This Title IX abuse is just another extension of The Abuse Industry. It will end up doing extensive damage colleges long-term. However, before that occurs, significant lifelong damage to the falsely accused victims will harm so many lives. It is a bully pulpit not a legal process.
False abuse claims for child abuse and domestic violence exploded matrimonial law revenue over the last 25 years. Everyone is against domestic violence, as everyone is against campus sexual assaults. So why do Democrats, the architects of the Violence Against Women Act, find the most reprehensible way to find facts in serious cases? Why are they hell bent on absolutes instead of due process? The answer, I think, is money and 'owning' a political issue.
Child abuse or domestic abuse reporting. An anonymous tip line, that is investigated by social workers who make recommendations. Cases get rarely get investigated by a real police officer/detective. However, they have been prevalent in contested custody cases for 25 years now. Accusers' names are masked, except the court system/judges are aware that one parent has a 'complaint' that has been vetted by an unqualified investigator (a social worker) and then you have a real legal battle on your hand. Funny that the judge knowing is not part of due process in many custody battles. Monies raised in abuse charities are than free to be accessed in custody cases. Monies that otherwise would not be able to be accessed. Money that attorney's helped raise for the same charities. Money spent that would upset a bunch of well-intentioned donors if they knew the actual use. It's a closed open secret in the family law industry. I'm so glad Effe brought this aspect up in Title IX and the fact it is a giant money-making opportunity. It is so wrong to create a conflict in the solution of sexual assaults and child abuse.
Think I'm full of it? Go look up some local family law attorneys, look on their bios and see if they have their own Domestic Abuse charity, or if they affiliate/volunteer themselves with an abuse charity. Where do you think all the money raised goes too? How do custody cases go on for years- who pays for it? Yes, a bunch of it goes to legitimate victims and their needs, which is absolutely fantastic. It's how it should be. Unfortunately, ill written abuse laws like this Title IX pile of crap, have a way of creating a bastardized legal industry instead of helping a victim. In custody cases a bunch of the abuse dollars, help feed the multi-billion-dollar family law industry. An industry that wreaks havoc on over 1 million non-custodial parents and their children each year. Custody is awarded temporarily after a claim. The accused then has to battle for their parental rights against non-profit dollars for their rights. It's either that explanation or that or that parent is one of the hordes of 'wealthy people' that make up non-custody batte (that last comment was very cynical). Bankrupting people, separating patents from kids, and all the while rewarding bad actors. It's not just attorneys & judges.
Police also can affirm how often the 'abuse' card is attempted to be used in a vindictive form. They are the only players in domestic violence who apply due process in such serious accused cases. Once due process and multi person investigation techniques are applied the abuse claim if false, usually disappears.
However, the CDC does not even attempt to measure how often initial claims are false. They only report admitted claims. Meaning claims that have been vetted by formal investigation. This conflates abuse data by omitting initial screened out claims. More than half of abuse claims are screened out without investigations, but again this data is segregated by the CDC, because it is a cash cow for healthcare and social services.
It's funny that the abuse industry professionals cannot admit to this or fix it. Their own very real form of abuse, with a whole new batch of victims that are a falsely accused or the child of a falsely accused parent, or a child who is coerced to accuse another parent. It's happening every day. So yes, very disgusted with a Title IX repeat of early mistakes in combating abuse.
Due process should never be abandoned - not on campus, not in court, and not before Congress (but don't tell Congress, they don't want to hear it). When society moves to a guilty until proven innocent presumption, oppression follows. Anyone ever try to prove they are innocent? That difficulty is why our legal standard is innocent until proven guilty.
If the electoral college votes had been in Trump’s favor and Biden claimed the election had been stolen from him, would all the election denier responding to this column be in support of the kind of investigation they now claim they want?
I’m so glad my son went into the trades instead of wasting time and money at some college. He makes an excellent living and enjoys his work, knowing there will always be demand for his skills in a world overflowing with fatuous college know-nothings. Not to mention avoiding the “sexual assault” nonsense machine.
‘Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned’ is an idiom that is adapted from a line in William Congreve’s play, The Mourning Bride (1697). The line from which it came is ‘Heaven has no rage like love to hatred turned, nor hell a fury like a woman scorned.” God help any male that walks on a campus. I will school my sons to video tape any consent first and foremost and truly - just don't have sex or go to parties or really maybe don't go to college...get into a trade.
There is a war on men but in particular on college campuses. I told my nephew 6 years ago when he started college that if he wanted a girl friend or just have casual sex, find a woman off campus.
What would one expect from a group of people who decide that due process can be applied selectively in a woke world?
Obviously these dolts do not read Common Sense, and have no common sense, but play to a select group of individuals who want to lead us down a path of dysfunction and malfunction. Somehow, it reminds me of the Lotus Eaters.
The author's relentless personal bias makes this piece, however well-intentioned, unreadable.
Your personal opinions, many of which are misinformed, about the Trump Administration are immaterial to what you're trying to write about here. That you are unable to write what should be a straight-forward piece about the terrible Kangaroo Courts on college campuses that destroy men without due process without the self-centered and narcissistic need to remind us that you are "on the right side of history" re: Trump is everything that is wrong with the state of modern "journavism" today.
Honestly, your editor at Common Sense should have had enough common sense to remove your vanity from this piece. It would have made it far more effective.
Great informative article and deep dive into how the current administration is trying to use Title IX to rob men on campus of their right to equal justice under the law afforded by the 14th Amendment. I will forward this article to my 20 year old son on campus; however, I am very disappointed that I will have to ask him to ignore the cheap shot the author took at the Trump administration for being immoral and chaotic even though Trump had the wisdom to appoint a woman to be head of the Department of Education that got it right. I will also have to ask my son to look past the fact that the author gives Biden credit for being a part of the amendment and thereby ignoring the fact that everyone on Earth knows that Biden does not have the mental acuity to do so. My comment to the author regarding morality is that those without sin should cast the first stone.
Excellent article. The now deceased Harvard/Berkeley sociologist Nathan Glazer, who worked on the Great Society programs in the 60's, wrote a book in 1988 titled "The Limits of Social Policy". One of the things he describes is the cascading effects of social policies: the secondary and tertiary groups that becomes involved, the layers that get added on and the unrecognized new social problems which arise. We can see some of Glazer's insights in the Emily's article. Consider:
1. the 701 pages of regulation are large enough to be exceedly intrusive but they will be expanded upon in each school, partly because that's the nature of the bureaucratic process,
2. take the 50 Title IX coordinators at Harvard and scale that number to the total number of college students in the country. This gives you about 43,000 Title IX coordinators nationwide. To that number add all the off campus consultants and lawfirms which advise on Title IX claims. All highly paid.
3. These coordinators and off-campus consultants have a vested interest in keeping progressive politicians in power,
4. the expanded rules now apply to sexual orientation and gender identity,
5. the expansion of legal education and practice to focus on adjudicating Title IX claims.
6. this all adds to the increase in costs for a college education, making a existing social problem more acute, creating the need for more student debt, etc, etc.
It dawned on me this morning that the unintended consequences of this policy may possibly be quite shocking to the advocates. With the growth of the LBGQT group in youth, I expect you will now see women become the targets of these investigations by disgruntled exes, and with the groundwork laid, they will suffer the consequences that young men have been facing. I would also expect to see young men go on the offensive and start reporting women for unwanted sexual advances/encounters (report her before she can report you).
As young women get kicked out of school, have their reputations ruined, and suffer at the hands of the "sex police" I would expect to see a pushback against this. All instances of sexual violence/assault need to be treated as serious and should be investigated, but the process has to be fair.
Great picture that accompanies the article. Modern Yale. Looks like a few Title IX violations just waiting to happen. A SCOTUS nominee or two in there that may need to explain what they were doing in that photo, why they were disrobed, and per the question of the senator, "Where you drunk or under the influence of marijuana?"
What the Biden Administration has done is pretty hideous, but it probably won't restore the status quo ante. Conducting such star chamber proceedings will only result in a tsunami of damaging and expensive lawsuits, not to mention a good deal of unwanted publicity. Anyhow, taking the long view it seems to me that this project of turning campus sexual relations into a regulated public utility will fail. Biology, not bureaucracy, is destiny.
This Title IX abuse is just another extension of The Abuse Industry. It will end up doing extensive damage colleges long-term. However, before that occurs, significant lifelong damage to the falsely accused victims will harm so many lives. It is a bully pulpit not a legal process.
False abuse claims for child abuse and domestic violence exploded matrimonial law revenue over the last 25 years. Everyone is against domestic violence, as everyone is against campus sexual assaults. So why do Democrats, the architects of the Violence Against Women Act, find the most reprehensible way to find facts in serious cases? Why are they hell bent on absolutes instead of due process? The answer, I think, is money and 'owning' a political issue.
Child abuse or domestic abuse reporting. An anonymous tip line, that is investigated by social workers who make recommendations. Cases get rarely get investigated by a real police officer/detective. However, they have been prevalent in contested custody cases for 25 years now. Accusers' names are masked, except the court system/judges are aware that one parent has a 'complaint' that has been vetted by an unqualified investigator (a social worker) and then you have a real legal battle on your hand. Funny that the judge knowing is not part of due process in many custody battles. Monies raised in abuse charities are than free to be accessed in custody cases. Monies that otherwise would not be able to be accessed. Money that attorney's helped raise for the same charities. Money spent that would upset a bunch of well-intentioned donors if they knew the actual use. It's a closed open secret in the family law industry. I'm so glad Effe brought this aspect up in Title IX and the fact it is a giant money-making opportunity. It is so wrong to create a conflict in the solution of sexual assaults and child abuse.
Think I'm full of it? Go look up some local family law attorneys, look on their bios and see if they have their own Domestic Abuse charity, or if they affiliate/volunteer themselves with an abuse charity. Where do you think all the money raised goes too? How do custody cases go on for years- who pays for it? Yes, a bunch of it goes to legitimate victims and their needs, which is absolutely fantastic. It's how it should be. Unfortunately, ill written abuse laws like this Title IX pile of crap, have a way of creating a bastardized legal industry instead of helping a victim. In custody cases a bunch of the abuse dollars, help feed the multi-billion-dollar family law industry. An industry that wreaks havoc on over 1 million non-custodial parents and their children each year. Custody is awarded temporarily after a claim. The accused then has to battle for their parental rights against non-profit dollars for their rights. It's either that explanation or that or that parent is one of the hordes of 'wealthy people' that make up non-custody batte (that last comment was very cynical). Bankrupting people, separating patents from kids, and all the while rewarding bad actors. It's not just attorneys & judges.
Police also can affirm how often the 'abuse' card is attempted to be used in a vindictive form. They are the only players in domestic violence who apply due process in such serious accused cases. Once due process and multi person investigation techniques are applied the abuse claim if false, usually disappears.
However, the CDC does not even attempt to measure how often initial claims are false. They only report admitted claims. Meaning claims that have been vetted by formal investigation. This conflates abuse data by omitting initial screened out claims. More than half of abuse claims are screened out without investigations, but again this data is segregated by the CDC, because it is a cash cow for healthcare and social services.
It's funny that the abuse industry professionals cannot admit to this or fix it. Their own very real form of abuse, with a whole new batch of victims that are a falsely accused or the child of a falsely accused parent, or a child who is coerced to accuse another parent. It's happening every day. So yes, very disgusted with a Title IX repeat of early mistakes in combating abuse.
Due process should never be abandoned - not on campus, not in court, and not before Congress (but don't tell Congress, they don't want to hear it). When society moves to a guilty until proven innocent presumption, oppression follows. Anyone ever try to prove they are innocent? That difficulty is why our legal standard is innocent until proven guilty.
If the electoral college votes had been in Trump’s favor and Biden claimed the election had been stolen from him, would all the election denier responding to this column be in support of the kind of investigation they now claim they want?
I’m so glad my son went into the trades instead of wasting time and money at some college. He makes an excellent living and enjoys his work, knowing there will always be demand for his skills in a world overflowing with fatuous college know-nothings. Not to mention avoiding the “sexual assault” nonsense machine.
Hahahahahahahaha. “As a conservative”.
Corrupt? How? Unlike Biden Inc, he didn’t take a dime
‘Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned’ is an idiom that is adapted from a line in William Congreve’s play, The Mourning Bride (1697). The line from which it came is ‘Heaven has no rage like love to hatred turned, nor hell a fury like a woman scorned.” God help any male that walks on a campus. I will school my sons to video tape any consent first and foremost and truly - just don't have sex or go to parties or really maybe don't go to college...get into a trade.
There is a war on men but in particular on college campuses. I told my nephew 6 years ago when he started college that if he wanted a girl friend or just have casual sex, find a woman off campus.
What would one expect from a group of people who decide that due process can be applied selectively in a woke world?
Obviously these dolts do not read Common Sense, and have no common sense, but play to a select group of individuals who want to lead us down a path of dysfunction and malfunction. Somehow, it reminds me of the Lotus Eaters.
The author's relentless personal bias makes this piece, however well-intentioned, unreadable.
Your personal opinions, many of which are misinformed, about the Trump Administration are immaterial to what you're trying to write about here. That you are unable to write what should be a straight-forward piece about the terrible Kangaroo Courts on college campuses that destroy men without due process without the self-centered and narcissistic need to remind us that you are "on the right side of history" re: Trump is everything that is wrong with the state of modern "journavism" today.
Honestly, your editor at Common Sense should have had enough common sense to remove your vanity from this piece. It would have made it far more effective.
Great informative article and deep dive into how the current administration is trying to use Title IX to rob men on campus of their right to equal justice under the law afforded by the 14th Amendment. I will forward this article to my 20 year old son on campus; however, I am very disappointed that I will have to ask him to ignore the cheap shot the author took at the Trump administration for being immoral and chaotic even though Trump had the wisdom to appoint a woman to be head of the Department of Education that got it right. I will also have to ask my son to look past the fact that the author gives Biden credit for being a part of the amendment and thereby ignoring the fact that everyone on Earth knows that Biden does not have the mental acuity to do so. My comment to the author regarding morality is that those without sin should cast the first stone.
Well, sorry I offended You. We're different, of course. But similar in a lotta ways. If I stereotyped You, ti was my mistake.
I enjoyed getting to know You better, Ma'am. Thank You for sharing.
Excellent article. The now deceased Harvard/Berkeley sociologist Nathan Glazer, who worked on the Great Society programs in the 60's, wrote a book in 1988 titled "The Limits of Social Policy". One of the things he describes is the cascading effects of social policies: the secondary and tertiary groups that becomes involved, the layers that get added on and the unrecognized new social problems which arise. We can see some of Glazer's insights in the Emily's article. Consider:
1. the 701 pages of regulation are large enough to be exceedly intrusive but they will be expanded upon in each school, partly because that's the nature of the bureaucratic process,
2. take the 50 Title IX coordinators at Harvard and scale that number to the total number of college students in the country. This gives you about 43,000 Title IX coordinators nationwide. To that number add all the off campus consultants and lawfirms which advise on Title IX claims. All highly paid.
3. These coordinators and off-campus consultants have a vested interest in keeping progressive politicians in power,
4. the expanded rules now apply to sexual orientation and gender identity,
5. the expansion of legal education and practice to focus on adjudicating Title IX claims.
6. this all adds to the increase in costs for a college education, making a existing social problem more acute, creating the need for more student debt, etc, etc.
It dawned on me this morning that the unintended consequences of this policy may possibly be quite shocking to the advocates. With the growth of the LBGQT group in youth, I expect you will now see women become the targets of these investigations by disgruntled exes, and with the groundwork laid, they will suffer the consequences that young men have been facing. I would also expect to see young men go on the offensive and start reporting women for unwanted sexual advances/encounters (report her before she can report you).
As young women get kicked out of school, have their reputations ruined, and suffer at the hands of the "sex police" I would expect to see a pushback against this. All instances of sexual violence/assault need to be treated as serious and should be investigated, but the process has to be fair.
Great picture that accompanies the article. Modern Yale. Looks like a few Title IX violations just waiting to happen. A SCOTUS nominee or two in there that may need to explain what they were doing in that photo, why they were disrobed, and per the question of the senator, "Where you drunk or under the influence of marijuana?"
What the Biden Administration has done is pretty hideous, but it probably won't restore the status quo ante. Conducting such star chamber proceedings will only result in a tsunami of damaging and expensive lawsuits, not to mention a good deal of unwanted publicity. Anyhow, taking the long view it seems to me that this project of turning campus sexual relations into a regulated public utility will fail. Biology, not bureaucracy, is destiny.
It appears this article provoked a lot of supportive comments about Trump’s administration.
I wonder when BW will have an “Honestly” episode about Trump, she could interview people who supported him and try to understand why. I volunteer.