"In the face of new information, there now appear to be discrepancies in Jackie's account, and we have come to the conclusion that our trust in her was misplaced."
More at the link, but that one sentence is a masterpiece of mealy-mouthedness.
६ डिसेंबर, २०१४
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
११७ टिप्पण्या:
It's fair to criticize Jackie, but yes they do need to accept blame for their part in spreading her story.
Looks like the lawyers got involved.
too late :)
A breath-taking pageant of liberal media bias. And the lawsuits to follow!!!! My, oh my!
The Party line redux. NO ONE can challenge a claim of a rape victim's total authority!!!
What don't you people understand?
PS: My WaPO carried the story today, front page above the fold. When a liberal press room makes that bet against the meme it likes, you got to be worried about your "Sources and Methods" if you are RS.
"Key parts of U-Va rape claim in doubt"
That's got to sting...
This is what passes for journalism in a liberal world.
"All the news that fits (our agenda)"
"Key parts of U-Va rape claim in doubt"
The parts in doubt?
1. Who did it?
2. Who many?
3. Their relationship, if any to the frat?
4. where the rape occurred?
5. When it occurred?
6. Who is Drew?
7. Did he and Jackie know each other?
8. What if anything happened?
minor details in a gangrape...
Nice payday for Phi Psi's lawyers. It could even be the end of Rolling Stone. What a shame !
"Mistakes were made."
You don't run this story until it is completely nailed down. Everything checked out. Then re-checked.
But if fit the worldview of the journalists and any caution was thrown away.
The Jacobinistas should be angry with RS but their anger will be directed at those who questioned the story.
I'm getting the sense that many news reports are promoted to benefit the White House.
It's nice to see some real reporting back at the Washington Post, though.
Who was more gullified, the writer or the magazine?
I read the article three times and each time was taken by the feeling that this was very badly written fiction. The stereotypes were too plentiful, the evil too pat. It is shocking that a writer could believe half of the story and that editors could believe it all.
When there is an industry dependent upon believing that one in four women in college is raped I suppose it is necessary to invent as many gang rapes as needed to get the numbers up.
Indeed a lame effort by RS to sidle away from the coming world of hurt. Just tether "Jackie" in the clearing, brush away your footprints, and pray.
As Michael K says, "nice payday for Phi [Kappa] Psi's lawyers." I do hope they sue and win big. Partly that is because I'm just vindictive, but mostly it's because I want a Message To Be Sent. The media are in a terrible state of ethical and intellectual free-fall, where emotion dictates fact-gathering and agenda rules all. Unless they see one of their own dangling from the gibbet, they are not going to change.
The sentence throws her under the bus, but how much of the article was "embroidered" by writer and not Jackie.
RS needs to be on the receiving end of a large lawsuit filed by UVA and the fraternity in question.
Lawyer up.
Who was in charge of holding onto all the 'fake but accurate' sound bites?
We should not forget, and I'm certain that Plaintiff's lawyers will remind the RS in the filings that, ignoring legal and journalistic best practices for balance, the entire story is presented as fact, without any of those polite shadings and presumptions of innocence about "alleged victim" and "possible rape".
That slant made it a better story, but will make the settlement pricier
Jim Geraghty does a nice series of tweets with Rolling Stone covers extolling violence and sex. Found at Twitchy.
Twany Brawley
Duke lacrosse players
Trayvon Martin
Ferguson MO
War on women
Grubering Obama care
The election of a President that has no qualities,no experiences, no accomplishments, or shown no intelligence needed to hold the office.
It is plain that the media cares not a wit about facts. They only care about advancing an agenda by lies and deception.
The liberal message is a failure if presented in an open exchange of information and ideas.
Always a failure.
So stories told by people you trust are supposed to be reported as fact. Oooookay.
Reading the account seems like reading a script for a prono. About as believeable, probably written by someone whose watched one too many of them.
It doesn't seem likely that UVa would sue Rolling Stone: The article served the anti-frat bias of the administration and faculty. They suspended all frat and sorority operations for a couple of months and are considering extending that to the end of the year. My guess is that "Jackie"'s story is going to end up as "true" even if not factual for a lot of those on the Charlottesville campus (and other campi, too).
I think it's cute that Drudge links to a piece in the WaPo (Janet Cooke's former employer) lecturing Rolling Stone on credulous journalism.
I live in the southwest. The moment the RT piece hit, everyone I know who had read it (both liberal and conservative) said, right away, without hesitation, within the first day -- no f'ing way this happened. So kind of a reverse Paulene Kael thing going on; I do not know a single person who believed it. Who are those strange gullible yahoos on the east coast that could be fooled by something like this. What profound differences there are in the way we now see the world.
I meant RS piece.
"that one sentence is a masterpiece of mealy-mouthedness"
Mealy-mouthed, yes; masterpiece, no.
Ramzpaul has a video on the first thing that tipped him off - beer bottles do not break when thrown at your face, with a demo video that is "painful."
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Unfortunately for some these claims were not extraordinary, they were obvious.
Journalists are different because they have standards, and editors, or something.
Regarding the President of UVA and the school administration suspending all fraternities AND Sororities until Jan., I would point out that using "collective guilt" as a punishment is a WAR CRIME under the Geneva Conventions..
Just sayin..
The Godfather said...
My guess is that "Jackie"'s story is going to end up as "true" even if not factual for a lot of those on the Charlottesville campus (and other campi, too).
The irony is that U-Va does have a serial rapist killer of coed's.
but he's not a rich Frat boy. He's a 30+ y/o Black, Dreadlocked Townie. So he does not fit the story she wanted.
Jesse Matthew
I think it credible that all the CO2 emissions we put into the atmosphere has some effect on the weather. But all those experts made very specific predictions which have turned out be wrong, and none of those experts have acknowledged their mistakes.......In like way, I think that excessive drinking has some effect on the sexual behavior of college aged youth, but just not the effect that Rolling Stone writers believe.......Due to my good looks and extraordinary charm, it's never happened to me, but I have heard that some men have made unwanted passes at women under the influence of liquor. However, in my field of acquaintance, I've never known anyone who has participated in a gang rape or who would countenance such behavior. Who's stereotyping who?
If "journalist" would stop coming up with a narrative and then finding a story to match it, they'd be better off
Phi Kappa Psi should be able to bankrupt Rolling Stone all by itself. The University should join the suit to build up their endowment, though I suspect they won't.
Not long ago the Board of Vistors (the board of trustees in quaint Thomas Jefferson-speak) tried unsuccessfully to oust the University President. They may have less trouble if they choose to try again.
Kudos to The Washington Post for killing this story.
One thing that struck me from the WaPo article, was this quote from Jackie:
“I know it was Phi Psi, because a year afterward, my friend pointed out the building to me and said that’s where it happened.”
It's truly bizarre to describe a conversation where your friend is telling you where you were raped. How do they know? How do you not know?
@Drill SGT, that too.
"Phi Kappa Psi should be able to bankrupt Rolling Stone all by itself."
Nah. Rolling Stone probably has a policy with one of those Bermuda-based libel insurance companies.
But they should be able to squeeze a big chunk of cash out of them.
"but he's not a rich Frat boy. He's a 30+ y/o Black, Dreadlocked Townie. So he does not fit the story she wanted. "
This, of course, is why that is still "a local story," like Gosnell and too many others. The MSM has an agenda and will not be deterred from its war on white men, especially if they are heterosexual.
There are too many UVA grads in high places in Washington, DC for the Post to ignore the problems with the Rolling Stone story.
This should be a prime example to colleges that seek to comply with Obama's Title IX demands of separate path and standards to handle claims of sexual abuse/assault/harassment that they WILL be sued and they WILL be paying out large sums of money. It's best they band together now and stand up against the Obama administration.
Can an organization, here an individual fraternity house, sue for defamation? As I understand it, no individuals are identified in the article as perpetrators.
Now, if this was a James O'Keefe type of a deal, after all the publicity about it being fake, ol' James reach into his back pocket and pull out video evidence proving it was,indeed, true.
Consider how bad the journalism in this case is. Here is "Andy," quoted in the WaPo.
A student identified as “Andy” in the Rolling Stone article said in an interview with The Post Friday night that Jackie did call him and two other friends for help a few weeks into the fall semester in 2012. He said Jackie said that “something bad happened” and that he ran to meet her on campus, about a mile from the school’s fraternities.
The student, who said he never spoke to a Rolling Stone reporter, said Jackie seemed “really upset, really shaken up” but disputed other details of that article’s account. Rolling Stone said that the three friends found Jackie in a “bloody dress,” with the Phi Kappa Psi house looming in the background, and that they debated “the social price of reporting Jackie’s rape” before advising against seeking help. He said none of that is accurate.
“Andy” said Jackie said she had been at a fraternity party and had been forced to perform oral sex on a group of men, but he does not remember her identifying a specific house. He said he did not notice any injuries or blood but said the group offered to get her help. She, instead, wanted to return to her dorm, and he and the friends spent the night with her to comfort her at her request.
That is a dramatically different account from the Rolling Stone article. R.S. not only did not talk to the alleged rapists, R.S. apparently did not talk to the witnesses who were called on the night in question.
Apparently everything from the article is from one woman, Jackie. And if you had talked to this other witness, you might realize that she is exaggerating the story for dramatic purposes. At the time of the alleged attack, she says she was forced to perform oral sex on several men. Now, years later, in Rolling Stone, it's a bloody dress, broken glass table, forcibly raped by multiple people.
The vibe I get is that Jackie is creating a rape narrative to add drama to her life. She goes to rape survivor meetings and manufactures drama to get sympathy and support. And nobody calls her out for this behavior because the counselors pride themselves on "no judgment."
That might be a good attitude for a rape counselor to have. After all, a woman who goes to rape counseling and makes shit up clearly has issues and needs counseling. But (obviously) you should not be giving her name out to reporters looking for a scoop.
And "please do not talk to the man I am calling a rapist," that should be a giant warning flag for any journalist.
Yup--these ace boon coon highly professional journalists got rolled by a young woman who may or may not have been traumatized, and may or may not have led an active fantasy life.
I do think that something happened to her, although who knows exactly what it was. You can't always tell a damaged book by its cover.
But cherry picking stories amongst the emotionally wounded is not the way one practices objective journalism. But who practices "objective journalism" these days?
Lamest effort to deflect blame I have seen all year.
In the face of new information, there now appear to be discrepancies in Jackie's account, and we have come to the conclusion that our trust in her was misplaced.
Another tell is the way the statement lapses into the passive voice and stale metaphor.
When the fuss about this RS story started I decided to read the story before commenting. Interest of fairness and all that. I didn't get far before my BS detector was making my ears ring.
@Saint Croix
If you want to give credit to someone for killing this story, you should really start with Richard Bradley and Steve Sailer - see here.
The Wash Post does get credit for following up and doing some actual reporting.
Interesting that we have seen so little from the Daily Cavalier, t.he student newspaper. My guess is that they have many sources, though the reliability may be hard to sort out. There's a pretty good chance they are intimidated as well
One would think the thing to learn from this is to never accept uncritically one persons story, even if it about something traumatizing like rape. It's fine for rape counselor a to do so--their only job is to provide comfort and support. But that is NOT the media's job. Rolling Stone and Ederly failed here.
We always hear how the number of false accusations are incredibly small. While that's up for debate, cases like this show how easy it is to get many people to accept your accusation without question, in the name of sensitivity.
Yet another hate-crime hoax. Shocking.
Eleanor said...
It's nice to see some real reporting back at the Washington Post, though.
They got it from Steve Sailer.
Will that liar be criminally prosecuted? Will the UVA president be dismissed "for cause"?
The rape survivor counselor who was a major source for the story is on two White House task forces. Make of that information what you will.
"Misplaced trust" is an amazing word to see in this context. "Jackie" is a source, not a personal friend.
The reporter in this piece spent several months shopping around for a really horrific rape story. Consciously or unconsciously, she was telling the people she interviewed that they had to come up with something big in order to make it into the story.
This is where the "only a tiny fraction of people lie about rape" statistic turns totally bogus. That tiny fraction, whatever it is, is not restricted by the facts. They can make up whatever story they want. If they're motivated by attention or sympathy, there's an incentive to make up a worse story in order to get more attention or more sympathy.
So the more unusual the story you want to tell, the more you have to worry about people telling you what you want to hear. If you were writing a story about black helicopters and alien autopsies, almost everybody who came forward would be a kook, regardless of whether there is some person, somewhere with a legitimate story to tell.
The idea that a reporter is somehow an advocate for someone she has never previously met and whose story she hasn't bothered to verify is just bizarre.
chickelit said...
"Chickelit said:
Lamest effort to deflect blame I have seen all year.
In the face of new information, there now appear to be discrepancies in Jackie's account, and we have come to the conclusion that our trust in her was misplaced.
Another tell is the way the statement lapses into the passive voice and stale metaphor.
12/6/14, 11:13 AM"
Excellent observation. That retreat to the passive voice --"shit just happened, dude"-- is a true tell. Insofar as institutions can emit a flop sweat, this is it.
One would think the thing to learn from this is to never accept uncritically one persons story, even if it about something traumatizing like rape. It's fine for rape counselor a to do so--their only job is to provide comfort and support. But that is NOT the media's job. Rolling Stone and Ederly failed here.
One repeating theme in the whole campus rape debate is that the uncritical acceptance approach is not really workable in contexts outside of advocacy or therapy. Once other people start getting involved and potentially serious consequences start getting considered, truth or falsehood become incredibly important.
In one sense, I guess this isn't surprising. Activists from one tiny intellectual circle are trying to break out and take the world by storm. Attitudes that worked well enough in an isolated context are showing their weaknesses as they get scaled up to deal with new problems.
But maybe the sheer number of times that these stories run aground when more than one person's story is taken into account means that the original activists aren't ready to take the world by storm just yet.
The main lesson I'm drawing from the experience is that Due Process is *always* important, and should not be dispensed with just because a particular problem seems important right now.
If you want to give credit to someone for killing this story, you should really start with Richard Bradley and Steve Sailer
Yeah, kudos to them for attacking the story first. And the attacks spread to other media as well. They raised doubts. I'm enjoying Bradley's blog, you can see it here.
But what killed the story was Rolling Stone's retraction, and what forced that retraction was the Washington Post.
Here is Jezebel attacking Bradley.
Here is Jezebel apologizing.
It wasn't Bradley who made them do that! He attacked the narrative, which pissed some people off. But finding the truth and killing the story? I think it was the WaPo that forced Rolling Stone to retract.
(Bradley agrees with me).
http://www.cavalierdaily.com/article/2014/12/rolling-stone-apology-leaves-lingering-questions-about-reports-accuracy
Check out the joke of an article at UVA's student newspaper.
UVA has a rather rigid Honor Code, governing acts of lying, cheating and stealing. Conviction of a violation of the Code is permanent dismissal from the University.
Unless she can get a psychological exemption, "Jackie," a senior, might have more than the RS debacle to deal with.
One of the commentariat here, Chilblaine, called shenanigans! on this at the time.
He was struck by the tonality of some of the language, such as: "Grab its legs". My own thought was that it was odd when I read the RS article, but that there were echos of the scene with Buffalo Bill in Silence of the Lambs. "It rubs the lotion on its skin or else it gets the hose again".
However, the poster made a convincing argument that there were too many long shots to pay off for this story to work. For example, just how many Buffalo Bill-type psychopaths can be expected to be found in such a small population? It was just too pat. It too neatly fit into the librul narrative about rampant unreported and unpunished campus rape.
And we know for a certainty that the libs/progs claim an absolute moral immunity ("fake but true") from the consequences of contriving stories to advance their Marcusean objectives that are "justified so long as they are oppositional".
Anyone remember the Keri Dunn hoax at Claremont McKenna that shut down all five schools for a number of days while they had 'teach-ins'?
Hanna Rosin at Slate;
"Recently I heard a story from someone who went to the high school with one of the Duke lacrosse players who were accused of rape. It was an all-boys school and when they heard they had produced a rapist they went through some serious soul-searching, reconsidering some of their traditions and educating the boys on sexual violence. When they learned the rape charges were trumped up, the school rallied around the boy and forgot about the reforms. Will the same thing happen at UVA, which seemed to be on the cusp on making changes at the school to better protect women from sexual assault? UVA president Teresa Sullivan says no. “Today's news must not alter this focus,” she wrote in a university-wide email today. “Here at U.Va., the safety of our students must continue to be our top priority, for all students, and especially for survivors of sexual assault.”
Two separate Crazy Ladies makes insane, utterly unbelievable allegations, which are swallowed whole by credulous liberals, then eventually disproved. What is the take-home lesson? Something must be done about those witches!
I tend to agree. Something needs to be done about Jackie, and Sabrina, and Teresa, and Hanna, and all the rest of their lying coven.
St Croix, I've been reading the Jezebel threads. That is some quality entertainment.
What I get, and it's covered here, is that nobody has any right to question a rape victim's account. Or anybody else that decided to attach the word rape around them somewhere. I get it, it's a terrible thing. I think rapists should suffer sever physical and emotional harm, then get dropped in the anarctic naked 500 miles from anything, but apparently I'm pro rape, so you know.
This was before the WaPo story and RS retraction but is very interesting.
Think Progress Defends Rolling Stone by Noting 3 Current Campus Gang Rape Cases
http://www.unz.com/isteve/think-progress-defends-rolling-stone-by-noting-3-current-campus-gang-rape-cases/
So the allegations of the gang rapes were no more true than the allegations of the Blue Fist Posters?
Stupid media. Can they ever get anything right?
"the uncritical acceptance approach is not really workable in contexts outside of advocacy or therapy"
Unfortunately, most of 'journalism' in the modern age is advocacy and/or therapy.
I'm late to the conversation here but I think it is worth going further along the path of the comments below of The Drill SGT, Michael K and PB to consider the egregious situation of the Jameis Winston rape allegation http://tinyurl.com/kbac7gq
Here's a black quarterback at FSU, potentially the NCAA champs this year, who has seemingly been able too slow roll his Title IX hearing until the end of this year's season. When he will drop out and go pro. And the results of the hearing will be meaningless...
Two points that resonate with me. Had this been filed as a criminal act the case would almost certainly be resolved by now.
And the fact that the first thing, after learning he was to be questioned, that one of his companions observing this "consensual act" did was to try to destroy the smart phone with which he was filming the "event."
And, apparently, Lena Dunham's story of having been raped by a prominent campus Republican named Barry at Oberlin is unraveling over at Breitbart.
The general manager at the campus radio station, who controls access to station records that would have definitively established a key fact in Dunham's pebbles-in-the baby's-vagina narrative....no wait!...I'm getting confused here, said...and here's the looselugnut librul money quote:
"Asking whether or not a victim is telling the truth is irrelevant," Ms. Hess proclaimed. "It's just not important if they are telling the truth."
Seriously, if there is anything more defective than a lib/prog, I don't know what it might be.
- Krumhorn
...nobody has any right to question a rape victim's account.
Two words: "Scottsboro Boys".
Between #GamerGate, #ShirtStorm and now #UVA, the harridans of the Social Justice Warrior League have given us a terrifying vision of the Future...and the Now, too, I guess.
Why wasn't Smarter Lil Lena's editor a tad suspicious about the outspoken Republican that supposedly raped her? At Oberlin no less! I know that they let Michelle Malkin in, but that was long ago.
The answer is obvious. The narrative is so compelling to them and the bubble is so clouded that they would never be suspicious.
I am anxious to hear the Althouse analysis of Lil Lena being raped by the prominent Republican all those years ago. Lil Lena has responded as you might expect!
Donald @ 12:29 PM:
"...What I get, and it's covered here, is that nobody has any right to question a rape victim's account. Or anybody else that decided to attach the word rape around them somewhere..."
True. I also just noticed that "race" and "rape" are almost interchangeable. The liberal hive-mind likes to economize on epithets.
..nobody has any right to question a rape victim's account.
Two words: Clinton supporters
Two more words: Cosby supporters
"Trampling the Crime Scene" was RS' and the SJWs' intent, all along. They keep their target demographic angried up and the accused off balance. "Presumption of Innocence" for the accused becomes "PR Debacle". Due Process mutates into a Teachable Moment.
It's convenient for the SJWs that Fraternities are majority White, but when I scan the exonerees' pages at Innocence Project those gentlemen are mostly black.
Two more words: Polanski supporters
And the left marched. All of these incidents appear to be timed to galvanize the left to march or engage in agit prop.
The protesters in NY went to the Apple Store and macy's and did die in's. Now, why does a protest about a black person getting killed by cop suddenly involve agitation in the Apple store? Because this is coordinated events of the protest kids. They are pushing the agenda.
Too bad most of these incidents end up not being factually based. Who cares. the protest kids want to do their little dramas.
and the media is there to push the meme or narrative along. From Trayvon to Brown to Garner to this case. To the one tomorrow, to the one after that. It's like we're living in Soviet Russia.
People are now tweeting about other shootings by cops. And in one case the cops responded to an assault with a deadly weapon call got out confronted him and killed him. First it was "he did nothing' then when the knife was recovered it was "did you have to kill him? Couldn't you shoot him in the hand" or "That's barely a knife". Then someone else tweeted an article about an off duty cop who shot a black kid who had a sandwhcih but cops thought it was a gun. In the article they linked to the cops say he had a gun and fired 3 shots off.
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2014/oct/09/st-louis-police-officer-shoots-dead-black-teenager-off-duty?CMP=share_btn_tw
Does truth really matter to these people? All that matters is pushing the narrative. And that narrative is the same old bullshit lefty narrative we all got in college. Who's a few innocent cops or innocent (probably) white fraternity members to get in the way of a good story that furthers the narrative.
"Asking whether or not a victim is telling the truth is irrelevant," Ms. Hess proclaimed. "It's just not important if they are telling the truth."
Well that does seem to be the case doesn't it. If you dare question the story you are questioning the victim. If you dare insinuate that Mike Brown had just been involved in a strong arm robbery) you are insulted the victim.
THe narrative is the narrative and if you quseiton it you are a sexist racist who wants women rape and black kids shot with their hands up.
Why is this happening now? My guess, because the left is scared that the dems lost the senate and are gearing up for their protests. And these are just the opening salvos. FInd a case. Oh a black kid was shot by white cop. Insert narrative. Racism! Rile up the protest kids. Rinse and repeat.
Ban all Fraternities.
Rolling Stone is another political asset, and this story seems to have been conceived and planted by political operatives working on an organized, centrally directed propaganda campaign.
Several of the key players seem to have links to the White House.
RS was just the vehicle for publication, it could have been several others just as easily.
Has anyone else noticed that all these college presidents are women ?
God, I hope this passes before my grandson starts college.
Ban all Fraternities.
Just another form of otherism. I guess the concept of freedom to associate only applies if you wish to be part of a rape counseling center or Scholars of Color.
- Krumhorn
It wasn't trust they misplaced, it was brains and morals. But of course they're journalists, so they don't have much of either to begin with.
Cosby's biographer doesn't mention his real (I believe) rapes, and Rolling Stone reports apparent fake rapes. It averages out I guess.
Eric Wemple at the Washington Post describes that same line :
Rolling Stone has issued a statement apologizing for the story, which includes this misogynistic, victim-blaming line: “In the face of new information, there now appear to be discrepancies in Jackie’s account, and we have come to the conclusion that our trust in her was misplaced.”
That sentence didn't blame the victims of the story; the frat members and pledges who were accused of being rapists and serial gang rape conspirators.
I had come home from the laundromat when my Imaginary Rapist pushed his way through the door. I can still recall his face clearly: my Imaginary Rapist looked like Brad Pitt but more rugged.
My Imaginary Rapist ordered me to take off all my clothes, except for the black thigh-high stockings and the four-inch red heels that I was wearing. My Imaginary Rapist then complimented me on my perfectly-proportioned round natural breasts and led me to the bed.
Surprisingly, he was almost tender during my Imaginary Rape, and we both reached orgasm at the same time, which was nice. He then put back on his clothes, made the bed and left. This is the first time I have ever told anyone about my Imaginary Rapist.
I am Laslo.'
It doesn't seem likely that UVa would sue Rolling Stone:
They probably won't. Colleges REALLY don't much care for men.
The frat, though, would be insane to not do so.
Journalists are different because they have standards, and editors, or something.
LAYERS of editors and proofreaders and fact checkers.
LAYERS.
And you know the writer will only do better in her career from now on.
It's truly bizarre to describe a conversation where your friend is telling you where you were raped. How do they know? How do you not know?
At what point do we say Jackie had nothing happen to her?
She doesn't know WHO did it.
WHERE it happened.
Her story on HOW is bafflingly implausible.
This should be a prime example to colleges that seek to comply with Obama's Title IX demands of separate path and standards to handle claims of sexual abuse/assault/harassment that they WILL be sued and they WILL be paying out large sums of money. It's best they band together now and stand up against the Obama administration.
I imagine it will increase their insurance costs significantly.
Why did anyone take the Rolling Stone seriously to begin with? Every article I've ever read from RS is tendentious and factually challenged.
One thing about all these incidents is that left instinctively believes one side. And doesn't even want to afford the other side even a smidgen of reasonable doubt.
I'm not invested in any ideology so if its a case of a cop shooting a black man I don't immediately jump to the conclusion that it's racism and only racism or that the cop must be guilty. Those pushing the meme can't conceive that it might be otherwise.
The big problem with reality is, most things aren't that relevant or interesting. What's an activist to do?
Ans: Make sh*t up.
The problem with making it up, though, is you have to keep raising the ante. It's not enough to be raped. You have to be raped by SEVEN GUYS. Count 'em. In pitch-dark. On broken glass. Feel it. With "Drew" and another guy "leading" the actual assailants. And after 3 --count 'em-- three hours of the broken glass, there is the bleeding bedraggled staggering down the staircase (just like in the movies! With the close-focus!) and out the suddenly-apparent side door (wonder if that shows up on the floor plan for Phi Kappa Psi?) to make the sobbing phone call to three "friends." Etc etc etc.
An entry level class in Bad Screenplays could hardly do better.
As said above, the problem with hyping reality is you have to keep hyping the hype. Pretty soon it surpasses any possible threshold of plausibility.
And then you move to Hollywood.
Does truth really matter to these people?
[..]
Why is this happening now?
"Some men just want to watch the world burn." -- Michael Caine, The Dark Knight
"Ban all Fraternities."
Did you have a bad experience with fraternities during middle school, Bitchtits?
Seeing as your never went to college and all.
It is interesting that the Rolling Stone retracted and apologized on a Friday. Was the timing deliberate, or was it just happenstance since the Washington Post story came out that same day?
Unless there's another shoe to drop - on, say, a Monday - I bet this story fizzled quickly and everyone forgets about the journalistic malpractice and the left's embarrassing bigotries.
garage mahal said...
Ban all Fraternities.
Which one wouldn't let you in, Flounder?
Garage, I'm curious. What specifically do you mean by "ban all fraternities"?
I would agree to ban all fraternities at the same time that "studies" programs were removed from the catalog.
Otherwise, no.
A chick blowing a bunch of guys (and then feeling bad about it later maybe, especially if caught) is what I believe in the pr0n trade is known as a blowbang.
Beta Spatula, your mission is clear. Still opportunity for a Lena Dunham tie-in.
Glass bottles break skulls; it's the other way around only in the movies.
Countless people have died after being hit with bottles.
A thrown glass bottle is going to break your cheekbone, it's not just going to leave a bruise. It will be identical to being hit with a rock of the same weight.
Anyway, consensus of the commenters at Jezebel is that it is unreasonable to expect a rape victim not to get a few details wrong, and these revelations are not sufficient to doubt the story.
But these are the core details, it's not like she confused a mauve t-shirt with a burgundy one.
Male victims of false rape accusations are victims of a special kind of hell.
Seeing as your never went to college and all
I'll make you another deal. I'll tell you where I went to college if you tell me where you went to college.
Or are you still frightened that mean leftists are going to rat you out to your employer? Which, you may have a point if you really do have a legal job somewhere. You have literally hundreds and hundreds of racist and threatening posts here. I'd be worried about someone showing your employer all these posts too. The internet is forever!
Gabriel said...
"Anyway, consensus of the commenters at Jezebel is that it is unreasonable to expect a rape victim not to get a few details wrong, and these revelations are not sufficient to doubt the story."
In order to believe this story, you have to believe that Jackie passed out on a bed of broken glass after being raped by seven men, and the seven men in question then thought that the best plan was to leave her there, and go back downstairs to the party. None of them was the least bit concerned that she would suddenly appear at the top of the stairs, screaming for help, covered in blood and incontrovertible evidence, utterly destroying the remainder of their lives.
I want to speak up for fraternities. The one I am a member of gets invited to start new chapters. College presidents see value in hosting a group of young men with a code of ethics and spirit of teamwork. Fraternities are not based on selfishness and drinking.
One of the members of my chapter recently retired as a high-ranking executive who lived overseas for many years. He grew up on a farm and attended a very small high school. He credits his experience as an officer in our house as the starting point of his thinking he had leadership talent. He served us well as a leader in the house, built a track record of leadership before graduation, and kept on being selected for leadership positions. Fraternity membership benefitted him and his employer.
garage mahal said...
....
I'll make you another deal. I'll tell you where I went to college if you tell me where you went to college.
Or are you still frightened that mean leftists are going to rat you out to your employer? Which, you may have a point if you really do have a legal job somewhere. You have literally hundreds and hundreds of racist and threatening posts here. I'd be worried about someone showing your employer all these posts too. The internet is forever!
***********
Garage, have you ever seen "The Lives of Others"?
Because YOU have all the makings of a really excellent Stasi rat.
Yep. garage is a fascist.
What did Insty used to say? "Multiple layers of editorial fact checking"?
"Garage, have you ever seen "The Lives of Others"?"
You ever have a two year flea problem?
I had just come home from work to find my Imaginary Rapist waiting inside my apartment. He looked sort of like a young Johhny Depp, and smelled of sweat, expensive Italian cologne and danger.
I started to turn to leave, but he told me to stay, and something in my Imaginary Rapist's deep brown eyes told me not to defy him. I expected him to tell me to take off my clothes but he specifically instructed me to leave my French Maid Uniform on: I work as a French Maid three days a week to supplement my college expenses.
My Imaginary Rapist asked me how I 'liked it' and I told him: anal, rough and with my hair pulled. So he gently laid me down on the bed and proceeded to pound my ass hard and relentlessly while pulling my long blonde hair: at one point I think I accidentally called him 'Daddy', I have what some would call 'Daddy Issues'.
After my Imaginary Rapist was done he commanded me to make him a sandwich. I asked him if he wanted some Sparking Water with that, but he said No, just the sandwich, which he ate, and then left. This is the first time I have told anyone about my Imaginary Rapist.
I am Laslo.
"The main lesson I'm drawing from the experience is that Due Process is *always* important, and should not be dispensed with just because a particular problem seems important right now."
As they say, ding!ding!ding!ding!ding!
This is the lesson of the entire history of justice and of the United States. There is always, always, always a temptation to skip the niceties when super-important problems come along. Because the "solution" is obvious.
But it's a dark road to go down and should be avoided. I thought we learned a lesson from the internment camps for Japanese-Americans. No?
Of course, the answer is at least a qualified no. We have this current "a rape accusation is always entirely true" concept being shoved into campuses around the country. And I would say there are strong overtones of this in the way climate change alarmism is promoted. "It's such an emergency there's no time to think or question, just do what we say." Be suspicious of anyone trying to do an end-around on any form of due process. No matter how "serious" the issue.
garage wouldn't be caught dead watching a movie like "The Lives of Others". It's too close to his fantasy-world I guess.
@Jupiter:one of them was the least bit concerned that she would suddenly appear at the top of the stairs, screaming for help, covered in blood and incontrovertible evidence, utterly destroying the remainder of their lives.
Why would they be concerned? They're the white male elite, right? Rape culture and privilege protect them, they haven't a care in the world.
I wish I were satirizing the Jezebel crowd but that is an accurate synopsis of what they're saying.
Should Jackie recant, they will say that "rape culture" made her do it. There is nothing that even Jackie could do or say at this point that would change their minds.
Alex: "garage wouldn't be caught dead watching a movie like "The Lives of Others". It's too close to his fantasy-world I guess."
It would be like Howard Hughes and "Ice Station Zebra".
Criminal defamatory libel is a thing in VA and the VA AG has brought more than 200 of these cases since 2002. It would not be the worst thing for Erdley to do some jail time for the crime she perpetrated.
I seem to remember that it was you, Bitchtits, who posted about "the blackys." But please call me racist.
Thank you for validating my decision to avoid giving ammunition to leftist fascists though, fat boy.
Oh and also, we know damn well that you didn't go to college.
...the entire story is presented as fact, without any of those polite shadings and presumptions of innocence about "alleged victim" and "possible rape".
I hope the same genius lawyers who, according to the writer, signed off on her article are retained to defend the magazine in court.
...the entire story is presented as fact, without any of those polite shadings and presumptions of innocence about "alleged victim" and "possible rape".
I hope the same genius lawyers who, according to the writer, signed off on her article are retained to defend the magazine in court.
...the entire story is presented as fact, without any of those polite shadings and presumptions of innocence about "alleged victim" and "possible rape".
I hope the same genius lawyers who, according to the writer, signed off on her article are retained to defend the magazine in court.
Sorry for the inadvertent duplicate postings.
Teach men not to rape, or teach women not to regret drunken sex?
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा