December 17, 2016

"We are concerned that our brothers have been named publicly with reckless disregard in violation of their constitutional rights."

"We are now compelled to speak for our team and take back our program."



Reason.com has this, by Robby Soave: "University of Minnesota Football Team Boycotts ‘Unjust Title IX Investigation’/Ten students of color were suspended for sexual misconduct, even though the police said it was consensual."
[Team member Carlton] Djam told police that their sex was fully consensual. He produced three video clips taken on the morning in question that showed the woman was "lucid, alert, somewhat playful and fully conscious; she does not appear to be objecting to anything at this time," according to the police report. This satisfied the police and no charges were filed....

[But] the university has its own process for investigating sexual misconduct that is separate from the police. According to the Education Department, Title IX—a federal statute mandating equality between the sexes in public education—requires universities to adjudicate sexual misconduct internally.... [T]he Office for Civil Rights—the agency that ensures Title IX compliance—has instructed universities to use a lower standard of proof. OCR guidance also discourages administrators from allowing cross-examination, one of the most vital tools a defendant has to prove his or her innocent.

As a result of Minnesota's Title IX proceeding, 10 players were suspended. 
Soave proceeds to critique the NYT for failing to mention race in its piece "Minnesota Football Players Pledge Boycott Over Teammates’ Suspensions." 

All 10 of the suspended players are black.

IN THE COMMENTS: David Begley said:
The players are essentially saying: Hey, it's okay to for ten of our teammates to have sex with a single drunk woman.

196 comments:

Laslo Spatula said...

"All 10 of the suspended players are black."

What color were the women?

Just curious about college diversity.

I am Laslo.

tcrosse said...

We have a US Attorney General named Lynch. Coincidence ?

Laslo Spatula said...

"According to the Education Department, Title IX—a federal statute mandating equality between the sexes in public education—requires universities to adjudicate sexual misconduct internally...."

The Government requires sex to be a level playing field.

Ménage à trois, inherently uneven by being an odd number, can thus only happen among the same sex. Which is why there are female volleyball players.

I am Laslo.

EDH said...

Given the status of black athletes on campus, it was fairly obvious at the time that black Democrats who acquiesced to the Title IX "Guidance Letter" out of political correctness and party line were veritable Emmett Tillls whistling past the graveyard.

Jim Gust said...

It is not just the nytimes. I am in mpls. right now, and watched local tv coverage of this story. Never mentioned the race of those suspended or their defenders, but they did say it in pictures.

This story is not quite fitting the narrative.

David Begley said...

So ten football players have sex with a single drunk woman. Maybe they should be suspended from the football team. They are surely poor representatives of the school.

Guildofcannonballs said...

Too bad Bush hated blacks or he would have demanded pre-school and after-school sex education for these gangbangers. Bush probably lynched their fathers with Romney therefore depriving the youths of a chance at hope.

Never having banged a girl (or guy or dog or *^*) with other men, I am sure I would be really confused about the etiquette, like these young men appear to have been.

So, it's George W. Bush's fault, and Focus on the Family in their damn waistoid barren "city" Colorado Springs, the modern day City of Hunger Games and assassinated abortionists.

THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THE RICH DON'T SIMPLY AND PATRIOTICALLY PAY THEIR FAIR SHARE.

Cheapies.

Arthur James said...

Surprise, surprise, young people conducting another public protest. Obedience has been shattered, respect and trust in authority obliterated. College campuses have become a playground for perpetual adolescence, for those teaching and attending. Forget details, the greater implication screams too loudly. Once more, a broken education system implodes. Yesterday, I felt pity for President Obama appearing so defeated, perplexed with the reality he has been soundly rejected. Moving forward, it cannot be ignored the damage his mindset has perpetrated upon young people--the fact the education system must experience a thorough cleansing.

AllenS said...

I don't live far from the U of M campus, and for a very long time what you see here has been a constant occurrence. This had become normal for these athletes who are recruited from all over the US to get to the campus and behave this way.

William said...

I can imagine a woman having a few drinks to help her over the hump before committing to sex, and then the next day regretting her decision. In such a case, I would be sympathetic to the player involved. . I don't think many women freely and lucidly agree to take on ten men at once, however. It does look like her judgment was impaired......Whtever happens,this promises to be a real shit show that will leave all parties involved utterly drenched.

David Begley said...

Send the 12-1 D3 St. Thomas Tommies to the bowl game. The Tommies could use a break from the Twin Cities.

tcrosse said...

So ten football players have sex with a single drunk woman.
What if they had sex with a single drunk man ? Not that there's anything wrong with that....

David Begley said...

The players are essentially saying: Hey, it's okay to for ten of our teammates to have sex with a single drunk woman.

Wilbur said...

Certainly the name Lynch, per se, is a micro-aggression.

This affair may finally bring to the awareness of the general public the nonsense that is Title IX and the OCR of our Injustice Department.

You know the libs at ESPN are squirming, sweating with discomfort, and hoping this story just somehow goes away. Because they know they can't bury it.

jr565 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
MayBee said...

I was just coming here to ask if you had seen this!

I am such a Golden Gophers football fan right now.

Curious George said...

Consensual and legal, perhaps. But ten guys pulling a train on a girl and videotaping it, disgusting.

Laslo Spatula said...

Was the punter involved? The punter never gets to be in on the gang-bang...

I am Laslo.

MayBee said...

CNN has a good article about it
http://www.cnn.com/2016/12/16/us/minnesota-gophers-football-boycott/index.html

The school has one of those preposterous "affirmative consent" laws. There needs to be a lot of push back on this, and I applaud these brave young men

David Begley said...

Curious George

They probably did the video as a preemptive defense to a rape charge.

MayBee said...

Yeah, the video was used to legally exonerate them.

Wilbur said...

Just read the Drudge link to Deadspin on this. Nowhere in the article or comments(generally supporting the students) is there a single mention of Title Nine or the Justice Department.

You may draw your own conclusions.

Wilbur said...

"Was the punter involved?"

The punter is usually the team holder, too.

Curious George said...

David Begley said...
Curious George

They probably did the video as a preemptive defense to a rape charge.

Blogger MayBee said...
Yeah, the video was used to legally exonerate them.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Doubt it. I think they videoed it to video it. The fact that it was used to exonerate them was dumb luck.

D.D. Driver said...

"So ten football players have sex with a single drunk woman."

I don't believe that is the allegation. Some of players were suspended because they were "in the same house."

MayBee said...

Doubt it. I think they videoed it to video it. The fact that it was used to exonerate them was dumb luck.

it was used to legally exonerate them. You make laws where all you have to support your innocence is a video tape, you can't be disgusted at videotapes being made. For whatever reason.

Laslo Spatula said...

IN THE COMMENTS: David Begley said:
"The players are essentially saying: Hey, it's okay to for ten of our teammates to have sex with a single drunk woman."


From the movie "Freaked":

Ortiz the Dog Boy: "Twelve milkmen IS theoretically possible. Thirteen is silly. Looks like there's one milkman too many, Coogan!"

I am Laslo

mezzrow said...

Ah, race, sex, and athletics in the twenty-first century.

What a time to be alive.

(meanwhile in West Lafayette, a phone rings...)

"Seriously? Sure, we'd love to go!"

MayBee said...

"The players are essentially saying: Hey, it's okay to for ten of our teammates to have sex with a single drunk woman."

No. They are saying it is unjust for them to be suspended. (and I believe it was 5 who had sex with her. Some number of them she claims were consensual. Are you judging her?)

Diogenes of Sinope said...

Throw all that due process, presumption of innocence, facing your accuser, legal representation, jury of your peers,prohibition of double jeopardy bullshit into the blackhole of radical feminism.

MayBee said...

I want to know if anybody who supports Affirmative Consent laws actually lives their lives by them.

Diogenes of Sinope said...

So how many consensual sex partners must be involved for a suspension edict? I'm guessing the number is ZERO. Only a single accusation by any woman is enough for a young man attending college to be suspended.

Bad Lieutenant said...

1. If this is to be tried on the court of public opinion, why is the video-all the video-not public?

2. That's a chick that missed a good opportunity to shut up. Then again she missed a good opportunity to quit drinking and go home. Then again, like her, word had probably spread that she was the It Girl and her life may have been not worth living. Still won't be. Her best bet was to quietly transfer. But with the videos, she had (has?) no future. Except with a man who digs that.

3. If gangbangs are outlawed, only outlaws will have gangbangs. (And gays, because nobody makes this kind of trouble in San Francisco.)

4. Another art form lost, suppressed by the intolerant, surviving only in Europe and Japan (and India and the Middle East, where of course it is gang rape and should be stopped, but That's Different).

5. Would be interesting to know the thought processes of all involved.

6. Was she white?

7. Was she good?

8. Were they good? Individually, I mean, not in the aggregate.

9. If she had got away with it, i.e. safe from discovery, would she regret it so?

10. If... as #9, would she do it again?

11. How much?

traditionalguy said...

The Age of Trump has enlightened the once passive subjects of two bit tyrants. As a result, Lexington and Concord just happened again.

Diogenes of Sinope said...

This punishing the GUILTY is so much easier once this due process crap is finally discarded.

Laslo Spatula said...

From Wiki:

The World's Biggest Gang Bang is a pornographic film staged in a Hollywood studio starring Annabel Chong and billed as her having sex with 300 men. In reality the participants were far fewer than advertised, they are said to have engaged with Chong in a total of 251 sex acts. The event was organised by pornographic film director John T. Bone.

The resulting video, The World's Biggest Gang Bang, released in 1999, is one of the highest grossing pornographic films ever.[1] The record attempt caught the attention of film director Gough Lewis and Chong became the subject of his documentary Sex: The Annabel Chong Story. Lewis's documentary was a hit at the Sundance Film Festival and was nominated for the Grand Jury Prize.


I am Laslo.

Diogenes of Sinope said...

Being drunk is a perfectly acceptable excuse for her. Being drunk has no bearing on the actions of the men and is in no way an excuse.

Mark said...

IN THE COMMENTS: David Begley said:
The players are essentially saying: Hey, it's okay to for ten of our teammates to have sex with a single drunk woman.


David Begley is essentially saying: Hey, it's okay to abolish due process and for public entities and even ignorant blog commenters to judge accused people as guilty without any fair and neutral adjudication.

PB said...

10 football players and they could only get one girl willing to have sex with them, so they had to share?

clint said...

If she consented, there's no crime. The police agree.

But that isn't the end of it.

There should be a gray area of what amounts to "conduct unbecoming" even though it's short of an actual crime. And things like suspension from a club or disciplinary action at work can clearly be for actions that wouldn't warrant police involvement. (It's not a crime to show up late for work on a regular basis, for example.)

The problem is that the university administration is no longer trusted to fairly arbitrate that gray area -- or even to delineate it in a way that is useful to a student who wishes to stay out of it.

Johnathan Birks said...

So let's see the video. If the police found it dispositive, I assume it buttresses the players' case.

PB said...

The whole process imposed on universities was a response to the disparity between the widely repeated fraud that 20% of women are sexually assaulted in college and the real statistics of this crime. So in typical Democrat fashion, instead of adjusting to reality, they decided to create a process that would lower the standards so they could then have data justifying the 20% number. With even that failing to achieve the goal, they've also worked persistently to expand the definition of sexual assault to include things that merely make some women uncomfortable like whistling and ogling.

Bob Ellison said...

The problem is that a young man cannot attend college safely. It's a shooting gallery.

Real American said...

So, in other words, a public university can punish students for having a type of non-criminal consensual sex of which it disapproves.

Mac McConnell said...

Curious George said...
"Consensual and legal, perhaps. But ten guys pulling a train on a girl and videotaping it, disgusting."

The girl pulls the train, the train being the guys.

Spiros Pappas said...

How awful and startling is the University's response. And how completely racist is it? (Remember when the New York Times slut shamed an eleven year old Mexican girl who was gang raped by a dozen Black men.) The Administration should cancel the bowl game and the coming season, along with these athletes' scholarships.

Also, I think this young woman is likely a victim of sex trafficking. So this is even worse.

James Pawlak said...

If justice existed, she would have AIDS and have infested all ten.

Bob Ellison said...

I'm with Curious George. Disgusting. You don't do that. You punch the guys and help the woman get her clothes on and back safe and sound to her room.

robother said...

I understand this young woman was employed by the UM Athletic Dept. I wonder how many young women are similarly employed by big conference athletic departments as part of recruitment/retention efforts? Questions of consent, terms of employment could get very messy for the University if this ever makes it into a civil court.

MayBee said...

Sex trafficking? She's part of the school's football program "game day activities" so she's probably either a trainer or a cheerleader.

And to those saying disgusting- I thought civil rights were all about protecting even the disgusting among us.
The guy home studying doesn't need protections from consensual sex rules.

(also ps. this girl admits to choosing to have sex with multiple players. At what point does a man step in and mansplain to her that she can't do that? At what point do you become #slutshamers?)

Bad Lieutenant said...

Spiros,

No; cite? Eleven is really beyond dispute.

But the internet is full of videos of women who either tolerate or downright crave this activity. Why? Who knows?

Sebastian said...

A lot of blame to go around. Very moralistic of me, I know. But that's the point: honest discussions of sexual morality have become impossible, when all we have is law and athlete entitlement and institutional interest and prog posturing.

"[T]he Office for Civil Rights—the agency that ensures Title IX compliance—has instructed universities to use a lower standard of proof. OCR guidance also discourages administrators from allowing cross-examination, one of the most vital tools a defendant has to prove his or her innocent." Not much longer. Prog administrators prided themselves on following "the law." We'll see how eager they are under the new dispensation.

Michael said...

Good for the team. The police could find no reason to charge any of them. Let the university chew on the financial loss, the embarrassment, while the kangaroo court readies itself to proceed with its one sided investigation.

More rape culture, less football revenue.

Humperdink said...

So colleges and universities have their own Sharia Law?

Whoda thunk there would be push back?

fivewheels said...

"At what point does a man step in and mansplain to her that she can't do that? At what point do you become #slutshamers?"

At the point a week later when she starts to feel a little slutty, you are then required to use your time machine to go back and stop her from exercising her sexual agency. Not just if you were one of the men she had sex with, but even if you were anywhere in the building, not participating. Or you deserve expulsion from school and public shaming in the news.

fivewheels said...

Also, if you see a woman getting friendly with a couple of guys, you must step in before anything happens and say, "This is wrong and immoral behavior and I do not approve! I command you to stop what you're doing and act like a respectable lady and go home!" Because that won't get you lynched by feminists either.

Michael said...

If you like your rape culture you can keep your rape culture.

Or you can have football revenue.

MayBee said...

Look how transparent the whole process has been:

"Kaler said in a letter Wednesday to university boosters that Claeys made the decision to suspend the players, with support from Coyle. Later in the evening, Coyle clarified that he made the decision in consultation with Claeys.

But two sources said Thursday that the decision was made above Claeys."

The University President lied and said the coach had decided to suspend the players. But that isn't true. The coach supports the team. So now it was the AD who made the decision.

traditionalguy said...

When California leaves for Mexico , we should sell Minnesota to Canada. Shrinkage happens. And then the brain injured football players and the sexually wounded party girls at Minnesota can get Natioalized Health Care. And the Somali Muslims get a better country to conquer. Everybody wins.

David Begley said...

Mark at 8:48.

Clint right below gets it right. The players have no property or human right to play on an average Big Ten team. The guys are all lowlifes and creeps.

And do I have this right? The coach backs this?

I say clean house. Fire the coach and get new players. Have the Tommies transfer over.

I will remind everyone that the University of San Francisco (private and Jesuit) self-imposed the death penalty on a very successful D1 basketball program after a star BB player assaulted a female student.. USF was like Duke back in the day.

MayBee said...

David Begley- the affirmative consent laws and campus title IX sex crime units are garbage and against civil rights.

Sometimes it takes the lowlifes and creeps to push back on injustice.

khesanh0802 said...

Good for them. The players may be guilty, but it's time to blow the whistle on the school's taking the law into their own hands. If there was sexual assault, file criminal charges. Harvard's soccer team, Princeton's swim team, MN football team; makes the witch hunt in Salem look like a coming out party.

mtrobertslaw said...

The premise the University is operating under is that it is absolutly impossible for any woman to be a slut.

fivewheels said...

Also: We don't know what really happened or how culpable the players might really be or what kind of guys they are, but from the outside we're free to draw inferences from whatever evidence we see. I think the fact that 80-some young men in Minnesota in December are willing to give up a free, perk-filled trip to San Diego tells me they believe there is an injustice there -- and they surely have better information than we do.

Big Mike said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
David Begley said...

MayBee

There is no civil right to play football. Kick them all off of the team. Fire all of the coaches.

This is about decency. I wonder what Bruce Smith, the Heisman winner from MN, would think of this. This incident is shameful.

Big Mike said...

The football team dropped its boycott. Not yet clear whether they got anything in exchange.

Mac McConnell said...

Where's the "college women are stupid" tag?

exhelodrvr1 said...

"Hey, it's okay to for ten of our teammates to have sex with a single drunk woman."

Really? You don't think it has anything to do with an unjust charge of sexual assault?

khesanh0802 said...

@clint I agree "conduct unbecoming" is easy to prove and punish. It can be dealt with in the schools. Sexual assault is a criminal act and should be treated as such. College administrators are incapable of dealing with any of this in an even handed manner. Give it to law enforcement.

MayBee said...

There is no civil right to play football. Kick them all off of the team. Fire all of the coaches.

Do you think anything you do not have a civil right to should be taken away from you without due process?

MadisonMan said...

I've been following a very thoughtful discussion about this on Facebook from a friend of my kid's who is a D1 athlete at Minn. Drinking has not been mentioned as a causative agent, and it should be. People: If you drink, sometimes you do things you later regret. But you've still done them. Keep that in mind. If you to drink and then take chances, own that aspect of your personality. Learn.

Also, I think a problem for Universities is that these sucky bowls aren't very fun for athletes -- they have to keep practicing, then leave their families over break to go somewhere "warm" to play for -- what? So the Conference can have money? It's not a hard to choice to boycott for the players, I would think -- plenty of upside.

My own D1 athlete is paying attention to this too. I applaud the stance of the players. They are being good team mates and reacting to a perceived wrong. I can't know enough about this to know if a true wrong occurred. I suspect not. Plenty of next morning regrets though. And as Begley says, a distinct lack of decency. GroupThink took over.

MayBee said...

You have no civil right to attend college. Kick out any man accused of not getting affirmative consent for sex.

Mac McConnell said...

I wonder how much $ these players will get in court. An agency of the MN government has deprived these player of their civil right to due process.

MayBee said...

Drinking has not been mentioned as a causative agent, and it should be. People: If you drink, sometimes you do things you later regret. But you've still done them. Keep that in mind. If you to drink and then take chances, own that aspect of your personality. Learn.

Yes.

Carol said...

See, this is why Jon Krakauer wrote his college rape book about Missoula: white perps.

David Begley said...

The thing many here are missing is that the team has rules and an administrative process. I haven't checked this but the team probably has a generic rule that a player can't act in a manner that brings the U into disrepute. Conduct unbecoming of a Gopher. Surely the U followed its own procedures in the suspension.

This due process stuff is a red herring.

fivewheels said...

So if we're saying this is about "conduct unbecoming" and there doesn't have to be a crime for this tawdry sexual incident to result in punishments and expulsions ... you'd all be fine with the woman also being expelled, right?

I suppose that would be fair. It would be interesting to see the reaction to that.

Michael K said...

"This had become normal for these athletes who are recruited from all over the US to get to the campus and behave this way."

I was at a luncheon last week with some USC supporters and one of the coaches. We do this several times a year to talk about the team and the recruits. We are all long time SC supporters. I have had season tickets for over 50 years.

One topic that came up in the discussion was the fact that the University found out about two similar incidents this past year. One involved two players from another state (both black) who had sex with a girl also from that state, and video was made and sent to her boyfriend in the other state. Another case was somewhat similar. The players in both cases were immediately dropped from the team and their scholarships were cancelled. They were off campus in a week. It was done quietly and these guys were outstanding prospects. One is 6 -8 and 300 pounds. They will go somewhere but SC, with an actively hostile NCAA, has to be "Caesar's wife" clean.

The coach was telling us that they talked to these kids before they arrive on campus and tell them how costly for their future misbehavior would be. These kids at SC are all prospective NFL players with $100 million potential earnings. Even so, they still screw up because they don't grow up fast enough. If they screw up in spite of best efforts, they are gone.

I wonder if Minnesota tolerated too much early on, like Missouri did with their black players a couple of years ago, and let this get out of control?

Another story the coach told us was of a black player a couple of years ago who was dismissed for infractions and who ended up a year or two later being involved with a string of armed robberies with a buddy.

rhhardin said...

You get one free goph.

mikee said...

The ownership of the team is misstated by the employees, err, I mean, the players.

Mac McConnell said...

Group sex is "conduct unbecoming", so how about blow jobs? anal? fisting? homo? SM? It's not MN's business.
Why all the hostility towards college athletes?

MayBee said...

The thing many here are missing is that the team has rules and an administrative process. I haven't checked this but the team probably has a generic rule that a player can't act in a manner that brings the U into disrepute. Conduct unbecoming of a Gopher. Surely the U followed its own procedures in the suspension.

No.
The suspension came from the administration, not from the team. And the Team says the suspensions came from a Title IX investigation, while the president of the university says its about "values".
However, one big problem with the whole thing is they do not know. That's the problem with lack of due process.

Furthermore, many of the players had already served suspension. These new suspensions Tuesday are what prompted the boycott by the players.

MayBee said...

Big Mike- where is it being reported they dropped their boycott? I can't find it via google.

Rob said...

Gopher? I hardly know her.

MayBee said...

OK, I found it.

The admin is saying
But #Gophers senior leadership was told by Coyle and Kaler that the 10 suspended players would receive fair hearing w/ diverse review panel.

Yeah, we'll see

Mark said...

#Gophers senior leadership was told by Coyle and Kaler that the 10 suspended players would receive fair hearing w/ diverse review panel.

So, punish first, judge second. That makes all this OK? Far from it.

traditionalguy said...

The surrendered. No way they win the game.

Sebastian said...

@MM: "Group sex is "conduct unbecoming", so how about blow jobs? anal? fisting? homo? SM? It's not MN's business." It is. Consent laws mean that any man engaging in sex must get institutional consent first.

campy said...

Kick out any man accused of not getting affirmative consent for sex.

That's a good start, MayBee, but it doesn't do anything about all the unreported attacks. I say for every reported incident they should kick out the accused man plus 3-5 white fratboys chosen at random.

Mark said...

That's a good start, MayBee, but it doesn't do anything about all the unreported attacks.

Actually, if universities are the rape factories that ideologues keep telling us they are, then they need to close down these evil hell-holes immediately. If women have a 70-80 percent chance of being raped on campus, they need to shut them down right away.

Gahrie said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Gahrie said...

So if we're saying this is about "conduct unbecoming" and there doesn't have to be a crime for this tawdry sexual incident to result in punishments and expulsions ... you'd all be fine with the woman also being expelled, right?

No No NO...a woman must never be punished for, or even be made to fell bad about, her actions...especially when it comes to sex. A woman has rights...not responsibilities. In fact, the reason why these men are being treated this way is largely a result of some people making the woman involved feel bad about the choices she made.

Unknown said...

So it is not okay for a woman to have sex with as many people as she wants?

Unknown said...

"Blogger Curious George said...
Consensual and legal, perhaps. But ten guys pulling a train on a girl and videotaping it, disgusting.

12/17/16, 8:08 AM
"

Really, it appears without the videotape showing that this girl was a willing participant, these guys would have all gone to jail. Lessons for young men, record everything.

Gahrie said...

So it is not okay for a woman to have sex with as many people as she wants?

Of course it's OK...nobody is talking about punishing the woman.......

Gahrie said...

This is about decency.

How quaint. But who appointed you to judge what is decent? What are your standards?

This incident is shameful.

Shame? Who are you to try and shame anyone for their behavior? What gives you the right to judge the choices this young woman has made? You are obviously a hater.


More seriously, we live in a world where the left has spent over fifty years destroying cultural and social mores, especially when it comes to sex. How many athletes have multiple children with multiple women and have no intention of marrying any of them? I'd say the chances that one of the men involved in this already has children by multiple mothers is pretty high.

We live in the world that elected Bill Clinton, even though he acted in an indecent manner. We live in a world where Miley Cyrus and Chris Brown are celebrated. We live in a world where Kim Karadashin and Paris Hilton become rich and famous because of leaked home made porn videos. We live in a world that still goes to Polanski and Allen movies.

Where did we think things were going?

Bill said...

Disgusting. You don't do that. You punch the guys and help the woman get her clothes on and back safe and sound to her room.

I'd suggest we bring back the idea of the gentleman, but women (better yet, the women who claim to represent all women: feminists) wouldn't allow it.

A gentleman isn't a beta male.

chuckR said...

Read the linked NYT story. Nobody looks good, not the U, not the players, not the woman.

But often you can find an unrelated story at a link where curiosity impels a click. Read trending #10 about a Jeopardy contestant to restore some faith in humanity.

Fernandinande said...

Reason, largely a SJW outfit, used a picture of a white guy, as did CNN; the NYT used a Diverse™ picture. But the "reporters" at the Fox Propaganda Bureau slipped up and showed pictures of the actual people under discussion, rather than using a picture of other people.
HT: Sailer.

Does that count as Fake News™? I mean the Fox pictures, of course...

Gahrie said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
chuckR said...

Read the linked NYT story. Nobody looks good, not the U, not the players, not the woman.

But often you can find an unrelated story at a link where curiosity impels a click. Read trending #10 about a Jeopardy contestant to restore some faith in humanity.

Gahrie said...

I'd suggest we bring back the idea of the gentleman, but women (better yet, the women who claim to represent all women: feminists) wouldn't allow it.

Most women would be fine with the return of Gentlemen...after all gentlemen treat women in a preferential manner, and women have no problem with judging the behavior of men and holding them to standards.

It is the unspoken corollary, the return of the Lady that they object to, because women's actions must never be judged.

Matthew Sablan said...

Were the players also drunk when these allegedly consensual or nonconsensual acts took place?

Matthew Sablan said...

Wait -- I think I'm confused. With single women or with a single woman? That's what I get for not reading as deeply as I thought I was this morning.

FullMoon said...

The Stanford swimmer guy was crucified and did not even get his zipper down.Because his consensual drunken partner, an anonymous heroine now, passed out while he was fingering her.



Matthew Sablan said...

Honestly, this sounds like a good place for "wait and see." Right now, it seems like the police think there's nothing to see here, but I'm open to being persuaded otherwise. If it turns out the police are right, the university should be sued until the football players run the place.

FullMoon said...

The "faces" of the boycott articles are white. No white players involved in frolic.
Is that intentional?

David said...

Begley has it right. I am not so foolish that I believe a misguided young woman could not "consent" to the multiple partners, in the sense that no rape law was violated. But the conduct is nevertheless inappropriate even if not unlawful. Why the team did not deal with this earlier through suspensions, temporary or permanent, is confusing. What was in the minds of players and coaches that they did not deal with this earlier.









David said...

Turns out I was wrong about the lack of team discipline. Several players had been suspended earlier.

Gahrie said...

Why the team did not deal with this earlier through suspensions, temporary or permanent, is confusing. What was in the minds of players and coaches that they did not deal with this earlier.

They did which is why the boycott is happening.....this is a second round of punishments.

Drago said...

There is a high probability that the players who were suspended, if they voted, voted entirely or almost entirely for the dems.

#TheyBuiltThis

chuck said...

> I am not so foolish that I believe a misguided young woman could not "consent" to the multiple partners,

There was a young woman whose ambition was to sleep with the entire Denver Rockets basketball team, and I believe she succeeded. But not all at once. In any case, best to wait on this, women are diverse and can do things that are not found in the feminist playbook.

Achilles said...

David Begley said...

I say clean house. Fire the coach and get new players. Have the Tommies transfer over.

I will remind everyone that the University of San Francisco (private and Jesuit) self-imposed the death penalty on a very successful D1 basketball program after a star BB player assaulted a female student.. USF was like Duke back in the day.


If I were like you, I would say where ever you are employed, Mr. Begly, you should be fired. Everyone who agrees with you or supports you, Mr. Begly, should be fired.

But I am not like you. If you push forward with your own personal version of sharia law and actually act on it I will be your enemy.

I will remind everyone that due process is a cherished and fundamental right and we have in the process of fighting for due process done horrible things. Trying to ruin other people's lives because they did something you find immoral or made choices you wouldn't is fucking fascist.

HT said...

I read that the police report says she consented with 2 of the men but not four others. Not sure how much we can ever really know about this case. But I also watched some of the video with the dad of one of the players, a former NFL player himself, as he is outraged that no one at the University is giving him answers. No doubt that that is frustrating, but I couldn't help thinking as I watched him, that his real anger should have been at his son, even if he happened to be one of the ones she is alleged to have given consent to. I also thought that if this is a situation in which she is consenting to have sex with two men but not four others, that she is putting herself at some risk just by that very fact.

YoungHegelian said...

This is seems to be an example of what seems to be a common feminist line of thought: "oh, I would never do that particular disgusting sex act, so I'm assuming that no other woman would do so willingly".

Men generally don't think like this. They think "I would never do that particular disgusting sex act, because I much prefer this particular disgusting sex act".

Sex with 1) athletes, 2) black guys, & 3) multiple partners all seem to be common enough female fantasies. Why find it strange that some young woman would take the opportunity to combine all three?

It's amazing how much of 19th C "Woman as Angel of the Household" doctrine still survives in some twisted form in 21st C feminism.

HT said...

Drago said...

There is a high probability that the players who were suspended, if they voted, voted entirely or almost entirely for the dems.

#TheyBuiltThis

12/17/16, 11:37 AM

_______

Why would you say that?

At some point maybe toward the end of the video they say they want to make their (ever nongreat) football program great again.

Gahrie said...

I also thought that if this is a situation in which she is consenting to have sex with two men but not four others, that she is putting herself at some risk just by that very fact.

You are obviously a misogynist and a hater. You are clearly implying that the women was somehow partially at fault for what happened to her, and that is simply unacceptable.

Gahrie said...

There is a high probability that the players who were suspended, if they voted, voted entirely or almost entirely for the dems.

Why would you say that?

Because they are Black, and Black Americans vote overwhelmingly Democrat.

Big Mike said...

I think we are overdue to legalize prostitution in college towns. It's a clear cut mistake college age guys to screw co-eds drunk or sober. Make the girl be in a relationship with a guy before she can get laid.

HT said...

You are kidding I think, but I don't mean to excuse the behavior of others. If what she says happened, then she was raped, and those men should be prosecuted. However, well, I'll just say there have been clear-er cut cases of rape in the past, and she makes the sorting it all out difficult, if not impossible. But again, it's almost silly to be commenting on this case as few or none of us really know what happened.

HT said...

Because they are Black, and Black Americans vote overwhelmingly Democrat.

Sorry, I read on ahead too fast, didn't see the words "who were suspended." Well, that's what you say - maybe they did, maybe they didn't.

BDNYC said...

So this woman nearly put several men in jail on bogus rape charges?

HT said...

Make the girl be in a relationship with a guy before she can get laid. Sounds like common sense advice to me (don't know about the "make" part, though).

RigelDog said...

VERY unfortunate that this example of questionable behavior may now become an opportunity to inform the country about the problems with Title IX. There are so many clear examples where Title IX punished students for normal, consensual sexual interactions.

AllenS said...

I don't believe that any of the 10 are in jail. There's nothing wrong with kicking them off of the football team, or removing them from the school grounds. Even if they had sex with her consent, they are still in violation of school and team rules. They are not going to be sent to jail for this.

The U of M needs to start recruiting young men who are students first, and athletes second.

walter said...

Of course, this is where the real problem is:
"the university has its own process"

Yes..University extra-judicial overreach has made videotaping of sex acts almost mandatory. Having documented cordial interactions with Emma didn't prevent Nungesser from the shit storm that rained down on him. Although this is not all that new, even outside Uni..the late Patrice O'neil did time due to a consensual "train" that became rape when word got out she did it.
This story suggests an additional precaution of administering a BAC test on camera as well followed seamlessly by the act.
Because patriarchy and stuff..

Fabi said...

Was there a glass-top coffee table involved? Rolling Stone want to know.

Rick said...

David Begley said...
So ten football players have sex with a single drunk woman.


As far as we can tell it's not even alleged all of the suspended players had sex with her.

HT said...

According to police records, a woman told officers she was drunk when she was sexually assaulted in a player's apartment by several men on Sept. 2, including some of the suspended players. She said her sexual contact with two men may have been consensual but that her contact with four of them was not. Other people were in the room while this happened, but prosecutors declined to take the case forward, citing lack of evidence.

http://www.espn.com/espnw/voices/article/18293974/minnesota-football-unifying-player-rights-moves-focus-sexual-assault-victims

Rick said...

MayBee said...
She's part of the school's football program "game day activities" so she's probably either a trainer or a cheerleader.


Cheerleaders aren't employees. "Game Day Activities" generally refers to food service, retail on site, or parking employees.

Rocco said...

One poster said:
"Group sex is 'conduct unbecoming', so how about blow jobs? anal? fisting? homo? SM?"

Not a reply, just an observation: In the future, everyone - whether they want to or not - will be Laslo for 15 minutes.

walter said...

"She said her sexual contact with two men may have been consensual but that her contact with four of them was not."

So.."drunk"..but making these determinations? Did she express them?

traditionalguy said...

So she was fine with the two wide outs, but when the nose tackle named Fatty Arbuckle climbed on top next she said rape. I buy that. Cut the first two lose and crucify the lineman.

traditionalguy said...

Is this why they call it Big Ten Footballing?

walter said...

Heh

Unknown said...

Imagine if a guy had tried to convince her not to do it? Wouldn't that be "judging" and "slut-shaming"? I thought college students are adults now. Don't they have coed dorms, including showers, on the campus? If this is ok, how can you complain about mass sex?

Drago said...

HT: "Sorry, I read on ahead too fast, didn't see the words "who were suspended." Well, that's what you say - maybe they did, maybe they didn't."

I didn't say they did or did not vote nor did I specify on an individual basis how they voted.

I was simply referring to probabilities relating to group voting proclivities based on recent election and polling results.

David Begley said...

At Bayor, President Ken Starr (yeah, Bill Clinton's special prosecutor) got bounced for some type of sex conduct scandal by the football team.

gadfly said...

@David Begley said...
Send the 12-1 D3 St. Thomas Tommies to the bowl game. The Tommies could use a break from the Twin Cities.

St. Thomas lost their only game in the Div-3 1st Round tournament to the UW-Oshkosh Titans 34-31. Oshkosh rolled on to the tournament final where they appropriately lost to a girl, Mary Hardin-Baylor.

rcocean said...

Just read all the comments and can't stop laughing.

The absurd white knights, the left-wing prudes, the illogical mish-mash of conflicting prejudices and political beliefs. Most people seem to believe the following:

1. Women can have sex anytime, anywhere, with anyone they want and if diagree you're a prude, a kill-joy, and a right-wing Christian.
2. If sex goes wrong, Women are never to blame. Disagree? You're a sexist pig.
3. But Women are equal to Men in every way. Disagree? You're a sexist pig.
4. Having drunken consensual sex with 1, 2 or even 3 men is OK. But 10 is wrong.
5. If a co-ed agrees drunken consensual sex with 10 men - the men are to blame.
6. Male students accused of having non-consensual sex should be suspended or expelled - even if there is no other proof then the women's drunken recollection.
7. Anyone who thinks the male students are being railroaded should be kicked off campus and fired - cause.

rcocean said...

And I agree with Bob Ellison. If I'd been in that room, boy, the punches would've been flying.

After the 3rd sexual act, I would have said: "Unhand that young maiden, Sir. Three is enough, but 4 is too many. If you don't, I shall beat you within an inch of your life".

After that, I would said, "My lady, I think you need to go back to your dorm room. I shall escort you".

And everyone would've lived happily ever after.

walter said...

rcocean,
And videotaping such an intimate, personal event is shameful...

gadfly said...

So the Gopher players announced this morning that they will play in the Holiday Bowl. Much to do about nothing, I guess.

rcocean said...

"And videotaping such an intimate, personal event is shameful..."

Yeah, especially when it keeps you from going to prison for 20 years on rape charge.

Gentlemen would rather serve time.

rcocean said...

"So the Gopher players announced this morning that they will play in the Holiday Bowl"

I guess team spirit only goes so far.

I recommend the Gophers kneel during the national anthem in protest. Even the NYT would applaud.

Owen said...

Rcocean: that list seems to be a good start.

Fernandinande said...

khesanh0802 said...
Harvard's soccer team,


Washington U. men's soccer team suspended over comments

ST. LOUIS (AP) -- The men's soccer team at Washington University in St. Louis has been indefinitely suspended for what the university calls sexually explicit comments and other inappropriate behavior toward the women's soccer team.

The angry hypersensitive lesbians of the women's team alerted administrators Wednesday. The suspension of the men's program was announced Friday night.

Bob Loblaw said...

The players are essentially saying: Hey, it's okay to for ten of our teammates to have sex with a single drunk woman.

This kind of statement is why the players are pushing for actual due process.

HT said...

Maybe they'll tank the bowl game.

Ken B said...

Bad idea: combining anti-puritan rules about housing and proximity with puritan attitudes towards the predictable results.

David Begley said...

From the Pioneer Press

"It started with the woman, a player and the recruit in a room and then became a prolonged sexual encounter between the woman and between 10 and 20 football players, with males lined up outside an apartment bedroom. That’s according to 23 pages of Minneapolis police reports and an 80-page report from the university’s Office of Equal Opportunity and Affirmative Action posted by KSTP.

She said she was drunk and her memory was hazy and included gaps. Both the U and Minneapolis police said early parts of the encounter appeared to have been consensual. The woman said that what followed — more men and more sexual contact — was rape. At various times over what might have lasted more than an hour, she said she tried to end the encounter, verbally and physically, but was prevented. Players denied this. The university largely agreed with her, finding her accounts more credible than the players’ denials. Hennepin County prosecutors have declined to press charges.

Examining players’ text messages that chronicled parts of the incident and referred to women with derogatory terms, university investigators concluded there existed a “collective effort by (some) accused students to deny this potentially sexually harassing activity.”

Rcocean:

1. The University made a finding of credibility and it is entitled to do so per its rules.

2. Call me a prude or whatever, but 10-20 football players lined up to bang some drunk woman is not a proud moment. As Spike Lee said, "Do the right thing!"

Hammond X. Gritzkofe said...

Many questions raised here.

There is sexual "misconduct" and - what? - sexual proper conduct? Does the University assert that "making the team" is proper conduct for a young lady?

Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972 is a federal law that states: "No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance."

Was the event federally funded?

Was the event an "educational program or activity?"

Who, and in what way, was "excluded from participation in" or "denied the benefits of" or "subjected to discrimination under" the event?

Was the exclusion, denial, or jubjection done on the basis of sex?

walter said...

The Pioneer Press article doesn't mention any video:
here

walter said...

Actually it does..."on Friday we learned that the recordings appear to capture only the early parts of the incident."

walter said...

from article:
The settlement was reached after a morning of testimony and about 90 minutes of afternoon discussions between the parties involved: the petitioner, the players, their attorneys and Hennepin County Judge Mel Dickson. Afterward, the woman said: “I’m glad this is over. … This has never been about punishing anyone. I just wanted to feel safe. Because of the resolution we came to, now I can.” However, that settlement doesn’t appear to have prevented the U from taking action.

mccullough said...

What are the school and team rules regarding multiple students having sex with the same person?

Sounds like the young woman consented to sex with the first few players. Why are they being punished?

Achilles said...

traditionalguy said...
So she was fine with the two wide outs, but when the nose tackle named Fatty Arbuckle climbed on top next she said rape. I buy that. Cut the first two lose and crucify the lineman.

The whole thing was on tape. The police watched the tape. They chose to not press charges. I guarantee if what you people are pulling out of your ass happened they would have pressed charges.

This girl made choices. She is either free to make those choices and accept responsibility for them or she isn't. If you can go back and punish the players to protect her honor you might as well start fitting women up for Burkhas.

HT said...

Are you sure the entire episode was filmed or just the beginning?

Jupiter said...

"It started with the woman, a player and the recruit in a room and then became a prolonged sexual encounter between the woman and between 10 and 20 football players, with males lined up outside an apartment bedroom."

And no one called the police, or even a coach, or tried to help her in any way. They all shot video and waited their turn. What a disgusting collection of predatory vermin.

Oh, well, most of them will be in prison soon, for one thing or another. No doubt unjustly.

Achilles said...

From the article:

WASN’T THIS WHOLE THING SETTLED?

"Yes and no. The restraining orders were lifted in November after the woman and the players reached an agreement. Under the agreement, the players and the petitioner are to have no contact while she attends the University of Minnesota. In addition, the players agreed not to file civil lawsuits against the woman."...

"Afterward, the woman said: “I’m glad this is over. … This has never been about punishing anyone. I just wanted to feel safe. Because of the resolution we came to, now I can.” However, that settlement doesn’t appear to have prevented the U from taking action."

But that wasn't enough for the university.

22 years old. Maybe we should be like Muslim countries do and just lock women up in the compounds of their male owners until they are 40 or so. It would be better than following them around and smashing man's lives after women make stupid decisions. But make sure all of the men are black just to add a cherry on top.

HT said...

Are you sure the entire episode was filmed or just the beginning?

Jupiter said...

Achilles said...

"Maybe we should be like Muslim countries do and just lock women up in the compounds of their male owners until they are 40 or so. It would be better than following them around and smashing man's lives after women make stupid decisions."

Achilles, I agree that universities and the DoE have gone completely overboard in their desire to criminalize any sexual encounter a woman may choose to decide was not consensual. But when 10 or 20 males wait around outside an apartment for their chance at having sex with one woman who may or may not consent, and may in any case be too drunk to consent, it is not (only) the woman who is making a stupid decision. Are you really suggesting that it is asking too much of a 22-year-old man to refrain from participating in what may very well, for all he knows, be gang rape?

I have no problem with a legal presumption that a woman who consented to have sex with two men she knew and liked did not consent to have sex with 10 or 20 strangers. It is possible that she did, but anyone who is relying on that possibility to defend himself against a charge of rape had better have some really good evidence. A man's right to avail himself of such an opportunity may exist, but I'm afraid I don't see any need to be especially active in defending it.

walter said...

The statement about never wanting to punish is a bit odd, no?

Fabi said...

"...her memory was hazy and included gaps."

Phrasing.

YoungHegelian said...

@Jupiter,

A man's right to avail himself of such an opportunity may exist, but I'm afraid I don't see any need to be especially active in defending it.

I don't either. No one in this story is a candidate for canonization, for sure. But, just how stupid does a woman have to be to put herself in a sexual situation with that many hormonally-addled young men (& I consider most young men "hormonally-addled")? It's not like these guys are subtle about this stuff. Shit always gets out of hand in situations like that. I mean, does this young woman want our sympathies when she knowingly puts her hand on a hot stove, too?

In the world of "Kink", the line between consent & non-consent is often deliberately blurred. This whole sordid episode falls well within that category.

jdniner said...

There are some women that want to have sex with 10 men. And there are groups of 10 men who want to have sex with one woman. I assume the college appropriately has a gender pronoun to describe each of these gender identities. If they don't I would say the college is guilty of bias.

YoungHegelian said...

Maybe the young woman was a big fan of silent movies, & wanted to emulate her screen idol, Clara Bow.

clarice said...

Male students everywhere ought to mount a protest against the misapplication of Title IX. Curiously, American children grow up in schools and watching movies and TV which quickly sexualize them and once they reach college they are treated as if they had entered some Victorian prison where acting on their sexual wishes is made perilous for men, Iowahawk is right:College men should just hire hookers and get receipts.

rcocean said...

"a prolonged sexual encounter between the woman and between 10 and 20 football players"

Wow, talk about hazy. So There way lots of sex, anywhere between 10 and 20? I wonder why the number is so, ah vague. Or why other reports say only 5-10 had sex with her. Or why only 6 were given restraining orders. Or why only 10 of the "maybe 20", were punished.

"The University made a finding of credibility and it is entitled to do so per its rules."

And the rest of society is entitled to judge the University's finding using OUR rules. Namely, the US Constitution, the right to due process and to be found innocent until proven guilty. Oh, the right to confront your accuser. And Title IX does NOT give Universities the right to run secret, kangaroo courts, and destroy peoples reputations and college studies without a fair trial.

traditionalguy said...

@ Achilles...I was being sarcastic about an earlier comment that she claimed the sex started out consensual but that she had later told the team to stop. Note: crucifixion of the nose tackle was also figurative and not literal.

walter said...

It's hard to stop a train.

coupe said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
coupe said...

When my father gave me my sex talk, it took only one sentence:

"Don't have sex with any woman you wouldn't want to marry."

That simple advice is all the sex education a boy needs to know. It has served me 50 years.

Course, that was about the time of the sexual revolution. I don't think my father would have said anything, except my Aunt was a nurse in the Home for Unwed Mothers, and I had just got a job as a gardeners helper there. Most of the girls there were from middle class families. The rest, I assume, got a coat hanger.

Michael K said...

"my Aunt was a nurse in the Home for Unwed Mothers, and I had just got a job as a gardeners helper there. Most of the girls there were from middle class families."

A cousin of mine, now dead, had a baby and put it up for adoption about 1940. It was a family secret scandal.

Another family member did the same more recently., That son, now about 50 and successful, has spent years trying to trace his biological mother. My daughter has done the "23 and me" dna thing and gave me a test kit for Christmas last year, She got a contact request from someone who was a cousin with a 25% dna match. She called him, with some trepidation, and they met. She figured out who had to be his mother and, after about 6 months of dithering, called the mother and told her about him. They are now in touch and plan to meet.

I wonder how many people are going to find out who they are from dna testing?

coupe said...

Michael K said...I wonder how many people are going to find out who they are from dna testing?

My Aunt and Uncle couldn't have children, so three of my cousins are adopted from that very home. I think they had records though, because one of my cousins (the girl) found her birth mother, while my other cousins (the boys) didn't want to know.

She said it wasn't very hard, although I'm sure they asked the birth mother first before giving her information.

This was a very weird thing for my cousin, as she was married with two kids of her own, yet changed her last name legally to that of her birth mother. I guess it meant a lot to her, even though I thought she was very lucky to have my Aunt as a mother.

I never asked my cousins husband how he felt about that, but I'm assuming he's good with it, as they are still married after 35 years :-)

Michael K said...

This fellow who is a cousin is very grateful to his adoptive parents and did not begin to search for his birth mother until they had died.

He had spent quite a bit on private detectives until "23 and me" came along with no results.

I've wondered if we would ever hear from the other adoptee but so far nothing. He/she would be 75.

coupe said...

When the 1940 census came out, I was excited to expand my genealogy. Also to lookup names of people from my childhood. One was the old lady that lived in the woods. She told us she came to Oregon on a covered wagon. Her family owned the land our home eventually built on, sold to a developer. Nothing. She wasn't in it.

Then I looked up my dads name, nothing. I think that was a loser of a census, ha. But my dad was in the CCC back then after his Army hitch ended in '39. They finally drafted him again in '42 when they were scraping the bottom of the barrel, as he was 28, a vagabond, and an alcoholic by then.

The one thing I did find, was the people in the Home for Unwed Mothers! They were called "inmates" on the census. Ow!

coupe said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
coupe said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
coupe said...

Hmm, scratch that, I seem to recall now that the old man was in the CCC before his first hitch in the Army. So, I don't know where he was hiding.

Freeman Hunt said...

They're only suspended from playing football, right? Big deal. They should be whether the sex was consensual or not. You shouldn't get to represent your school on the field if you act so dishonorably.

"Have never been more proud of our kids."

Really, coach? Six of your guys run a train on a drunk girl, and you couldn't be prouder? No wonder your players act the way they do. You shouldn't be working with young men.

Why is this even Title IX related? Why not just, you can't play because your conduct is an embarrassment to your school?

coupe said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
William said...

Is there anyone in this entire tale who has acted in a worthy or honorable way. Worse, the details aren't even salacious...........They say the past is a foreign country, but it's the present that throws me for a loop. I recognize that sexting is now part of the courtship ritual, but since when did group sex become a thing. It's good to see that the girl draws the line at more than two partners per session. I think men should respect a woman's wish to keep the numbers to manageable proportions. I suppose, also, that it's a good thing that the men involved record the encounter to forestall any future misunderstanding.........Nonetheless, the behavior of everyone involved is so remote from my field of reference that I find it difficult to pass judgment. It's like reading about the sex habits of sand worms. These people give decadence a bad name.

HoodlumDoodlum said...

David Begley said...This is about decency.

Your concept of decency is patriarchal and insufficiently sex-positive, David. Stop slutshaming--slutshaming supports rape culture.

mikeski said...

"She said her sexual contact with two men may have been consensual [...]"

"may have been"? How is that even possible? Isn't consent binary?

Or is this a case of the Churchillesque "If a lady says no, she means maybe. If she says maybe, she means yes. If she says yes, she is no lady."

(Churchillesque in both the sense that "it sounds like something Winston may have said", and "a quick search attributed the quote to five different people in the first page of hits".)

sdharms said...

hey, David Begley, that is NOT what they are saying. They are saying we will not tolerate like sheep extra judicial kangaroo courts.

Douglas said...

Prof. Suk at Harvard Law School has been making this point for some time - whatever the intentions of those favoring looser definitions of sexual assault and weaker due process for those accused, the result (more, and more unjust, convictions) is likely to be borne mostly by minority male students.

Douglas said...

Mr. Begley, It's not illegal to have sex with a drunk person. Indeed thousands, probably hundreds of thousands of drunk people have sex every day, including a lot of college students. Now maybe you are assuming from the fact that this woman had sex with ten men that she was too drunk to know what she was doing - that is the standard most states use (I don't know about Minnesota) for invalidating a woman's consent to sex. I think we would need to know more than just that, however. Was she passing out? Was she slurring her words? Was she vomiting? Those would be external indicia of the kind of extreme intoxication that invalidates consent.

Now if you are suggesting that colleges should adopt a Victorian-like code of conduct that forbids men to take advantage of women who have had a couple of drinks - call it a "Code of Gentlemanly conduct" - that might have some merit, especially if you coupled it with a similar code for women forbidding them from drinking themselves silly in the company of men.

Dave Hunter said...

What about a woman's "right to choose" to have relations with multiple men in sequence? Does UM not recognize her rights?

JAORE said...

Suppose, as apparently the police determined, and the woman (sort of) confirmed, the first two/few times were consensual. Further the video appears to show the woman in reasonable control of her facilities.

Now, let's assume the video cuts off not at encounter number2, but (say) number 3 or 4. The woman is seen in apparent control. There is no video evidence of her objecting.

Where do you go with this if the cops had pressed charges, or as the school makes a final determination.

Well, gotta take them all down, because SOMETHING was really bad here. Include guys that did not have actual sexual contact with the woman. Isn't that like conviction everyone at a rape scene because they did not stop the crime?

Punish all the active participants including the first, apparently consensual encounter because of events that followed.

OR

All the participants after #2, which is the line the woman sort of drew in testimony. But that would ignore the video in my scenario.

OR

Does the school, with naught to go on say, all those after the video stops..... Makes no sense.

OR

Let the law determine the outcome.

I'd hate to make a young man's future depend on sorting THAT mess out.

And for you that say it's only football, get a grip. Some of these guys planning on sports as a career either as a player or coach. And, how would you like YOUR records/transcript to say expelled or tossed from the team for sexual assault?

Jupiter said...

Douglas said...
"Prof. Suk at Harvard Law School has been making this point for some time - whatever the intentions of those favoring looser definitions of sexual assault and weaker due process for those accused, the result (more, and more unjust, convictions) is likely to be borne mostly by minority male students."

Yeah, it does seem like "minority males" do have a kind of a tendency to commit gang rape. As Steve Sailer has documented, when it comes to gang rape, "football players" means blacks. Funny that, huh? It's almost like it's in their genes.

But I would say there were some consequences for the young woman involved as well, unless you are one of the many commenters who assume that a woman who desires sex with two men must necessarily desire sex with all of their friends. Maybe someone should have had the "Derbyshire talk" with her. Like, when you are drunk and fucking two black guys, and a bunch of their friends show up and start pawing you, get your clothes on and get out of there, unless you want to fuck them all, on camera. Easier said than done, I imagine, getting dressed in a room full of rapists.

Joe said...

It is long past time for universities to get out of ALL organized sports.

Jupiter said...

JAORE said...

"And, how would you like YOUR records/transcript to say expelled or tossed from the team for sexual assault?"

JAORE, I wouldn't. Which is why, if I saw several of my teammates committing gang rape, I would not get in line. "Me next!", is what I would not say. See how that works? Later, when everyone is sitting around discussing who was involved, your name doesn't come up! Cool that! For extra credit, you could even call one of the coaches whose job is keeping you out of trouble, and tell them what was going on. I kind of doubt that he would say, "Shit, Son! Time's a wastin'! Get in that line!".

Rick said...

Jupiter said...
if I saw several of my teammates committing gang rape, I would not get in line.


Since this didn't actually happen I'm not sure why people insist on discussing the issue with this as a predicate. If you start a sentence with "Since the moon is made of green cheese..." does it really matter what comes next?

Jupiter said...

Rick said...
Jupiter said...
if I saw several of my teammates committing gang rape, I would not get in line.

"Since this didn't actually happen I'm not sure why people insist on discussing the issue with this as a predicate."

Rick, whether gang rape occurred depends upon whether the woman consented to have sex with the gang. It is evident that a gang of men who rape a woman will claim she gave consent. The law should not accept that claim without very strong evidence. A couple of cops watching the first few minutes of a sex video is not even weak evidence.