the error occurred due to the limits of the language, specifically the English language, not due to any limits of your thoughts or ideas. However, you might rather buy more wine instead of giving such a donation because there will never be enough money to fix the inherent limits of language and the ensuing misunderstandings, which will continue to occur at infinitum.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>If you find you have more to say, please do not let this be your last word on the issue for that would surely constitute a significant loss to the thread.</p>
<p>
</a></p>
<p>I read through the story. It reminded me of The Castle and Darkness At Noon. I have decided to lend my support - and money - to falsely accused male college students. Thank you for the link, Consolation. It opened my eyes.</p>
<p>I am not good at many things, but I am good at advocacy (and running money). Hopefully I can move from analysis to action on this issue. That story made my blood boil. I am sure it is doing the same to many other people. Backlash is inevitable from this.</p>
<p>awcntdb, Thank you Sir! 
The donation will be on its way.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>So are these numbers accurate? 36 cases over a 3 year period? 262 claims over a 5 year period with 72 percent of the money going to the accused ? I think the latter was what LF already posted. </p>
<p>Here is another article to add to the mix. </p>
<p>in my view, this article is important because it addresses the public policy problems, which the RS article has brought to the fore in a major way. These problems existed before, but the current drive by advocates to change the system at whatever costs is highlighting the weakness of the “at whatever costs” approach, and the public is naturally inclined to reject this approach. </p>
<p>Basically, the article explains why one cannot have both the strictest punishments and the loosest / broadest standards at the same time. Reduced to its essence, people instinctively do not accept raising the chances that they themselves or anyone they know could be railroaded, which is the inevitable by-product of the “at whatever costs” approach. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2014-12-09/you-cant-just-accuse-people-of-rape”>http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2014-12-09/you-cant-just-accuse-people-of-rape</a></p>
<p>How much money have universities paid for mishandling the cases of rape victims?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I would never have thought of doing this, but I will follow your lead. My company will make a significant contribution as well to assisting falsely accused college males. This crap has got to stop. </p>
<p>And how much will they pay when the poor and middle class kids also start to launch lawsuits? The #1 priority should be to fund such lawsuits and swarm the Universities (yes, that’s how advocates think). </p>
<p>The Senate Bill is now defunct too, is my guess. But of course people should call their Senators to vote against it to make sure not only it gets defeated, it gets defeated by a very big margin so that no one thinks again about resurrecting it in another form.</p>
<p>I agree that we should help the poor and middle class get representation. But 36 suits? That’s it? 200 settlements over a 5 year period? That’s it? </p>
<p>SWDY, and you are telling me 1 percent of women are sexually assaulted is a low number? Don’t bs me. </p>
<p>80 women raped at UVa, just one college, every year, is a low number, but 36 lawsuits of men claiming to be falsely accused for the entire country in a year is a national scandal. OK. Got it. Nice to know what’s important.</p>
<p>Welcome to backlash. And all over the liberal wing of the media, too, which has traditionally been a very defendable friend for general feminist advocacy issues including rape prevention. Imagine that. I just did a scan of the usual suspects in my book marks. (Hell, I personally earmark 1/3 or my charitable donations for feminist causes!)</p>
<p>This UVA case will turn the clock back by 30 years. One of the key teaching that advocates get is to not overreach. Someone didn’t get the memo. Others didn’t back off when they should have.</p>
<p>Liberals care about perversion of Justice more than any other cause. You simply can’t trample over civil liberties just to advance a cause, even a just cause. Too many other causes depend on civil liberties. Due process is too key an issue. This UVA case brought it to light and it is getting huge media attention now.</p>
<p>This will be interesting.</p>
<p>I am flabbergasted at what you are telling me and what you have posted over the last few days. I am glad you posted . I am glad you have shared your stories. I don’t know what else to say. Do you want to help me here? 36 lawsuits over 3 years? That’s a misprint right? </p>
<p>Are they class action suits? </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Talk about missing the central meme and issue of a discussion - the national scandal is there are lawsuits from men because of blatantly unfair judicial processes, which directly violate the fundamental principles of our society. </p>
<p>Note in this quote that judicial standards and principles do not matter, just comparing numbers matters. The post is literally intellectually vacuous. It is a numbers game that a 5 year-old could play, no thought required.</p>
<p>Here is my position (and I speak for myself only) and see if you can tell the difference: I have the EXACT same concern for alleged raped females trying to get justice, as I have for accused males trying to get justice. My principle is that not having the OPPORTUNITY to try and get justice is wrong, irrespective of whom you are and irrespective of which side of the case you are on. </p>
<p>I do not compare numbers and outcomes and think I am on sound footing by saying only 36 of this and 80 of that etc. How about the thinking man’s approach that we should be teaching college students - that if it is wrong not to give a female rape accuser a fair system for her to try and garner justice, then it is equally wrong to not give the accused male a fair system for him to try and garner justice. Not sure why this basic standard is now considered a draconian concept.</p>
<p>Another piece of the intellectual puzzle that seems lost on advocates, but clearly is not lost on the public is this - a fair judicial system is NOT the same or equivalent to a system that delivers the results you desire. A fair system is a system that ONLY affords you the opportunity to present and try to achieve the justice you want, but it does not guarantee you get what you want de facto. Any judicial system, which gives any group the conviction numbers that they want is inherently a system devoid of equal operating principles. Not sure why this basic standard is also now considered a draconian concept as well.</p>
<p>The quote really does illustrate the exact reason why people, in general, are not going to not take this stuff lying down. </p>
<p>I want the men to get justice. I read the link. If the story is true, that gentleman did not get justice. </p>
<p>I want the system to work better for men and women. </p>
<p>Go for it. Go help the men. Go help the 60 men a year who are having problems. Run an ad campaign on it. Are you going to help women’s groups too? If you are running a public company, and you are not helping women, I hope I don’t have shares in that company. I hope you aren’t selling a lot of products to women. </p>
<p>The amount of women who aren’t getting justice dwarfs the men who aren’t getting justice.</p>
<p>I hope that students are learning how to count too. </p>
<p>I want to see this ad campaign. Can’t wait to see it.</p>