So, Rolling Stone...

[Batboy2/75]

http://www.mindingthecampus.com/2012/04 ... rick_witt/

[nafod]

One of the huge failures at Penn State regarding Sandusky was that the university leadership thought they could handle it themselves.

Penn State's police department is a full-blown force with jurisdiction for crimes on campus, but they weren't notified.

[Yes, I'm drunk]

I've been following another rape case that I linked to a few pages back. Initially, victims were bullied into silence. However, after the story went national, I've seen a few people mention that we need to teach young girls that doing drugs among large groups of teenage boys who are drinking and also doing drugs is a bad idea. In every situation, the person mentioning what should be common sense was accused of 'blaming the victim' or some such thing.

I realized that "the left" had taken leave of reality when they slaughtered Miss Nevada's suggestion that women might want to learn self-defense as a way of not becoming the next victim of sexual assault.

But then again, reality-based rape scenarios are probably more likely to be something Miss Nevada needs to worry about than her typical social media-based detractors.

[Herv100]

http://www.mindingthecampus.com/2012/04 ... rick_witt/

America, Fuck Yeah!

[Holland Oates]

None of the chicks in that second pic need to be worried about being raped.

[Turdacious]

But then again, reality-based rape scenarios are probably more likely to be something Miss Nevada needs to worry about than her typical social media-based detractors.

She's a poor, non-white, non-college student? They seem to be at the highest risk.

[Yes, I'm drunk]

But then again, reality-based rape scenarios are probably more likely to be something Miss Nevada needs to worry about than her typical social media-based detractors.

She's a poor, non-white, non-college student? They seem to be at the highest risk.

Quite. And who do these "non-white" girls need to avoid to make sure they're not the next victim? It's certainly not white men.

[Grandpa's Spells]

I like when fake racist memes have fake references at the bottom. You can't possibly believe we went four years without a single black woman being raped by a white man.

[Turdacious]

I like when fake racist memes have fake references at the bottom. You can't possibly believe we went four years without a single black woman being raped by a white man.

Those are legit references if you consider the DOJ legit, and they do imply that in Table 42. http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/cvus0602.pdf

Apparently pointing out who is at the biggest risk is of no interest to Rolling Stone:

Divorced or separated, urban, poor women, ages 16-24 experienced the highest risk for rape/sexual assault.

While the greatest number of rapes/sexual assaults occurred among Whites, the rate of rapes/sexual assaults per 1000 persons was greater among Blacks and Hispanics

http://www.nmcsap.org/statistics.html#cb

[terra]

More DOJ facts on the potential bigger picture.
This article also introduced the term 'feminist fantasy tax' with regard to facts...

https://heartiste.wordpress.com/2014/12 ... ual-facts/

[Protobuilder]

I like when fake racist memes have fake references at the bottom. You can't possibly believe we went four years without a single black woman being raped by a white man.

Those are legit references if you consider the DOJ legit, and they do imply that in Table 42. http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/cvus0602.pdf

Apparently pointing out who is at the biggest risk is of no interest to Rolling Stone:

Divorced or separated, urban, poor women, ages 16-24 experienced the highest risk for rape/sexual assault.

While the greatest number of rapes/sexual assaults occurred among Whites, the rate of rapes/sexual assaults per 1000 persons was greater among Blacks and Hispanics

http://www.nmcsap.org/statistics.html#cb

Obviously, it's white-privileged white boys trolling the inner cities in packs.

[baffled]

Richard Bradley, the guy who first brought some questions on this fiasco, is doing serious work on his blog.

Also, there's this: http://www.businessinsider.com/theres-m ... st-2014-12

A group of University of Virginia students featured in the Rolling Stone article on sexual assault at the school have confirmed the name of fellow UVA student Jackie's alleged rapist to CNN — and it's looking increasingly likely that he doesn't exist.

...

While it has been previously reported that the name Jackie had given her friends — now revealed as Monahan — did not match anyone in Phi Psi or even in UVA, there now seems to be more evidence that the alleged rapist does not exist.

CNN reports that "Jackie told her friends that Monahan dropped out of the university after the assault, but a university record check by CNN revealed that no one by that name ever attended the university. Another check found no one by that name in the United States."

A separate search by Business Insider based on the name reported by CNN did not yield any matches in a public records database. There also appear to be no references to anyone named Haven Monahan online, except in reference to Jackie and ongoing investigation into Rolling Stone's UVA story.

Jackie's friends said they exchanged text messages with Monahan on multiple occasions, and received at least one email from a Yahoo account in his name.

The Washington Times reports that the friends were given three numbers for Monahan — a number supplied by Jackie that the students originally reached out to and was supposedly his personal cellphone, a second number that he replied from and said was a friend's phone, and a third number that he continued the conversation on and said was his BlackBerry.

According to The Times, all three of these numbers "were labeled as an 'Internet Phone' on a database background check." This means that they were sent using "services that allow users to send SMS text messages from a computer or iPad without having a phone number," The Times reports.

Last week, The Washington Post confirmed that a photo supposedly of Monahan that the friends received from the BlackBerry number was actually a former classmate from Jackie's high school, who "said he barely knew Jackie and hasn't been to Charlottesville for at least six years."

All of this adds up to growing evidence questioning the identity of Haven Monahan, Jackie's alleged rapist.

"There's a very good chance whoever I was texting was Jackie," UVA student Alex Stock, a friend identified as "Andy" in Rolling Stone, told CNN. "There's a definite possibility."

Still waiting to find out if it's all happening because the fraternity put up a fight, seeing when it'll swing back towards the center, etc.

[Herv100]

This thread reminds me of a great comment I saw on a Ferguson thread somewheres.

Reality is just a social construct. What objectively or scientifically happened doesn't matter, what matters is how it makes you feel.

[baffled]

This thread reminds me of a great comment I saw on a Ferguson thread somewheres.

Reality is just a social construct. What objectively or scientifically happened doesn't matter, what matters is how it makes you feel.

It's definitely all about the feelz.

And the patriarchy. Don't ever forget the evil patriarchy. Or white privilege.

The Kochs, too.

[baffled]

At least EVERYBODY KEPT THEIR FUCKING JOBS
http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle ... story.html

Also on Sunday evening, U-Va. President Teresa Sullivan said in a statement: “Rolling Stone’s story, ‘A Rape on Campus,’ did nothing to combat sexual violence, and it damaged serious efforts to address the issue. Irresponsible journalism unjustly damaged the reputations of many innocent individuals and the University of Virginia. Rolling Stone falsely accused some University of Virginia students of heinous, criminal acts, and falsely depicted others as indifferent to the suffering of their classmate. The story portrayed University staff members as manipulative and callous toward victims of sexual assault. Such false depictions reinforce the reluctance sexual assault victims already feel about reporting their experience, lest they be doubted or ignored.”

The report cites several major reporting failures. The principal one was Erdely’s, and ultimately her editor’s: almost total reliance on Jackie’s account of what occurred on the night of Sept. 28, 2012, when Jackie said she was lured by a date to an upstairs bedroom at the Phi Kappa Psi fraternity house and repeatedly assaulted.

The magazine essentially failed to find corroboration for Jackie’s account from others — students, university administrators, law enforcement officials — but published her story regardless.

Despite presenting in her story comments from three friends who advised Jackie that night not to report the rape, Erdely never spoke with those friends and made little effort to do so, the report confirmed. The friends — Ryan Duffin, Kathryn Hendley and Alex Stock — said Erdely never contacted them and denied that they had told Jackie to remain silent about the alleged crime.

In fact, Erdely wrote in her article that she had contacted Duffin and that he declined to be interviewed. That statement is apparently false; Duffin told The Post he was never contacted by Rolling Stone.

The campus of the University of Virginia is seen March 20. (J. Lawler Duggan/For The Washington Post)
“In hindsight,” the report said, the most crucial decision that Rolling Stone made was not contacting the three friends. “That was the reporting path, if taken, that would almost certainly have led the magazine’s editors to change plans.”

In public statements and in its apology, Rolling Stone and Erdely also apparently misrepresented the notion that they declined to contact “Drew” — Jackie’s supposed date on the night of the alleged rape — because of an agreement with Jackie not to do so.

In fact, the Columbia report makes clear, there was no such agreement. “Jackie made no demand that Rolling Stone not try to identify Drew,” the report’s authors wrote, noting that Jackie even suggested Erdely check the fraternity’s roster to find him.

http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/fea ... g-20150405

[Protobuilder]

The 'apology' is something that you can really marvel at however.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/06/busin ... .html?_r=0

For those of you who are link-phobic, she apologizes to the readers, her editors, her colleagues to the UVA 'community' and to victims of sexual assault. The people she purposely tried to smear as rapists didn't get a mention.

Of course, at least she didn't tweet something non-pc because she would have been forced to write a real apology and be out of a job.

[baffled]

The 'apology' is something that you can really marvel at however.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/06/busin ... .html?_r=0

For those of you who are link-phobic, she apologizes to the readers, her editors, her colleagues to the UVA 'community' and to victims of sexual assault. The people she purposely tried to smear as rapists didn't get a mention.

Of course, at least she didn't tweet something non-pc because she would have been forced to write a real apology and be out of a job.

Exactly. It's unbelievable.

Only reasons I can think of as to why he didn't apologized to the fraternity:
1) White male, fraternity, patriarchy bullshit. Fuck them.
2) Preparing for a lawsuit and trying to minimize the amount of ammo she can give the fraternity and anyone else who decides they want a piece.

[baffled]

Over/under on ruined careers, lawsuits settled and SJW meltdowns in public forums?

Ruined careers looks like: 0.
- Nobody is being fired and Erdley keeps a gig as Contributing Editor... and everyone else who failed to do their job gets to keep failing to do it and collect a check.

Lawsuits settled: Guessing at least 1, but also guessing it depends on the judge who gets the case, and how much RS's insurer wants to fight or just make this all end.

SJW meltdowns: Can't be computed with today's technology.

[Protobuilder]

Over/under on ruined careers, lawsuits settled and SJW meltdowns in public forums?

Ruined careers looks like: 0.
- Nobody is being fired and Erdley keeps a gig as Contributing Editor... and everyone else who failed to do their job gets to keep failing to do it and collect a check.

Lawsuits settled: Guessing at least 1, but also guessing it depends on the judge who gets the case, and how much RS's insurer wants to fight or just make this all end.

SJW meltdowns: Can't be computed with today's technology.

I want to see it go to court to hear what their entire thought process was. This wasn't a young journalist rushing out a blog post on their own nor a case of sources lying. Did Erdley ever believe for a moment it was a true story or did she go looking for it? When her editors read it did they consider fact-checking any part of it? When they knew it was complete bullshit but decided to print it did they simply figure that the accused would get off following their day in court and after journalism awards were in hand and pats on the back given? Unbelievable.

[baffled]

Over/under on ruined careers, lawsuits settled and SJW meltdowns in public forums?

Ruined careers looks like: 0.
- Nobody is being fired and Erdley keeps a gig as Contributing Editor... and everyone else who failed to do their job gets to keep failing to do it and collect a check.

Lawsuits settled: Guessing at least 1, but also guessing it depends on the judge who gets the case, and how much RS's insurer wants to fight or just make this all end.

SJW meltdowns: Can't be computed with today's technology.

I want to see it go to court to hear what their entire thought process was. This wasn't a young journalist rushing out a blog post on their own nor a case of sources lying. Did Erdley ever believe for a moment it was a true story or did she go looking for it? When her editors read it did they consider fact-checking any part of it? When they knew it was complete bullshit but decided to print it did they simply figure that the accused would get off following their day in court and after journalism awards were in hand and pats on the back given? Unbelievable.

Didn't she already admit that she was looking for "the right story"? The Columbia Journalism report more or less said that everyone passed the buck and didn't do their job.

I really don't have a clue what they were thinking, but I have read that Erdley has a number of stories that have been falling under heavy scrutiny, or have been debunked.

The Army rape story is a big one that got beaten to a pulp recently.

[Protobuilder]

Over/under on ruined careers, lawsuits settled and SJW meltdowns in public forums?

Ruined careers looks like: 0.
- Nobody is being fired and Erdley keeps a gig as Contributing Editor... and everyone else who failed to do their job gets to keep failing to do it and collect a check.

Lawsuits settled: Guessing at least 1, but also guessing it depends on the judge who gets the case, and how much RS's insurer wants to fight or just make this all end.

SJW meltdowns: Can't be computed with today's technology.

I want to see it go to court to hear what their entire thought process was. This wasn't a young journalist rushing out a blog post on their own nor a case of sources lying. Did Erdley ever believe for a moment it was a true story or did she go looking for it? When her editors read it did they consider fact-checking any part of it? When they knew it was complete bullshit but decided to print it did they simply figure that the accused would get off following their day in court and after journalism awards were in hand and pats on the back given? Unbelievable.

Didn't she already admit that she was looking for "the right story"? The Columbia Journalism report more or less said that everyone passed the buck and didn't do their job.

I really don't have a clue what they were thinking, but I have read that Erdley has a number of stories that have been falling under heavy scrutiny, or have been debunked.

The Army rape story is a big one that got beaten to a pulp recently.

I didn't hear that she said that but it makes sense that she didn't drop the story as she had already put so much time into writing the rest of the article. It's not easy to walk away from a project you have put a lot of time into. If George Lucas doesn't do it, we end up with Ewoks. She did it and people's lives were ruined.

Her wikipedia bio is something she can use in future articles.

Sabrina Rubin Erdely is an American magazine reporter best known for the publication in Rolling Stone of an article detailing the alleged rape, later found not to have occurred, of a University of Virginia student by several fraternity members. The magazine retracted the article, entitled "A Rape on Campus", following a Columbia University School of Journalism review of the article which concluded that Ms. Erdely and Rolling Stone failed to engage in “basic, even routine journalistic practice”.

A graduate of the University of Pennsylvania, Erdely has written about rape and bullying.... She is now a freelance journalist. Erdely's Rolling Stone story "A Rape on Campus" was named by Columbia Journalism Review as "the Worst Journalism of 2014"[4] and as "Error of the Year" by the Poynter Institute

[baffled]

Nice. I hope that never gets edited.

Richard Bradley obviously has a unique perspective on this, and he may be a little bitter given the backlash he received for being the first to question the article.

http://www.richardbradley.net/shotsinth ... k-thereof/

This is a bit of a gem, IMO.:

This heads-will-not-roll resolution, along with comments from owner and editor-in-chief Jann Wenner that again seemed to put the onus of responsibility on Jackie, doesn’t seem to have quelled the anger over Rolling Stone’s bogus journalism. (Although part of me agrees with Wenner: Jackie is a liar, and we shouldn’t forget that. She does not escape responsibility because, as I heard managing editor Will Dana say on NPR the the other day, she’s “a girl.” She’s a college junior, a young woman, a legal adult, and of an age where, if you called her a girl, many women of her age would take offense. Let’s put it this way: She is old enough to know better, and to suggest otherwise is sexist.)

The focus has largely been on Rolling Stone and Erdley. However, "Jackie" played a major role in all of this and deserves to shoulder a large portion of the blame

Other great parts, according to me:

Rubin Erdely owes Phi Psi and its members—probably all fraternity members, frankly—an apology. That she refuses to acknowledge her obligation says something about her character.

It also suggests that, despite everything, she still believes, whether Jackie’s story is true or not—it obviously isn’t—some larger truth about rape culture and the predilections of fraternity members. Seen in this light, her refusal to apologize actually strengthens the fraternity’s lawsuit; it reinforces the idea that Sabrina Rubin Erdely really, really doesn’t like fraternities—and was determined to portray their members as rapists.

2) The Columbia report notes that Rolling Stone refused to waive its attorney client privilege and give Coll access to their lawyers. The tautological reason Rolling Stone gave: That to do so would be waiving attorney-client privilege. (Get it? They wouldn’t waive attorney-client privilege because that would mean waiving attorney-client privilege.)

The magazine’s lack of transparency casts doubt on virtually all of what Rolling Stone has to say in its own defense.

Here’s why: With a story this sensitive, good libel lawyers—and I assume Rolling Stone has very good lawyers—are, or should be, very much in the mix. On sensitive stories, they become something akin to editors with a law degree. You simply could not publish such an accusatory article without having it very heavily lawyered; there is, or ought to be, a lot of discussion between the editor-in-chief and the magazine’s libel lawyer(s). That Rolling Stone won’t disclose their lawyers’ advice suggests that the magazine did not take it, or did the least amount possible to satisfy legal concerns. After all, if the lawyers argued that the magazine had done excellent work and was on safe ground publishing the story, disclosing that information would likely have discouraged any potential lawsuits—like the one Phi Psi is now pursuing against the magazine.

In other words: It’s highly likely that Rolling Stone had a prepublication warning that this story had significant problems—and published the story anyway. Because they knew it was a sexy story, and they were willing to take the risk.

If that turns out to be true.... whoa. I'm assuming major publications like RS have insurance that protects them if, and when, they are sued for libel, defamation or whatever. Can't imagine they're happy.

4) Sabrina Rubin Erdely is a terrible journalist. This harsh but inescapable truth is born out again and again throughout the Coll report, though its authors are kind enough not to connect the dots. (Not me.) There are many reasons, but the most basic one is that Erdely knew what story she wanted to write before she wrote it—and her faith in her own righteousness blinded her to everything that could have prevented this disaster.

Nice.

[terra]

Women have the power to eliminate 80% of rape (that is, man sexually assaulting woman type of rape) in one generation...

Most rapists were subjected to some form of sexual abuse in childhood. A startling amount is perpetrated by females. Peer-reviewed studies conclude that between 60-80% of “rapists, sex offenders and sexually aggressive men” were sexually abused by a female.” In this same article she also states “According to a 2004 U.S. Department of Education mass study of university students, 57% of students reporting child sexual abuse cited a male offender, and 42% reported a female offender

...So, you think the answer is to “teach men not to rape”? Since we know 95% of men will never rape, and we know that 60 to 80% of serial rapists were themselves raped as children by women, I have a much more effective suggestion. Instead of berating all men for what only 5% of the population do, how about we teach women not to rape children? That would decrease the 5% margin by at least half.

It's a ranty but interesting read...

http://honeybadgerbrigade.com/2014/10/08/rape-culture/

[bennyonesix]

Why are you holding Rolling Stone to our value system?

They openly reject us and our values.

To them, our honesty and integrity etc are at best hollow and most often cover for oppression.

This reporter was doing what she was hired to do.

If you read her apology, it was for failing her tribe, not violating our legal/ethical standards.

Look fuckers, us white men (for lack of a better term) and our trans-tribal ideology has lost. It is identity/tribal politics out there: us v them. Analyzing it any other way is useless.

I shit you not, our internal enemies/opponents/SJW think this shit is WWE with it's meta wink and nod and it's over the top drama.

[WildGorillaMan]

Why are you holding Rolling Stone to our value system?

They openly reject us and our values.

To them, our honesty and integrity etc are at best hollow and most often cover for oppression.

This reporter was doing what she was hired to do.

If you read her apology, it was for failing her tribe, not violating our legal/ethical standards.

Look fuckers, us white men (for lack of a better term) and our trans-tribal ideology has lost. It is identity/tribal politics out there: us v them. Analyzing it any other way is useless.

I shit you not, our internal enemies/opponents/SJW think this shit is WWE with it's meta wink and nod and it's over the top drama.

That's the best explanation I've seen so far.