"And she’s very excited about the Halloween party at Chi Phi at the fraternity. And you can tell from the text messages that she wants to go to the party. She’s getting ready for it. And then just before the party, there’s another moment that moves her thinking in this new direction. She gets a phone call from the president of the fraternity.... And he tells her, you can’t come to the party. You’re not invited. And he adds that it’s for her own good, because there are so many rumors swirling about what happened by both women and men. And there’s so much judgment about her. She shouldn’t come to the party. She sends a text message to one of the seven guys.... And she says to him, 'I knew this was going to happen. The women will always get the short end of the stick... You all... 'are not my friends....' This anger continues in the text messages... her telling of the events [has] now really changed...."
From yesterday's episode of the NYT "Daily" podcast,
"The Firestorm Over a Rape Allegation at Cornell/The New York Times has reviewed a trove of documents related to the case. Our reporter explains what we know."
I blogged about that podcast yesterday, but didn't have a transcript to excerpt. Today, I'm giving you the excerpt I wanted verbatim.
పోస్ట్లు
65 కామెంట్లు:
“Oh yeah! Since you disinvited me let’s see how you handle rape allegations.”
A woman scorned.
She sounds like a person who is vulnerable to suggestion and craves social acceptance, as some of us are, and some of us are that way far more than others of us are. It's a bell curve. I'm worried that her attorneys haven't really managed to get her to understand what it would be like for her if she testifies in court. Because of her vulnerabilities, I also wonder if she's just going along with them.
President of Frat here’s what happens, finds it wrong, decides to intervene to prevent it happening again, and is now the villain; because victim status is more important than being someone that does the right thing quietly.
you can’t come to the party. You’re not invited
I get why he did that, but it was a really bad move. What he should have done was an internal investigation and maybe kicked some people out of the frat. Particularly the drug users and people committing crimes.
Blaming the outsider and barring her from the party just aggravated a dangerous situation. Then she got mad and wanted to prove how right she was and how bad they were. Nightmare scenario.
At first I thought this was a post about Dean Wormer's wife, returning from her vacation in Sarasota.
This poor girl better accept a settlement and disappear. Then tell Letitia to get lost. I can’t imagine how she would handle being cross examined.
"What he should have done was an internal investigation and maybe kicked some people out of the frat. Particularly the drug users and people committing crimes."
The whole point is that it looks like no crimes (well, other than drug possession) took place.
On the bright side, PSU is off the front page.
She sends a text message to one of the seven guys.... And she says to him, 'I knew this was going to happen. The women will always get the short end of the stick... You all... 'are not my friends....' This anger continues in the text messages... her telling of the events [has] now really changed...."
This is why (presumably) criminal actions were not taken against any of the men. It's why the "punishment" was write an essay. It's not rape, it's bad behavior. Feminists are once again saying that a woman's emotional reality is more important than factual reality. And feminism is taking her down a dark road of trying to punish men for her bad feelings about what happened.
>(The DA) has also conceded that her sworn statement in 2024, it is different than what she’s saying in the lawsuit, which was filed in 2026. And he’s signaling that doesn’t mean that her story has changed. It means that a victim’s understanding of something as traumatic as a sexual assault can change over time and that this may merit a second look at this point.<
What bullshit! The fool notion of “recovered memory” has been discredited. This "changed understanding" bit is simply a dime store maneuver around that impediment.
>And as she tells her story, she explains to investigators that there comes to be a point where she’s no longer really clear on whether or not she’s in control...There was one line that I found particularly striking that I read, where she noted that because she felt uncomfortable, she took more ketamine because she wanted to numb herself from the situation that she felt she was stuck in.
Yeah, by all means, take more ketamine because we all know that anesthetizing yourself will increase your ability to be in control...
"She gets a phone call from the president of the fraternity.... And he tells her, you can’t come to the party."
Frat houses are going to have mandatory "sensitivity training".
"Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned."
William Congreve
The Mourning Bridge
1697
Not getting invited to the party is the straw that broke the camels back.
Who said anything about a camel.
This is how rumors get started.
My understanding is that NY law has no provision to charge anyone with "date r@pe". Assuming both parties are of legal age and absent threat of violence or mental disability, impaired judgement is not sufficient to establish lack of consent. If intoxication or drugs are involved in the incident there has to be a nearly complete loss of the ability to communicate consent.
*For the camel reference to land you have to watch Norm and Dennis Miller cock talk. There's some weird uneasy moments because it was live and Norm was his usual unfiltered self
"My understanding is that NY law has no provision to charge anyone with "date r@pe". "
The clip I watched with the NY Governor said something about looking into "changing the law".
Regret from putting herself in a position to be passed around once, then twice, then anger because she's forced to regret her bad decisions. And now she's volunteering to be passed around again, this time in court, for political advantage.
The girl has some serious personality defects, starting with deciding on booze and drugs before her evening of adventure at the frat party. Very sad. Self-destructive.
'I start with a man, and then take I away reason and accountability.'
Now she really is about to become a victim.
Nothing screams “I was raped!” quite like wanting to return and party some more with her accused attackers.
All's fair in lust and abortion? Baby, maybe. Maybe, baby... not. The infantilization and disempowerment of women is an extraordinary conception of toxic masculinity birthed with feminism to normalize a sexual revolution, a social progression armed with liberal license, misled through education. Most men and women have a healthier, mature relationship between peers.
A gender prop. Vive la revolution!
***The clip I watched with the NY Governor said something about looking into "changing the law".***
That's how they roll in New York. Trump is a "convicted felon" and an "adjudicated rapist" because of it. These erstwhile frat boys are in deep serious.
"NY Governor said something about looking into "changing the law".
Exceptions will be made. It's a Pro-Choice, Pro-Choice, Pro-Choice selective, opportunistic jurisdiction. That said, forewarned is forearmed. Abort.
Wait, so this happens, then the fraternity and other women decide to ostracize her?
MORON move
Let's say she did sign up for something adventurous. Even if she had not had second thoughts, much less feel it went toward abuse, and she seems like she was just going to go along.
But then the gossipy social condemning started and the choice was to ostracize rather than celebrate her as being brave and adventurous.
Leave it to the courts. Those men and the fraternity deserve to be smacked around.
Christopher B. From what I've seen so far, NY law says voluntary intoxication does not remove the ability to consent. Her lawsuit says she was coerced into taking Ket, so that may be the lever they are pulling to get past the voluntary intoxication hurdle. But the people that have been walking through the wording of the law make it sound like she had to be tricked or forced into taking an intoxicant. It would be nice if a NY lawyer looked at case law around this, as that would tell us more about how the law is actually applied.
Social liberal club. #NoJudgment #NoLabels #LustWins
"... the fraternity and other women decide to ostracize her?
MORON move".
Yes. Yes it was. Thank God we have dispassionate, mature political and legal leaders that can see the facts behind the non-case and not charge....
Never mind.
Leslie Graves said...
She sounds like a person who is vulnerable to suggestion and craves social acceptance...
And is also deficient in the ability to predict possible consequences of her actions.
So she's RAGE FUELED. Got it.
I see a pattern.
In the Trayvon Martin case, the prosecutor and police chief recognized that they couldn’t get conviction, but trial would cost the state millions — they were the adults in the room ; so they lost their jobs. When they were proven right, nobody gave them their jobs back. The Cornell seven case looks like the same deal — a political stunt that will lead to acquittal.
It’s much more subtle, but the thing I noticed in network coverage is that she is consistently referred to as a “young woman” and the male coeds are referenced “men”.
This sounds very condescending and sexist.
Also isn’t it common knowledge that girls mature earlier than boys? Is there ever a point at which they are equals?
Or do they just wake up one morning and make the discovery that they’re on the “short end of the stick”
Of course we all know that neither girls or boys actually mature until sometime into their mid 20’s and thus not responsible for the bad choices they’ve made up until that point, like school debt or who they’ve voted for.
I'm sick of the John Doe thing. And the Jane Doe thing. Why are we naming them after deer? Are they Bambi, you have to protect Bambi?
Protect children, sure. Hide the identities of children. But it's insane to coddle adults and pretend like they will be anonymous all throughout a criminal trial.
No they won't! People have a right to confront their accusers.
How many of the Cornell 7 know the name of this woman? Most of them. The idea that a secret, anonymous prosecution can go forward is barbaric. This is how the Democrats sucked Anita Hill and Christine Ford into the machine, by promising them their names would be secret. Like hell they will be.
Men will use you, sexually.
Feminists will use you, ruin your life, turn you into a sexless, joyless, unhappy martyr, and then forget all about you.
Best case: this woman extorts a lot of money from Cornell, her identity remains secret, and no criminal prosecutions go forward.
Take some of that $2 billion Qatar money. Fuck you, Cornell! Zero sympathy for the feminist hellhole you have spawned in your classrooms.
I think the frat brothers ought to sue Cornell, too. Pile on and blame the university baby-sitters for their failure, incompetence, and lies.
I know it's going to hurt your feelings to get a grade, Cornell, but I'm giving you one. F, motherfucker! That's right, you got to repeat a class and do it again.
I think the Trump administration ought to take these "culture of rape" claims seriously and do an investigation of all the evil shit that is happening at your university. Send the FBI swat teams in. Let's re-visit that whole "accreditation" thing. It's a "culture of rape"? Nobody wants to pay $200,000 to send their daughter into that.
I'm sure I mentioned this before.
I have some friends/clients who had (yes had)(He died) a older teenage son. He was 19-21??? somewhere in there.
Anyhow, he lived in an apartment with his girlfriend. They would fight a lot. When she got really angry, she would threaten him. She would say "I'm going to call the police and tell them you raped me."
Modern women.
Per the NYTs : "An alleged campus sexual assault at Cornell University has gripped the country and ignited a national debate over consent."
There's no evidence that either of these is true.
So were all drugs being used legal? And what evidence it there she took the drugs volunatily? Was she warned of the effects?
One can be unable to give consent, be taken advantage of, and then decide to blame yourself and "Let it go". And then change your mind. The fact that you "let it go" right after the rape, doesn't mean the rape didn't happen.
“So were all drugs being used legal? And what evidence it there she took the drugs volunatily? Was she warned of the effects?”
Do you have any evidence that this was the first time that she had taken ketamine? I think that it is unlikely.
“One can be unable to give consent, be taken advantage of, and then decide to blame yourself and "Let it go". And then change your mind. The fact that you "let it go" right after the rape, doesn't mean the rape didn't happen.”
You typically can’t retroactively repeal consent. Consent is most often prospective. They had consent at the time the sex occurred. Regret can’t negate previous consent.
Mick Jagger put it eloquently...
"Lead guitars and movie stars get their tongue beneath the hood."
From time immemorial men have taken advantage of women sexually. Once upon a time universities had strict rules in place protecting women from men and from themselves. Universities are now coed and young women are taught and believe they are no different from men. But this is just not so. A sexual encounter is much more significant for the female participant physically, psychologically, and emotionally.
When a young woman willingly walks into a fraternity already intoxicated she is entering a den of male sexual predators ready for action and she is alone and unprepared for what may follow.
So, another bogus gang-rape claim. Yawn.
Disbelieve all women.
I have learned that women are both the best of humanity... and the worst. When you have a good woman involved, things happen that men cannot get done. And when the women are, well, not being good.... everything goes to hell far worse than if men had been involved.
"The whole point is that it looks like no crimes (well, other than drug possession) took place."
Isn't it Democrat policy to enable drug use?
"Best case: this woman extorts a lot of money from Cornell, her identity remains secret, and no criminal prosecutions go forward."
Too late. Her name is all over the place, if you look.
I hate homophones.
>Martha said...
When a young woman willingly walks into a fraternity already intoxicated she is entering a den of male sexual predators ready for action and she is alone and unprepared for what may follow.<
I spent a couple years involved in fraternity parties where there were plenty of drunk people - male and female. Amazingly enough, no rapes occurred in that den of male sexual predators. I guess all those sexual predators that I associated with must have just been off their game, huh.
That's a pretty broad brush you're swinging there ma'am. In the name of equality of the sexes, let's fully apply that brush to what you claimed and spiff it up a bit, shall we?
Goes like this:
When a young slut willingly walks into a fraternity already intoxicated, she is entering a den of male sexual predators (sic) who are, as is she, ready for action and she certainly should be prepared for what may follow.
"A sexual encounter is much more significant for the female participant physically, psychologically, and emotionally."
I must be doing something wrong.
Who brought the ketamine to campus?
Did any of these Cornell shits get charged with drug use, possession or buying/selling? Why not?
Rich kids get away with a lot... and the ladies clutch their pearls and worry who got disinvited to the party...
Get rid of the off-label illegal ketamine on campus Cornell and you wont see so many sex assaults, I guarantee it. It is an anesthetic, you know. What's the statute of limitations on drug sales or possession?
That's what they should focus on. Did somebody's anesthesiologist dad leave a prescription book around? Somebody paid good money for those drugs... who?
Is his normal at Cornel like laughing at underage drinking is in madison? Raise your children better, white elites. Charge them for using illegal drugs because non white folk dont understand why that is not criminal chage,.
#westandwithjackie!!!(TM)
Nikole Hannah-Jones: "I want to send my daughter to one of these rape culture universities. But we got to get her grades up first."
Actual rape crisis: 250,000 girls in the UK.
You can spot an actual rape crisis, because people try to avoid it.
Manufactured, phony, feminist rape crisis: people pay $200,000 to join in.
*Those men and the fraternity deserve to be smacked around.*
Yep. Because at no time should a woman be held responsible - or made to feel bad - for what she's done.
"When a young woman willingly walks into a fraternity already intoxicated she is entering a den of male sexual predators"
Who's the predator and who is the prey? It sure seems like this woman went in there ready for action. I don't think she was expecting a tea party with cucumber sandwiches.
Do i have any evidence?
Oh sure, I'm secret investigator. I just type on the internet as a hobby.
I'm asking were the drugs she was given legal? Yes or No. And was she told of their affect on her? Yes or No. And what were those affects?
You can't "Withdraw consent". I'm saying if she said nothing later and delayed taking action, that doesn't equal "Giving consent" at the time of action.
Harvey Weinstain raped women. The fact that they didn't take action - immediately after it was over - doesn't mean it wasn't rape.
"and she certainly should be prepared for what may follow."
Sure. And then next week or next month or next year, when she decides she's not a slut and it was a mistake, she uses her pussy pass (don't yell at me, I didn't make up the term) to ruin some guy (or guys) lives.
James K said: Who's the predator and who is the prey? It sure seems like this woman went in there ready for action. I don't think she was expecting a tea party with cucumber sandwiches.
Jane Doe had romantic and sexual feelings for Male 1, suspected to be Matthew Ingalls, for some time, and went to the fraternity to meet Ingalls as planned that evening. Jane Doe did not go to the fraternity to engage in group sex. She did once she arrived consent to the threesome with Male 2, suspected to be Jonathan Newell. Then with the help of ketamine things got out of control.
Do you think this was the fraternity bros first rodeo?
This scenario would never happen in a sorority.
Women are not usually the predators.
Jane Doe
Ivy League students have the same morals as those in the trailer parks & ghettoes
I was in a frat in college 30 years ago. We were never like these entitled jagoffs. This gal is disturbed and these guys are scum.
For the whole of my lifetime, frat parties have been about drunken sex. And drunken sex has never been as great for women as for men. And the whole time, frat parties have been avoidable. But leftist women aren't allowed to inhabit reality. A leftist woman invited to a frat party has received the same marker of social acceptance as being invited to be a frat member. Being disinvited is being dissed. Being dissed alters the past. She thought the party was an equity orgy in which she liberated herself from shackles of convention along with other seekers after liberation. Now she realizes it was a patriarchal orgy which reenacted the power structure of capitalism by oppressing i.e., raping her after extracting her consent in a strip-mining sort of way. Do trees consent to become paper, even if it's paper for the NYT? Same, same.
After quickly checking my Hierarchy of Oppression tool which I got as merch at the last DNC convention, I’d say men in the case are obviously guilty since they are men except that I’m not sure what a woman is. Is Jane Doe a woman? Has that been proved? Can it be proved? Was she a woman that night? Faced with these uncertainties, I’m not sure whether Jane Doe was a victim or an oppressor. Perhaps she is a rich white man identifying as female? Or what if the “men” now identified as women? What then? Where are we and are we there yet?
The feminist attorneys who found Jane Roe did not tell her that she could get an abortion in another state.
They were using an innocent woman for their own agenda. If they cared about their client, they would have helped her. That care was an illusion. They were using their client for their own purposes: to enact a feminist agenda in the Supreme Court.
So Jane Roe went through the entire pregnancy, gave birth, and the baby was 2 years old when the case was finally heard. That whole judicial process was a feminist lie. Not an actual "case or controversy." Jane Roe could have terminated her baby, cheaply and easily, in another state. But the attorneys were vile people. By their own feminist standards, they were forcing their own client to carry her baby to term, by deceiving her.
I would warn Jane Roe today that her attorneys and the feminists who are advising her to hate men are taking her down an ugly and vicious path. They do not care about you and are not interested in helping you or healing you.
This is a case about money (Cornell has deep pockets) and power (2026 election is next month). The feminist movement is a scam and it is damaged the lives of millions of people. Wake up, America. Be a humanist. Respect the lives of all human beings.
"Jane Doe did not go to the fraternity to engage in group sex. She did once she arrived consent to the threesome with Male 2, suspected to be Jonathan Newell. Then with the help of ketamine things got out of control...."
Why not rewrite the law so that consent is not the issue? Just make group sex a crime. Problem solved.
That way, the woman would be committing a crime too and perhaps she'd withhold consent from the start to avoid committing a crime. Or would she? She didn't refrain from underage drinking or using illegal drugs. But in any case, society could reject this kind of exploitative sex and not leave these cases to depend on consent.
Why not just make anything a woman dislikes a crime? Punishable by death, unless the defendant is a Democrat.
Why not rewrite the law so that consent is not the issue? Just make group sex a crime. Problem solved.
They don't want to solve the problem. They want to use the problem to get money (the lawyers) or power (the politicians). Modern feminists use possible crimes against one woman to empower themselves.
What they say and do about 250,000 rape victims in the UK is damning. What they say and do about the rape culture of Hamas is damning.
They are using this specific incident to create false rape alarm and play like they are the feminist heroes who will save women from demonic men. That's all this is. Kabuki theater for the internet, with these kids as props, to be discarded later.
Current feminist ideology says that a woman's sexual choices are never bad. Autonomy, right?
Lily Phillips had sex with 101 men in a single day in 2024.
That's appalling. But feminism has no problem with it. The ideology has devolved to where women can do no wrong in sexual relations.
So a solution that limits a woman's sexual autonomy is of no interest to feminists. Abortion up until birth, killing newborns, adultery, prostitution, feminists are fine with all of it. They have abandoned any pretense at equality, or treating all human beings like we are human beings.
Feminism has gone off the rails, Althouse.
Supervised flukeing at Planned Flukehood with a judge and jury of peers. RRR with Planned Parenthood to provide preemergent and post-congress burden control. Make it Democratic, Inclusive, and Equitable (DIE). #NoJudgment #NoLabels #AllsFairInLustAndAbortion
Ice Nine (1:05pm):
I have no direct knowledge of fraternities, having gone to a college that had banned them (St. John's, Annapolis). I do know that my late sister, who went to a famous party school (University of Virginia, 1971-75), said that one of her favorite pastimes was going to frat parties sober. I can't recall now if she put it this way, or if it was my interpretation, but apparently it's even better than a trip to the zoo.
She felt entirely safe, being sober. The fact that she was 16 for the first few months of college may have helped: I don't know the age of consent in Virginia, and am not going to look it up (don't need that in my search history), but that may have made her illegal as well as sober.
కామెంట్ను పోస్ట్ చేయండి
Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 4 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith. Also: No italics, even briefly. Use asterisks for emphasis. And don't play with the format by changing fonts or using boldface or all caps. Never include more than one extra line break between paragraphs.