I still get Rolling Stone. Shut up. I'm really into music.

I read about the UVA faux-rape thing online back before I even got the issue. When I read the story, I like to think I would have noticed some errors in it (rolling around in broken glass for hours probably would require an emergency room and many many stitches), but I'll never know now. Either way, it's officially been outed as bullshit. Surprise. Another false rape story that the media bought, hook, line, and sinker, without verifying much of anything.

I just read the retraction/apology story. In it, they delve through what should have happened (hint: it rhymes with shminvestigative shmournalism), but really, they just pass the buck around. Oh, this person should have checked this, that person should have checked that. The fact checker DID spot some things, and pass those questions along like she should have, but the concerns were overlooked, by what I'm presuming to be another media outlet excited to push out another story that pushes the rape culture narrative that all men are rapists-in-waiting, and all women are victims, and under no expectation to be responsible for themselves.

But what I'm really stuck on right now is a big what if. See, remember what happend with the Duke LaCrosse "rape"? All the players have a black mark on their lives now, and the coach retired. All based on an accusation. What if Jackie "The Would-Be Rape Victim" Coakley had actually based her 'date' on a real life dude and given up a real identity? The media would probably have been talking about what kind of asshole this guy was for months, if not a year or two, before we finally got down to the he-said, she-said, and by that time, it would probably be down to an ambiguous thing, just because the lie she fabricated was based on a real man. As it is, one of the biggest nails in Jackie Coakley's storie's coffin is that she only gave up a first name, and that name didn't match anyone living in the frat house, and only matched the first name of a lifeguard that she worked with, but who had little to no other associations with Jackie Coakley.

"Why would a woman make up a rape accusation?" Because of the attention she gets. This one got Jackie Coakley a lot of it. Nationwide attention. But for some reason, the 'national outcry' was aimed only at Rolling Stone (and not a whole lot, from what I see, instead of the girl who made it all up in the first place. Maybe that'll come later: Jackie Coakley, and why we should feel bad for her.

But hey, this is no reason to think false rape accusations happen all the time, right? This has GOT to be a weird one-off.