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

Universities need to stop suspending students who are being accused of sexual misconduct until they are proven guilty. They also should have the right to stay anonymous until their convictions. At least this student won the first battle and he is now planning to seek damage over false allegations.

Fuckoff555

February 21, 2018
6311 upvotes
/r/MensRights
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/celtic-starlet-wins-battle-university-12038909
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 Universities need to stop suspending students who are being accused of sexual misconduct until they are proven guilty. They also should have the right to stay anonymous until their convictions. At least this student won the first battle and he is now planning to seek damage over false allegations.
Author

Fuckoff555

Upvotes 6311
Comments 182
Date February 21, 2018 6:47 PM UTC
(8 years ago)
Subreddit Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/7z7xzd/universities_need_to_stop_suspending_students_who/
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/universities-need-to-stop-suspending-students-who.905576
https://theredarchive.com/post/905576
Top posts by Fuckoff555

We should be careful to not become like the sexist feminists we hate, and not to let rage and anger control us so that we don't become mysogynistic, and destroy this sub and this movement from within.

4399 upvotes
November 4, 2018
/r/MensRights

Jennifer Lopez's boyfriend Alex Rodriguez is fighting to reduce his $115K-a-month spousal/child support. He's paying her $115K a month despite her having a kid with her new boyfriend and refusing to work again even though she got a master’s degree in psychology.

3202 upvotes
October 24, 2018
/r/MensRights

Woman whose acid attack on ex-lover left him in such pain he took own life is cleared of murder and manslaughter

1109 upvotes
May 18, 2018
/r/MensRights

Feminist group wants to shut down France's first ever sex dolls brothel because they argue that it encourages a culture of rape, but the police say it's legal.

868 upvotes
March 20, 2018
/r/MensRights

A list about feminism misandry for anyone who thinks that feminism fights for men’s rights, for anyone who thinks that feminism was only a sexist movement starting from the third wave and for anyone who accuse the MRM of being a sexist movement, while still defending feminism.

846 upvotes
November 8, 2018
/r/MensRights

Woman arrested for trying to frame man in false rape case

200 upvotes
May 11, 2018
/r/MensRights

An attorney for a woman who claims to have been sexually assaulted by a DPS Trooper inside his patrol vehicle has apologized, in the wake of the release of DPS dashcam footage of the incident.

199 upvotes
May 23, 2018
/r/MensRights

After all the brigading that we had lately, there's a real pushing to make the MRM be supportive of the feminist movement, and I think that will be the day that the MRM stop being a movement for men’s rights.

197 upvotes
December 9, 2018
/r/MensRights

Comments

[–][deleted] 517 points518 points519 points 8 years ago (57 children) | Copy Link

Well, since he is now suing for damages, he won his case. Why not say who the accuser is so no more guys hook up with her and get falsely accused?

[–]ExclusiveTrademark 305 points306 points307 points 8 years ago (36 children) | Copy Link

How do we not have a false accuser database? I get the argument that it may dissuade real victims from coming foreword, but there has to be SOMETHING to protect other people from being falsely accused.

[–][deleted] 128 points129 points130 points 8 years ago (21 children) | Copy Link

That is the thing. One crazy female can really mess up many guys lives. Meet a guy, date a couple times, get drunk, feel bad and declare rape. Go through trial etc. Meet new guy, date, get drunk and have sex, regret it, declare rape and repeat. Although this pattern is more along the lines of the women who get wasted and end up going home with some guy and doing the walk of shame the next day. They place responsibility for their actions on the guy, who may or may not have bought them a drink, for contributing to them being drunk. The theme now is that if drunk, yes does not mean yes.....unfortunately, the guy is also drunk and lets face it, men suck at social cues without alcohol.

[–]Shippoyasha 40 points41 points42 points 8 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

They really ought to be legally branded at the very least. Let the courts and the public realize a person has a shady history and is not trust worthy. If they want to ruin other peoples' lives, then it's only fair they put their own livelihood on the line.

[–]Themightysavage 39 points40 points41 points 8 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

False accusers should go on the sex offender registry. They should have to notify neighbors, employers and romantic interests. Just like rapists and pedophiles.

[–]Derproid12 points 8 years ago* [recovered] (4 children) | Copy Link

A false accuser is essentially a rapist of the justice system.

[–]Themightysavage 3 points4 points5 points 8 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

It's using sex to destroy someone's entire life, it is rape.

[–]Madusch 9 points10 points11 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

That's not the definition of rape.

[–]Themightysavage 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I am aware of that, but it is a solid description of it.

[–]Jesus_marley -1 points0 points1 point 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Rape is not about sex, it's about power.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

TBH I'd rather go on a blind date with a sex offender than a false accuser.

[–][deleted] 31 points32 points33 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I would say keep both their names private and do a quiet investigation, but the one being accused never gets that right. Their name is dragged through the mud, others look at them as if they are really an offender. Friends distance themselves because their other social circles believe the accusations. If the accuser was also named, perhaps other students who have had issues with the accuser could come forward with their experiences. How long did it take to catch Jemma Beale? Lets face it, if one person is doing it, there are others who just haven't been caught yet.

[–]Bullfrog777 3 points4 points5 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It’d be a nice idea but secret trials can easily be corrupted and have been in the past.

[–]twoEZpayments 4 points5 points6 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Look how easily your credit can be fucked. Its no suprise man.

[–]xRisingSunx 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yes, branded.....maybe with a LETTER of some kind, and let's make it RED so people can see it easier...Yes...I can see it now a Big Red letter A for "Accuser". /s lol

[–]FlagrantWrongsDotCom -3 points-2 points-1 points 8 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

One [terrorist] female can really mess up many guys lives.

Thats an understatement. Its way beyond just that individuals guys life and I dont even understand where somehow its an ask for due process. A girl, like alexandra elizabeth rogers, former assistant vice undersecretary of defense john rogers daughter, can directly result in millions of lives lost effectively and billions per week lost from the american economy alone. Her father and her etc have been caught up in a confessed sprawling international corruption/criminal terrorist criminal conspiracy with systematic confessed criminal rights violations by people in formal positions with home office, london metropolitan, a US police chief and others. The police chief even confessed to systematic falsification/tampering/destruction of legally protected records. That police force had also previously terrorized her ex bf at his own home with materially provably false accusations about things that werent even crimes by her father when they had no authority regardless. There was a knowingly false arrest based upon yet more egregiously provably false statements to london metropolitan. Her father nearly killed him when he attacked him several different times after several million of funds werent delivered. There are a tremendous number of other crimes that people need to be prosecuted for. Theres only been a civil prosecution related to part of this and drastically much more needs to be done. I would greatly appreciate it if you contacted your representatives, shine a light on this however you can and demand justice immediately.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 8 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

Wow. Never even heard of any of this before.

[–]Atheist101 -1 points0 points1 point 8 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Because it's not true. Some fake spam site is the "source", which most likely is a Russian troll site meant to stir the pot

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

I searched for the rogers. None of this info came up. Edit:more on Duke player Wral.com stated the woman was the aggressor in this encounter, in public leading up to sex.

[–]FlagrantWrongsDotCom 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Factually speaking this isnt the same person and its only been briefly reported on certain media outlets that dont appear to return in search results largely for some reason. To the best of my knowledge wral isnt one of them though Alexandra definitely was an aggressor on more than one occasion.

Here is Johns wiki entry.

[–]WikiTextBot 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

John C. Rogers

John Rogers is a former deputy assistant secretary in the office of Secretary of Defense Les Aspin and a national leader in advancing stem cell medical research in the political and strategic arena. He also contributes regularly on National Defense issues in the United States. During Rogers' 30-year career, he has founded and successfully built companies in the public policy and national security industries. He is the co-founder and current CEO of Capstone National Partners, a Washington, D.C.-based government relations firm.


[ PM | Exclude me | Exclude from subreddit | FAQ / Information | Source | Donate ] Downvote to remove | v0.28

[–]FlagrantWrongsDotCom -1 points0 points1 point 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Like I said john works in PR and has routinely targeted my posts. Hey there atheist, I have direct primary source documents including court records. If you actually do your due diligence with any competence instead of blindly making spurious ad hominem attacks you will find the same. This isnt a Russian troll site. I worked directly with and have correspondence from President Obama's administration.

[–]FlagrantWrongsDotCom -3 points-2 points-1 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Go figure. Media failing the american people/planet by not reporting on something causing actual scaled harm even if its easily documented? Her father worked in PR, in DC offering about the least subtle fixing services Ive ever seen (literally explicitly offering fixing services) where he even publicly advertised on his website entrainment programs (basically literally mkultra and its variants) for hire and spent about at least 10 years planning/working to screw this guy over. Undoubtedly he and others involved with him have put in significant work preventing this from getting picked up because putting it mildly the public would be beyond outraged.

[–]LadyChelseaFaye 7 points8 points9 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

No there needs to be repercussions for the actions of people who falsely accuse. Just because it dissuades a victim it also needs to dissuade false accusers. An actual victim should never feel as though they’ve done anything wrong. They should want to come forward but thanks to people like this they are afraid of what could happen negatively. There needs to be something done.

[–]Throwawayingaccount 13 points14 points15 points 8 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Even if we had one, it would be worthless.

If you are accused of theft, in a court of law, you are allowed to bring up that the accuser has been convicted of ten false theft accusations. This is not true for sexual crimes.

If they don't even have that right in a court of law, what makes you think they'd have that right in a college tribunal?

[–]ExclusiveTrademark 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Not sure I'm understanding you here. Are you saying that those with proven records of false rape accusations are immune from having that record held against them in court?

Either way, that rule has no bearing on a false accuser database. It would be nothing more than a publicly available warning system so others don't become victims of false accusers.

[–]Throwawayingaccount 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Are you saying that those with proven records of false rape accusations are immune from having that record held against them in court?

Yes. In the US at least. I am unfamiliar with courts in other countries.

[–]Aivias 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

A high profile rape conviction (Ched Evens) was overturned in the UK because character witnesses were allowed to stand who corroborated the details of the supposed rape with their consensual encounters with the same woman and as a result an attempt to remove any ability for the courts to include this evidence was submitted but thank fully rejected.

[–]ASexual-Buff-Baboon4 points 8 years ago [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link

We should use the Sex offenders registry

[–]ExclusiveTrademark 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I like that idea based on pure equality; if a false accusation could result in an innocent person's life being ruined by an offender registry, then why shouldn't that be the consequences for the accuser? However, there would never be mainstream support for it. People would just argue that non-sex crimes don't belong on sex offender registries, and they would win that argument.

[–]Thatguymorganwall 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

False Accuser Database? That's a great idea.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

False accuser data base? No man, we already have a sex offender registry, that's where they belong. On the list with the rapists and pedophiles.

[–]scurvybill 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

There need to be stiff repercussions for false accusers, but if there's a database, it ought not be available to the general public simply because it's a giant billboard saying "this person has lied about rape in the past, so raping them now would likely avoid consequences."

Throw 'em in prison, name and shame 'em in the media, but keeping a database is a bad idea.

I was going to make this argument and then realized than anyone who's falsely accused and on the sex offender registry has a giant billboard saying you can take advantage of them and just claim rape afterwards.

Why does the existence of shitty people have to make everything so complicated...

[–]f__ckyourhappiness 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

I get the argument that it may dissuade real victims from coming foreword

There is no situation where this could happen though.

[–]ExclusiveTrademark 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I don't believe it would be a serious issue, but I can see where that argument could be made. That said, my hypothetical database of false accusers would be strictly reserved for those who clearly made false accusation. Like an accuser names a guy, gives his description, and tells the police where he lives, but it later turns out that the guy was in a totally different country at the alleged time of the incident.

[–]f__ckyourhappiness 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Specifically targeting someone should automatically put you on the list if his alibi is proven, but lying about it in general should also do the same thing.

[–]GingerPeanutButter30 points 8 years ago [recovered] (2 children) | Copy Link

He won a case about whether or not Duke followed proper protocol with the case and appeals. This stopped Duke from being able to suspend him, for now. He is also suing for damages alongside that. This isn't like the cases where kid gets kicked out, woman shown to be lying, kid sues for damages, yet.

I'm not sure when his name was "public," but everything I've seen has been after he sued the school. I know there's a problem with guys names getting released but I can't tell if this is one because articles w his name appear to be about him vs Duke. The woman certainly hasn't been shown to be lying (personal beliefs aside) so I'm not sure why she should be publicized right now.

I found an article that talks a little more about specifics of his actual sexual misconduct case.

http://www.dukechronicle.com/article/2017/02/examining-the-ciaran-mckenna-lawsuit-does-virginity-affect-consent

[–][deleted] 12 points13 points14 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

He won a case about whether or not Duke followed proper protocol with the case and appeals. This stopped Duke from being able to suspend him, for now.

A permanent injunction sounds like it could be.....permanent

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

isn't that illegal in some countries. they are protected by anonymity laws. fucking joke. i bet if she is protected by said laws and he said her name, he'd face serious legal consequences. think about that. a girl could falsely accuse a man, he could prove his innocence, then in an attempt to save other men that same pain would expose her name, and thus face punishment.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

That is the thing, the person making accusations has their name protected by law while the accused is left hanging. Even if it is discovered as a false rape claim, the accuser is still protected and able to make more claims. This makes it hard to catch serial false claimers. The lawsuits just list them as Jane Doe's when they, and the university get sued after a false claim. Its why Jemma Beale is so famous, they finally listed a serial false claimer. Took bad one guy spent years in jail, another had to flee the country with his life destroyed and all the others also suffered.

[+][deleted] -26 points-25 points-24 points 8 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

Well, since he is now suing for damages, he won his case.

No, the case against him wasn't proven beyond a reasonable doubt. That doesn't mean that she lied or that he "won."

Beyond a reasonable doubt usually means greater than 90%. So if we are only 89% sure that someone was raped, a jury would not convict the accused rapist.

Does that mean we should release the alleged victim's personal information? What would that achieve?

[–][deleted] 24 points25 points26 points 8 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

The judge gave an injunction saying the university could not suspend him and also said the university acted in bad faith. The university even said they did not fully believe the accused. As for saying who the alleged victim was, well 1) so others who have been falsely accused can come forward 2) allow future suitors to know that she files false rape claims so that they have fair warning.

You believe that people who play victim and try to sabotage someone else should be able to get away with anonymity? Again, even the university didn't fully believe her claims that she said no.

[–][deleted] -3 points-2 points-1 points 8 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

allow future suitors to know that she files false rape claims so that they have fair warning.

Who said that the claim was false? Neither the panel nor the judge said that she's lying.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

People...you're down voting this guy because you dislike his interpretation. He isn't being offensive or antagonistic. Come on now.

[–]nybo 4 points5 points6 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yeah not guilty doesn't mean the accusation is false, most often it just means not enough evidence.

[–]Aivias-1 points 8 years ago* [recovered] (3 children) | Copy Link

No, its a deflection tactic. Its specifically to muddy the waters with a "well, not guilty isnt innocent.." which would mean that a man accused of rape has no way of proving his innocence in a court of law. I dont know about you but Id rather the culture didnt start a turn where even courts cant say youre innocent of a crime.

[–]nybo 3 points4 points5 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

But the accusation isn't proven false either, so you're not granting her the assumption of innocence either.

[–]Operator216 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

You don't prove innocence in court. You prove guilt.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

You just described feminists. Only 2% of rapists are convicted? Assumes that Anyone not proven innocent is guilty.

Assuming anyone not proven guilty is innocent is how or justice system is supposed to work.

[–]farahad 17 points18 points19 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

You've already ruined his college education and any chance he had of leading a normal (post-)college life. For 0-89% certainty that he was guilty of a crime. That's the problem.

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points8 points 8 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

But the panel were not unanimously convinced of the alleged victim’s credibility and that she said “no” to sex despite claiming she had.

We have to stop the liars from ruining peoples lives

[+][deleted] -11 points-10 points-9 points 8 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

So if the panel isn't unanimously convinced you were telling the truth, that means you are a liar?

How does that make sense?

[–][deleted] 9 points10 points11 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

In these days of "believe the victim", if the Office of Conduct starts to question the honesty of the alleged victim, I start to question. Especially since there are numerous lawsuits against universities for unquestioningly believing victims. Because they believed the alleged victims without question, these universities trampled the males rights, did improper investigations and opened themselves up to a lawsuit in pursuit of a guilty verdict. When one of these offices thinks something is fishy, then something is fishy

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

if the Office of Conduct starts to question the honesty of the alleged victim, I start to question.

That's not what you said. You said that she was a liar. Is that what the 'Office of Conduct' said? Is that what the judge said?

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

That's nice.

[–]BanSpeech 304 points305 points306 points 8 years ago (32 children) | Copy Link

It's pretty bullshit that they can't find a happy-medium, like home schooling/take home work/online lecture recordings/etc... while waiting for the disciplinary process to end. Something similar to how cops get put on desk duty during an IA.

You don't want to falsely punish someone, but you don't want to allow guilty people free reign while they are being investigated. And there would need to be a maximum legal complaince time so they can't keep a student in limbo for six months...

[–]Grasshopper21 147 points148 points149 points 8 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

So those should be options given to the accuser though. Those would still be considered punishment by most and There should be no penalty for accusations alone.

[–]ThirdTurnip 104 points105 points106 points 8 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

Agreed.

If the allegations are so serious and supported by evidence that the student is considered a risk to others, why aren't the police investigating it? Why hasn't the case been made in court and a judge decided that they are a risk and should be subject to loss of freedoms?

[–]Sardonislamir 28 points29 points30 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Correct. A school is not the appropriate investigating nor reporting entity. The accuser is a citizen making an official statement of criminal action against another. ONLY the Police can and should be taking action.

[–]eriverside 7 points8 points9 points 8 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

Gona play devil's advocate: criminal cases are decided when there is no reasonable doubt about the defendant's guilt (95% confident). Civil cases are a preponderance of evidence (51%). Sexual assault cases are notoriously ambiguous.

Let's take a hypothetical case of 2 people meeting at a bar. They aren't drunk, they're both horny, they go home. They get into, everything is fine, until one of the 2 (P1) wants anal. The other (P2) isn't into it. P1 forces themselves onto P2 despite a struggle.

I'd consider that rape. There was consent, consent was taken away because circumstances changed. That's pretty clear to me. Here's the tricky part: how do you prove any of it beyond a reasonable doubt?

So this kind of situation is trickier because if you don't put the offender away, you have a predator on campus.

I personally don't support school tribunals - I do think police should handle it - but the criminal system of judging cases is too strict for the nature of the crime. I don't have a solution though, just opening up the conversation.

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points 8 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

No, ur is the only way to handle crime (any crime).

You have to prove they are guilty. Nothing less is acceptable to a civilized society.

[–]eriverside -1 points0 points1 point 8 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

In most circumstances I'd agree, but the conviction rate of sexual assault are too low due the nature of the crime and the "beyond reasonable doubt" standard. It's a bit of an ambiguous crime in terms of proving it - you'd need DNA, or video, or something, but if the guy's using a condom (or she's using a strapon she washes) and not recording themselves it can easily fall into a he said she said.

So there is an issue and the status quo isn't a solution.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

but the conviction rate of sexual assault are too low due the nature of the crime and the "beyond reasonable doubt" standard.

Says who?

The rate of accusations that are proven true in a court of law are too low? Those are the ones we can prove are true.

It's a bit of an ambiguous crime in terms of proving it - you'd need DNA, or video, or something, but if the guy's using a condom (or she's using a strapon she washes) and not recording themselves it can easily fall into a he said she said.

Yep, and He said/She said should never result in a conviction.

So there is an issue and the status quo isn't a solution.

The status quo is the only solution. You don't jail people without proving they are guilty first.

[–]eriverside 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Those are the ones we can prove are true.

Just because the court could not prove it was true doesn't mean it wasn't. It could be there was no crime, it could be the defendant took precautions to obscure the situation enough to cause doubt. Assault is one of those really easy to get away with it crimes.

OJ was acquitted in criminal court, but lost in civil. The difference is the threshold of proof required.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Just because the court could not prove it was true doesn't mean it wasn't.

Doesn't mean it was true either.

It could be there was no crime, it could be the defendant took precautions to obscure the situation enough to cause doubt.

Either could be true.

OJ was acquitted in criminal court, but lost in civil. The difference is the threshold of proof required.

The difference is the penalty able to be applied.

Civil Court cannot take OJ's freedom. It's as simple as that.

You do not take someone's freedom away for a crime you can't prove they committed.

[–]xRisingSunx 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

it can easily fall into a he said she said

It's ALWAYS been that way. Ever since Emmett Till got lynched. Just cause he was black he was guilty. Now the bar is even lower, just being a man makes you guilty. Unless of course you had sex with another man, then no one cares if a rape happened or not.

[–]backthefuckupbitch 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The conviction rate in the UK is over 60% - slightly higher than that other crimes. I'm not sure where people get the low conviction rate idea from - it certainly isn't from court records and government issued statistics on convictions.

[–]ialsohaveadobro 6 points7 points8 points 8 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

There are a few problems involved.

First, the school does not want to be liable for negligently failing to do enough to protect students from sexual assaults. The school's student discipline process is in part intended as something to point to as "doing something about it." If they leave it entirely in the hands of police, they can be accused of sitting on their hands.

Second, on the other hand, schools also feel genuine responsibility for protecting students, so they want to take the actions appropriate under the circumstances. It's not an entirely cynical exercise.

Third, however, schools are not really equipped to do a good job at deciding these matters. The decision-makers are generally profs and students. They don't have the experience, time, or expertise to treat the proceeding like a court trial.

Fourth, there's a built-in bias toward the school's best interests. The proceeding is conducted by the school, according to rules written by the school, by people either paid by the school or seeking a degree from the school, who are also aware of public opinion or political pressure both generally and, in the more serious cases, concerning the specific case itself.

Finally, you have the usual he-said-she-said problems and usually scant evidence.

So you have a bunch of amateurs spending limited time trying to decide what to do about a situation they have little information about, aware of social and political pressure and the threat of liability.

The path of least resistance will tend to be to side with the accuser. If they do so wrongly, the worst-case outcome is they expel an innocent student. Whereas if they wrongly fail to discipline a rapist, the worst-case outcome is more rape, big liability exposure, social and political fallout, resulting dips in enrollment, reputation, and alumni donations, and probably some administrative heads rolling.

Those factors are not easy to overcome.

[–]singerandascholar 13 points14 points15 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Please explain to me how simply reporting it to the police and having a judge decide if they are a risk to society and need to be jailed (vs. being let out on bail) is not easy for the school.

In my opinion, the school should have NOTHING to do with it. This is a criminal matter to be handled by our justice system. My proposal negates every point you make. First and second, they acted to the extent of the law. Third, this is exactly why they should not handle it. Fourth, the school should use the court system to protects it interest.

I do not understand how using our justice system is not the easiest possible solution for a school.

[–]denyjunctionfunction 45 points46 points47 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

That would never work for some majors. Anyone with a lab class would be screwed. Also, online classes. Can’t stand them personally.

[–]Luchadorgreen 15 points16 points17 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

They should be refunded at the accused's discretion, then.

[–]SoundOfDrums 7 points8 points9 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Preferably rescheduled if it's possible for the accuser and accused.

[–]tearsofsadness 32 points33 points34 points 8 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

Our legal system figured this out already. It’s called bail if the person isn’t a risk of leaving / harming anyone. The issue is the schools having their own courts and such. I get why but now that these type of issues are well known and people want to solve them they should go back to the courts and police.

[–]Lethn 39 points40 points41 points 8 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

The problem is that universities have gone and clearly formed a borderline quasi-independent government within their own communities. This is the exact same problem we have in the UK with sharia courts when you allow ideological fanatics to do whatever the hell they like within these communities you get plenty of innocent people getting fucked over by this. Partly because they themselves don't realise they're in a bubble community to begin with, they'll just be there by circumstance or were born into it.

Unfortunately there's no other way really of getting round this other than fighting them and this guy at least is doing it right, sue them into oblivion, because the police sure as hell aren't getting involved.

I honestly think that one of the reasons that the police don't interfere with these university cases isn't because of the universities' autonomy it's because they know who is there. The reason I bring this particular problem up is because I'm reminded of that Oxford medical student who stabbed her tinder date, rich family, lots of connections and I bet you the police won't have wanted anything to do with it.

[–]ThirdTurnip 4 points5 points6 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yes, universities have a lot of power. They can slip people into degrees or deny them access.

[–]singerandascholar 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Then shame on the communities that allows them to do it. The administrators of schools who choose to take this upon themselves should be tried for obstruction of justice.

Sure - our legal system may not be fantastic, but that does not mean it does not apply.

[–]M60P 3 points4 points5 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Its called feminism

[–]mwobuddy 5 points6 points7 points 8 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

Our legal system figured this out already. It’s called bail if the person isn’t a risk of leaving / harming anyone.

Except bail is normally too high for the average person to afford, and they must take on debt to get it. The justice system is for the wealthy.

[–]singerandascholar 7 points8 points9 points 8 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

If bail was not high there would be no incentive to return to court. That is why it is good to be high. Then you are not having to waste tax payer dollars hunting individuals down. They are in debt to a bondsman who has a vested interest in your return and will do what he can to ensure you do / keep tabs on you.

[–]mwobuddy -2 points-1 points0 points 8 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

If bail was not high there would be no incentive to return to court. That is why it is good to be high. Then you are not having to waste tax payer dollars hunting individuals down.

that makes no sense.

[–]singerandascholar 4 points5 points6 points 8 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

How not? If I commit a crime and bail is only $100, why would I not skip town and make you come looking for me?

That would require state resources to find me? Correct?

On the other hand - if I have to go take out a loan ... I now have more problems. If I want to skip town not only will the state be looking for me, so will the bondsman and collections agencies ...

[–]mwobuddy -2 points-1 points0 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

On the other hand - if I have to go take out a loan ... I now have more problems. If I want to skip town not only will the state be looking for me, so will the bondsman and collections agencies ...

I know which ones im not scared of.

How not? If I commit a crime and bail is only $100, why would I not skip town and make you come looking for me?

if I can murder and be wealthy enough to pay 500,000 bail and then skip town, exactly what incentive is there to come back?

[–]singerandascholar 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

In that case you would have no incentive, but we are talking about incentivizing the average citizen, to whom 500,000 would require a loan.

It is not a matter of if you are scared of them. It is a matter of ease of identification. Why spend state resources when the bondsman is equally motivated to trace your financial past and get his money back. That will lead the state right to you.

[–]mwobuddy 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

You're suggesting that finding someone so you can get tem put in prison will get your money back?

[–]Sour_Badger 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Money is a big advantage in the legal system no doubt, but the little guy wins a lot even vs absurdly rich people so its not a system "for the rich"

[–][deleted] 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]Sour_Badger 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

lol that's the example you hold up? The original reality TV show?

[–][deleted] 176 points177 points178 points 8 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

I love how the female's name always stays anon though. #equality

[+]tearsofsadness -107 points-106 points-105 points 8 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

The victims name. It isn’t written that only females stay anonymous.

[–]mpsunshine37 48 points49 points50 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

But when women accuse men their names are plastered everywhere.

[–]scyth3s 129 points130 points131 points 8 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

*accuser

[–]quesakitty 7 points8 points9 points 8 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Technically, u/tearsofsadness is correct. The states in which this law is prevalent refer specifically to victim’s anonymity, not the accuser’s.

[–]scyth3s 10 points11 points12 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

You missed the whole point of what I said. That's understandable given that it was only one word.

An accuser is not necessarily a victim, but they are given anonymity all the same. The law may say"victim, but it means" accuser.

[+]tearsofsadness -15 points-14 points-13 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

They don’t want to listen.

[–]TheAngryBird03 3 points4 points5 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The sub is about discussion which hopefully changes people’s minds in a direction which is equal for all. If individuals don’t listen then they don’t listen but you can’t tar everyone with the same brush

[–]LewixAri 19 points20 points21 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

In this situation she isn't a victim. The victim is the guy who's life could ae been ruined by a lying cunt scum ae the Earth piece of dugshit. Pure cunto she is.

[–][deleted] 16 points17 points18 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

a friend of mine was accused orlf rape so far that it went to court once cross examined, she confessed she made it up, however, any time I told someone what school I had gone to or what part of the city I was from, they would always ask if I knew that rapist "____"...he couldn't shake that moniker. ..kinda ruined him...and what did she get...nothing!

[–]seank3 7 points8 points9 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

This is where the system is broken. If an accuser is making things up to the point it goes to court and they confess that it was all one big lie, they should be given a prison sentence for wasting courts and police time and ruining someone’s life with false accusations.

Maybe then folk wouldn’t be so quick to jump on the rape train to the courts just to get one up on that person you slept with once, but they changed their mind a week later and show the rape card.

[–]TheMasterChiefs 57 points58 points59 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

This is one disturbing theme that's going on right now, which is this idea of guilty until proven innocent instead of visa versa. Especially when a female comes forth to accuse a male, we somehow have a bias against the male. A false impression that if a female complains about sexual assault, it must be true. It's such a fucked up notion.

[–]I_might_be_weasel 12 points13 points14 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

What is the basis for this not to go to the actual police in the town? Why does a University have any judicial or law enforcement authority over anything?

[–]dukunt 124 points125 points126 points 8 years ago* (6 children) | Copy Link

The entire university system is a mess right now. You're guilty until proven innocent but the catch is that your not allowed to defend youself either. So you're fucked any way you slice. But you're innocent you say? You obviously didnt read your university statutes. I'll paraphrase, the first statute says men are guilty of all accusations of sexual misconduct. But you didnt do it? Please refer to the second statute, accused men are not allowed to defend themselves against a sexual alligation. Too traumatizing to the women-folk. What's that? Being labelled a rapist is also traumatizing you say? You should have thought of that when you decided to be born male.

[–]ThirdTurnip 29 points30 points31 points 8 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Gay? No sexuality "isn't necessarily static". Gay men can lust after women!

You've complained about her and other female students being too friendly and were told to put up with it. Not relevant.

She explicitly threatened you via email for refusing to date her and made good on that threat with a transparently malicious complaint of sexual harassment? Not relevant.

She confessed in writing to her complaint being false the moment the university told her you're gay? We're not looking at that.

etc. etc. etc.

[–]HotDealsInTexas 13 points14 points15 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Wasn't that one an actual case where a female student accused a male student of rape, and it turned out he was gay and had rejected her? I swear I saw a news article about that a while ago.

[–]BulbasaurusThe7th 4 points5 points6 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I remember a case where the girl accused some dude of rape, then even got her gay male friend to say the guy tried raping him too. Them gay best friends are useful for your bog standard feminist, eh?

[–]ThirdTurnip 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

That one was me.

From memory there was only one extremely brief article buried towards the back of a newspaper with almost no details of the case, not even about me being gay.

This woman was stalking and sexually harassing me and she was caught red handed at both, eg. she was found to have been snooping in my government files while working for them. At one point she also faked a series and death rape threat emails which the police ISP traced back to her as the originator.

She confessed to faking them but continued to present them to courts as "evidence" and real, and the police didn't charged her with anything - even though I later learned she was at the time on probation for attempting to strangle her ex-boyfriend. And she had threatened my life, by writing a bizarre suicide note pretending to be me, forging my signature on it and giving it to my boss.

[–]desderon 30 points31 points32 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

And this all comes from Obama threatening to remove federal funding from colleges that did not comply with the "men are guilty" feminist agenda.

I still don't understand how he and the people who suggested the policy though it was going to do any good. Maybe I'm just being naive and they did not care at all. Whatever the reason it has been a fucking disgrace.

[–]ThirdTurnip 14 points15 points16 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Maybe in the US but this shit happens in universities in other countries (eg. Australia) without any such threat.

[–]soEezee 11 points12 points13 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I was listening to jjj hack yesterday and they were talking about rape culture in uni.

The main story was “I went out and got so blind they wouldn’t let me in the club so I got a lift home. I don’t remember it, I don’t have proof but I’m sure I was sexually assaulted now I’m mad because the University only sent that person to live off dorm.”
They preceeded to spend the next 15 mins talking about why every woman ever is sexually assaulted and the whole thing is corrupt and not a single mention of men getting sexually assaulted.

Then they went on to talk about banning filming live gigs with your phone.

Man I’m getting sick of their sjw anti men agenda.

[–]sonofsuperman1983 39 points40 points41 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

If feminism was truly about equality this would be on a fem page.

[–]Matt22blaster 22 points23 points24 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

The punishment for false accusations should be equal to the punishment the accused would have received if convicted. This has to be stopped.

[–]nexxdexx 6 points7 points8 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Agreed, it's the only fair course of action.

[–]Bread_Is_Adequate 15 points16 points17 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I honestly believe jail time should be the punishment of a false rape accusation

[–]seank3 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I fucking 100% agree!

[–]nateklly 6 points7 points8 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

People need to start recognizing that accusing someone of rape can RUIN their life's. It can prohibit them being able to get a job and if they have a public reputation, it can complete decimate it until it's essentially nothing

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points9 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Everyone realizes it. But feminists and their male allies on the political left just don't care. In their eyes, men are no more than cattle.

[–]IronJohnMRA 17 points18 points19 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

In July 2016, an OSC panel found Ciaran unanimously responsible for violating sexual misconduct policy because the alleged victim had not verbally consented.

I hope he ruins Duke over this bullshit. They most certainly have ruined him.

[–][deleted] 8 points9 points10 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

This crap is so fucking stupid. I want to know what exactly their process was for determining whether or not she verbally consented at the time because unless they have a time machine handy, I'm calling bullshit. The vast majority of these cases are just he said/she said crap and if that's ALL the evidence you have then drop the case. I'm a very firm believer in the idea that one should rather 10 guilty people go free than one innocent person be punished.

[–]JoseJimeniz 17 points18 points19 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

But now a judge has ruled that the university in Durham, North Carolina, had not acted properly in the case.

...what is a university doing acting at all?

Their job is to arrange a professor and a classroom.

After that: i'm an adult. If i was assaulted i go to the police.

[–]theothermod[M] [score hidden] 8 years ago stickied comment (24 children) | Copy Link

Hello and welcome to /r/MensRights. If you are not a subscriber, please take a moment to understand what you are seeing.

This subreddit is about the issues faced by men in our society.

We welcome healthy debate and you won't be banned merely for disagreement. It is common here to reject feminist ideology, but that doesn't mean we hate women or oppose equal rights. Rather, we seek to expand those equal rights to include men.

These are some of the best discussions we've had. There is also a documentary made by a feminist who investigated our movement. If you want to know more about the issues we are concerned with, try these books: The War Against Boys by Christina Hoff Sommers or The Myth of Male Power by Warren Farrell.

Thank you for being open minded.

[–]f__ckyourhappiness 6 points7 points8 points 8 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

Rather, we seek to expand those equal rights to include men.

If you have to "expand" equal rights to make them equal, they weren't equal to begin with.

[–]TheAngryBird03 9 points10 points11 points 8 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

I agree with this and this is why I’m against feminism. I am for equal rights in all areas and some of the systems we have really aren’t equal.

In the Uk we have a minister (politician) in the cabinet (like presidents advisors) dedicated solely to women and lgbt groups issues. This minister doesn’t include men’s issues and there isn’t another minister who does. This is at the top of uk government.

[–]f__ckyourhappiness 9 points10 points11 points 8 years ago* (6 children) | Copy Link

Humanitarianism (True equal rights) is not Feminism (Women's Rights). Every time I explain this to "suffragists" they retort with, "No, but we've REDEFINED Feminism. Now EVERYONE is included.".

To which I respond, " No, it's Humanitarianism and always has been. Including more groups in your own simply bolsters the support behind your agenda, it does not, in any way, change the meaning of what you're championing. Feminism is ONLY about women's rights, while Humanitarianism is about EQUAL RIGHTS. Stop hiding behind a term that makes you feel like women are doing all of this for EVERYONE thereby indebting everyone to your gender (in the view of a Feminist), and redefine yourself as what you profess to be, Humanitarian.".

At this point they usually call me racist white-male misogynist cis-scum and retreat to their echo chamber.

Edit: Tl;Dr: You cannot reason with a Feminist that doesn't understand their views are already attributed to Humanitarianism, because they refuse to let go of their entitlement/grandiose sense of self.

[+]redditproha -7 points-6 points-5 points 8 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Feminism by definition means equal rights.

[–]theothermod 6 points7 points8 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The difference between what a movement calls itself and what it actually does is immense.

If feminism is equal rights, then men's rights activists are feminists - and most people who call themselves feminists are not.

[–]morerokk 3 points4 points5 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

By definition, yes.

In practice, no.

[–]f__ckyourhappiness 5 points6 points7 points 8 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

Are you actually retarded, or simply unable to read? It even says ON YOUR LINK "organized activity on behalf of women's rights and interests".

Fuck off with your misinformation, here's the actual definitions:

Feminism

noun

fem·i·nism

ˈfeməˌnizəm/

the advocacy of women's rights on the basis of the equality of the sexes. 

synonyms: the women's movement, the feminist movement, women's liberation, female emancipation, women's rights; informalwomen's lib

"a longtime advocate of feminism"

Humanitarianism

noun

hu·man·i·tar·i·an·ism

(h)yo͞oˌmanəˈterēənizəm/

the promotion of human welfare. 

"a contribution made in the spirit of humanitarianism"

.

Which one advocates for equal rights for all HUMANS, and which is self-aggrandizing pandering to the female empowerment/misogynist movement?

[–]redditproha -2 points-1 points0 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Just because you can copy/paste doesn't make you right. I can copy/paste too.

Also, there's no need for insults. You actually ignored selections from my link and selectively pasted what fit your your bullshit argument; so in fact, you can't read. Here's the actual definition:

Feminism

noun

fem·i·nism

ˈfeməˌnizəm/

1 : the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes

2 : organized activity on behalf of women's rights and interests

Humanitarianism has absolutely nothing to do with equality, it says so in your definition lol.

Humanitarianism has to do with the advancement of human wellbeing, hence why humanitarian organizations are named so.

nice try lol

[–]f__ckyourhappiness 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

You can't actually exercise your brain with mental gymnastics.

Humanitarian = Human rights across the board.

If Feminism is social equality of the sexes, then so is Men's Rights. Why not be a Men's Rights activist then? Why are you so hung up on MAKING SURE that people know you're a feminist, instead of a human rights activist?

God damn man...

[+]redditproha -10 points-9 points-8 points 8 years ago* (7 children) | Copy Link

I don't think you understand feminism. Feminism is equal rights. That is the definition.

[–][deleted] 8 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]theothermod 7 points8 points9 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

The difference between what a movement calls itself and what it actually does is immense.

If feminism is equal rights, then men's rights activists are feminists - and most people who call themselves feminists are not.

[–]redditproha -1 points0 points1 point 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

That's true. But we were strictly talking definitions. The asshole I replied to is just trying to fool people with his fancy formatting skills.

Feminism is equal rights for all, by definition. The movement might have morphed into something else but that doesn't change the definition.

Similar to your analogy, men's rights is just about misogyny if this sub is any indication.

[–]theothermod 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

And feminism is just about misandry if judged by its actions.

[–]TheAngryBird03 3 points4 points5 points 8 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

Number 2 in your definition is my exact reason why I’m against feminism.

Feminism is about the cause of women’s rights above all others. The aim is to create equality but by prioritising women over all other groups the aim will never be achieved.

I am for equal rights for all people regardless of gender, race etc. This means I wish to advocate for all sexes, not just men, not just women etc. I feel that advocating for one group above all other is wrong and this is what feminism does, this is why I’m against feminism.

I am equally against men’s rights is its sole aim is to advocate only for men. Fortunately what I see with most men’s rights is the want to gain an equal footing then nothing more. Feminism wants to gain an equal footing then go further and establish advantage.

[–]Aivias 3 points4 points5 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Find me five articles from mainstream media resources that make demands for more women in refuse collection. Or fishing.

Ill wait.

[–]DepressiveVortex -5 points-4 points-3 points 8 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

This spiel is downright disagreeable.. I see it as nothing but a plea to the insane. Please stop using it.

[–]theothermod 3 points4 points5 points 8 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Why is it disagreeable? In what way is it "a plea to the insane"?

Can you suggest any changes or improvements?

[–]DepressiveVortex 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

It goes out of its way to appeal to the worst that is seen here- feminists. We don't like feminists, we both know that. Appealing to their ideology does nothing good, we should be appealing to a sense of logic and reasoning... The message sounds nice, yes, but the time for being nice, and appealing to feminists, is long past. I really don't think it's useful.

[–]theothermod 4 points5 points6 points 8 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

I'm sorry, but I can't agree with you on this point.

The text is a standard introduction intended for posting if a thread gets to r/all. When this happens, we are visited by thousands of people who have never been exposed to men's rights, or who have only heard smears about us.

Such occasions are important opportunities to state our positions directly to an audience that contains many who would be willing to listen.

Bringing our message to potentially open minds is more important than maintaining an inflexible position of ideological purity.

[–]DepressiveVortex 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

I can understand that viewpoint, but is is still pandering. This sub has its purpose, and it shouldn't be pandering to other people who will never like us anyway. That is why.

[–]theothermod 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I consider it education rather than pandering, but we'll just have to disagree.

[–]DepressiveVortex 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I appreciate you having replied to me so long. We might disagree, but I think our go's are the same. I only want to help people. Thank you for replying.

[–]Obwalden 3 points4 points5 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Either both the person who is being accused and the one who is pointing their finger should be named or neither.

[–]Phiau 3 points4 points5 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Article blocked by Google survey

[–]loveisdead9582 3 points4 points5 points 8 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link

Agreed. Not to discount the actual guilty parties, but there have been multiple lives ruined by false accusations of rape - enough to warrant some sort of protection until proven guilty.

I feel like there should be some sort of protocol where if both parties share classes or dorms, they are moved to a new schedule where they don’t interact. They should be instructed to avoid one another - ala restraining order - until the court case goes through. The knowledge that until it goes through in court, the accused party would still be allowed to maintain a position in the school may deter some false accusations.

I’ve seen one too many stories about college athletes losing their scholarships and educations because of false accusations. If the claims are valid, absolutely prosecute the asshole to the fullest extent of the law. But the view that any girl can claim rape and the accused is instantly vilified needs to be stopped. Unless there is video evidence, no one should lose out on their future.

[–]nateklly 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

I agree with everything except what you said in your last paragraph, when you talked about video evidence. I do not think a rape claim can be pursued if the victim does not have any evidence. Video evidence probably won't be available in most instances, so I would turn to DNA analysis or something else. I know only something like only 2% of crimes are solved using DNA but we should do as best we can.

Don't get me wrong, I still think evidence is ALWAYS nessisary (I can never spell that word sorry) for anyone to be ever proved guilty no matter what. That is the basis of a fair justice system, and rape should be treated the same

[–]loveisdead9582 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

Like you said, video evidence won’t be available in most instances. If there is video evidence that is supported by dna testing then it should be easy to conclude.

I just don’t know how else to approach the situation. I don’t ever want to call anyone of any gender a liar when they say they’ve been sexually harassed/assaulted, but unless there’s concrete evidence, our law system dictates “innocent until proven guilty”.

[–]nateklly 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yea everything is obviously x100 easier when video evidence is present, it doesn't matter what the crime is. But a mix of everything is probably the best

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

throw the ho in jail.

[–]Teal_Kitten 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Its never sat well with me how so many other women are so blazè about accusing someone of something so serious. But considering how the justice system works around cases like these im almost not surprised women use this loophole as a tool to get their way

[–]game_r14 points 8 years ago [recovered] (6 children) | Copy Link

Universities should stop suspending students even if they are guilty. After someone's prison sentence ends I don't see why they should be banned from access to education. What's the point of ever getting out of prison if you become a social outcast forever?

[–]sixtynineningbeavers 3 points4 points5 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Some universities expel

[–][deleted] 11 points12 points13 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

These “rapists” aren’t getting prison sentences bc there’s no evidence they did anything. Liberal colleges pander to every bullshit ideology you can imagine, this included.

[–]willmaster123 4 points5 points6 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

...seriously? I wouldn't accept a fucking rapist back into the college to live with other students. I can't believe this is even being suggested rn. Of course they are going to expel the student.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yep expelling any male accused 9th sexual misconduct could never be abused.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

When you try to write a title, but you hate education...

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

As I was scrolling down All, I saw this headline and had a thought.

Should a workplace be able to fire/suspend a person who is accused of sexual misconduct before being convicted in a court?

That is, suppose your co-worker says: jack grabbed my pussy. Should the company not do anything until the police come and arrest him? If jack is ultimately not convicted, should jack keep his job?

Suppose your co-worker threatens to quit unless the alleged pussy grabber is fired.. and the PG is a mail room employee and the co-worker is the financial controller... should the company lose their controller because the courts didn’t do anything?

Is the differences because a university is a public institution? Would USC (a private college) get a pass on this?

[–]tonyh322 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

And they should be able to face their accuser. Basically they should get the same due process we all do. No matter what you think of Betsy DeVos, if she successfully gets rid of kangaroo courts then in my eyes she will be the best Secretary of Education in this country's history.

[–]exhustedmommy 8 points9 points10 points 8 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

I absolutely agree. Sadly there are many girls who cry rape when a guy dumps them, won't sleep with them, or won't date them, and in the case of my husband (this happened in highschool) when they don't want to get caught cheating so they tell their SO they were raped. It is despicable. I also believe that woman who falsely accuse men of this should be punished severely as these types of allegations can 100% ruin someone's life. I have 3 children, a girl and 2 boys. I am not in any way worried about my daughter when she gets older as she will be taught to defend herself, but I am scared to death for my sons. I am scared they will meet some crazy bitch and she will cry rape just to get them in trouble. No one should lose a job, or a place in school due to an allegation, it is supposed to be innocent till proven guilty right?

[–]nateklly 7 points8 points9 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

That's what I thought too... I loved your point about fake rape allegations should be punished. As you said, allegations of rape can completely destroy someone's LIFE. This is not something to joke about. Rapists should be put in jail, as well as people who falsely claim an instance of rape.

[–]exhustedmommy 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yep absolutely. I feel like you should have just as harsh of a sentence for falsely claiming rape as you do for committing rape.

[–]IronJohnMRA 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I am scared they will meet some crazy bitch and she will cry rape just to get them in trouble.

I am actually glad to hear this. As a mother you are way ahead of the pack. Most women would never even acknowledge this reality, even if it meant protecting their sons, as it would also mean that they were siding against other women as well. If you want to make a difference here, start talking to other mothers of sons about this issue.

[–]exhustedmommy 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Oh I do. I have expressed this concern with all of my mother friends and they absolutely agree with me. I don't care about being sided with other woman, I care about the safety of my children and others children and I will support what is right regardless of if I piss off some feminist. No one's life should be ruined over some girl trying to get revenge. When I lost my virginity my mother tried to convince me that my boyfriend raped me, he didn't nor would he have ever. She tried to get me to go to the cops, I refused even though she yelled, and screamed and grounded me for a month (I was 14). I wasn't going to let my boyfriend suffer his whole life for a straight up lie just so I wouldn't be grounded. Sadly I feel like there are a lot of parents like this and that is not ok.

[–]--Edog-- 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link

I thought Betsy Devos was overturning all this? Also - if a guy is a rapist he should be going to jail, not just getting kicked out of a school.

[–]ThirdTurnip 4 points5 points6 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I'm not completely across this but I think I read that she has instructed universities to stop doing stuff like this, but some are openly disobeying.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

She revoked the guidance, but had not issued any new guidance.

[–]Housethrowaway123xyz 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Why don't colleges pass the allegations off to the police? In this case, the police wouldn't have prosecuted due to lack of evidence

[–]Uneeda_Biscuit 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Sounds like BYU

[–]50PercentLies 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I'm always torn on this. I want to bring publicity to the cases so that Universities get the fucking message, but also don't want to bring any unnecessary heat down on these guys.

[–]colenotphil3 points 8 years ago* [recovered] (3 children) | Copy Link

While I 100% agree that everyone should be innocent until proven guilty, and there is some merit to the argument being made here, the source (Daily Record) is a Scottish tabloid. Not exactly hard-hitting unbiased news. I feel that detracts vastly from the point here.

[–]TheAfterman89 3 points4 points5 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I agree about the Record, horrible newspaper.

The fact they mention he's a "celtic starlet" is all for the clicks and views as they know any sort of story with Celtic or Rangers in will get them views.

Back on topic though i completely agree. All parties should be kept anonymous until there's an official verdict.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Aye they just use the old firm to try and make them feel more important.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Or - just keep universities out of the criminal investigation business. Most universities have police departments. Let the trained professionals handle criminal investigations. Not some title IX rep who wouldn’t know impartiality if it bit them in the ass.

[–]McFeely_Smackup 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

While I hate to be in the position of defending these Title IX Star Chamber Tribunals, the schools were placed in a VERY shitty situation by the Obama era "Dear Colleague" policy letter.

The Schools are legally required to provide a harassment free environment for students...well, to be honest, it only seems to care about female students. Male students are as free as ever to be harassed.

So what is the school supposed to do when a student accuses another of rape? a criminal investigation and trial could take literally years, during which time presumably the accused and accuser will still be in the same education and social circles...creating a hostile enviroment for at least one of them.

If they do nothing but say " let the police handle it" then they have failed the "Dear Colleague" mandate. If they take action, they violate legal due process (in practice, if not in theory).

So there seems to be two options. Trump needs to rescind the Dear Colleague instructions and issue new, fair guidelines for recognizing the rights of accused persons, OR take a hard line and say schools will not be involved in disciplining students for criminal actions until the legal process is complete...which means accusers are going to have to be told to suck it up and sit in class next to the person they've accused.

There's no easy answer here, the problem is what they're doing right now is literally worse than doing nothing at all.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

How do you even prove it “several months later”? It becomes a ‘he said, she said’ situation.

[–]ExclusiveTrademark 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Prove what? The rape or that it was a false accusation?

[+][deleted] -6 points-5 points-4 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

They never release their names, that's illegal. Only if a legal conviction occurs do they have their name as public record. I work in this field, I would know. Also they are not suspended. They actually just can't attend class to prevent retaliation on either side but have their classes online, meal plan still active and have a place to live.

[+]mrducci -10 points-9 points-8 points 8 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

I don't agree with the post statement entirely. I think these situations need to be mediated like a workplace dispute. If there is an accusation, nothing goes public, there is no press, you are instructed to not speak to anyone about it. However, both parties are removed from their position until after the investigation. The removal is important, because in the event that there is an assault; man on woman, woman on man, man on man or woman in woman (omitting trans tags for efficiency, not spite) they victim could be continually victimized by the presence of their attacker. Another thing that I would like to see from this sub is absolute outrage and denouncement when an attack or assault does occur. The protection of good men only means something when bad actor are cut from the ranks.

[–]dgriffith 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

In a university situation where both parties are actively learning and have a deadline for exams and etc, you cannot simply just remove them from their "positions". As students this causes both of them - innocent or not - material harm. You miss classes, exams, courses, careers and further opportunities are delayed, and so on.

Edit : run on sentence

[–]mrducci -2 points-1 points0 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Right...not expelling them. But they can be instructed to not attend lectures. Profs can be informed and instructed accordingly. It isn't impossible, unless you have blinders on. This shouldn't be a men's rights issue or a women's rights issue. It should be a get it right issue.

[–]dgriffith 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Then you leave the university open to a suit for damages because they're not yet guilty of anything yet they're being treated differently in a manner that would very likely affect the education that they're paying for. It sounds easy to implement something along these lines, but it isn't.

[–]SSFW3925 -2 points-1 points0 points 8 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

We all know men will do almost anything to get sex but women will do almost anything to get attention because attention makes them feel safe. This explains almost everything women do, hair, clothes, makeup and walking around half naked most of the time. So just like there are sick men that will rape to get sex there are sick women that will make false accusations to get attention. And it must be fair to believe that there are just as many sick women as there are sick men. Sick men rape and their sick female counterparts make false accusations.

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