Universities Not Safe for Men?
Sexual assault policy in universities was originally designed to create campuses safe for women, but now has devolved into a biased and unfair campus-based justice system that is stacked against the accused. At Stanford, which is a typical example, a recent sexual assault accusation highlighted the lopsidedness of the Judicial Affairs Board's treatment of such cases: the accused cannot cross-examine witnesses or offer exculpatory evidence on his own behalf other than a request that the campus "Investigator" contact certain witnesses. He is denied appeal, while any acquittal can be appealed.
Under pressure from pushy radical feminists and interest groups, the Obama Administration has sided with this type of bizarre, unjust system. Dr. Russlyn Ali, head of the Office of Civil Rights at the Department of Education, essentially rewrote the standard for “due process protection” when determining the fate of the accused in a sexual misconduct case. She “suggests” that universities dismiss the notion that a conviction will result only from a determination of guilt “beyond a reasonable doubt" and expel students who are found guilty according to a “preponderance of the evidence” (50.1 percent) standard. So, all a college Judicial Affairs Board has to do is round up enough “jurors”(students and campus community members who are almost never trained in the practice of law) that will hand down a guilty verdict. And as shown before, in this type of system, the accused really has no rights of his own.
To understand the radical, anti-male nuttiness of this approach, look no further than the materials used to train BJA jurors at Stanford, obtained by the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education(FIRE). One such item is Why Does He Do That: Inside the Minds of Angry and Controlling Men. The book’s author, Lundy Bancroft, is a fraud who makes money off "low-cost workshops" for battered women. He publishes no educational or academic credentials on his website, refuses to answer calls that do not deal directly with setting up speaking engagements, and is a self-described "author, workshop leader, and consultant on domestic abuse" He has no formal training in psychology or psychiatry and disdains evidence-based methods, simultaneously claiming that his methods for rehabilitating abusers are better than existing ones and that they do not work on most abusers because most men cannot stop being abusers. He has frequently made extravagant claims with no proof,such as his admonition that jurors should be “very, very cautious in accepting a man’s claim that he has been wrongly accused of abuse or violence. The great majority of allegations of abuse—though not all—are substantially accurate.”
I am no lawyer, but I am fairly certain that telling people the accused is probably guilty counts as “prejudicing the jury.” No evidence is given for the second assertion, and the first is an hodgepodge amalgamation of other statistics with no accurate citation.
 
Universities like Stanford and the Obama Administration are allowing the pursuit of justice to devolve into a witch hunt. Do you agree?
- Comment (25)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (0)
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
Comments:
Aug '10
Re: Universities Not Safe for Men?
This conversation, started by Ricochet member MMPadre, touches on this topic.
It includes my own account of why I, as a young woman who experienced sexual misconduct on campus, ultimately went to the police to report the incident, rather than trusting the incident to our Judicial Affairs board, where even I as the one assaulted feared the offender would not be treated fairly.
It also includes the observation that part of the problem might be that women in college these days often can't even tell whether or not a sexual crime has been committed against them. College-age women might be hesitant to broach this subject in mixed company, but they do talk about it, in secrecy, amongst each other.
Edited on November 14, 2011 at 12:15pmOct '11
Re: Universities Not Safe for Men?
When I was in college I was accused of indecent exposure for - no joke - not closing the bathroom door all the way at an off-campus party. The "victim's" reasoning was that, if allowed to go unpunished, pervs like myself could get off on not latching bathroom doors. She brought it up to the school administration, which dismissed it pretty quickly, but not before hauling me in front of the dean. I've had my package grabbed several times before at a gay bar (went to hear a buddy DJ, promise), and that discomfort is nowhere near the fear of getting expelled or registering as a sex offender, however unlikely it looks in hindsight.
Sexual assault's bad, but so often it's a he-said-she-said thing, with no other witnesses and no other evidence, especially when the charge turns on consent. If my accuser wasn't as honest as she was, she could have probably taken this incident a whole lot further than she did. I'm just not sure I trust any judicial system that could ruin someone based on no physical and little testimonial evidence. Also something to keep in mind when making laws.
Feb '11
Re: Universities Not Safe for Men?
Maybe co-ed schools aren't all they were supposed to be.
Oct '10
Re: Universities Not Safe for Men?
I kindof agree that looser standards of evidence are a good idea in private systems of justice for sexual assault cases. Public courts should not be weakened, of course, and there should still be an appeals process for private systems. But I do agree with the radical feminists on this one point; the system is often stacked against victims of sexual assault.
(And, fyi, I hate feminazis in every other respect; I have a nasty history with some of them. They are, in my opinion, genuinely evil people).
Oct '10
Re: Universities Not Safe for Men?
Sexual assault is fairly common between members of the same gender, too, and not just between homosexuals (believe it or not, there are heterosexuals who are so sex-crazed they don't care about gender, just sex). Of course, it doesn't happen as much.
Apr '11
Re: Universities Not Safe for Men?
If the standard of review is the preponderance of the evidence, then either the accused, or the accuser is in violation of the standard. If it is more likely than not that the accused is innocent, then almost by definition it is also more likely than not that the accuser has made a false accusation. Isn’t it unfair that the accuser is not put at jeopardy under the same standard as the accused? If schools adopt the preponderance of the evidence as the burden of proof it seems that in every case someone (accused or accuser) should be expelled. The schools do not, in fact, discipline accusers whose accusations are not proven. That is where the unfairness lies.
Nov '10
Re: Universities Not Safe for Men?
"Private systems of justice have looser standards with regard to sexual assault, Your Honor." I'd like to meet the criminal court Solomon who would let you get away with that one; perhaps he'll kind of agree. Maybe Penn State's legal representatives are crafting just such an argument. Who knows, perhaps the judge (like, apparently, the Kollege Kops) is a football fan.
Aug '10
Re: Universities Not Safe for Men?
MMPadre
"Private systems of justice have looser standards with regard to sexual assault, Your Honor." I'd like to meet the criminal court Solomon who would let you get away with that one...
What Joseph is saying sounds perfectly natural to me. When it comes to private organizations there is -- long has been, and probably should be -- a somewhat lower burden of proof that the accuser must meet to be believed.
It's not necessary to prove beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law that a pastor has been having an affair in order to have rightful grounds for dismissing him from leadership within the church.
And would we need proof beyond a reasonable doubt that a professor has been diddling his freshman students in order to find his dismissal appropriate?
It's a matter of proportion. It's fine for private institutions to give less benefit of the doubt to the accused than our criminal courts do, not fine when they give practically no benefit of the doubt, as college JAs do today.
Aug '10
Re: Universities Not Safe for Men?
Man, if that had been the lewdest thing I had witnessed in college, I would have considered myself lucky. I'm sorry you had to go through that.
Edited on November 14, 2011 at 5:10pmRe: Universities Not Safe for Men?
Vasant, anyone facing a kangaroo court of the sort that you are discussing should get a lawyer and file a suit against the university. I suspect that a preponderance of evidence would show that the accused in such cases is being treated unfairly.
Aug '10
Re: Universities Not Safe for Men?
That colleges are free to expel those who don't meet certain standards of behavior doesn't seem strange to me.
But is it really true that private institutions can force someone to register as a sex offender without having proved their case in a court of law? If that's true, that's just... evil.
Oct '11
Re: Universities Not Safe for Men?
Midget Faded Rattlesnake
That colleges are free to expel those who don't meet certain standards of behavior doesn't seem strange to me.
But is it really true that private institutions can force someone to register as a sex offender without having proved their case in a court of law? If that's true, that's just... evil. · Nov 14 at 8:34am
No, I was overly paranoid. I was afraid she would go to the cops, which she didn't. That's actually one upside to having colleges take control of situations: the standard of evidence may be more lax, but often so is the punishment. When I was an RA, if we busted someone for alcohol, we only gave them a $15 fee and an essay assignment, which was removed from their record after a year. Far preferable to calling the cops for an MIP. However, in the case of sexual assault, it would still follow you around in your disciplinary file, and you would have to disclose it on many job apps.
Aug '10
Re: Universities Not Safe for Men?
QuickerBrownFox
No, I was overly paranoid.
I sympathize with overly paranoid.
That was one of the things that made my own incident so painful -- the fear that if I were to kick or punch the offender and he sustained serious injury, I might be somehow punished for defending myself. A truly idiotic thing to have running through your brain when your personal boundaries are being violated -- but I guess the mantra "violence is not the answer" to bullies had been successfully drummed into my skull, after all. (Ain't public education great?)
QuickerBrownFox
That's actually one upside to having colleges take control of situations: the standard of evidence may be more lax, but often so is the punishment.
It's only reasonable that laxer standards of evidence correspond to laxer punishments.
A $15 fine and an essay assignment probably wouldn't've been too terrifying a punishment for the crime of "peeing with door ajar", for instance.
Mar '11
Re: Universities Not Safe for Men?
There are at least two separate issues here. Preponderance of evidence is the standard typically used in administrative proceedings like those involving employment disputes. I've no real problem using this standard of proof in academic dismissal cases as well. The problem arises when rules of evidence and other procedures are so manipulated as to deny one party the ability to fairly present the case against which the standard is applied. This looks like what's afoot here.
Oct '11
Re: Universities Not Safe for Men?
I'm not so sure about that. More than other crimes? I agree that private systems may need a looser standard, but in the case of sexual assault or harassment (or slander, or another offense that primarily pits one person's word against another) the system will end up looking stacked against one side regardless, and I'd rather give the benefit of the doubt to the accused. What if a girl with a grudge decides to claim a guy grabbed her? Do you want a system that allows a crying girl's word to be weighed 1:1 against a guy who society pretty much assumes is a sex-crazed maniac?
When a sexual assault claim could have an impact on the reputation of a business, then it makes more sense to have a lower overall bar, since more is at stake than just a person (though I still think the evidentiary standard should be fairly high).
Oct '11
Re: Universities Not Safe for Men?
Midget Faded Rattlesnake
That was one of the things that made my own incident so painful -- the fear that if I were to kick or punch the offender and he sustained serious injury, I might be somehow punished for defending myself. A truly idiotic thing to have running through your brain when your personal boundaries are being violated -- but I guess the mantra "violence is not the answer" to bullies had been successfully drummed into my skull, after all. (Ain't public education great?)
That's too bad, because I think one of the reasons a higher standard of evidence works is the understanding that, on a practical level, people take care of themselves, and an overreaction is about as unlikely to go unpunished as the underlying assault.
Midget Faded Rattlesnake
A $15 fine and an essay assignment probably wouldn't've been too terrifying a punishment for the crime of "peeing with door ajar", for instance.
It probably would have been worth the $15 to have that essay read by someone with a handlebar mustache and two PhD's. It certainly would've proved a challenge for the "quote Churchill" rule.
Aug '10
Re: Universities Not Safe for Men?
QuickerBrownFox
That's too bad, because I think one of the reasons a higher standard of evidence works is the understanding that, on a practical level, people take care of themselves, and an overreaction is about as unlikely to go unpunished as the underlying assault.
Exactly so.
Law must assume that people tend to take care of themselves -- there's no other practical way to order society. So it's not surprising that pandemonium results when institutions unteach people how to take care of themselves, that is, teach them to suppress perfectly natural and reasonable instincts for self-preservation.
Girls' lives today would be much easier if they still felt completely free to slap and knee them what deserves it.
QuickerBrownFox
It probably would have been worth the $15 to have that essay read by someone with a handlebar mustache and two PhD's.
And worth $30 to have the essay read by someone with a PhD and two handlebar mustaches.
Nov '10
Re: Universities Not Safe for Men?
Midget Faded Rattlesnake
What Joseph is saying sounds perfectly natural to me. When it comes to private organizations there is -- long has been, and probably should be -- a somewhat lower burden of proof that the accuser must meet to be believed.
Are we on the same page? The examples you cite are not felonies. When you're talking about an actual sexual assault, there cannot be two kinds of law --one for the University, and one for everyone else. Recall the Duke rape case: ex-prosecutor Mike Nifong had to suppress evidence and suborn perjury to convict the student defendants. But the progressive Duke faculty had only to make up their minds.
Aug '10
Re: Universities Not Safe for Men?
MMPadre
Are we on the same page? The examples you cite are not felonies. When you're talking about an actual sexual assault, there cannot be two kinds of law --one for the University, and one for everyone else.
My understanding of sexual assault is that it's not always felonious. At the most flagrant end of the spectrum it's rape, which is of course a felony (though from what I've heard from friends in confidence about date-rape, a gal often doesn't know if she's been date-raped or not -- very problematic). But it also includes more minor offenses which can be misdemeanors, such as indecent exposure and groping.
In the hypersexed environment of today's campuses, would it even be feasible for every incident of sexual assault, no matter how minor, to be taken to the police for resolution? On the other hand, there's something to be said for promoting good conduct on campus through sensible internal resolution of minor matters, no?
Nov '10
Re: Universities Not Safe for Men?
Midget Faded Rattlesnake
In the hypersexed environment of today's campuses, would it even be feasible for every incident of sexual assault, no matter how minor, to be taken to the police for resolution? On the other hand, there's something to be said for promoting good conduct on campus through sensible internal resolution of minor matters, no? · Nov 14 at 12:35pm
Sensible resolution? Yes, that would be nice. Determined how and by whom? The professors at Duke didn't want to promote good conduct. They just wanted to punish people they knew were guilty. And Obama, according to Mr. Ramachandran, apparently agrees with that sort.