WASHINGTON, April 30, 2015 – Claims by certain sensationalist politicians are often repeated by adoring and equally sensationalist news media. That was certainly the case when a study by RTI International claimed one in five female college students in America is a victim of sexual assault.
“This is not your fight alone,” said President Obama in a public service announcement heralding his “It’s On Us” national campaign. “This is not your fight alone. This is on all of us, every one of us, to fight campus sexual assault. You are not alone. And we have your back and we are going to organize campus by campus, city by city, state by state. The entire country is going to make sure that we understand what this is about and that we’re going to put a stop to it.”
For its part, Rolling Stone magazine went so far as to manufacture a story to fit the new, politically charged narrative. The magazine eventually apologized for its “A Rape on Campus” story, retracting its claims.
An investigation by the Columbia Journalism Review found Rolling Stone’s “failure encompassed reporting, editing, editorial supervision and fact-checking.” In other words, they accused a campus fraternity of a crime without any critical examination of the victim or the evidence.
Christopher Kerbs and Christine Lindquiest, two of the RTI study’s senior authors, attempted to tamp down the hysteria surrounding their findings and its use by unscrupulous political demagogues in a piece written for Time magazine.
“Although we used the best methodology available to us at the time, there are caveats that make it inappropriate to use the 1-in-5 number in the way it’s being used today, as a baseline or the only statistic when discussing our country’s problem with rape and sexual assault on campus. The 1-in-5 statistic is not a nationally representative estimate of prevalence of sexual assault, and we have never presented it as being representative of anything other than the population of senior undergraduate women at the two universities where data were collected,” wrote Kerbs and Lindquiest.
And many a college campus enacted sweeping, totalitarian sex codes to deal with the fictitious “crisis.” As with any law, the violation(s) prohibited must be defined. The University of Michigan, for instance, partially defines sexual violence as “discounting the partner’s feelings regarding sex; criticizing the partner sexually… withholding sex and affection; always demanding sex.”
K. C. Johnson, a history professor at Brooklyn College and City University of New York Graduate Center, said a male student accused of a sex crime may have an “advocate” at his college hearing, provided he or she is not a lawyer. And they “cannot speak in any way during the disciplinary hearing,” wrote Johnson in the journal Minding the Campus.
Under new federal guidelines handed down by the Department of Education, campuses are required to presume the accuser is telling the truth and that the accused is guilty until proven innocent.
The modern university campus is not so much an institution of higher learning as it is a testing laboratory of totalitarian control. Draconian codes governing sex or speech are designed to protect students and faculty from feeling “hurt” or “unsafe” by challenges to their politically correct lunacy. And, more important, to criminalize all activity, from expressions in the bedroom to those in the public square, that do not conform to the utopian dreams of the dreamers.
Who are these drowsy campus worthies?
Read Also: Rolling Stone will never get it
Well, take Professor James Kilgore for instance. He’s an adjunct instructor of global studies and urban planning at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
Back in the 1970s, Kilgore was a member of the Symbionese Liberation Army, the domestic terrorist organization that kidnapped and sexually brutalized newspaper heiress Patty Hurst.
Kilgore got into the university racket “after serving a six-year sentence for the murder of a suburban Sacramento housewife Myrna Opsahl during an April 1975 bank robbery,” the Associated Press reported in 2009.
And then there is Bill Ayers, founder of the violent Marxist Weather Underground, which committed acts of violence through bombings and armed robberies in the late ’60s and early ’70s.
Ayers’ girlfriend at the time, Diana Oughton, and two fellow gang members died when the nail bomb they were building (intended for a non-commissioned officer’s dance at Fort Dix, N..J.) exploded prematurely.
Fellow terrorist and informant Larry Grathwohl told his FBI handlers that “Ayers, along with Bernardine Dohrn, probably had the most authority within the Weathermen,” he confessed in his book Bringing Down America.
Ayers is a retired professor from the University of Illinois at Chicago’s college of education, where he harangued future teachers in the ways of social justice and urban educational reform. And Ayers is a past vice president of the curriculum studies division of the American Education Research Association.
In 2013, a former student of Ayers commented on the quality of his professor’s pedagogical style on the website RateMyProfessors.com. He claimed Ayers stalked students on Facebook with whom he disagreed, adding that “his theories are crazy! He thinks we should forcefully intern citizens and re-educate” them.
Bernardine Dohrn, Ayers’ wife, filled the gaping hole left in Bill’s heart after Oughton abruptly atomized in a shrapnel-filled flash of light back in 1970. Bill and Bernardine hold in common a deep and disturbing love of violence.
Upon reading the horrific details surrounding the 1969 Manson family murder of actress Sharon Tate, her unborn baby and four house guests, Dohrn proclaimed, “Dig it! First they killed those pigs, then they ate dinner in the same room with them. They shoved a fork into the victim’s stomach! Wild!”
In his true-crime classic Helter Skelter, Manson family prosecutor Vincent Bugliosi recalled his questioning of Susan Atkins, later convicted for the stabbing death of Sharon Tate:
Bugliosi: “Susan, did Charlie [Manson] oftentimes use the word ‘pig’ or ‘pigs’?”
Bugliosi: “What did the word ‘pig’ or ‘pigs’ mean to you and your Family?”
Atkins: “‘Pig’ was a word used to describe the establishment… You can’t conceive of what it would be like to see every man judge himself and then take it out on every other man all over the face of the earth.”
Atkins scrawled the word “pig” on the front door before leaving the murder house… in Sharon Tate’s blood.
It’s clear Manson’s vision of global chaos and murder appealed to Bernardine Dorhn’s radical nihilism.
Dorhn is currently an adjunct professor of criminal justice for the University of Illinois at Chicago.
So, what kind of people are our colleges and universities foisting on what remains of America’s civil society?
If Professor Irwin Horwitz is to be believed, the academy is producing rogues. “I am frankly and completely disgusted,” he told students in his Texas A&M strategic management class. “You all lack the honor and maturity to live up to the standards that Texas A&M holds.”
“Since teaching this course,” Horwitz continued in his email to students, “I have caught and seen cheating… None of you, in my opinion, given the behavior in this class, deserves to pass, or graduate to become an Aggie, as you do not in any way embody the honor that the university holds graduates should have within their personal character.”
Professor Horwitz failed his entire class for lacking, well, class.
The “Aggie Code of Honor” demands that its students do not “lie, cheat or steal or tolerate those that do.” It further states that its code “is an effort to unify the aims of all Texas A&M men and women toward a high code of ethics and personal dignity. For most, living under this code will be no problem, as it asks nothing of a person that is beyond reason.”
The Aggie Code of Honor is the detritus of a bygone era, a time when Judeo-Christian morality informed secular “ethics.” But today’s secular ethics, like school grades, rise or fall on a Bell Curve.
One of Horwitz’s students told a sympathetic reporter at the San Francisco Chronicle that his professor was “one of the least empathetic people I have ever had teach a class.”
Empathy is the currency of the depraved, those who demand judgment-free understanding, by which they mean “moral relativism.”
In his 1987 book The Closing of the American Mind, professor Allen Bloom said a fundamental shift in academia could be found in its “changed understanding of what it means to be an American. The old view was that, by recognizing and accepting man’s natural rights, men found a fundamental basis of unity and sameness. Class, race, religion, national origin or culture all disappear or become dim when bathed in the light of natural rights, which give men common interests and make them truly brothers.
“The recent education of openness has rejected all that. It pays no attention to natural rights or the historical origins of our regime, which are now thought to have been essentially flawed and regressive. It is progressive and forward-looking. It does not demand fundamental agreement or the abandonment of old or new beliefs in favor of the natural ones. It is open to all kinds of men, all kinds of life-styles, all ideologies. There is no enemy other than the man who is not open to everything. But when there are no shared goals or vision of the public good, is the social contract any longer possible?”
It’s like Charlie Manson once said: “These children that come at you with knives, they are your children. You taught them. I didn’t teach them. I just tried to help them stand up.”