Coulter: One in five Rolling Stone writers are morons

From The Clarion-Ledger

In response to the total implosion of Rolling Stone’s preposterous story about a fraternity gang-rape at the University of Virginia, the media have reverted to their Soviet-style reporting. They’re not even saying: We’re choosing not to talk about UVA because it’s a side show. It’s more like: UVA? That’s a school?

Not only did the UVA gang rape turn out to be a hoax, but then President Obama’s own Department of Justice completed a six-year study on college rape, and it turns out that instead of 1-in-5 college coeds being raped, the figure is 0.03-in-5.

Less than 1 percent of college students are the victim of a sexual assault — 0.6 percent to be exact — not to be confused with the 20 percent, or “one in five,” claimed by feminists and President Obama.

But neither the DOJ report, nor the UVA rape hoax have dissuaded Sens. Kirsten Gillibrand and Claire McCaskill from pushing their idea that the nation is in the grip of a college rape epidemic.

This week, Gillibrand dismissed the UVA outrage, saying, “Clearly, we don’t know the facts of what did or did not happen in this case.”

Actually, we know quite well what happened in this case. A disturbed young woman invented a fake boyfriend and a fake gang-rape to get attention, and an incompetent journalist acted as her transcriber. It was a total hoax — just like the Duke lacrosse case, the Jamie Leigh Jones case, the Tawana Brawley case, and every other claim of white men committing gang-rape.

Gillibrand and McCaskill: Perhaps the accusations against Dreyfus were overblown, but that doesn’t mean there’s not an epidemic of Jews selling secrets to the Germans!

We are truly in the middle of a rape epidemic: an epidemic of women falsely claiming to have been raped.

It’s said that “women never lie about rape!” But the evidence shows that women lie about rape all the time -– for attention, for revenge and for an alibi. All serious studies of the matter suggest that at least 40 percent of rape claims are false.

The U.S. Air Force, for example, examined more than a thousand rape allegations on military bases over the course of four years and concluded that 46 percent were false. In 27 percent of the cases, the accuser recanted. A large study of rape allegations over nine years in a small Midwestern city, by Eugene J. Kanin of Purdue University, found that 41 percent of the rape claims were false.

To put it in terms Kirsten Gillibrand would understand, two in five women claiming to have been raped are lying.

So why are we always being hectored: Only 2 percent of rape allegations are false!

That oft-cited number comes from Susan Brownmiller’s 1975 book, “Against Our Will” — which sourced the claim to a mimeograph of a speech by a state court judge, who made a passing remark about a New York police precinct with an all-female rape squad. Nothing more is known about whether this was an actual study, and if so, what was examined, how the information was collected or the actual results. Nor can any trace of the speech, the precinct or the data be found.

In Women’s Studies classes, that figure is called a “home run.”

That’s why the feminists are so anxious to move on from the UVA nonsense rape story. They want to move on now so they can come back to it later, when everyone’s forgotten, and start citing UVA as their No. 1 example of the fraternity gang-rape culture.

It’s crucial that we get a letter in the file that says, “This was total B.S.” Otherwise, the UVA hoax will remain in an open file, marked “unresolved.”

All we’re hearing now is, Enough! Enough! Don’t be a bad winner. All this coverage is putting Jackie in a precarious emotional state. If you were a gentleman, you would drop the subject.

Then in three months, they’ll be bringing up the UVA gang rape as proof of a college rape epidemic. In six months, the case will show up in feminist textbooks.

Wait a minute! That was a hoax!

We didn’t agree it was a hoax. We conceded nothing.

The Duke lacrosse case proves that. In an unusual move, after that gang-rape turned out to be yet another hoax, the players refused to accept the case being dismissed for “insufficient evidence,” which is how prosecutors usually drop charges. They insisted on being declared “innocent.”

This, the attorney general did. He also denounced the prosecutor, Mike Nifong, and saw that he was disbarred.

A few years went by, and then, this year, some douchebag wrote a book that claims “something happened” in the Duke case between the players and the stripper (who has since been convicted of murder). The book got a rave review from The New York Times.

With feminists, either you lose or the game was rained out.

So before anyone moves on from UVA, we need to get it in writing that this case was a hoax. Jackie’s got to apologize to the fraternity; UVA’s president has to not only apologize, but pay restitution to the Greek system for shutting it down for an entire semester; and Rolling Stone authoress Sabrina Rubin Erdely has got to swear that she will never, ever write again.

She cannot be an “investigative journalist.” She cannot even write movie reviews. Remember, Sabrina: No means no.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | 2 Comments

Woman falsely accuses man of rape, and man captures it on video

From Rachel Alexander at Right Wing News

The latest feminist obsession with rape has reached the point where false accusations are now being thrown around loosely. It has resulted in a negative stigma toward men on college campuses, and destroyed the lives of those falsely accused. Fortunately, one man videotaped his entire encounter with a woman who wrongly accused him, proving her wrong and probably saving him from arrest and prosecution.

Fly Height posted the video, showing a disheveled looking woman who appears to be high and trespassing in a man’s room. She cries out, “Don’t touch me, rape, he wants to rape me! Help me!” The startled man responds back, “stop hitting me lady.”  With the door wide open and her boyfriend standing next to her, she continues, “I promise I won’t squeal on you anymore … I’ll do anything you want!” She then bangs on his door, yelling, “I was trying to get out of your room, you won’t let me.” The victim asks her repeatedly, “Please call the cops and get out of my room.”

Another man, possibly a landlord, approaches her as she finally leaves the man’s place, sympathetically taking her side. But it won’t matter, all the evidence is preserved on video.

It is despicable that our culture now instructs women to cry rape at the smallest thing, instead of treating it seriously. Not all men are in a position to capture something like this on video. Hopefully the men that are able to will do so, to protect themselves from this vicious strain of feminism.

Watch the video below:
http://www.flyheight.com/mplayer/player.php?post=64924

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | 12 Comments

Why Rolling Stone’s UVA rape culture story went viral

Posted in Uncategorized | 6 Comments

Is date-rape crusade hurting innocent young men?

From U-T San Diego

As a journalist, I can’t say I’m surprised about the recent Rolling Stone UVA rape debacle. I’m also not surprised by how the public has responded to Rolling Stone’s callous apology for its shoddy reporting and editing. By casting a renewed shadow of doubt on rape accusers and accusations, Rolling Stone and reporter Sabrina Rubin Erdely have indeed done survivors of rape a horrific disservice.

As a mother of two sons, however, here’s what does surprise me: How little attention defendants of civil liberties have paid to what unsubstantiated rape charges can do to the lives of the accused. Even if it turns out that Erdely was dead wrong. Even if “Jackie’s” allegations about Phi Kappa Psi were completely fabricated, there will be an indelible smudge on that fraternity and those young men. And no apology will take that away.

Sure, you can find diatribes on right-wing websites and TV stations that sing this refrain. But among liberals like myself? I’ve listened to colleagues and friends rage endlessly about the male predator crisis on campus.

And I’ve bitten my tongue so hard I’ve practically bled. That’s because even my meekest attempts to question if this anti-date-rape crusade might be spinning into a full-blown hysteria have been gunned down. It’s been made clear that coming out “on the side” of an accused rapist is tone-deaf, misogynistic, and anti-feminist.

I am a feminist, for whatever that’s worth. I am a person who is outraged by any act of violence. But I also support the American presumption that a person is innocent until proven guilty.

I fear for young women who may become the next rape statistic. But I look at my two adolescent sons and I fear for them, too.

I’ve heard advocates emphasize that only a tiny percentage of rape accusations are fallacious. I believe that. But the sexual landscape is becoming brutally hard to navigate. We are well beyond the notion that a stranger must pop out of an alley for it to be considered an attack. As our definition of consensual sex continues to morph, some young women could interpret certain unfortunate sexual encounters as “rape” when they may just have been stupid, risky, unpleasant and regrettable.

In this hyper-sensitized environment, it’s not an unreasonable stretch for me to imagine my own son or one of his friends drinking too much, falling into bed with a young woman who has also drunk too much, and waking up in the morning to discover he’s a “rapist.”

So what are young men to make of all this? Avoiding problems isn’t merely a matter of making sure a woman says “yes.” As many of us who pawed and partied our way through young adulthood know, sex can be confusing, messy and full of second thoughts. My friends and I woke up on plenty of mornings, hungover and mortified about the stupid choices we’d made and the sketchy encounters we’d had. But do I think back for a minute on these incidents as anything approaching rape? Absolutely not.

Sexual predation on campus is an issue we must deal with. The first step must be dealing with alcohol and substance abuse among young adults. A national study of undergraduates found that 55 percent of females and 75 percent of males involved in date rape had been drinking or using drugs prior to the incident. A 2002 study published in the Journal of American College Health asked 772 college undergrads if they’d ever woken up after a night of drinking and found themselves unable to remember what they’d done or where they had been. Among those who drank within the past two weeks, 1 in 10 reported having blacked out during that period. Many later learned they had “vandalized property, driven a car, had sexual intercourse, or engaged in other risky behaviors.”

This problem has probably been exacerbated by the fact that since the drinking age was raised to 21, college alcohol use has gone underground. Kids get drunk within the secretive walls of frats and private apartments, while the universities look the other way. And they look away again when traumatized victims knock on their doors complaining they’ve been attacked.

I recently shared my concerns with a friend, who is the mother of three teen sons. She responded that women have silently endured the tragic toll of date rape for so long that the pendulum may have to swing in the other direction and hurt some innocent males before we find a balance.

Maybe so. But it won’t mow down my sons as it swings in their direction. I will tell them not to let their passions dictate their actions. I’ll warn them to abstain from alcohol and drugs when mingling with girls. I’ll draw up contracts they can ask potential partners to sign before they engage in sex. Maybe I’ll even ask them to have a witness present. Come to think of it, does anyone know where I can buy a male chastity belt? It just may be the next rage on campus.

Posted in Uncategorized | 5 Comments

Rolling Stone’s UVA rape story just took another hit

From Robby Soave at Reason.com

The Washington Post just published another investigative report on the University of Virginia gang rape allegations—and whatever credibility Sabrina Rubin Erdely and Rolling Stone had left is totally obliterated.

WaPost spoke with the three friends who rescued Jackie after her alleged gang rape on September 28, 2012. The details they provided depart significantly from Jackie’s narrative as reported by Erdely. The friends told WaPost that Jackie did not appear battered or bloodied and gave a description of the attack significantly different than what was later published in Rolling Stone. They also clarified that it was Jackie who didn’t want to go to the police, not them:

The scene with her friends was pivotal in the article, as it alleged that the friends were callously apathetic about a beaten, bloodied, injured classmate reporting a brutal gang rape at the Phi Kappa Psi fraternity. The account alleged that the students worried about the effect it might have on their social status, how it might reflect on Jackie during the rest of her collegiate career, and how they suggested not reporting it. It set up the article’s theme: That U-Va. has a culture that is indifferent to rape.

“It didn’t happen that way at all,” Andy said.

Instead, the friends remember being shocked. Though they did not notice any blood or visible injuries, they said they immediately urged Jackie to speak to police and insisted that they find her help. Instead, they said, Jackie declined and asked to be taken back to her dorm room. They went with her — two of them said they spent the night — seeking to comfort Jackie in what appeared to be a moment of extreme turmoil.

Erdely portrayed Jackie’s friends as popularity-obsessed sociopaths who deterred her from reporting the assault. They say that’s not true; it was Jackie who didn’t want to report it.

That may seem damning, but it’s just the beginning. According to the friends, Jackie didname her attacker, but no one by that name attended UVA. Pictures of the attacker—the man Jackie claimed was a UVA junior who had asked her out on a date—that she provided to the friends were actually pictures of a former high school classmate who never attended UVA and “hasn’t been to Charlottesville in at least six years.” His name is not the one Jackie gave her friends. These details were all verified by WaPost.

Here’s the timeline, according to the friends:

The three friends said that Jackie soon began talking about a handsome junior from chemistry class who had a crush on her and had been asking her out on dates.

Intrigued, Jackie’s friends got his phone number from her and began exchanging text messages with the mysterious upperclassman. He then raved to them about “this super smart hot,” freshman who shared his love of the band Coheed and Cambria, according to the texts, which were provided to The Post. …

Jackie told her three friends that she accepted the upperclassman’s invitation for a dinner date on Friday Sept. 28, 2012.

Curious about Jackie’s date, the friends said that they failed to locate the student on a U-Va. database and social media. Andy, Cindy and Randall all said they never met the student in person. Before Jackie’s date, the friends said that they became suspicious that perhaps they hadn’t really been in contact with the chemistry student at all.

U-Va. officials told The Post that no student by the name Jackie provided to her friends as her date and attacker in 2012 had ever enrolled at the university. Randall provided The Post with pictures that Jackie’s purported date had sent of himself by text message in 2012.

The Post identified the person in the pictures and learned that his name does not match the one Jackie provided to friends in 2012. In an interview, the man said that he was Jackie’s high school classmate but that he “never really spoke to her.”

The man said that he was never a U-Va. student and is not a member of any fraternity. Additionally, the man said that he had not visited Charlottesville in at least six years and that he was in another state participating in an athletic event during the weekend of Sept. 28, 2012.

If the friends’ narrative is accurate, it seems doubtful that “Drew” exists at all, and is instead the product of some kind of catfishing situation. Compare that with Rolling Stoneeditor Sean Woods’ initial claim that “I’m satisfied that [the perpetrators] exist and are real. We knew who they were.”

One of the friends, “Randall,” also told WaPost that Erdely lied when she wrote that he declined to be interviewed because of “loyalty to his own frat.” Randall said he would have gladly given an interview but was never contacted.

The friends quoted in the latest article still say Jackie’s changed behavior that first semester is evidence of some trauma she sustained. That may be true, although it is difficult to say what, exactly, that might have entailed. There is not a shred of evidence to suggest such a trauma bears any resemblance to the incredible story told by Rolling Stone.

Lest anyone think that this debacle is solely the fault of someone who falsely claimed rape, keep in mind that these fraudulent charges were put forth by a national magazine that made no effort to verify them, and ignored every red flag in its haste to publish the story of the century—even when Jackie refused to name her attackers and attempted to withdraw her story. Whatever the truth is—whatever the excellent reporters at WaPostmanage to uncover next—the fact remains that Rolling Stone and Erdely should have known better.

The degree to which everyone involved in this travesty of journalism failed at their jobs is almost unbelievable. But unlike the story of a gang rape at UVA, we now have incontrovertible proof of it.

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

The UVA Story Unravels: Feminist Agitprop and Rape-Hoax Denialism

Cathy Young’s take on the UVA scandal…

We will almost certainly never know for sure what actually happened to Jackie, the troubled young woman at the center of the now-discredited Rolling Stone tale of rape and impunity at the University of Virginia that riveted the nation for two weeks before it came apart. She may be a mentally ill fantasist; she may have experienced a less brutal sexual assault and either deliberately exaggerated or sincerely reimagined it as the grotesque horror she recounted to writer Sabrina Rubin Erdely; she may have suffered some other trauma. Many fear that the story’s undoing may hurt the credibility of real rape victims, and one can only hope that doesn’t happen.

But the UVA fiasco should destroy the credibility of the feminist crusade against “rape culture,” whose virulent zealotry and disregard for truth have been starkly exposed by this scandal.

The uncritical rush to embrace of Rolling Stone story attests to the toxic climate created by this crusade. Erdely’s article should have quickly set off alarm bells (mine went off on the second reading). The preplanned initiation-ritual gang rape in which “Clockwork Orange”-level ultraviolence meets “Silence of the Lambs” (“Grab its motherf—–g leg,” yells one of the men); the reaction of the victim’s friends who see her disheveled and bloodied yet talk her out of going to the police or to the hospital because being “the girl who cried rape” would carry a social stigma; the nonchalance of the frat boy who casually chats her up shortly after engineering the attack—it all seems highly implausible, reading more like a rape-culture morality tale than a factual account.

And that’s not even to mention the fact that Jackie supposedly endured three hours of rape while lying on sharp shards of glass from a smashed coffee table; or that later, when she had become an anti-rape activist on campus, a man supposedly threw a beer bottle at her as she walked past a bar and it broke on the side of her face but left only a bruise.
When critical scrutiny finally began, much of it focused on Erdely’s failure to even attempt to contact any of the alleged rapists for their side of the story (a subject on which she was peculiarly evasive in interviews).

Yet the story was riddled with other problems.

Click here to read the rest of the article.

Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments

The College Rape Overcorrection

Emily Yoffe writes at Slate about how the so-called rape epidemic harms men.

Drew Sterrett couldn’t know that when his friend slipped into his bottom bunk late one night in March of his freshman year, she was setting off a series of events that would end his college education. It was 2012, and Sterrett was an engineering student at the University of Michigan.

The young woman, CB, lived down the hall. A group of students had been hanging out in the dorm on a Friday evening—there was drinking, but no one was incapacitated—when CB told Sterrett that her roommate had family members staying in their room and she needed a place to spend the night. Sterrett loaned her a shirt to sleep in and assumed she’d crash on the mat he and his roommate kept for visitors. Instead, CB came and lay down next to him on his bed. The two had made out in the past but had no serious romantic interest in each other.

They talked quietly, started kissing, and then things escalated, as they often do when two teenagers are in bed together. When it became clear they were going to have intercourse, CB asked Sterrett about a condom, and he retrieved one from a drawer. Their sex became so loud and went on for so long that Sterrett’s roommate, unable to sleep in the upper bunk, sent Sterrett a Facebook message around 3 a.m.: “Dude, you and [CB] are being abnoxtiously [sic] loud and inconsiderate, so expect to pay back in full tomorrow …”

The two finally finished and went to sleep. The next morning, Sterrett says CB told him that she wanted to keep their interlude private. He thought she was embarrassed that she’d had sex with a friend and agreed not to talk to others about it. They saw each other frequently in the dorm until the school year ended.

Sterrett was home in New York for the summer when he was contacted by a university official, Heather Cowan, program manager of the Office of Student Conflict Resolution, and told to make himself available for a Skype interview with her and another administrator. No reason was given.

As the interview got under way, Sterrett realized that CB must have told Cowan something disturbing about their one-time assignation. Becoming concerned about the tenor of the questions, he asked the administrators if he should consult a lawyer. He says they told him that if he ended the interview in order to seek counsel that fact would be reported to the university and the investigation would continue without his input. He kept talking. He told Cowan that he and CB had had a consensual encounter while his roommate was only a few feet away.

As the interview was coming to a close, Sterrett says the administrators told him this matter was confidential—though he’d still not been explicitly told what the matter was—and that he should not talk to anyone about it, especially not fellow students who might be witnesses on his behalf.

Later, Sterrett would consult a lawyer and file a lawsuit against the university alleging he’d been deprived of his constitutional right to due process. This account is drawn from the legal filings in that ongoing case. These include Sterrett’s case against the university, affidavits from witnesses sworn on Sterrett’s behalf, the university’s response, and a deposition of CB taken by Sterrett’s lawyer.

(Through his lawyer, Sterrett declined to speak to me. A Michigan spokesman said the university cannot comment on a pending case. CB has remained anonymous in court filings. I contacted her lawyer, Joshua Sheffer, who sent the following statement: “While we strongly disagree with Plaintiff’s description of the night in question, we do not feel that it should be played out in the press.” It continued: “This lawsuit is between Plaintiff and the University of Michigan; my client wishes only to put this traumatic event behind her and move forward with her education and life.”)

Click here to read the rest of the story.

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

The ‘best interest of the child’ includes Mom AND Dad

Christian Paasch, chair of National Parents Organization of Virginia, writes at PilotOnline.com about the “abysmal child-custody status quo in our nation’s family courtrooms.” 

The abysmal child-custody status quo in our nation’s family courtrooms is about as relevant to our children today as 1957’s June Cleaver is to the modern, American woman. In other words: not at all.

In fact, today’s standard family court practices not only prevent children from developing loving bonds with both their parents after divorce or separation, but also dramatically affect their health and well being. We should no longer stand by while our family courts hurt our children.

How do we know that children fare better with both parents than with one? According to the Centers for Disease Control, the Department of Justice and the U.S. Census Bureau, children raised by single parents account for:

n 63 percent of teen suicides

n 71 percent of high school dropouts

n 85 percent of those in prison

n 85 percent of children who exhibit behavioral disorders

n 90 percent of homeless and runaway children.

Let’s go back to June Cleaver for a moment and put ourselves in her shoes. Because as ridiculous as that might seem, that is exactly the kind of mindset in which the vast majority of our family courts currently operate. Today, most family courts routinely award sole custody following divorce or separation as the default. That’s despite research that clearly shows shared parenting – where both parents, who are proven to be competent, are fully engaged in their children’s lives – is best for children.

In November, National Parents Organization released its inaugural Shared Parenting Report Card, the nation’s first study analyzing and grading each state based on its child custody laws. On a 4-point scale, the report found that the nation, as a whole, scored 1.63, meaning most states performed poorly in encouraging shared parenting and parental equality. The report can be found at nationalparentsorganization.org.

Virginia received a D-, primarily because it has no statutory preference for, or presumption of, shared parenting (joint legal custody and shared physical custody) for temporary or final orders. And while Virginia laws require a court to consider the “best interests of the child” in determining custody, they contain no specific language that encourages shared parenting.

Many states (though not Virginia, unfortunately) are considering reforming their child custody laws in upcoming legislative sessions, in an effort to ensure children have equal time with both parents following divorce. The last time Virginia considered such a bill, in 2012, valid concerns about domestic abuse, drug abuse and other issues resulted in the bill’s defeat.

Of course, our courts should not support shared parenting in verified instances of domestic abuse or other violence. When both parents are fit, however, our courts should start both parents on equal footing so we don’t deprive our children of one loving parent’s critical influence and presence.

We at National Parents Organization of Virginia want to craft a more comprehensive and inclusive bill collaboratively, sitting down with all stakeholders, accounting for concerns and finding a solution that works and can be adopted. We believe it is possible, and we look forward to engaging legislators accordingly and respectfully.

Despite the research supporting shared parenting and the startling impacts of single parenting, parental inequality continues to persist in our family courts. Sole and/or primary custody prevails a great majority of the time – even though, in most cases, both parents are fit and desire to be fully engaged in their children’s lives.

According to the U.S. Census Bureau, 35 percent of children in our nation today are raised in households where the mother and father no longer live together. These children deserve better. Just as we encourage our children to earn grades that reflect their best efforts, each state must make its best effort to improve the performance of its family court system and curb the negative impacts its actions are having on our children.

We cannot continue the status quo.

Posted in Uncategorized | 3 Comments