For the men claiming this is just "regretted sex" - are you not at all concerned that so many women feel violated and regretful after sleeping with you? It just strikes me as such a sad defense. Maybe the epidemic of regretted sex is one we should be discussing as well.
18
I have served on these Kangaroo courts and am very glad I no longer do. I did not have to serve on a serious sexual assault case - mostly plagiarism and bongs in dorm rooms stuff. Never felt comfortable doing it except in the cases of plagiarism and honor code violations. The dirty little secret is that the University does not want it publicized that sexual assault takes place on their campus. It affects their reputation. It is my belief that universities are risk averse and will do everything they can to avoid publicity regarding bad things happening on campus whether they are sexual assault, suicide, drug abuse, racist incidents, etc. I am very confident most Universities will do whatever they can to avoid this publicity and 'Kangaroo courts' have much more control over information than does a legitimate public trial. Alcohol is a major player in many of these situations and serious charges around these often cloudy situations requires a legitimate legal system - not a professor, a student, and a staff member making a determination in a kangaroo court.
26
Let's take this seriously and let the "town" police handle it. Campus cops are good for directing traffic at football games and professors and admin can deal with plagiarism or putting the Delta house on double secret probation but sexual assault or other serious crimes need real investigators.
Universities have vested interest in dealing with things "in house".
19
Common sense. But uncommon. Of late a mere accusation is enough to trample someone's life long reputation with assumption of guilt and smearing their name all over newspapers. Whether NFL or hollywood or the students while seemingly different cases boil down to assumption of guilt by simple accusation without any due process to the accused. The Columbia case where the girl carried the mattress around campus to tear down a guy already proved innocent by the university is one that comes first to mind. This is brazen witch hunt like one columnist in NYT wrote only in this case the witch is only accuses and is not even tried or even a preponderance of evidence.
The issue is real for all men.Due process is long due.
12
What Sommers is saying seems simple common sense - accountability and responsibility goes both ways, all parties have equal due process rights and the sad fact that latter day feminism has morphed into an orgy of hatred against the white heterosexual man.
In retrospect, it seems clear that Obama and his administration capitulated to these identity interests, with consequences that we are paying for now, every day.
13
Why the presumption of innocence, the requirement that guilt be proven, or due process should be suspended for any alleged crime committed at any venue which falls under the rightful jurisdiction of the U.S. Constitution and its’ Bill of Rights is beyond me.
11
As it turns out, this article is valuable, but not in the way Hoff Sommers intends.
Women, know that drinking is very risky. You could become dependent on others to take care of you, and you cannot trust that they will. You might be blamed for whatever happens to you even if the law is on your side. You cannot assume that other women will support you. They may or they may not.
"Victim" is still a jeering term and a sneer. The victim is stripped of inherent dignity, and at best, can count on being pitied or shunned. If this is the social reality that many around you are creating, you do need to know it. This reality has nothing to do with "equity." It is the opposite if equity.
11
Men are also victims of assault and rape yet no one is ever telling them to lay off the booze. It's insulting and stupid. I appreciate that you are giving women a warning that the system is unfair, but mostly, women already know it.
9
I think this whole discussion seems to miss an important point. Are young women on campus more vulnerable than women the same age in the rest of the world. I don't think so. So why are we focused on protecting college women?
The answer of course is that these are children of privilege. Their parents are powerful and they expect their children, male and female, to be protected. The idea that a college would simply tell as student to call the police and have one of their male students picked up for rape is not acceptable. This gives college women another recourse. But calling the police is really the only recourse if the woman is not a college student. What these rules actually do is protect college men from criminal charges and throw predatory rapists out into the community to find less protected victims.
31
"I think [administrative tribunals] lack the training and resources to investigate and adjudicate felonies."
They don't investigate and adjudicate felonies. They're not allowed to. They investigate and adjudicate violations of the institution's sexual misconduct policies. Sexual misconduct covers a range of behaviors, up to and including sexual violence.
Schools must investigate reported sexual violence to determine if the incident compromised the victim's ability to benefit from the school's program or poses a threat to other students'.
The author perpetuates a common misunderstanding of the role of campus adjudication of sexual violence under Title IX. It undermines her other arguments as well.
11
Sexual violence is a felony, not a campus infraction. It is a matter for law enforcement and legal prosecution, not "suspension" by college drones. Period. Anyone who has lived through the real thing knows that.
20
Puffin is right and this is a critical point. Colleges do not adjudicate felonies, they investigate conduct violations. Well said! Colorado - sexual violence can be both a felony and a conduct violation. There is nothing inconsistent about this. For example, attempted or completed sexual assault in your workplace is considered workplace sexual harassment under Title VII (take the case of Harvey Weinstein). It is also a felony. You may not agree with the logic of this, but it is in fact the law.
8
Beyond the ridiculousness of assuming that women in this day and age would go through the difficult process of reporting rape due to "regretted sex", there is a very simple solution for men afraid of being "victimized" by wrathful ex-lovers: only have sex with people whom you know, trust, and respect, and who you know really want to do it with you.
Considering that sex can result in potentially life-changing consequences like STDs or pregnancy, and that the greater consequence falls on the female, is that really too much to ask? Or do young men these days feel such an entitlement for casual sex these days that any kind of barrier feels like oppression?
30
Naive statement. Look into these matters and you will see people in relationships ripped apart by kangaroo courts wherein the supposed female victim neither wanted to press charged nor claimed there was any crime committed. Not kidding. Never take this kind of power to be judge and executioner lighter. Bad things will follow.
6
@rb: 'Beyond the ridiculousness of assuming that women in this day and age would go through the difficult process of reporting rape due to "regretted sex"'
You completely miss the point. There are plenty of cases out there where force or threats were DEFINITELY not an issue and both parties were intoxicated at some level. Title IX has created a monster and most people can recognize the injustice and irony of feminists pleading for special rights for women.
10
Kind of the like the way you assume men in this day and age would actually rape any women. Why would they even go through the difficult process of defending thems Or proving their innocence or trying to present exculpatory evidence or suing the colleges for putting them in kangaroo courts? Look I have heard and spoken to your kind a lot. People who fall on this notion that “false rape accusations must be rare because why would any woman want to put herself through all that?” By that logic I could say “why would any man rape a woman in this day and age, afterall a simple accusation can irrevocably destroy his life, reputation, career, education and friendships and that is even if he is found not guilty nor ever convicted.” You seem to assume that women are more rational beings than men which creates your fallacy that I am calling out.
7
Wow! Someone from Trump World actually making sense. I agree with Hoff Sommers!
14
CHS is no fan of Trump. Her politics appear to be left-central with a big dollop of classic liberalism.
11
I was wondering how long the backlash would take! We couldn’t possibly allow the spigot to remain open and the torrent of women’s voices to continue (certainly not in a culture that constantly silences them or calls them liars).I’m truly surprised it took this long for some media outlet to drag out the tired old arguments of Christina Hoff Sommers, - so beloved by conservatives (and“men’s rights”groups) in the 80s.I just thought Breitbart would be the one to dredge up her ridiculous arguments.Is an interview with Katie Rophie next?
At the very least, the NYTs may have made note of the fact that Sommers has been on her crusade against feminism for 30 years, her work being excoriated by actual feminist scholars. Both Sommers and Rophie became media darlings by promoting the nonsensical idea of “victim feminism” that speaks directly to conservative male paranoia. But these attractive, white, educated women opposing feminist ideas and principles proved too irresistible for the media to ignore (legitimate feminist scholarship, as it turns out, is quite easy to ignore). Sommers and Rophie built entire careers from the publicity they garnered being known as “women brave enough to stand up to the ideas of these feminazis”-their actual work bearing no resemblance to real scholarship or research. Can we PLEASE not give Sommers and her ilk another platform to spout this garbage? If the NYTs wouldn’t waste space interviewing climate change deniers why give space to the rape-deniers?
23
Due process and the rights of the accused can co-exist just fine. Lady Justice holds a balance, not a sledge hammer.
12
Your equation of anyone who disagrees with women's groups as tantamount to silencing women's voices and being rape-deniers, is exactly the kind of feminine fragility that Sommers is railing against. No one ever purports someone who disagrees with a man is actually harboring a subversive agenda to silence them.
Just because you're advocating women's issues does not grant your position immunity from criticism in the public discourse. It seems to me that too many women's advocates would rather label all of their opponents rapists/sexists rather than engage in an honest discourse.
24
Clearly Ms Sommers has never been part of higher ed in a technical field nor ever spoken to a group of female graduate students in a hard science. I suggest that she read through coverage in Chemical and Engineering News. https://cen.acs.org/articles/95/i37/Confronting-sexual-harassment-chemis...
It took me days of looking at this on my desk before I had the courage to pick it up. My fear being that it would bring back old memories best forgotten. Appearing with a black eye in the Dean's office, I was sat down and told I could choose between a law suit or a PhD. He then pulled out the lower drawer of his desk and offered me a Scotch.
22
unfortunately your anecdote about your visit with the Dean doesn't really help deal with the complexity of this issue
9
This anecdote certainly does help us to deal with the complexity of the issue by raising the very real question of how common these attitudes are, and how many others have been treated in a similar way.
This is precisely the question raised by Harvey Weinstein's first accused. Was she the only one?
15
Sommers has guts to go against the party line. Feminism in 2017 can be brutal and does not stand for criticism...of itself or women.
19
Common sense in this period of hot-house politics appears as intelligent as it is rare.
15
They're teens; children, really. Many are away from home for the first time. Like all children, they sometimes do stupid things: drink too much, trust the wrong people, fall stupidly in love. This was me 50 years ago. I was in love. We both got very drunk and had sex. She was very angry in the morning. That was not her intention. Still, we were lovers for a few months before it fell apart. We were both too immature to maintain a relationship. It broke my heart.
Please, please, please do not confuse this scenario with the exploitation of youngsters (both male and female) by campus predators (student and faculty) who hunt campuses for easy prey. Rape is a crime. School administrators (and student tribunals) are not competent to investigate, much less adjudicate crime. Crime must be reported to competent authorities, in most cases to the local police.
13
The fact that you thing the police do anything in the majority of these situations just shows how uninformed you are. Go read Jon Krakauer's "Missoula" to see how the police silenced the victims, even when they knew the men accused had been reported multiple times.
9
"Go read Jon Krakauer's "Missoula" to see how the police silenced the victims, even when they knew the men accused had been reported multiple times."
So the idea is to protect college women from that treatment while leaving non-college women to their own devices? And turn the predatory rapists loose on them with no warning? This isn't a "war on boys" or college men, its a war on the rest of the community. Its allowing privileged college women to abandon their responsibility to protect the larger community.
4
Hoff Sommers also says something that may be misleading. "An equity feminist (the good kind, apparently) does not assume every act under the influence is rape," or some such.
I hope that everyone is teaching adolescents and young adults that if someone is so impaired that they are falling into unconsciousness or unaware of their surroundings, they cannot consent. Of course this applies to both men and women: inserting something into anyone's body when they cannot consent is an assault.
Of course no one should ever get this drunk, not even one time. It means they will have to depend on others for their well being. This article and a lot of these comments should tell you how safe that is.
7
Insert into someone’s body...
What about being forced to insert. I had a drunken experience in which I awoke to find that I been inserted into a drunk female without my consent. Not really pleasant for me, but based on the common understanding of being too intoxicated to consent to penetration the drunk female rapist was actually the victim and I the perpetrator. Nobody came to me to tell me I was a victim and I was smart enough to not bring it up.
Now, if that girl decided the next day that this was something she didn’t want to do I could easily have been charged with raping my rapist.
9
"Of course this applies to both men and women: inserting something into anyone's body when they cannot consent is an assault."
Just to clear things up, the current conversation isn't around people unable to move or see, but rather people who are moderately drunk, capable of moving and usually capable of making choices. It's just that those choices are regretted later...which is fine, but calling that rape isn't.
2
While most reasonable people agree with your second paragraph, unfortunately some extremists do not. There are people who argue that any amount of alcohol constitutes an inability to consent to sex.
Everyone agrees that an unconscious individual is incapable of consent. But the nature of drunkenness inevitably leads to grey areas. At what point is one too drunk? What if one appears to give consent, but is in a blackout? What about individuals who are very drunk but are not displaying typical drunken behaviour?
Unlike drunk driving, in which a legal limit has been set, there isn't an agreed-upon moment in which one loses the ability to consent. And this has left victims, police, juries, and universities each using their own.
6
Thank goodness and C.H. Sommers for good some common sense in the pages of the NYT.
24
Most of what Hoff Sommers says is misleading concerning the law, and as another person has stated, this aspect of her remarks should have been corrected by the NYT.
One should not support of very poor critique of an admitted problem, just because one (thinks one) is on "the same side."
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/30/health/men-rape-sexual-assault.html
According to this article, although serial rape is relatively rare, most serial offenders start young, in high school or early college. The Title IX guidelines may need to be scrutinized, but the underlying issues they are trying to deal with are enormous and life-changing, and we know they are not going away.
7
Since when is sex without consent (including when drunk) “regretted sex?” It is rape. If Harvey Weinstein’s actions are considered to be harassment and rape, how can a boy’s abusive behavior on a college campus be considered differently? We are outraged when reading that Harvey Weinstein approached a woman in his bathrobe and asked for a massage. We are not dismissing the woman as “fragile and easily traumatized.” We are finally standing up and saying this is unacceptable. It is not simply bad manners, as Sommers implies. We are not calling the women who have come forward against Weinstein “fainting couch feminists.” We are finally getting to a place where grown women are being believed and are able to speak out about harassment and sexual assault without being dismissed. But on college campuses, Sommers is still blaming the victim and calling rape“regretted sex.” She is turning things around and backwards on young women. People are expressing outrage at the harassment and sexual assault in the workplace. But Devos is taking college campuses in the opposite direction. How can there be such a gulf between what is playing out in the professional business and art worlds and what is going on on college campuses??? DeVos and Sommers are despicable.
24
You're not paying attention to what's actually happening Linda.
Almost none of these situations on colleges are actual rape by the legal definition.
They're drunk people having sex and then it being treated as if that equates to the man committing a crime.
There's no justification for that at all. You could equally say that the woman raped the man if he was drunk. Which they don't.
8
I call foul, Gary. You're not in the room when "these situations," occur, so you have no basis to determine that "almost none," of the situations involve, "actual rape," however you define that. Nor do you have any statistical basis for that assertion. What takes place in these situations for the educational institution or law enforcement, if they're called in, to determine on a case by case basis. Not all institutions, however, handle their obligations adequately. There is room for improvement in that space, but the wholesale condemnation by the Education Dept of solid policy guidelines, not because they are out of bounds, but because they were put in place by Trump's predecessor, is turning the clock back, not because it's right, but because of partisan concerns.
Thus, there's no justification for you to set yourself up as judge and jury and attempt to dismiss the fact: 25% of women are being victimized on US campuses. What we need is colleges and universities holding students who commit acts of sexual violence accountable under their honor codes, a Dept of Education that: 1) acknowledges that the rights of both the accused and accusor were already solidly protected when this Admin. arrived on scene, and, 2) does its job and enforces federal law (Title IX) which protects the civil rights of those being subjected to sexual bias, harassment or violence in K-12 and in higher ed.
6
Just as you said, Linda, case by case basis.
No one is saying that sex without consent isn't rape.
However, as Professor Sommers has pointed out, some *other* cases have been sex with consent at the time but one party forgets or regrets.
And yes, drunk sex can be perfectly consenting. Not necessarily *wise* -- but consent generally isn't subject to a wisdom test.
As for the proportion of women victimized -- according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics (December 2014) it's more like 1 in 40.
5
And people wonder why the western male sperm count is down 50%.......
6
The question is what happens once someone leaves the university/college/school environment. I can tell you. These young women, now feel that any comment expressed in any form of harshness is rude and worth investigation by their corporate HR. Even an answers such as "whatever" said in resignation, gets one called on the carpet. This is the travesty passes now into the entire system. Instead of the rough and tumble of ideas where disagreements are bound to happen and must be fully explored we have cautions which in turn leads to less than true exploration and evaluation of difficult considerations for real fears of reprisals.
13
What is your basis for saying this?
Sexual harassment is dealt with quite seriously in most workplaces. Perhaps you should inform everyone that harassing a coworker can get you fired, and that most employees are at-will, and hence have little real protection against discharge. Nor do the employees of private companies enjoy general First Amendment rights in their workplace.
That is what is what is happening when you leave college.
6
You characterize the guidelines as rules opposed by many men before going on to interview (surprise!) a woman who opposes the guidelines.
Many women oppose the guidelines and many men are for the guidelines as they are currently written.
4
"It’s reasonable to have some kind of procedures, to counsel and be understanding and protective and listen to both sides and work out an arrangement."
This suggestion is given by almost all people who oppose Title IX and the "kangaroo" courts that it is associated with. But what should the replacement arrangement be?
If the alleged rapist and supposed victim are in the same dorm, what should you do? Do you do a coin flip, and move the victim 50% of the time and the accused 50% of the time? Do you say that if the assault likely happened (>50%) the accused moves, and otherwise it's the victim? Do you move neither, and tell them to just deal with it, and ignore the matter entirely? What if they're in the same class?
School tribunals have many flaws including that they lack the ability to subpoena and aren't always fair to the accused (or the victim!), but until a serious alternative is proposed I will support them. I'd rather stop 9 rapists from interacting with their victims even if it means 1 innocent will have to move housing (something that happens to non-rapists based on shortages anyway).
3
For one thing, as you may know in the criminal justice system the strength of the evidence is an important factor in determining bail and other release conditions.
Not to mention that if, say, the complainant and the respondent are in the same residence hall and share a class, perhaps the complainant can change rooms and the respondent can change classes. Or vice versa.
Incidentally, you (just like everyone else) have no way of knowing how many guilty respondents there are for every innocent respondent.
Last but not least, with all due respect you've also made a misleading, bordering on dishonest, comparison. Someone who is denied a class seat or a dorm room based on shortages has not been judged in light of an accusation. Someone who has been forced to move simply because he (or she) was accused, has been.
PS: When one side is the accused, the other side is the accuser -- not the victim. The whole reason we have proceedings is to find out whether any given complainant is in fact a victim.
5
I would love to see the issue of due process debunked more when discussing Title IX. Sommers would have you believe that universities are finding students "guilty of rape." They are not. Title IX entails a disciplinary proceeding, not a criminal one. These are not rape tribunals at all and carry none of the penalties of a criminal matter. Students are not asking for their rapists to go to jail - they are simply asking colleges to protect them from having to go to class with someone who assaulted them.
Sommers takes advantage of this common misconception to make it seem as if campuses are denying due process and trampling on the rights of the accused. It is the exact opposite. The preponderance of evidence standard that she takes issue with is the standard used in ALL discrimination and civil rights claims. I think many would be surprised to learn that the preponderance of evidence was used in the O.J. civil trial because it is the standard for any civil case. To use the criminal standard of proof for a college disciplinary proceeding would mean asking colleges treat Title IX differently from all other discrimination claims. Making it harder for rape survivors to seek justice than any other victim of discrimination - now that would be unfair.
13
"...they are simply asking colleges to protect them from having to go to class with someone who assaulted them."
Do you honestly expect to be taken seriously with a comment like that? Whether criminal or university discipline, the accused deserves due process or the equivalent! There are far too many women who lie about sexual assault for the obama rules to stand. Thank you, Secretary DeVos. Thank you, Christina Hoff Sommers.
9
BW, the comment above agrees that everyone should receive "due process." The issue is what process is due. A criminal standard makes no sense at all, and does not need to be met before a harasser can be fired from a job, for example.
Schools are not jobs, and Title IX does not benefit from a body of law like the one that has developed for Title VII. It may even be true that the tribunals as they exist are unworkable. But the comment by Elizabeth certainly should be taken seriously. She sees through the rhetoric and gives us the real story.
By the way, have we forgotten this article already?
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/30/health/men-rape-sexual-assault.html
3
Yes, the men just get kicked out of college and have their lives ruined. Rather than going to jail and having them ruined. They should be so happy.
13
"Equity Feminism"? Feminism is about equity, period. Such an adjectival modifier for feminism or feminists is redundant or in the case of "fainting couch," antithetical. Nor am I aware of any notion of feminism that encompassed a view of women as infantilized or "fragile and easily traumatized."
Ms Sommers evidently does not understand the concept of feminism, whatever the merit of some of her points.
6
Feminism may have once been about equity, but it is no longer. New wave feminists are now more interested in leveraging intersectionality to destroy Western culture and values.
18
I'm genuinely surprised by the lack of understanding of this issue. Let's first consider two standards that are relatively familiar to everyone because they have existed for a long time and have been adjudicated in thousands of cases for generations. One is the criminal standard for rape, which requires proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, and the other is the EEOC/Title VII standard for ending workplace discrimination, which has to be proved by a preponderance of the evidence. Look, everyone knows that a person can be fired for sexual harassment, and that their job does not have to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt in order to fire them.
To say that the college environment differs from the workplace is certainly true, and that Title IX due process standards need to be scrutinized and reformulated so that everyone is treated fairly, and with some sort of uniformity and predictability, is true as well. If college administrators, faculty, and students have not been doing a good job, and they often haven't, then taking the advice of commentator who uses emotionally-charged jeering words like "fainting couch" and "victim feminism" will not be an improvement.
What happens in the real world to a woman who is assaulted is another story. In the interest of brevity I will simply cite a New York Times article from 1985 on a remarkable study by Barbara F. Reskin, and ask whether much has changed:
http://www.nytimes.com/1985/06/17/style/jurors-in-rape-trials-studied.html
5
Yes. If only the NYT could put some clarifications within these articles about standards of evidence. Readers are being misled on this issue and the NYT has a role in clarifying the facts surrounding Title IX and how college processes differ from criminal ones.
4
Not sure why the Times bothered to print this. The failure to acknowledge facts: 1) that 25% of women are sexually assaulted in college; and 2) that this is where the predator mentality that plagues our workplace gains traction, is what is causing people to fall for both Betsy DeVos' & Stephanie Saul's claims that men are the real victims. Until we take seriously the misogyny that plagues our culture and campuses, we'll waste time giving people like this ink when we should be doing the real work: 1) teaching our kids -- boys and girls alike (esp. grades 9-12), about respecting boundaries and healthy relationships; 2) acknowledging that hand wringing about predatory workplaces, while giving airtime to those who weaken standards for holding predators on campus accountable is internally inconsistent and dooms at the outset our aspirations of solving the sexual harassment/violence problems in either millieu.
12
the 25% "statistic" has been debunked hundreds of times yet people keep mindlessly repeating it. the actual statistic according to the department of justice is 1%.
5
The bigger the lie, the more it's likely to be believed. Where on Earth did you come up with 25% of women on campus are sexually assaulted? Are you thinking of the camps in Calais, perhaps? War-torn Sudan? Hamburg over New Year's Eve 2016?
You do know that 25% or even 20% statistic has been shown time and time again to be bogus. Why would you want women to grow up paranoid and fearful that assault lurks behind every corner? It doesn't - especially on college campuses. The only reason that statistic is bandied about, from what I can see, is that it serves one purpose - to make money for the continuation of the victimization industry.
4
Sigh. I understand that the 25% statistic is inconvenient to your arguments. However unfortunate that may be, the truth of it is borne out both by DOJ research and entirely consistent with campus climate surveys. I replied to Roy, immediately above. When that reply posts, it will contain the data you need to see again ...
4
Great non nonsense approach. Maybe the pendulum is moving back toward more common sense and due process. Women dress code is another issue where a bit of common sense could abate unwanted primitive male interest when "skimpy" dressed.
3
Finally, a reasonable piece on this issue that brings up the very important aspect of what was lacking in recent policies regarding campus sexual assault, etc. - the lack of due process. I despise Betsy Devos, and the Trump administration but demanding a renewed focus on due process is exactly what does need to happen for this particular issue. Summers is right to advocate for a return to equity feminism, and to raise concerns about the expanded definitions of what can be considered "assault" today that are also arguably unreasonably and problematically over broad.
21
I agree with you comment almost in its entirety--I LOVE Secretary DeVos and President Trump!
3
I agree with MM here. De vos and Trump are despicably wrong on most issues, but right on this one.
5
The idea of having a separate judiciary system is frightening in itself. But when, in addition, you consider the multiple cases in which a notorious injustice was committed, you are impelled to reconsider.
Indeed, as I read in the newspapers and hear from acquaintances, it seems that pursuing a love life in the university is becoming a burdensome, if not perilous, choice.
If there is an ongoing sexual revolution, as some suggest, it would be a throwback rather than a latter-day liberation, as the reckless freedom for which young people strove in the 1960s seems to be gradually ebbing. The courts which already attest to the new precepts, though their goal to fight sexual assault is surely honorable, are an ominous symptom.
5
Anyone railing against the content of this piece is brainwashed by the ideology of "fainting couch feminism." Sommers is calling for equality at a time when men are being monolithically other'd as predators and potential rapists. This protectionist attitude towards women does infantilize them. Case in point: a friend of mine has to serve on the tribunals at his college. He is the only man on the "jury." A recent case expelled a male student -- EXPELLED HIM -- for sending text messages declaring his undying love for a girl. The content of these text messages inspire a strong interpretation that he believed himself to be in love with her, in the manner of many romance films wherein a heartsick male pursues a girl and after much cajoling, finally wins her. The male on this jury voted to send the male student to another branch for a semester -- but even that seems harsh to me. It was the women who insisted the student be expelled completely. As if all declarations of interest are roads to rape now. And on this note, while discussing this, a friend told me that she was shocked at how a college-age relative defined rape as basically something as simple as a forced kiss. (And there was a case adjudicated where a gay partner kissed his former lover while he was sleeping and this was labeled 'sexual assault.') By the way, the friend who was shocked by this new definition of rape was harassed by a male neighbor. We got him to go away ourselves and it made us feel very, very powerful.
35
CH Sommers body of work is impressive, as is this piece. The SJWs criticizing her work fortunately have not prevailed when it comes to this aspect of fundamental criminal justice. Cheers!
21
ok, room for debate, but hard to argue against a call for due process (buckle up, mccarthyist “guilty because accused,” is reawakened and slouching back toward us once again).
the corollary caution against college judicial bodies is also hard to ignore, anyone who has been present as a witness to discussion of even trivial matters, has to fear for anyone caught in their grasp for any matter of weight...never mind that all too often these locally constituted authorities are rather concerned with brand protection than truth.
fair also is the notion that "Teaching people how to avoid becoming victims isn’t blaming the victim. It’s common sense" whether on campus or in the street.
finally, there is no doubt that a "major source of the trouble is binge drinking"...any trouble, from the risks of the party culture to poor academic performance to failing health.
so those who wish may take their shots at the messenger, but her message is on target.
34
I'd like to hear some examples of "regretted sex" from De Vos. In my experience "regretted sex" is when two months later someone realizes she is pregnant because no birth control method was used, or when someone slept with a co-worker and decided later she didn't like him but he continues to like her. When someone wakes up the next morning and clearly remembers that she did not want to have sex the night before, yet it happened, that is not "regretted" sex; it is unwanted sex and it may be rape.
11
I agree, but I would add that people do things they don't want to do all the time; that's not necessarily a crime. I would suppose that that points to a crime in these cases only if consent was denied and the act was forced.
4
Amherst College. Male and female get drunk. Male passes out in girlfriends bed. Drunk roommate performs a sex act. Male has no memory and certainly could not consent. Did not even know act occurred until college sends him a hearing notice. Kangaroo court held. He is expelled and is now suing.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/campus-sexual-assault-policies-a...
14
I think she meant, when you wake up the next morning and wish you hadn't done what you decided to do last night. And that there might be a link between making a decision you regret 8 hours after the fact, and drinking too much. Im not defending her, just positing another version of regretted sex. I have known plenty of friends who wish they hadn't had sex with a guy the night before. None accused anyone of rape however
8
Since app. 1980 when nothing was really done re this issue I have seen the pendulum swing back and forth.
First, after 1980 women had a real legal recourse when this happened and the predators were taken down but it was quickly taken over by the extreme feminists who turned it into all men are evil and they have to atone for their five million yrs. of existence and the man was guilty if accused.
This so ticked off everybody including many women, feminism became a dirty word, the guard was let down and the predators like Weinstein came out of the
woodwork.
Don't let it happen again, ie a witch hunt where the man is guilty if accused or an environment where women have to put up with abuse.
9
Worst. Timing. Ever.
3
Do campus activists not see the precedent they are setting by enforcing punishment based on the belief that women cannot be held responsible for their actions if they've had even one drink; that they are always victims; that they have no agency?
How are we to have more women leaders in business if men are taught to believe that only they are responsible for decisions and conduct?
Campus activists are not seeing beyond their immediate situation. They are unknowingly driving women back into the past when we were delicate flowers and calling it justice and empowerment.
49
This woman has a long history of making false and misleading representations about her own qualifications and those of who she quotes. Somehow the trump administration finds these terrible mouthpieces of the right wing and we are lead, yet again, to hear this tripe. It sadly demeans every victim of the very real and too frequent occurrence of sexual assault whose victims are driven to avoid reporting for fear of the shaming this woman perpetuates.
6
I noticed you didn't dispute the argument. Care to try again?
11
AEI and " scholar ". Sorry, no. This person is a very well paid propagandist, period. SHE belongs on FOX, and right wing radio. But, " all viewpoints".
Fine. Schools have absolutely NO business " handling " possible assault cases. EVER. That's what the police and prosecutors are there for. CALL the Police, the Real Police. Schools are ONLY interested in THEIR reputations, their enrollments, and Money. Call the Police. Period.
9
When I was in college a female student falsely accused a professor of sexual assault and he was fired. She then went on to terrorize a fellow student, female not male, in quite bizarre ways. She quickly became known as a person to stay as far away from as possible. Literally, if she was walking toward you across campus, you'd take a detour between some buildings or duck into the cafeteria or library. It was not safe to be near her. Because you could be next. And there was no process other than kicking the accused out. Due process should not vanish because the crime alleged is heinous. Due process is more important than ever in such cases and, no, students and professors are not equipped to adjudicate serious crimes and change the course of someone's life by banishing them from their college and labelling them as sexual predator.
65
@YadaYada Sounds like classic borderline personality disorder, or some other Axis B personality disorder. That's the cruel irony of this new victim culture; I believe that feminists with personality disorders actually invented this entire theory to support their own twisted reality, and now are inculcating an entire generation into a victim mentality. Feminism is good in principle, yet when left in the hands of deranged individuals and demagogues like Linda Sarsour and Yvette Felarca, serious damage can ensue. I believe we are at the cusp of a major backlash from all this, from the all the anti-white/anti-male propaganda to the imagined oppression of the patriarchy, we will see a total collapse of the left into chaos, and if it's bad enough, the jackboot of the right will be ready to restore order. Let's hope not.
10
I am so glad you've identified that one evil woman all the men have been so worried about. That anecdotal evidence is definitely sufficient, and does not at all rest on the cultural stereotype that women in general are not to be trusted.
10
SP, *people in general* shouldn't be (unconditionally and totally) trusted. It's not an XX vs. XY thing.
People will do all sorts of nasty things -- including raping, or lying about someone else -- to get what they want.
8
I have a male friend who was accused of rape and several female friends who have accused others of rape. I don’t know the absolute truth in any of these cases—I wasn’t present in any of these cases—but I’m as certain as I can be that the man was falsely accused and the women I know were telling the truth.
The falsely-accused guy went through hell and several aspects of the college’s investigation were less than fair to him. But the women I know who told the truth also went through hell and faced investigations that were also unfair to them.
Sexual assault that really happens (reported and otherwise) dwarfs the false-accusation problem. Yes, rape can be profoundly damaging and a false accusation of rape can be profoundly damaging, but the former happens a whole lot more than the latter. The first priority must be stopping sexual assault.
That priority doesn’t mean that men should be presumed guilty or that a false allegation isn’t a major injustice, but Ms. Hoff Sommers’ phrase about “untold numbers” suggests a false equivalence in the frequency of these two very different injustices. She’s in a position to know better.
Ms. Hoff Sommers has a point about the inadequacy of college tribunal processes, but genuine victims and the falsely accused are both ill-served by these. I don’t know what the solution is, but justice demands that we make things better for everyone.
30
Your comment suggests a ’false equivalence’ between the numbers of guilty that walk free and the number of innocents that are punished, which is talking point espoused by the ’victim feminist’ movement. Asserting this viewpoint is a deliberate attempt to undermine a long-established principle that it’s preferable that 1000 guilty walk free rather than punish a single innocent. The fact that eliminating the presumption of innocence and lowering the standard of evidence required to find an accused responsible will result in more actual perpetrators punished than innocents being wrongly convicted is not a morally valid argument for adopting weakened protections. Criminal justice policy setting is not a procees of examining which approach ”on balance” results in more correct outcomes, justifying more false convictions because of a disproportionate increase in punishment for the actually guilty. Justice demands that the burden of proof be placed on the accuser, not the adoption of an approach is which conflicting accounts are given equal validity. Nearly all of us have been victims of a crime at some point in our lives. Many of us have also been accused of something we didn’t do. Not always being able to obtain justice is the price we pay for remaining free of the risk of being unjustly punished. So while its true there is no ’equivalence’ in these numbers, I’m not sure where the idea that there should be is coning from.
15
(1) Debating feminist thought detracts from the urgency of the issue - the fact is, there are epidemic numbers of rape survivors, most of whom have historically been denied justice or support. Anti-rape activists are not ‘victim feminists’ - they are humanists who seek to stop the mass perpetration of violence and related societal harms.
(2) Sexual assault in the context of intimate partner violence is different from rape that happens once; there are many campus survivors of IPV. Leaving a violent relationship safely has been likened to backing out of a minefield. The survivor knows best the way out of that minefield; their agency MUST be respected. Remedies that mandate criminal prosecution of perpetrators must be balanced by careful consideration of safety planning for survivors.
(3) In fulfillment of the imperative to foster future leaders of a humane, civil and educated society, codes of conduct hold university communities to the highest standards of behavior. Sexual violence and harassment within a university community should not be tolerated. Absent a swift and appropriate institutional enforcement mechanism, while awaiting the slow process of the criminal justice system, university standards are lowered, reduced to “no one in our community has yet been convicted of a crime”. Universities do not convict their members of crimes; universities rightfully uphold community conduct standards and sanction violators who injure other members.
10
A few counterpoints, Nancy.
1. Sexual Violence has fallen by more than half since '93 (according to RAINN) and no decent person has a problem with stopping rape altogether; in that sense we are all anti-rape activists. The problems this interview is addressing are the expansion of the definition of rape and the lack of due process.
2. I agree with your points here entirely. No argument.
3. Due process is in fact consistent with the highest standard of behavior, and neither should the community outside a university tolerate sexual violence and harassment, so I take issue with your distinction. I suppose the issue we should both want to address is the "slow process of the criminal justice system"; I would add that it is necessary for college students to better understand that system so that they can navigate it successfully if necessary. Finally, when you say "universities rightfully uphold community conduct standards and sanction violators who injure other members", I guess you are thinking of instances where the university gets it right. What this interview addresses is how the university system lets down the falsely-accused and how it distorts those community standards to begin with. The interview sadly does not address the times when the described system lets down actual victims, which happens a lot as well.
7
Actually, Sommers did not coin "victim" feminism. The pejorative label was used first by socialist women to condemn feminists fighting sexual abuse and exploitation in the 1980s.
2
Do you have any evidence for that accusation?
2
The reason colleges set up these judicial systems is not to obtain justice for rape victims. Justice would require lengthy prison sentences for the guilty.
The purpose is to discourage victims from going to the police. University administrators don't care about justice. They care about bad publicity, and what could be worse publicity than a public trial, reported in the newspapers daily, of a student or ex-student for on-campus rape?
45
I have nothing to write about the subject this articloe is about but I do want to make an observation about Christina Hoff Sommers.
I like how she explains things in a way that makes it easy even for someone like myself to understand.
5
A welcome breath of fresh air.
Victim feminism -- pass the smelling salts -- wants to take us back to the early 1900s. Urged on by progressives like Louis D. Brandeis, the Supreme Court upheld, as constitutional, a 1903 Oregon law that prohibited employment of women in industrial jobs for more than ten hours per day.
The Brandeis Brief used "sociology" to demonstrate that long working hours had a negative effect on the "health, safety, morals, and general welfare of women". That reduced economic opportunities for women.
Today, Brandeis's heirs want us to believe that women are fragile and easily traumatized. That narrative is a plea for special treatment for women -- and it purports to advance women's interests by demeaning and degrading women.
Let's bring back equity feminism.
55
I feel like there's the same logic in the gig economy. People can be their own boss, set their own schedule! But, oh right, there's no health insurance, no steady wage, no stability. Yeah. That just makes people tough. Women are tough.
If Brandeis' efforts were paternalistic, I suggest that your comment is, too, because it fails to do what Chaucer's Wife of Bath advised: ask the woman what she wants.
5
Bingo! Christina Hoff Sommers has hit the nail on the head.
Political correctness and campus molly-coddling of young women is not feminism, It is the opposite.
Making a sexual joke at a party or making a pass at somebody (regardless of is not a crime. AS LONG as there is no unwanted touching.
As Ms Sommers says, walking in a mini skirt in an area notorious for cat calling just to provoke a reaction and make a silly YouTube video is not common sense and most certainly not victim shaming.
29
Burkas for everyone!
3
Nothing Sommers said seems unreasonable. Basically, society is not yet qualified to adjudicate these issues. Better get started. It's just turned ou/been confirmedt that Human-caused Climate Change is an "actual" thing. No time to waste, then?
4
Everyone deserves due process and the presumption of innocence. Our country and legal system is founded upon these principles.
That a university tribunal composed of students, deans, professors and staffers can somehow circumvent these core principles is a travesty of justice.
These tribunals are nothing more than kangaroo courts and have ultimately done more harm than good.
75
" . . . composed of students, deans, professors . . . "
This argument - that universities are unqualified to adjudicate such matters - is commonly trotted out and accepted without a second glance. And it's nonsense.
Who are the people who populate juries in the criminal justice system and make life and death judgments? Students, plumbers, executives, professors, deans, dentists and folks like you and I.
2
Except in the university the accused has none of the rights he would be accorded in the criminal justice system. She/he is often denied council, cannot face and question the accuser or even present evidence of innocence! Those are only some of the differences!
17
Yes, they populate the *juries*. As for the bench and both counsel tables, they are populated with legally trained and qualified individuals who actually conduct the proceedings.
5
This is what passes for intellectualism or expertise on the right?
The term "victim feminism" is an insult to anyone who has indeed been victimized by a rapist or assailant. Wanting justice and compassion is not asking for "special treatment." And I have news for Ms Hoff Sommers - when it comes to matters of sexual assault and harassment, women are in fact an oppressed and silenced class. Harvey Weinstein, anyone?
If I had written a college paper using phrases such as "untold numbers of college students have been subjected to injustices" without providing supporting evidence, my professor would've handed me back my work with a failing grade and instructions to support my argument with evidence.
"Fainting couch feminism?" Are you kidding? From a group of people who infantilize women to the point that we are considered unable to make our own reproductive decisions? Is this woman actually arguing that we should take sexual assault "like a man" but then defer to our male legislators when birth control and abortion rights are at issue?
And again with the conservative line that women who regret having sex then turn around and accuse men of having raped them. No evidence of this is provided either, although apparently, it happens all the time.
As for college tribunals, they need to be fair to both parties, of course. But a finding of fault is not a criminal conviction and does not carry the same penalties, so have a lower standard of proof is appropriate.
39
In your rush to point out how wrong and evil Summers and Conservatives are, you missed the disclaimer that this was condensed. She might have given stats that will be included in the original interview. Or you could google it. Summers is authentic and intelligent, and she backs up her claims with evidence.
But you saved the worst of your comment for the end. Heaven forbid you agree with someone that offended you with words even if that ultimately makes you support treating rape like anything other than a crime. Tribunals are for college drama that only priveleged kids need in order to resolve a dispute. Rape is a crime. Police handle crime. Or is rape culture acceptable for you, as long as it means you don't have to agree with someone that you don't like? Because true rape culture would be allowing an unregulated, unlicensed, unaccountable 'committee' to investigate rape.
6
Not all who oppose abortion infantilize women and say they can’t make reproductive choices (as you yourself say—where’s the evidence to back up your claims?) For instance, many believe the reproductive choice is made *before^ the pregnancy for the millions who are pregnant and not victims of rape. They might in fact believe that you infantilize women by always viewing them as victims rather than agents. This has nothing to do with where I stand on the issue and everything to do with my exhaustion with these polarizing arguments that trade in either:or fallacies and ad hominem attacks (which hopefully your professor also covered) to no one’s advantage. When did all us “open-minded” people become so damn close-minded? You see nothing of value in what she said? I did not expect to share many views with her, but I think she is quite right about due process and how advising others on how to avoid becoming victims is *not* victim blaming. We all advise our children not to talk to strangers and wear seat belts, no?
9
You say that college tribunals need to be fair to both parties. That was her entire point, they are skewed unfairly under current policy. No, when it comes to something as serious as sexual assault, a lower standard of proof is not appropriate. It is possible to deliver justice to victims without punishing those who haven’t committed a crime. This shouldn’t be an either-or proposition.
25