Don't be sending your children to Duke -- or any college or university where there's a poisonous attitude toward men and the belief that all women are helpless victims.

So men should only go to those colleges which are really just renamed trade schools? Or perhaps there are some outside the U.S. that would be good?

Perhaps someone at Duke needs to start a mens center and start handing out a copy of the rules, breathalysers, sexual contracts, and digital audio recorders to every guy who wants to have sex

FB, it has its problems, but I'd put American feminism up against anything in the world, on campus or off.

Duke's a private school. (Their motto translates as "Learning and religion.") I don't know what their endowment is like, but they might want to consider what happened to Antioch , which is essentially in foreclosure at this point... No classes.

(That whole Wikipedia page is kind of fun to read.)

Although you got to hand it to feminists.

I mean who else could possibly pull off the scizophrenic message of promoting womens equailty via an agrgumnet that women are too stupid/weak/naive/impressionable/incapable to ever think or act for themselves.

Ah, the endowment's right their on Wiki: $4.9 billion for 11,000 students. That's enough money to gloss over a lot of stupidities like this. Also, Coach K will kick your ass.... Know that.

"assume that women don't want to have sex with the men who make moves on them. (Hey, you wymyn...lots of us enjoy that sort of thing...seek it out, even!)"

This is the reason I tell my friend I dont do online dating (I've tried it). I love it when a man goes out of his way to ask me out.

She also tells me men dont really care about weight. But I have seen a really big concerned effort from my stepfather and all my male friends regarding my weight gain.

BTW Amy I'm reading Protein Power awesome read!
One of the anti-depressants I take has been known to cause diabetes.

> One of the anti-depressants I take
> has been known to cause diabetes

YOW! Move carefully out there, PP, take good care of yourself.

Hey, when I entered college for the first time, in freshman orientation they recommended having written agreements for any sexual contact. Verbal agreement was OK for such things as holding hands. That was quickly taken back after one student asked what happens if the girl said no after signing the contract but before having sex. Was what she was doing so a breech of contract? If the man continued, would it be rape or not after all she had agreeded to it. The college, ever fearful, backed out of its advice with some annoucement that really said "don't listen to us... talk to your lawyer or something." And yes, the rules were written such that only a male could be the perp. The victum could be female or male (e.g. forced homo-sexual sex).

Yep, Antioch is what they were based on. It was about that same time.

I'm so glad to be out of college. Stories like this remind me of when certain students invaded our coffee niche in the student union and talked all that talk. Sometimes they were cute!

Duke's rules define sexual misconduct so broadly and vaguely as to include any sexual activity without explicit "verbal or nonverbal" consent, which must be so "clear" as to dispel "real or perceived power differentials between individuals [that] may create an unintentional atmosphere of coercion" (emphasis added).

To me, the tell is in the phrase "real or perceived power differentials between individuals [that] may create an unintentional atmosphere of coercion." The phrase suggests that the framers of the policy regard pretty much all sex as a power play (initiated by the male), and therefore coercive. You're pretty much guilty before you even get your shoes off.

The real education is not gotten in the classroom.

The issue with radical feminists and their utterings is the same as it's been for the last 40 years. They're envious. Envious that some women can get men, and they can't.

Really no different than socialists in concept. Socialists are envious that someone that they can't fully control has something they can't control. So it all needs to be redistributed to those they can control.

Another failure of American parenting. Parents should teach their kids to be grateful for what they have and how to effectively earn more, and not to be envious of what others have earned.

Both feminists and socialists would be laughable, except that the policies caused by their envy filter down to the rest of us, inevitably.

The purpose of the wording is to enable the panel to design whatever outcome they choose to enforce. It's just window dressing to create the illusion of a formal process, when in fact the results are entirely discretionary. This is social justice - i.e. what's just is whatever authorized social 'agents' say is just.

And while these policies are obviously intended to harass and degrade males, they can also be used against women.

Consider what would happen if a devoutly religious conservative white girl were molested by a black lesbian.

In most settings, I think that these policies result from an unholy alliance between administrators and faculty ideologues. The admins don't want reports of crimes on the campus to be made public, and the ideologues want the opportunity to enforce social justice without the impediments of due process and civil rights. Because otherwise, sexual assaults would be reported to the police.

"According to two really vile-thinking feminists there, Duke women are easily talked into bed by smartypants men there."

This just in. Young women, many of them away from home for the first time and experiencing a degree of freedom not found in their parent's house start experimenting with sex.

Film at nine, ten-thirty, twelve-fifteen, and three.

Still bracing for when (if?) one of these man hating crazies reviews one of John's books or the stories Sarah and I wrote.

He even covered it in the first book with one of the characters pointing out to her Feministing friend that they are all successful and they work for very successful women. Suki even has a greater net worth than John and she is much younger.

I remember in college lots and lots of very sexually agressive young women, especially after a few Bartles & James at parties. That was before the revolution we call the internet and the insane binge drinking that goes on nowdays.

Sounds to me like a valid reason for a male-only college. But wait, that would be denounced as sexist, right?

"Duke women are easily talked into bed by smartypants men there." Actually, that's probably true -- not of the female students, but of the female faculty, who seem to seriously be in need of father figures.

I was browsing the science section at the bookstore yesterday. There are a lot of books published lately expressing alarm about the scientific ignorance of the American public. But most of them are gotcha books -- they label the American public ignorant because said public refuses to engage in an evidence-free belief in global warming. When this trend first started, a couple of these books fooled me, but I'm getting good at spotting them now. One of them I saw had, as a co-author, a female professor from Duke. That told me all I needed to know about that book.

It's a curious logic (or lack thereof) that when a woman lies about having her tubes tied, being on the pill, digs a condom out of the trash to inseminate herself (or in one recent case gave a guy oral sex and used that to impregnate herself), or more than one of the prior, the guy is forced to pay the women for at least two decades (usually far more than child support needs) and is told if he kept it in his pants he wouldn't have the problem. Yet when some scumbag exagerrates himself in an attempt to be the 30th man to bang a college girl, she suddenly has no culpability and he's a criminal? He's scum, for sure, but criminal? Men and women have both been giving each other false impressions for centuries, shouldn't we all know this by now?

What I think is worse than lying to a woman (or man) you don't know is pretending to be something you are not to get someone to marry you, make a couple kids, then come clean and take all the person's money for the rest of their life. Yet, in the long term fraud (pregnancy, and or marriage) we provide huge financial incentives. But one scumbag lies, and that is a crime?

We're definitely in leave of our sense. Me, I won't insult women by pretending that are too stupid to question whether or not a poorly groomed unshowered stranger is really a millionnaire former athlete in disquise before the panties come down.

> digs a condom out of the trash to
> inseminate herself

Jeez, I hate when that happens! Y'know, some fluids are so magical that they should never (ever!) leave our bodies, because Earth is a world of treachery and deceit. Also, did you hear about that guy who woke up in a bathtub full of ice but with one of his kidneys gone? That poor sap!

Also, Richard Gere. & Rod Stewart.

@Crid: "Jeez, I hate when that happens! Y'know, some fluids are so magical that they should never (ever!) leave our bodies, because Earth is a world of treachery and deceit. Also, did you hear about that guy who woke up in a bathtub full of ice but with one of his kidneys gone? That poor sap!"
_______

It's rare, but it does happen, and the women that does it wins in court. There was recently a published case in California where a woman sued a man for medical bills -- he put tabasco sauce in the condom before pitching it, and when she went to the restroom he heard her scream. In a rare moment of unbiased sanity, the judge threw out her case.

The point was not that it is common, the point is that whatever the circumstance, however the woman deceives the man, the judgments almost unanimously favor the woman. The rare stories of digging condoms out of trash (or the case of oral sex collection and impregnation that happened in Chicago) are just to reinforce that even in ridiculous circumstances, women win. If courts aren't fair to men who are obviously shammed, they aren't going to be fair to the average man.

Also, did you hear about that guy who woke up in a bathtub full of ice but with one of his kidneys gone?

It was Jason Statham, and it was his heart not his kidney. I know it's true b/c they caught it all on video. But it worked out okay. A couple of jump starts and he was good to go.

Policies like this are going to impact applications. There are already few reasons for men to go to college, and the last big remaining one - easy sex with cute chicks - is now off the table.

Men are better served going to a tech school and learning HVAC or something like it. It can't be outsourced, there's very few women in the schools (and they aren't the feminazi type), and it won't leave you in debt for the first 10-15 years of your career.

> it does happen

Dude, worry about this! Do you hear me? Sit there! Stew and fret, chafe and fuss, rail to the heavens over the injustice of it all! Talk about it to people you know. When they're done listening to you, select a nickname for yourself –something about the nature of interpersonal bonds, maybe– and then talk about it with strangers, who might not be aware of this slight, but very real, hazard.

"Tobasco sauce".

> It was Jason Statham, and it was his
> heart not his kidney.

My mistake.

RE: mixing semen with tobasco sauce.

I wonder how Lena's doing these days....

@Crid: "Dude, worry about this! Do you hear me? Sit there! Stew and fret, chafe and fuss, rail to the heavens over the injustice of it all! Talk about it to people you know. When they're done listening to you, select a nickname for yourself –something about the nature of interpersonal bonds, maybe– and then talk about it with strangers, who might not be aware of this slight, but very real, hazard."
____________

I'm not worried about it.

In your word, "Dude," do you have some difficulty reading? My point was about the brain-dead stupid courts, not about fearing some rare risk.

Then again, you probably knew that, and are just being an ass to provoke an argument.

> My point was about the brain-dead
> stupid courts

Oh, I hear ya! It's important to know this: If you get into that situation, the courts will not protect you! M'kay? American jurisprudence is completely incompetent in this context... The attorneys, the bailiffs, the sheriffs & investigators, all the machinery of our globally famous law enforcement can't do DICK for you in a sitch like that... In fact, they're part of the problem! Because people don't understand, y'know? Not even judges.

I mean, sheesh, she was taking goo from a condom! Sometimes women do that, it does happen, because there aren't enough men walking around who'll squirt for the simple pleasure of it.

Nightmare!

> just being an ass to provoke

Yeah? So? Gimme some latitude. Technically, this is still part of a holiday weekend.

> Oh, I hear ya! It's important to know this:
> If you get into that situation, the
> courts will not protect you! M'kay?

No it's important to know that if the courts won't even protect the rare guy who took precautions (minus the tabasco) or even rarer guy never had sex just got a hummer, they certainly aren't going to protect the more common person who was lied to about soemone's fertility or birth control.

Basically, if the courts won't even do the right thing in the one in a million case where it is obviously fraud, you can't count on them to do the right thing in more common cases.

> Yeah? So? Gimme some latitude.
> Technically, this is still part of
> a holiday weekend.

You're right. The blogosphere would be a boring place without the occasional color commentary.

Happy new year

> if the courts won't even protect
> the rare guy who took precautions

And they won't, man, they won't.

> Basically, if the courts won't even
> do the right thing in the one in a
> million case where it is obviously
> fraud, you can't count on them to
> do the right thing in more
> common cases.

An honest guy can't get a break in this world of ours, y'knowutimean?

Lock the doors, draw the blinds, turn off the radio, sit in a chair in the center of the room with your wrists on your knees, and wait for the end.

Trust no one! Remember the tabasco women!

Well, as California Attorney General Earl Warren stated in 1942, the fact that no Japanese Americans had actually committed any acts of sabotage was in itself 'ominous'. I think we can all see where this is going: internment of breeding-age males.
Just to be safe.

internment of breeding-age males.

Which is pretty much all of them between the ages of 15 and 80.

You think a bunch of chicks are gonna be able to keep all of them in check?

in the school of unintended consequences, this will hurt young women too. So these actualy smart young men that they are so worried over will immediately change their ways...
And stop being interested in young women that go to school there, removing themselves from the pool. Others simply won't bother to be schooled there anymore. One of the things that you do in college is learn about adult relationships, unless everything is so skewed that you can't. Similar to the policies in most workplaces, a wolf whistle will land you in trouble, and commenting on a girl's new hairstyle? heaven's forbid. In the workplace the policies are prolly overboard, but don't effect things too much. It's dangerous liasons to go after someone at work anyway. In a place of life learning of the sort that college is, it can be a bad thing, when the rules are so broad.

One thing is seen in the transfer of the 'patriarchy' to the 'matriarchy'... it isn't about giving an individual the agency to act. it's still about power. for this reason the radicals will attack those who are sympathetic if they don't tow the line fully.

All of the problems that the Uni is addressing are already covered by state law. But in pulling those limits into themselves, they act like students attending college are forced to go there. Having had friends that went to VERY rulesbound colleges, they will leave if it's too limiting...

> Having had friends that went to
> VERY rulesbound colleges, they will
> leave if it's too limiting...

Swissy, you're right.

I wish people could understand that... That there are plenty of manly men and womanly women out there, sometimes even teenagers and sometimes even children, who know better than to be tormented by this shit. It's not even right to say they "know better" as in 'knowledge'; their spirits are strong enough not to feel intimidation from this kind of foolishness. Women will always like men who are men. They may not always talk about it, but they'll always feel it when he walks into a room. (And they'll probably notice that he's not whining about sexual conduct rules.) Human sexuality is not threatened by Duke University.

And even if it were –even if the Conniving Tobasco Jezebels really existed, and were toiling (with the collusive courts!) to entrap earnest young men– they're not the threat to worry about. The weaknesses in mens own character are much more likely to do us in. (As they are in the hearts of and for the women.)

I worry like Hell that I'm going to crash horribly in the hairpin during the first lap at Monaco this coming May. I worry about this because it's fun to worry about. It's a self-flattering fantasy to think I'll be there (even to watch, let alone to drive).

(And if I do crash, it's because someone poured tobasco sauce all over my tires... Know that! Do you hear me? I'm saying it now! Formula One auto racing is a bubbling cesspool of perfidy and betrayal! That's what caused [will cause] the crash of 2010! It's not because I'm a fifty-year-old delusional couch potato who's never driven faster than 5mph over the speed limit.)

> in pulling those limits into themselves,
> they act like students

My favorite expression of that thought was in this review of Posner by Dutton:

Typical academics, on the other hand, are not oriented toward political reality: “They tend to be unworldly. They are, most of them anyway, the people who have never left school. Their milieu is postadolescent.”

"Taylor sees a disregard of due process and a bias against white males, not just at Duke, but across academia"

Ir's worth mentioning that a lot of the worst offenders in the Duke lacrosse lynch mob, like Nifong the rogue prosecutor and Evan Thomas the Newsweek reporter who proclaimed "the narrative was right, but the facts were wrong", were white males.

If you poke around university administrative offices, you'll see for yourself that there's no shortage of gray-haired white men in high-paying positions. If these assholes actually believed the bullshit they spew about the wonders of diversity, they would all have resigned from their cushy jobs years ago, and offered them to handicapped Muslim lesbians of color.

If these assholes actually believed the bullshit they spew about the wonders of diversity, they would all have resigned from their cushy jobs years ago, and offered them to handicapped Muslim lesbians of color.

In Richard Russo's terrific spoof of academia, Straight Man, there is a character who offers this, but of course thinks better of it later. A funny moment in a very funny book.

And stop being interested in young women that go to school there, removing themselves from the pool. - SwissArmyD

I had never thought of that but it might be a good explaination from something I have talked about with my friends from college. Of all the people I know of from college (which had the rules based on antioch) there are only 3 couples that met there. That is less than 1%. When I talk to other people, lots of people met their spouse at college. I have always thought that was strange...

When I talk to other people, lots of people met their spouse at college. I have always thought that was strange...

Well, for starters, who would want to date or marry a woman who would go to such a university?

And second, what kind of "man" would stay once such rules were in place? Certainly not one who was in the market for a spouse, that's for damn sure.

"In the workplace the policies are prolly overboard, but don't effect things too much."

Swiss, I have to disagree in one respect... we all know that in many industries, a lot of the most productive conversations and bull sessions take place unofficially and off the clock -- at someone's house, in the hotel bar, at the airport, etc. What happens when hyper-sensitive rules are in place is that female employees wind up being excluded from those venues, because it's too much of a risk to have them there, and it winds up being a good old boys' club. That's the sort of thing that feminism used to decry, but apparently they're OK with it now.

Crid, can we establish CTJ as an official Advice Goddess acronym? Also there's this matter: "Formula One auto racing is a bubbling cesspool of perfidy and betrayal!" You say that like it's news...

"And second, what kind of "man" would stay once such rules were in place? Certainly not one who was in the market for a spouse, that's for damn sure."

I did. The self-identifying ALC simply alerted me to the non-starters. Thanks girls!

> can we establish CTJ as an
> official Advice Goddess
> acronym?

In the past, Amy has resisted signing off on acronyms like that until she's sure there'll be a need, and that doesn't look too likely in this case. But you can go ahead and ask Swiss to get started on the paperwork if you want....

> You say that like it's news...

Exactly. Some guys eagerly warn us that women are endlessly cunning in their ability to get pregnant when they shouldn't... As if this were news, and as if men were pathetically unable to protect themselves from the responsibility because of the extreme behavior of their partners.

These fantasies get unnecessarily gruesome, like my tale of flaming disaster at the Monaco hairpin. I've never driven anything over 220bhp, and never been to France. Should anyone worry?

A lot of these institutions should really have been closed down a long time ago in the interests of intellectual hygiene, and many of these tenured academics should have been told to go and get real jobs and get in touch with the real world.

Nick, I think it's ironic that the modern academy has become today's equivalent of the medieval guild system, considering that it began as a reaction against that very same. I think there's a natural tendency for academics to assume that the university will take care of things for them (because it often does), and thus they become virtual children, highly worshipful of the parent and authority figures upon whom they depend.

And Crid, we won't worry as long as you don't wind up in the harbor.

"> can we establish CTJ as an
> official Advice Goddess
> acronym?"

Why of course we can my friend! Simply fill out the relavant documents in triplicate, get them signed by the Advice Goddess [remember to make the appropriate sacrifice to her image] fax them in to the corrected numbers in partIII of the annotated instructions, and we will consider the request. The instructions are on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying 'Beware of the Leopard'.

Should you win the lottery, you can be assured that we will, in due time, add them to the correct data dictionary. You will recieve the rules stipulation thereafter that outlines the correct situations to use the TLA [three leter acronym] in question.

Have a pleasant day,
SwissArmyD, preventer of IT

As a reminder, the penaty for improper sacrifices to the Goddess as part of the appication process is death

lujlp
Officer of the Director of Needlessly Outdated Moral Code Enforcment

Damn, I can't recall what the proper sacrifice is. Was I supposed to burn Rambler parts? Or did it have to do with cell phone smashing?

Its not my job to give relevent advice, its my job to punish you when you mees up

Sounds to me like a valid reason for a male-only college. But wait, that would be denounced as sexist, right?

My husband attended an all-male college, Hampden- Sydney. He's an old fashioned man's man and knows how to treat a lady - certainly nothing he learned from his uberfeminist mama nor would have learned at State U.