W. Center suit unlikely to succeed

This article has been corrected. You may view this article’s correction here.

The Yale Women’s Center’s message to Zeta Psi was clear: “Lawyer up.” But the legal merits of a possible sexual-harassment case against the fraternity are much less clear, several legal experts told the News on Tuesday.After a picture of the fraternity’s pledge class standing in front of the Center with a sign that read “We Love Yale Sluts” surfaced on the Internet over the weekend, the Center board said Monday that it has contacted two lawyers, who tentatively agreed to work on the case pro bono.

While charges of harassment connected to the physical blocking of the Center door are more likely to stand up in court, members of the board would have a harder time proving the pledges committed defamation by holding up the sign, experts said. But before it gets that far, Zeta Psi is looking to repair its image by participating in or hosting events in support of women at Yale.

Members of the Center wrote “This Time We Sue” in the tagline of an e-mail denouncing the photo they sent out on various panlists Sunday. But so far the Center has taken no legal action beyond contacting lawyers, Chase Olivarius-McAllister ’09, the Center’s former political-action coordinator, said.

“Wait for us to file a suit before deciding on the merits of the case,” she said.

Defamation law requires a specific targeted individual, said Eugene Volokh, a law professor at the University of California, Los Angeles. But it would be hard to name individuals who were defamed by a poster like the one featured in the photo, he said.

Even if a target could be identified, courts would treat the term “slut” as a word that expresses an opinion and is therefore difficult to define legally, Volokh said.

“The idea of group defamation doesn’t exist in American law,” explained Yale Law School professor Robert Post. “The idea of defaming women in general is not a cause of action in the U.S.”

Susan Estrich, a professor at the University of Southern California’s Gould School of Law, said she does not think the Center would have a case against the students for holding up the sign.

“There’s no law I’m familiar with that says you can’t stand out front with stupid signs,” she said. “They just engaged in speech that people found offensive.”

She suggested another course of action she says would be more consistent with the First Amendment: more speech.

“Maybe somebody should go over to the fraternity house and put up signs that say ‘We Love Yale Fools,’” she said. “I hope the women of Yale are smart enough and strong enough and clever enough to give as good as they get and realize that free speech is a value and not get mad but get even.”

But Estrich said blocking the entrance to the Center could be more serious legally. On the second count, harassment, the Center may have a stronger — but still far from knock-down — case, experts said.

“It’s right in the gray area of ‘Is this protected speech, or is this harassment?’” Deborah Rhode ’74 LAW ’77, a professor of law at Stanford, said.

Rhode said the pledges’ presence at the Center — which one member has alleged deterred her from entering and which could reasonably be construed as creating a “hostile and intimidating environment” — is legally much more significant than the photograph itself. But there exists an obvious tension with the First Amendment when someone sues for this kind of offensive speech, she said.

Volokh said the harassment claim faces a similar problem — identifying the victims, who in this case could include the Center itself and the woman who was allegedly prevented from entering. Either way, sexual harassment suits usually have to prove a pattern of “severe and pervasive” behavior, which the one-time incident would not constitute, Volokh said.

Courts have generally been more permissive of speech on college campuses, Volokh said, as long as it holds up under a number of tests. Along with a few other circumstances, speech is unprotected when it has the imminent potential to incite illegal conduct, when it is likely to be perceived as a threat of a crime, and when it is libelous, he said.

Whether a suit is ever filed or not, the brothers of Zeta Psi are focused on their trial in the court of public opinion.

“We’re all terribly sorry, and at that moment we didn’t actually think that Yale girls are sluts,” a student pictured in the photograph said. “Obviously it was inappropriate, and obviously we shouldn’t have done anything. At the moment, you don’t think.”

He said the fraternity is planning a public-relations initiative to mend its damaged reputation, with brothers brainstorming ways to reach out to the community.

“We actually have a meeting tomorrow with all the brothers, and everyone’s supposed to bring an idea of how to help restore our image,” the student said. “Everybody’s excited to help out because everybody’s very sorry. It was a stupid moment, a stupid thing.”

The chapter’s president, Jon Charest ’10, would not comment on the content of weekly chapter meetings. But he said the fraternity hopes to do “something to support the female community at Yale.”

Charest said Zeta Psi has not yet been contacted by the Women’s Center. Olivarius-McAllister declined to comment on whether the Center had been contacted.

Comments

  • Anonymous

    what women's center suit?

    oh right. i imagine the legal experts consulted for this article were quite perplexed as to why they were asked to comment on a non-existent case. i mean, i understand the desire to write a follow up after such a major article, but this is pure speculation.

  • Anonymous

    hmmmm you spend a day doing "legal research" to randomo peeps across the US.
    THAT DOES NOT CONSTITUTE AN ARTICLE.

  • Anonymous

    wait..i thought a suit hadn't been filed yet?

  • Anonymous

    wait..i thought you yourself, sir abrahamson said just yesterday that all the center was doing was "considering legal action." so a suit is yet to be filed and you are already qualifying its merits. if anyone's jumping to conclusions of this it's you…silly.

  • Anonymous

    you say a hypothetical law suit is "unlikely to succeed"?

    YEAH. that's totally newsworthy. thanks ydn! you keep me informed for all my hypothetical needs!

    In the hypothetical land of hypotheticalness.

  • Anonymous

    zeta psi is going to be hosting events in support of women??

    HIDE YOUR DAUGHTERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1111

  • Anonymous

    How about "WE LOVE YALE RAPISTS"?

  • Anonymous

    "At the moment, you don’t think.”

    How about the moment you printed the sign and headed to the Women's Center with it? How about all the subsequent moments in which you left the Women's Center, uploaded the photo on to your computer and the facebook??

    Way more than one isolated moment of STUPIDITY

  • Anonymous

    this article is weird. i don't get it.

  • Anonymous

    "at that moment we didn’t actually think that Yale girls are sluts"… but you know… like the rest of the time we do… just AT THAT MOMENT we didn't.

    You sound silly Mr. Zeta Psi man. You should be more semantically clear!

  • Anonymous

    Whether a suit is ever filed or not, the brothers of Zeta Psi are focused on their trial in the court of public opinion.

    Yes, I'm sure they were considering their public opinion when they posted this photo on Facebook, insighting this controversy in the first place. Did they think the public would approve of it then???

    This is obviously about saving their asses.

    Their degrading concepts of women have not changed. Isn't that the goal of this whole thing in the first place?

  • Anonymous

    Who are these random Californians you are consulting, your mommies?

  • Anonymous

    This is called a "one time incident" and although for specifically zeta psi it may be, there has certainly been a history of "severe and pervasive" assault on the Women's Center and women at Yale in general. Like two years ago when members of a fraternity shouted "no means yes and yes means anal" outside the Women's Center. Or before that, when fraternity brothers stole t-shirts, put up by the Women's Center, commemorating rape and put them on as part of a prank. I just thought it should be mentioned that this is not just one isolated incident.

  • Anonymous

    What Jon Charest could "do for Yale women" is keep away. and tell his other frat boys to follow suit.

  • Anonymous

    Your nebulous article failed to address Yale's liability for this.
    It happened on their campus between their student organizations.

    Can't they be sued?

  • Anonymous

    yale can't be sued because the fraternity is not a student organization at yale

  • Anonymous

    I'm so glad that someone brought up the 1st amendment. It gets forgotten so often. But are you really telling me that neo-Nazis can legally march through a predominately Jewish suburb (where many Holocaust survivors live), but this fraternity can't stand outside this center with a sign? If these women want the right to free speech, they should be prepared to allow other people free speech as well.

  • Anonymous

    To 4:49 AM - no, Yale is not liable *unless* the administration proves indifferent to YWC requests for discussion/mediation. Yale is smart enough to know that they need to take a meeting and, if the YWC members are angry enough at said meeting, to send out an email about the incident and perhaps host an event about sexism. Then, Yale will be liable no more.

    Also- The spate of comments at 4am, doubtless originating from aggravated YWC members, is amusing. This article accomplishes plenty: if nothing else, it demonstrates the unlikelihood that a lawsuit exists in the first place because of the nebulousness of the charges. The YWC will find this out soon enough.

  • Anonymous

    Is this county lawsuit nuts or what? As soon as someone gets their feelings hurt they want to file a lawsuit. Face it, there are rude and obnoxious people out there (a disproportionate number in frats). Encountering these jerks is a part of college life. Get over it.

  • Anonymous

    i am an alum, and i have some scattered thoughts:

    question -- instead of using the word "slut," what if Zeta had instead said "as promiscuous men, we love the women of Yale who are promiscuous, as well"???

    in other words, which is more offensive: use of the word "slut," or the sentiment expressed beneath the crude language?

    the WC believes "slut" can be equated with the most horrendous of racial slurs. this belief, however, doesn't necessarily make it so.

    i think Zeta acted in a way that can be described as immature, stupid, and insensitive. i question, however, whether they committed Hatespeech.

    regardless of what the women's center thinks, the offenders probably did not know that "slut" carries the same connotations as do racial slurs with unique historical context. while intent is not the sole indicator of blameworthiness, intent is certainly one factor that should be considered when judging these supposed bigots.

    whoever said that this wasn't a one-time incident is right. but that fact doesn't necessarily signal anything more than a culture of ignorance. the people who acted in the past are not the same individuals who acted a few days ago. it's hard to connect the incidents because the individuals involved have changed.

    i guess that in sum, i think that people on both sides are getting too worked up about this. the bottom line is that most college kids, whether male or female, whether in the ivy league or at state school X Y or Z, are ignorant, stupid, insensitive, quick to judge, drunkards, and ultimately just insanely entitled. this doesn't make them horrible individuals, but rather overgrown, highly educated children. when it comes down to it, everyone almost certainly deserves to be forgiven if he/she apologizes. i loved yale, but let's be real -- it's not the real world. we all do dumb things that we regret. believe me when i say that once your four years are up, or when you finally start working, you learn what's appropriate and what's not.

  • Anonymous

    How could anyone criticize the YDN for writing an article about the possible outcome of a lawsuit? The Women's Center specifically wrote "This time we sue" as the subject of their email. Therefore, it's obviously worth looking into whether such a suit would have merit. Don't get upset because the article simply made clear that such a suit, as many wrote yesterday, would be totally groundless.

  • Anonymous

    Put your money where your mouths are, ladies. It's that simple.

  • Anonymous

    92 yale women get raped every year.
    Is calling all women, and especially women who are seeking out the women's center as a safe space and place for social change, sluts hate speech? You bet.

  • Anonymous

    It is because of women like Olivarius-McAllister that feminists have a bad name. Always looking to create problems with issues that don't exist… And to compare the word "slut" with the "N" word… Absolutely ridiculous. It's a stupid picture with a bunch of frat guys holding a stupid sign. They didn't hurt anyone, they certainly didn't rape anyone, and they couldn't have blocked the entrance of the YWC to anyone. It was 12:30 in the morning. The door was surely locked anyway…

  • Anonymous

    The idea of a harassment suit against the fraternity is just plain dumb, for reasons having nothing to do with whether the fraternity was really obnoxious and stepped over the line.

    Title IX only allows educational institutions -- not individuals or fraternities -- to be sued for sexual harassment.

    Deborah Rhode is supposedly a law professor.

    Why doesn't she know this basic rule of law?

    Any junior lawyer would know this.

  • Anonymous

    92 rapes a year? What?

    From the Yale website:

    "Forcible sex offenses (including forcible rape): 2004: 4; 2005: 11; 2006: 9."

    Obviously 1 is too many, but spare us the bogus stats.

  • Anonymous

    Is it just me or has everyone missed the point? The question is not a) whether or not Zeta's actions constitute as hate speech or b) whether or not it violates free speech. The issue is whether or not their actions qualify as sexual harassment.

    According to the CT laws and Yale policies outlined in the first article this act qualifies as sexual harassment. However, to fully qualify as sexual harassment there must be a victim.

    Here in lies the problem with what Zeta did. They published the photo in the public domain because it was a funny joke (to them). The fact of the matter is that they chose the YWC to be in the background because that's what made the joke. They chose the YWC because they were the group most likely to be offended. They intended to upset if not harass the members of the YWC.

    Publishing the photo in the public domain took the act from an insider's joke to an attempt at public humiliation.

    Therein lies the problem. There's no issue if the photo is taken in the frat house. There's no issue if the photo is never circulated publicly. You can yell racial slurs in your own home while watching the Fresh Prince of Bel Aire without ever engaging in racial harassment.

    Surprisingly (as I've been labeled a sexist more times than I can count) I have to side with the YWC on this one. While I'm not sure this should go to trial, I do think that the threat of a suit will go along way towards forcing the University to make a public condemnation of the act as well curb future potentially damaging activity by the fraternity. In fact, a weak denouncement of the act from Andrew Hamilton just showed up in my mailbox…

  • Anonymous

    As someone pretty quick to criticize the YDN for running puffy, content-less trend articles (especially under this Board), I think this is actually a pretty solid piece of reporting. Definitely preferable to the one about how Yale students, uh, don't exercise.

  • Anonymous

    @5:50: "Like newspapers: horror sells."

    I do anti-rape work, and I've got nothing to "sell." I haven't worked with RSVP so I can't speak for them entirely, but no anti-rape activist wants rape statistics to be higher. I've been raped several times; the gory details "sell" themselves.

    But, growing up I always knew not to trust the cops to do anything but make things worse, so I never became an official statistic. The one time I did call the Yale cops, they flat out refused to come.

    So, when faced with inept cops on one side and a spineless administration on the other, why would I bother reporting anything? The Department of Justice study from which that statistic comes, and which I've read, tried to compensate for the situations where assault victims don't report it, based on surveys and interviews. Neither the DoJ, nor sexual assault victims, nor anti-rape activists has anything to gain from high rape statistics.

  • Anonymous

    This may sound cruel, but I mean it in the strictest analytical sense.

    Given that many women go through Yale with nary a wayward glance, what is it about *you* that causes you to be "raped several times" and, when you call the police, what causes them to "flat out refuse to come?"

    Is it your friends? Your location/address? Your background? Do you project "easy mark?" Seriously: what do you think it is?

  • Anonymous

    Chase Olivarius-McAllister has given feminism an awesome name, and the only name its got on this campus: active, brave, incisive, and creative.

    She is also totally delightful and the degree to which she has been villified on this website is a testament to the extent that people hate feminists. To know her personally is to be impressed.

  • Anonymous

    You cannot blame a woman for getting raped! That's like saying it's the cashier at a gas station's fault for working there when he gets shot in a late night robbery. Believe it or not, some women are born into abusive families or neighborhoods where rape is sadly a common occurrence. It's attitudes like the one above that allow a culture tolerant of sexual abuse to continue. One in four women will be sexually assaulted in her lifetime--and one in ten men. Rape is the most common violent crime facing women on college campuses, even Yale. Sadly it's one Yale doesn't like to report (Yale is under scrutiny for underreporting rape statistics). If people at Yale cannot even be symathetic towards rape victims, they certainly aren't going to try to stop sexual harassment. I thought the Yale community had more respect for women than this.

  • Anonymous

    #33 - To suggest that a victim of rape is potentially to blame for such a violent attack against her body in one of the most horrific ways possible is disturbing. NOTHING justifies rape and thus it would make more sense, and frankly a sense of respect, to question why her rapist(s) committed the vile act in the first place - why they chose to assert power in such a sexually violent and pervasive manner. Because when it comes to rape, there's clearly something wrong with the rapist and not necessarily the rape victim.

    Also, it (should) be common knowledge that rape is underreported - not just at Yale but everywhere. I'm sure that Yale administrators would agree that not all rapes that occur on campus are actually reported.

    Funmi Showole
    Silliman 2008

  • Anonymous

    "I'll say it off the bat: I am a man, and I belong to a fraternity. To a lot of people, that will mean that my opinion is less worthwhile. That is fine, but I am still going to state it. I think that people like Olivarius-McAllister actually hurt the feminist cause. No amount of brilliant writing or witty argumentation or willingness to fight for what you think is right (sometimes known as courage) is going to persuade most of the men at yale that pornography is designed to subjugate women, or persuade women that being fashionable is participating in prostitution. That is because those ideas are ridiculous. I mean, ever since the Women's Center had its "frats" discussion, the Women's Center and Olivarius-McAllister particularly have been the target of innumerable accusations, most of them profane, and all of them bitter. I have to agree that Olivarius-mcallister's talents are undeniably unique, but history will show them to have been futile, as long as she keeps on advocating radical ideas. The Women's Center doesn't get that just because Olivarius-mcallister is incisive, stunning, and powerful, doesn't mean that her futile advocacy of radical ideas won't actually hurt feminism, by making it seem inveterately hostile to men, impossible for any woman who isn't iconic to practice, and in the end mean that small, important, non-radical but still feminist changes take place."

    I said this after the YDN did its piece on the Women's Center a few months ago, and I have to admit that I was wrong.

    The Women's Center and Chase Olivarius-McAllister are changing this campus, its fraternities, and women's expecatation of how men should treat them -- for the better.

    I am sorry I underestimated Olivarius-McAllister and the Center.

    Repentent and admiring,
    DKE '08

  • Anonymous

    @9:27: It's not cruel, just terribly misinformed.

    Your answer: Several years of an abusive relationship that neither leaving town nor breaking up could stop.

    Cops refuse domestic violence calls all the time. I'm not unique in this, and all the other women I know who have called the cops in similar cases have gotten the same response.

    And no, sorry, it's not a certain kind of woman who is raped or harrassed. I was living on campus at the time. I doubt I would look like an 'easy mark': I look like a pretty stereotypically queer woman. I don't often go out in skirts, let alone short ones that supposedly beckon men's attention. There was no domestic abuse in my immediate family. I'm a feminist, and part of that is that there have always been really great men in my life, between family and friends. I'm an overgrown tomboy who still arm wrestles boys.

    Bottom line is: You can't lump assault victims into a category of "easy marks"; most of us would get left out. I know a lot of people who have been raped or it's been attempted or otherwise abused, and I doubt any of them (adult men, married middle-class women, little kids, etc) would fit into your categories. You'll learn nothing from trying to categorize assault victims, but you'll learn a ton if you just listen.

  • Anonymous

    How in the world do people not have anything to gain from higher rape statistics? People will certainly pay more attention to 92 occurrences than to 4. It's very similar to how the negative effects of marijuana are overstated on TV, because it has more impact that way.

  • Anonymous

    Or, more succinctly, higher stats = higher funding

  • Anonymous

    "Several years of an abusive relationship that neither leaving town nor breaking up could stop."

    Ummm… my humanity (such as it is) wants to empathize, but my intellect demands, e.g., where were your parents? Why didn't the restraining order work? Why did the abuser move in with you again when you changed your address?

    "Several years"?!

    Perhaps I *am* naive, but I do wonder whether you are…"reinterpreting" history. Otherwise, "several years" demands complicity (unless you were kept in a cage of some sort).

    Again: not trying to hurt you, just applying a certain logic.

    BTW: nowhere did I imply that "short skirts" et. al. "attract" rape; although certain behaviors do, apparently (i.e., criminals often display animal instinct in identifying potential victims).

    So… "several years…" I wonder… Really, do you think you had any responsibility there? At least to your self and safety?

    Thank you for sharing your story, though; quite brave.

    Oh, wait: "Cops refuse domestic violence calls all the time. I'm not unique in this, and all the other women I know who have called the cops in similar cases have gotten the same response."

    Cops REFUSE to come? What happened when you filed the complaint (especially given that the calls were recorded)?

    ALL the other women you know have had the SAME (non-)response (i.e., REFUSAL to intervene)? Um… sorry: I have SEVERAL friends on the force and I KNOW ABSOLUTELY that this does not happen in my community and have trouble believing that my community is all that different from yours.

    There is more to this story.

  • Anonymous

    Oh, wait! You say that this was on CAMPUS? Unless you were involved in the CRESPO case (which had little to do with Yale and more to do with a corrupt cop and a protective police force--valid criticisms--but even THERE the perp got, in the end, 5-20 years in prison), CAMPUS episodes are much more like the KORB case where despite court-found innocence a kid fries under university over-reaction.

    An instructive contrary example would be Harvard's Elster case where there *was* a rape (Harvard claims, its first) but the guy pretty much got off; the community rightfully flipped out and now Harvard is as super-sensitive as any other campus. BTW, embedded in the above is, again, evidence of the TRUE RARITY of rape on campus, BUT also evidence that victims have difficulty coming out about the events.

    Crespo; Korb; Elster. There are so few one can actually NAME them.

  • Anonymous

    @2:12: Okay, this is starting to get totally off topic, so I don't want to argue over details of this story. My purpose in getting into it at all was to point out that it's not as simple complicity or predation, or other things you think you can understand, from an outsider's perspective, with pure logic. I can't say that I can make logic of the whole thing myself, years later. So, yes, of course there is more to the story--not things I would have a reason to hide, but just things that do not make ordinary sense.

    And that was my point: domestic abuse is incredibly complicated, and often goes against your ordinary logic--even for the people involved. But we can't create any real solutions to the problem by just saying, "Where's the logic in this?" all the time. If you want to do anything about the problem, don't analyze it all the time, because you'll get nowhere.

    So regardless of whether there are 4 rapes or 92 rapes at Yale each year, there are that many completely diverse but incredibly tragic stories that will not be alleviated by writing off statistics, judging, or analyzing, but by listening to the people involved. And all too often those stories, whether being told in public, in filing a report, or among friends and family, fall on deaf ears.

  • Anonymous

    Dear 10:27am, ITA 2:12
    Perpetual victimhood and a chip on your shoulder will not lead you to a healthy relationship with men.

    Whatever happened in your past, you do need to examine your behavior and see if perhaps you'd taken another course of action, would the outcome have been different? If you allow people to treat you badly, some will. While it doesn't excuse the criminal behavior of others, you may be surprised how much easier life is when you accept some accountability when merited. Now that is true empowerment.

    Associating with feminists will not help repair your ability to trust men. They take the worst, most predatory and abusive examples of a few men and apply them to all men. This does nothing to help either sex and simply amps up the gender war.

    A real statistic young women ought to fear is that 31% of 35-39 year old women are never married. Yikes!

  • Anonymous

    Some of the appalling responses on this board are exactly why so many rape victims do not come foward. Instead of being supported by their community, they are accused of perhaps contributing to their own rape and asked to re-evaluate their own choices. Where is the conversation about the rapists who choose to violate the bodies of others in such violently intimate ways? THAT is the real problem and NOT the choices of women (and some men) who regardless of what decisions they may have made, can never create situations in which the only outcome is or should be rape.

    Also, it is (or should be) widely known that rape is an underreported crime. I think that even the Yale administration would agree that more rapes happen on campus then are reported or are ever made public. We should strive towards creating a campus environment in which rape victims are not re-victimized by blame/denial of their lived experiences but are rather supported by an entire community that stands up against rape and other acts of violence and intimidation against women.

    Funmi Showole
    Silliman '08

  • Anonymous

    "other things you think you can understand, from an outsider's perspective"

    Ah, the old "it's a woman thing; you wouldn't understand."

    Thanks.

    BTW: there are definitely worse things that can happen in New Haven. Just ask Ms. Jovin.

    And to Funmi Showole: "blah blah blah" stop trotting out that old tired crap about an unsupportive community. Bullcrap. BTW: I recognize your name from somewhere: no doubt tied to some other "oh help me help me" carping. [Pooh taps forehead…"thinkthink think thinkthink"]

    Wait! Weren't you involved in some other attempt to curtail free speech? Some such or other. Main point: *that* is what you will be remembered for.

    You are at Yale. ALL of you are at Yale. Hold that thought.

    BILL GATES has done more for the world--created jobs, created wealth, improved productivity and, finally, created a HUGE foundation focused on charitable giving--than any social sciences major I could name (exclusive of, maybe, Econ).

    Now, recall: y'all are at Yale. Is it better to focus your energies on the SLIGHTS you suffer, or to focus on the ACTUAL change you could make if you focused on your EDUCATION and building a positive NETWORK of contacts.

    Did capitalist pigdog Bill Gates do more, or will those who are remembered for their thin skins and agitprop activities (and thus miss out on various job opps) do more for the world?

    NO ONE has sympathy for the "poor me, poor me!" cries of Yalies. You want change? Study hard, make friends, move on.

    You wanna make sure that your resume gets roundfiled? Make a different kind of name for yourself.

    Do I expect you to take my advice? Not at all: I merely look forward, ten years hence, to saying "Told you so."

    Don't fritter away what you have: you are surrounded by the (on average) BRIGHTEST, POLITEST, SAVVIEST, and most WORLD-CHANGING cohort you will ever have the PRIVILEGE of meeting. Why waste that on a temptest in a teapot?

    My two cents, and worth every penny.

  • Anonymous

    As a rape victim myself: Feminists need to Shut up Shut up Shut up with the gender politics! You are making this way to complicated. The kindest thing anyone ever did for me was make me face up to the part (getting drunk at a frat party) played in what happened. IT WAS STUPID for me to do that and I never did it again. This does not in anyway make what he did right, at all. But it was more harmful for me to take the perpetual powerless victim position and just get over it, not repeat MY mistakes and not carry a chip on my shoulder.

    I move on, left college, found a nice guy, got married(to a fraternity man - who would've guess!), treat him well and don't harbor resentment against men in general. When I went to the femninist dominated rape crisis center at UF they merely tried and tried to get me on their boo-hoo, if your pregnant you must abort it or you will suffer(not true!), frat boys are all evil, men in general are predatory and you need to get on board with our political agenda. They wanted me to go lobby to make a freaking 2-Live Crew song censored for "encouraging sexist attitude that leads to rape" I can't even remember the song name now so how much cultural impact could it have had.

    If I encountered a young woman experiencing what I did I would tell her the same thing: I'm sorry it happened, you need to accept accountability if merited, move on and don't hold a grudge, don't carry a chip against all men unless you want to be a spinster. Shut up with forcing women to be perpetual, angry victims. The real world is hard enough without this stupid, unfounded gender war. If the worst thing that happens to you is that you get called a slut, then you have a pretty nice life!<p>
    p.s. Shut up feminists!

  • Anonymous

    To the above: I get your point, but you likely meant "Shut up [F]eminists," i.e., brownshirt, capital "F" marxist/feminists, versus the more natural "women can and should do that which they choose and without impediment" feminists (to include those who choose, e.g., motherhood, traditional womanly arts, entrepreneurship, or whatEVER).

    But your realism is well appreciated (not by everyone, to be sure).

  • Anonymous

    Perhaps you remember my name because I actually stand behind my comments?

    And yes, I do understand the importance of taking full advantage of my Yale experience (that part of your post resonated with me) which is what I strive to do. But to me, that is not in conflict with standing up against what I perceive to be bigotry and hate when I see it. And if ten years from now you tell me that I have "wasted" those years advocating for anti-racism, then I think I would simply smile because that is after all one of my goals.

    Thanks,
    Funmi

  • Anonymous

    I'm the poster form10:59 again:

    Fummi

    You seem to enjoy being the savior of groups you put into boxes labeled "oppressed." Aside form bing condescending to such people, this world view contradicts the reality you will see one day out of your Yale bubble. No one at Yale is currently oppressed.

    Most people have prejudices and hatred for a specific group or mankind in general. You aren't actually going to stop it. You'd be better off recognizing any such beliefs within yourself (as we all harbor them) and deal with them in a way that is productive rather than trying to censor uncomfortable viewpoints or frog marching actual, hypothetical or imagined rape victims around to further your personal, political agenda. Which is what you do when you bring it up and your reason for the existence and actions of a very political YMC.

    This 'lawsuit' isn't about what is in the best interest of poor little Yale women, nor women in general. This is about forwarding a specific political agenda. One based on the myth that history has been one big conspiracy against women/dark skinned people/the disabled etc. Truth is: Go to any society, past or present, and a small group of powerful people have always ruled over the rest of the people(including most men.)

    Also in your wrong assumption is that men are simply knuckle dragging Neanderthals, lead around by their privates incapable of understand the complex feelings of a victimized female. Actually, men are just as emotionally and spiritually deep as women, as capable of feeling pain, indignation, frustration, outrage etc.

    So, to borrow the above posters term, why do the Feminist Brownshirts engage in this constant gender war?

  • Anonymous

    #47 - I agree with you in some respects and disagree with others. I happen to believe that there are systems of oppression that exist throughout the world and even at Yale. While scholarship exists that makes similar claims, I also understand that some people choose to disagree. That is their perogative.

    I agree that it is important to evaluate one's own prejudices and work towards deconstructing them. It's something that I attempt to do and will continue to do so - at times by my own free will but also at times when I am confronted by situations that may reveal my own prejudices and push me to address them. But I don't think that this internal work conflicts with encouraging and challenging others to do the same. I also don't think that a long-standing history of inequality or oppression justfies present acts of bigotry or means that we should be complacent with the status quo. Though I also understand that you may take issue with my terms of inequality and oppression and so this happens to be something else which we disagree upon.

    I'll also quickly address your "Also in your wrong assumption . . ." statement though I am unsure as to whether it's directed towards me because I neither stated any of those comments nor do I think I conveyed those sentiments. In my earlier posts on this thread, I simply tried to make four basic points:
    1. No rape should be justified by the actions of the rape victim.
    2. Rape is an underreported crime.
    3. Our campus should stand in opposition to rape.
    4. I pesonally wish to advocate for anti-racism.
    None of this means that I think that men are "simply knuckle dragging Neanderthals, lead around by their privates incapable of understand the complex feelings of a victimized female". Everyday I admire and am inspired by the character of the vast majority of the men in my life and wholeheartedly agree that they share the same emotional and spiritual depth that women do. And I don't think that opposing racism or acts of violence against both men and women means opposing men as well.

    Funmi

  • ok

    The judge should get a good laugh when this is taken to trial. They did not break any laws doing what they did so it is an entirely pointless lawsuit over a stupid joke.