Female Student denies rape occurred, boyfriend still expelled.

[Darsithis]

Am I remembering correctly that gender based threads are also not allowed now?

Not saying I agree with what happened in the OP, but I could swear that's a new policy.

Threads about a news item are okay. Threads talking about gender for the sake of gender, like "Which Sex is Stronger?" aren't.

[Barbariangreataxe]

I don't think men should be allowed in university at all. They are all just rapists anyway.

[Milchshake]

Threads about a news item are okay. Threads talking about gender for the sake of gender, like "Which Sex is Stronger?" aren't.

What about the strong subtext of "women lying about" rape?

There's little discussion of the man's actions in the various accounts. Or the validity of of the financial harm he suffered from the accusation. Instead we get a edited copypasta from a very biased source.
Local news has an actual statement from the woman. Why would the OP leave out this material, which is at the heart of making this newsworthy?
http://denver.cbslocal.com/2016/04/1...onsensual-sex/

According to CSU-Pueblo’s internal investigation, obtained by CBS4, the woman told an investigator, “Grant was lying on top of me and I told him that I did not want to have sexual intercourse with him that is unprotected because I am not on any birth control. Although I told Grant no, Grant ended up penetrating me … and I told him to stop. He stopped and pulled out from me immediately. Grant then said to me that if he used a condom, would I be okay with that. I told Grant yes to the condom. Grant placed on the condom and we began to have protected sex at this point which I was okay with it.”

The woman's point of view was purposely omitted. While people chime in about how "women lie about rape". The thread seems to be cultivating comments about Title XI infractions not being real crimes.

I mean a real newsworthy element is whether these counter Title IX suits are even covered by Title IX.

It feels like that time everyone missed that copypasta job that one guy posted from Stormfront a few weeks ago.

[Strangebrew]

what the....
i am a leftist, with a decent amount of activism. but i know (and every other activist that i met knows) that you must study in the university

Not the case in america apparantly


http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/27103/

[Darththeo]

"I don't like what they did, but they did nothing wrong, people."

Nothe defending somehow.

I was going to reply to this, but Talsar had a better response.

There is a difference between defending an action and calling it illegal.

[Deleted]

I don't think men should be allowed in university at all. They are all just rapists anyway.

Pretty much

The demonisation of men continues with the feminist hate movement

Phrases like "patriarchy", "toxic masculinity", the narrative that X group are all rapists, well we've seen this all before:

[purebalance]

Surprised this isn't a Tennisace thread. But seriously, this gentlemen deserves to sue the shit out of this university and I hope he gets a free college tuition paid for by them.

If it was a Tennisace thread he/she would be condemning the man. Difference here is Theo is basically saying unfortunately this is the law we have existing and maybe it should be changed.

[Theodarzna]

If it was a Tennisace thread he/she would be condemning the man. Difference here is Theo is basically saying unfortunately this is the law we have existing and maybe it should be changed.

I am of the opinion the April 4th OCR letter and its regulatory guidelines were unconstitutional from the start. Mainly because no public comment was allowed before this became law, increasingly it forces colleges to micromanage the lives of students, faculty ect, even off campus and outside the dorms. However, not all actions taken by an agency are subject to the notice-and-comment requirement of the APA. Interpretive rules, statements of policy, and general policy guidance (which I will collectively refer to as "non-substantive rules") are excluded from the notice-and-comment requirement, for the general reason that they either only affect internal office policy, or simply clarify the agency’s interpretation of its regulations or enabling legislation, rather than imposing new requirements on the public. But the OCR dear colleague letter does effect the public but no proper procedure was followed.