TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

  • Subreddits

      Popular

    • /r/askTRP
    • /r/TheRedPill
    • /r/MarriedRedPill
    • /r/MensRights
    • /r/MGTOW
    • /r/PurplePillDebate
    • /r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen
    • Other

    • /r/AllPillDebate
    • /r/AlreadyRed
    • /r/altTRP
    • /r/AntiFeminists
    • /r/askFDS
    • /r/askMRP
    • /r/askRPC
    • /r/becomeaman
    • /r/BlackPillScience
    • /r/Chadfish
    • /r/Divorce_Men
    • /r/EverydayMisandry
    • /r/ExRedPill
    • /r/FemaleDatingStrategy
    • /r/FeminismStopsWhen
    • /r/GEOTRP
    • /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
    • /r/MalePsychology
    • /r/Male_Studies
    • /r/MenSupportMen
    • /r/MGTOW2
    • /r/MuslimRedPill
    • /r/newTRP
    • /r/PussyPass
    • /r/PussyPassDenied
    • /r/RedPillBooks
    • /r/RedPillParenting
    • /r/RedPillWives
    • /r/RedPillWomen
    • /r/RedPillWorkplace
    • /r/RPChristians
    • /r/seduction
    • /r/ThankTRP
    • /r/TheRedPillStories
    • /r/trpGAME
    • /r/TRPOffTopic
    • /r/TrueBlackPillMGTOW
    • /r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre
  • Blogs

      Popular

    • Dalrock
    • Heartiste
    • Illimitable Men
    • Return of Kings
    • Rian Stone
    • The Rational Male
    • Woujo
    • Other

    • Artful Prudence
    • A Voice for Men
    • Alpha Game
    • Black Label Logic
    • Caleb Jones
    • Captain Capitalism
    • Corporate Machiavelli
    • Days of Game
    • Deep Strength
    • Dicipres
    • Donal Graeme
    • Female Misogynist
    • Free Northerner
    • Gaming My Wife
    • Good Looking Loser
    • Hawaiian Libertarian
    • In Mala Fide
    • KillToParty
    • Kill Your Inner Loser
    • Krauser PUA
    • LaidNYC
    • Married Man Sex Life
    • NO MA'AM
    • Omega Virgin Revolt
    • Pook's Mill
    • Random Xpat Rantings
    • Red Pill Theory
    • Red Pill Wifery
    • RedPillDad
    • RedPillDoctor
    • Seasons of Tumult and Discord
    • Sigma Frame
    • The Feminine Woman
    • The Futurist
    • The Masculine Principle
    • The Modern Man
    • The New Modern Man
    • The Obsidian Files
    • The Power Moves
    • The Private Man
    • The Red Pill Room
    • The Red Quest
    • The Rules Revisited
    • The Spearhead
    • Troy Francis
    • Wintery Knight
    • Young Man Red Pill
  • Books
  • Dictionary
  • @TRParchive
  • Please help TheRedArchive stay alive

Recent federal court rulings are huge victories for Title IX fairness and major setbacks for extremist feminists in higher education and elsewhere.

Title_IX_For_All

August 31, 2021
175 upvotes
/r/MensRights
https://lawliberty.org/turning-the-page-on-title-ix-fairness/
Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB
Share
Share Tweet Reddit Email
Post Information
Title Recent federal court rulings are huge victories for Title IX fairness and major setbacks for extremist feminists in higher education and elsewhere.
Author

Title_IX_For_All

Upvotes 175
Comments 28
Date August 31, 2021 10:41 PM UTC
(4 years ago)
Subreddit Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/pfgo5u/recent_federal_court_rulings_are_huge_victories/
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/recent-federal-court-rulings-are-huge-victories.1066517
https://theredarchive.com/post/1066517
Red Pill terms in post
feminist
Top posts by Title_IX_For_All

A nightclub security video showing his rape accuser leading him to have sex caused a judge to toss the criminal case against him, declaring it did not meet the minimal pretrial evidential burden. USC expelled him anyway! He filed a civil suit & was just reinstated.

2136 upvotes
December 31, 2018
/r/MensRights

Judge rules boys discriminated against in Title IX sports case

1547 upvotes
November 14, 2018
/r/MensRights

A woman with an STD infects a man she has consensual sex with, then falsely accuses him of rape because she was afraid he was going to report her to the authorities for infecting him. She said she was "scared and didn’t know what to do."

1302 upvotes
March 8, 2022
/r/MensRights

Campaign: complimenting a woman, asking for her number, or giving her any attention is regarded as predatory in the off-chance it is unwanted. At some point, even a cynic should wonder if the purpose is simply to demonize men.

1154 upvotes
September 29, 2023
/r/MensRights

Another accused student commits suicide. Parents sue.

640 upvotes
February 17, 2023
/r/MensRights

Jezebel, the notoriously misandrist and gynomyopic online magazine launched by Gawker Media, is finally being shut down.

580 upvotes
November 9, 2023
/r/MensRights

A false sex-assault accuser has been sentenced: 12 years probation and "court costs and fees totaling $290 in $100 monthly installments beginning 30 days after she was sentenced." Basically, probation + the cost of a Nintendo Switch, on an installment plan.

546 upvotes
February 27, 2024
/r/MensRights

Lawsuit: a university counselor initiated an unauthorized investigation against a falsely accused student who confided in her about the pain of being wrongly accused. This resulted in him being dismissed from the program.

497 upvotes
September 12, 2024
/r/MensRights

Comments

[–]OldEgalitarianMRA 59 points60 points61 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

That's great news. This was the work of the men's right's organization The National Coalition for Men . Betsy DeVoos met with them during the discussion section of the new protocols being adopted.

This is proof that Men's Right's is making serious progress. Don't pay attention to those that would goad us to fight. Stay focussed on legislation. Support Men's Right's orgs. They are hiring lawyers and we need lawyers.

[–]Mens-Advocate 22 points23 points24 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It is also the ongoing work of courageous lawyers, such as Andrew Miltenberg and Kimberly Lau.

[–]MrProficient 18 points19 points20 points 4 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

I am happy that those being accused are finally getting due process when it comes to Title IX.

​

I am sad that it is now finally happening, and hasn't always been a thing that should have been since the start.

​

I have met no person who honestly thinks rape is okay. I have never encountered someone who truly thinks its alright for college males to rape girls. However, I think that while we take rape accusations seriously, we should be following the due process of the legal system. Are there some things that need to change about the legal process regarding rape? Yes I do, but that does not mean I accept abandoning the presumption of innocence that was enshrined into our doctrine. Personally I don't think college administrations should be involved in sexual misconduct, and it should be handled by law enforcement. Can a college administration assist in law enforcement? I think it should be required fully by federal law to cooperate and not protect or infringe on the process to protect special people. That being said, I am not sure how to enforce legislatively that girls or boys who are sexually assaulted be taken seriously, I just think that there should be more emphasis in crafting a legal system that does not allow people to get off on a technicality.

​

I think about the the Brock Turner situation. he was caught in the act by two other students mid act, and he was pinned down with his pants down dick out by these two students until campus police arrived on scene. Yet the excuse of intercourse vs outercourse because he was too drunk to get it in. Does that change intent? Yet the legal system will allow him a slap on the wrist, while innocent men who didn't actually rape, to face severe prison time because of it.

[–]tenchineuro 6 points7 points8 points 4 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

I think that while we take rape accusations seriously, we should be following the due process of the legal system.

Rape is a crime that can result in conviction on the unsupported word of any woman, where her identity is kept secret and the accused is tarred and feathered publicly, and were innocence is no defense from prison, social alienation, or career and family loss. Women making false accusations face no jeopardy. They are enabled to make serial false accusations. In fact, an enterprising woman in the UK made it into a business proposition (the UK pays victim compensation)...

  • https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/4313763/woman-falsely-accused-rape-15-men-is-jailed/
  • ‘Attention-seeking’ woman cost taxpayers £900,000 after falsely accusing 15 men of rape after lies exposed

Mind you, the UK could care less about imprisoning innocent men, but they have serious budget problems.

I think sexual assault accusations need the same standards of evidence and protections for the accused as for any other serious crime.

[–]BrokeMacMountain 3 points4 points5 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Mind you, the UK could care less about...

you mean 'could NOT care less.'. if you could care less it means you care.

[–]Mens-Advocate 2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago* (7 children) | Copy Link

Your Turner information is completely wrong. His pants were never down, and his dick never out. He engaged in consensual foreplay, nothing more. He was railroaded, as was the judge, Persky.

The facts:

https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/byg1z4/brock_turner_again_case_in_the_news_again_victim/eqhg6ez

https://www.scribd.com/doc/315432156/Brock-Turner-police-report

From the police report:

Jonsson said, "We found him on top of the girl." ... I noticed that his pants seemed disheveled around his crotch area and he had what appeared to be a cylindrical bulge consistent with an erect penis under his pants.

Presumably the police officer understands English and so was accurate in stating the pants "disheveled" (that is, wrinkled, not open). Had the pants been open, the officer would have said so. Further, the officer stated, "an erect penis under his pants". Had the penis been out and visible, the officer would have said so.

[–]MrProficient 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

The victim was intoxicated and passed out, therefore under California law, she cannot consent in any sort of sexual acts.

California Penal Code section 261 (a)(3)

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?sectionNum=261.&lawCode=PEN

"Where a person is prevented from resisting by any intoxicating or anesthetic substance, or any controlled substance, and this condition was known, or reasonably should have been known by the accused."

I.e. for you since you are too stupid to understand, means that you cannot lawfully engage in sexual acts with a passed out girl from intoxication. Otherwise you are raping her/attempting to rape her

You are innocent until proven guilty. Brock Turner was found guilty "of three felony charges: assault with intent to commit rape of an intoxicated/unconscious person, penetration of an intoxicated person and penetration of an unconscious person."

https://abcnews.go.com/US/humiliated-chanel-miller-survivor-brock-turner-sex-assault/story?id=65821466

Which means, you are wrong. He was found guilty because he attempted to rape a passed out intoxicated. I am going to trust ABC's review of the case over yours. As I read your post from two years. I find it disturbing that your account conflicts with the actual evidence. Your argument is that she consented before passing out. She was already intoxicated prior, thus she could not consent as she was already intoxicated. Hence why he was convicted of 3 counts.

​

I might concede that he might not have had his pants down dick out, but he was in fact caught in the act, and then chased down and pinned down by two Swedish Stanford students Carl-Fredrik Arndt and Peter Jonsson until police arrived.

​

Your response is not supported by the facts which makes you are as delusional as a screeching feminist. Also, your link is linked to an old post that uses Wikipedia as it's source.

​

Yikes dude, seriously.

[–]Mens-Advocate 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago* (5 children) | Copy Link

Look, if you insist upon insulting me and mis-representing my arguments, I reserve the right to insult you back. Goose, gander.

The victim was intoxicated and passed out, therefore under California law, she cannot consent in any sort of sexual acts.

"Passed out" (at the time of digital penetration) is a lie. There is no evidence indicating the timing of his fingering relative to her passing out.

California Penal Code section 261 (a)(3)

Your interpretation of the penal code is penile rather than penal. That is, because you're a prick, you ignored my point (and a standard MR point) that two intoxicated people engaging in sexual activity does not make the male any more guilty than the female. It is a mis-application of the neutral law that prosecutors and courts twist such a situation to accuse the male when both participants are intoxicated.

You are innocent until proven guilty. Brock Turner was found guilty "of three felony charges: assault with intent to commit rape of an intoxicated/unconscious person, penetration of an intoxicated person and penetration of an unconscious person."

You engage in bad faith. You clearly have not read my linked post which already stated exactly this and indicated why the jury erred.

Which means, you are wrong. He was found guilty because he attempted to rape a passed out intoxicated. I am going to trust ABC's review of the case over yours.

You're an asswipe. ABC and most media are not reliable in recounting gender matters. But the actual court documents are easily available. Brock Turner did not attempt rape, and there is no evidence to support that. In case your lonely brain cell cannot understand the point, it is physically impossible to rape with pants closed unless you believe in the fourth dimension. The jury bought the silly argument that having an erection indicates intent to rape, which would have every male on earth a rapist. (Juries are human and far from perfect.)

Your argument is that she consented before passing out. She was already intoxicated prior, thus she could not consent as she was already intoxicated. Hence why he was convicted of 3 counts.

That is the misandrist way prosecutors mis-apply the law, but you have ignored the common MR arguments that

  • Neither or both parties are "guilty" if both are intoxicated.
  • An intoxicated female is still responsible when driving, so should be still responsible when f-cking.

I might concede that he might not have had his pants down dick out, but he was in fact caught in the act, and then chased down and pinned down by two Swedish Stanford students Carl-Fredrik Arndt and Peter Jonsson until police arrived.

Aha. You are forced to admit error & are just blowing smoke to distract from that. Further, "he was caught in the act" is weaseling. Exactly what act? Inserting a penis? No. Having his penis out? No. Touching her vagina? No, nobody saw that. Laying atop her? Yes, that's all they saw - but that's minor compared to the image painted of him raping her.

Your response is not supported by the facts which makes you are as delusional as a screeching feminist. Also, your link is linked to an old post that uses Wikipedia as it's source.

On the contrary, my linked post is entirely accurate; you have not disproved a single word. My sources were the police reports and court documents themselves, not mindless blowhards like yourself.

You're aligning yourself with bloodthirsty feminist haridan Dauber, attention and money-grubbing "victim" Chanel Miller, and conscience-free prosecutor Alaleh Kianerci. In contrast, it's significant that dozens of females who knew Turner well wrote to the court contesting the image painted by persecutors prosecutors and media.

[–]MrProficient 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Yikes dude, seriously. Your factually inaccurate and you just keep on doubling down. Yikes.

[–]Xralius 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link

Hey I'm not the person you're arguing with but if you look at the facts of the case objectively, there is no proof that Turner knew she passed out or even that she passed out while they were fooling around, rather than after. The prosecution suggested Brock ran away and that indicated he knew she was passed out, per the two witnesses. If you look at a few details on the witness statements though there are quite a few holes in their story as well, perhaps some embellishment that came with being confronted by police after tackling Turner and doubling down on a narrative.

[–]MrProficient 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

-Rapist finds a passed out girl behind a dumpster -Tries to fuck her after unsuccessfully doesn't get any from the girl's sister by self admission -Gets caught in the act by two swedish students -Runs away -Gets chased down and pinned down by 2 guys -Gets arrested -Gets convicted of 3 counts -Gets off with light punishment -Garbage humans on internet try to spin to make rapist into victim -Garbage human can't see how their bias is in direct disagreement with evidence and fact -Garbage human arguing=Rapist Brock Turner????

[–]Xralius -1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I don't think you know much more than random yahoo articles have told you. As the previous guy said you seem to be arguing in bad faith / reveling in misinformation and you seem to have no intention of actually having the facts down before commenting. It's pathetic.

-Rapist finds a passed out girl behind a dumpster

Wrong for multiple reasons - They were dancing and making out a party before leaving the party together. - They were not behind a dumpster. This was actually what Brock's appeal was regarding as the prosecutor not only mislead the jury with this info but pushed this narrative publicly.

Tries to fuck her after unsuccessfully doesn't get any from the girl's sister by self admission

Yeah he was a college guy trying to make out with girls at a party.

Runs away

Here's the interesting thing about this. The bikers change their story throughout the entire case. When first asked by police, the bikers said they just thought something looked strange. However later change their story saying they knew he was assaulting her. Additionally, they claim that they got off their bikes and chased Turner after he took off running. How did they catch him only 10-25 yards away (according to police report) if he was sprinting away from them as the bikers claim? Even if Turner, an Olympic caliber athlete, was running at a slower than average pace, they wouldn't have been able to catch him that fast.

Garbage human can't see how their bias is in direct disagreement with evidence and fact

Are you a garbage human?

[–]Ice-Ice-B4by 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

I agree this insident was pushed by the mob media. Media painted it a complete different way, to this day people think he found the girl behind the dumpster and took advantage of her.

Also, the girl was a Masters students with a boyfriend:

being a Victim sounds better than being a cheating slut

[–]falante788 26 points27 points28 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Stop calling them extremist feminists these are regular feminists

[–]63daddy 3 points4 points5 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

It’s a bit of good news, but it by no means endures accused students will receive due process in the future.

The real issue of course is that colleges have no business judging actions which are felony crimes. Cases of sexual assault and other such accusations should be handled by our legal system, not our education system.

[–]Title_IX_For_All[S] 2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The real issue of course is that colleges have no business judging actions which are felony crimes. Cases of sexual assault and other such accusations should be handled by our legal system, not our education system.

I agree! Schools can provide accommodations (housing, coursework, counseling), but should leave the judging of felony accusations to those better suited.

[–]MerlynTrump 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

So far the courts have upheld the Rule, but the Biden admin will probably just change the rule.

[–]MerlynTrump 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I think the big priority for Men's Rights in the short term is that we have to take away the Democrat Senate majority in 2022, then it makes it harder for Biden to get these nominees and feminist judges through.

[–]tenchineuro 4 points5 points6 points 4 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

  • and the nomination of Catherine Lhamon, Biden’s controversial pick to oversee Title IX as head of the Education Department’s Office for Civil Rights

Biden has promised to kill the Trump changes that give men (some) due process rights, I don't see why the article is calling this a good thing.

  • (a post she held under President Obama)

When he sent out his 'Dear Colleague' letter to colleges.

  • Title IX is the federal law banning sex discrimination at schools receiving federal funds but which is now used to address sexual misconduct. Lhamon weaponized this law when she was last in charge, enforcing a 2011 Dear Colleague Letter (DCL) that lowered the burden of proof to find fault and encouraged schools to presume guilt, withhold evidence, and suspend or expel students based on mere allegations.

So her nomination is a good thing?

  • While the California court most recently failed to dismiss the case, giving challengers 45 days to amend their filing, it did express skepticism that those bringing suit had standing to do so.

The court doubts standing but lets the case continue?

I guess we shall see, but this is not done yet.

[–]denyjunctionfunction 3 points4 points5 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

  • and the nomination of Catherine Lhamon, Biden’s controversial pick to oversee Title IX as head of the Education Department’s Office for Civil Rights

Biden has promised to kill the Trump changes that give men (some) due process rights, I don't see why the article is calling this a good thing.

You missed half of the sentence.

and the nomination of Catherine Lhamon, Biden’s controversial pick to oversee Title IX as head of the Education Department’s Office for Civil Rights (a post she held under President Obama) failed in the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee.

[–]Angryasfk 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Appointing that woman demonstrates that Biden does not deserve support.

And those who are happy about the Afghan withdrawal shouldn’t back him (or defend him) on that basis either. He’s now bumping his gums about how it was Trump’s decision and how bad Trump’s “timing” was. I guess not continuing an endless war in Afghanistan is due to Trump then, and Biden would have stayed indefinitely otherwise!

I don’t see why people support this guy given all that. The only reason is “anyone but Trump”, and now Trump’s gone, why continue to make excuses? I may have been willing to give him the benefit of the doubt, but appointing THAT woman, given what she did (Obama could at least claim he didn’t know that things would go that badly - although he could have stopped her) makes me ready to give the man the same slack her Title IX victims get: none!

[–]MerlynTrump 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Obama and Biden are pretty beholden to the feminists, and probably share their views. They're no better than Hillary when it comes to men's rights.

[–]Angryasfk 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Oh I don’t doubt that - although I think it’s more opportunism in Biden’s case. The Hunter Biden laptop indicates that public office is a huge gravy train for the guy. Incidentally, keeping that “out of the news” prior to the election is the real vote rigging, with Twitter breaching their own rules to do it (a “mistake” according to their CEO). Biden would never have been elected if it had been more widely reported.

[–]MerlynTrump 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

did Facebook also suppress the laptop story? And it was from a reputable paper (NY Post, the oldest in the country), not from a more hardcore conservative source like breitbart or gatewaypundit.

[–]reddut_gang 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

good shit

[–]Southerndude62 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Extremely important development. The feminist challenge has been effectively destroyed.

Fuck feminism!

[–]Angryasfk 2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

It hasn’t sadly. Biden wanted to put that woman in her old job, and she’s clearly still wanting things to run that way. He has no excuse.

The committee has, temporarily, blocked her appointment. But it’s deadlocked and the Dems hold both Houses of Congress. Apparently all the Dems on the Committee voted for her! They can all go f#ck themselves! It shows how far the Dems have degenerated on this sort of issue.

The Court victories themselves are good, but they only have meaning whilst the De Voss policies remain in force, and if THAT woman gets the job, they will be removed the next day. Even if she gets knocked back, Biden will clearly just appoint someone of like mind anyway. What’s clearly needed is for the SCOTUS to strike down her guidance. Or else for the Dems to suffer such a defeat on the basis of this that they won’t dare support it or it’s partisans again. I’m not holding my breath for either.

[–]MerlynTrump 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The real threat is all the feminist (and anti-White) judges Biden is appointing.

Browse all authors
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter