Wednesday, January 17, 2007

Fact-Checking the (Rump) Group of 88

From the new statement: “The disaster [of which the original Group of 88 ad spoke] is the atmosphere that allows sexism, racism, and sexual violence to be so prevalent on campus.”

For anyone who believes that sexism and racism are “prevalent” in the politically correct atmosphere of any elite college campus, including Duke, I hear that a bridge in my home borough can be purchased cheaply.

Meanwhile, statistics exist to evaluate the veracity for the third segment of the rump Group’s statement. Duke has an undergraduate population of just over 6000 students. In the 2005-2006 academic year, there were five reports of sexual misconduct. Two of the five students brought up on charges were found guilty. Victims of “sexual violence” on campus, therefore, totaled approximately .033 percent of Duke’s student body.

In the five academic years prior to 2005-2006, there were 15 reports of sexual misconduct, and four of the fifteen students were found guilty, for an average of just under one student annually. Between 2000 and 2005, therefore, victims of “sexual violence” totaled approximately .015 percent of Duke’s student body annually.

One instance of sexual violence is one instance too many, just as one campus instance of any form of violence is one instance too many. But to suggest that the University’s own disciplinary figures suggest an atmosphere of “prevalent” sexual violence on campus is to defy logic.

It would seem to me that the rump Group owes Duke’s student body an apology.

Hat tip: B.N.

Corrected the decimal point in percentages.


Anonymous said...


Just to be fair (even though the rumps aren't), sexual misconduct could occur and not be reported, although I personally doubt it would make much difference to the stats.

Anonymous said...

Well, I guess the Group is talking about unverified, unreported cases, including "date rape" or unwanted touchings (contact dancing, for example).

That's my guess.

Anonymous said...

I'm sure the murder rate is VERY high as well. Just haven't found any bodies and there are no reports of missing persons.

Anonymous said...

Once again...

Facts > leftist hyperbole

Thanks, KC

Anonymous said...

and they are being helpful to real rape victims (to encourage them to come forward) by continuing this Hoax how...?

kcjohnson9 said...

To the 5.24:

Sexual assault is almost certainly under-reported nationally--though whether it's under-reported on major college campuses, where the student life apparatus is very sensitive to such matters, is unclear. It's interesting that a majority of the charges of sexual misconduct at Duke were deemed insufficient.

But, of course, the rump Group would counter with the claim of unreported allegations--a claim that's impossible to disprove and ideologically convenient at the same time.

Anonymous said...


I think you are referring to the most magnificent of all bridges: the Brooklyn Bridge.

Anonymous said...

Fact-checking the Rump?

Hello there, Rump--howdy doody

Heinie treats are on the house

Anonymous said...

A rump is : a group with a small part of its original membership and therefore being unrepresentative or lacking in authority.

Anonymous said...

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The term rump can mean
The buttocks or "backside" of the human body
the corresponding part of an animal, as in rump steak, a cut of meat
In politics, a remnant of a larger political grouping that continues to exist after the group has formally dissolved or been abolished. See, for example:
Rump legislature
Rump organization
Rump Parliament
rump state
National Party (South Africa) was a Rump party lead by DF Malan that won the 1948 elections against the United Party in South Africa.

Anonymous said...

KC, those are rates, not percentages -- if you want percentages you need to multiply by a factor of 100.

Anonymous said...

“The disaster [of which the original Group of 88 ad spoke] is the atmosphere that allows sexism, racism, and sexual violence to be so prevalent on campus.”

The real issue here is what the Group's definition is of sexism, racism, and sexual violence is. Expect that their definition will cover a much wider view than most persons so they can get the numbers up. They would include things that most persons would think are trivial.

KC keep up the good work

Cdn Stats Guy

Anonymous said...

What we did at Davidson back in the early '80's would cause all the Dook 88 to have the vapors.

Our inhumanity and depravity produced a record number of Rhodes scholars, drs., lawyers, clergy.

Back then, we didn't equate stripping with prostitution, or an insult as a hate crime.

We had such a good time, too. Poor kids today, it must be the most depressing thing to attend college today. Infantilizing--don't know if it's a word, but that's the thing that comes to mind.

kcjohnson9 said...

Thanks on the percentages--made the correction on decimal point!

Anonymous said...

I get the feeling that the Gang of 88 (87) has not been thinking carefully about the consequences of drawing attention to themselves by the greater American public.

Anonymous said...

KC: Agreed. What idiotic statement will these folks come up with next?

It's pretty obvious to anyone with an iota of sense that their statements are nothing more than victimization mythos served with a side of guilt. It just does not wash, particularly in light of the facts of this case (i.e., lack thereof).

And the facts, not the bigotted, self-serving rantings of the fringe, are what's driving this train now. These individuals have totally missed it, they're standing on the platform while the smoke rises, searching for a racist under every rock. They are intentionally hiding from the truth, which is the very last thing any decent educator should do, to hold onto an oppression- based world-view that has been completely defeated. The lamp of knowledge indeed. These people make the middle ages look enlightened in comparison.


Anonymous said...

I am new to this fascinating case. One thing strikes me: why did the judge in the case not throw it out? How was the DA able to persist for so long with such a weak case and in the face of such blundering? Where was the judge? Who was the judge?

Anonymous said...

What is going on with this G88? Has global warming hit the area to allow the tropical ebola virus to take root in North Carolina? What has gotten into the minds of these "scholars"?

I'm writing from WDC, or as MSM says inside the beltway. Along with living "inside the beltway" comes the common opinion that we are clueless about what else is going on in the world "outside the beltway". Well I wish it were true.

This g88 and associates could do the good human relations things they "espouse" but not without simply addressing facts in this case and then sending a loud message that it's possible for a group like the all knowing 88 to be wrong and mislead. And con recognize it and react accordingly.

The Feb 5 hearing should go forward as scheduled. There are plenty of motions to hear decisions on.

Anonymous said...

5:56 - The case is going through its death throes. The Judge would most likely heave it if he suppresses the identification provided by the victim. That's the last piece of evidence.

And if you are expecting me to sit here and double-guess His Honor, or criticize him, you are mistaken. I encourage EVERYONE who cares about these Defendants' welfare to kindly REFRAIN from doing so.


Anonymous said...

g88 needs to quit listening to rap "music"

Anonymous said...

You have got to be kidding me. Sexual assault is a huge problem on college campuses nationwide, and Duke is certainly no exception. When you combine a social scene dominated by fraternities and alcohol with hard-working hard-partying image-obsessed students at a relatively small school, you have the perfect recipe for rampant sexual assault. I just graduated from Duke in May and can assure you that sexual assault (especially date rape) is a problem that is almost never reported. This is because in many cases the sexual assault is committed by an acquaintace, member of a social circle, or even a friend - and filing official charges that will almost certainly dismissed just isn't that attractive when it means you will quite possibly also ruin your social life. In fact, it is such a problem that just a few years ago a group of students put together a publication entitled "Saturday Night: Untold Stories of Sexual Assault" and it was so well recieved that they have made it an annual publication, filled with new submissions every year. In the future, I would hope that you can stick to covering topics that you have a little more firsthand knowledge of.

Anonymous said...

If I was 'date raped' I'd find a new 'circle' of 'friends.' Such a shame though, I might never be asked to the prom.....

Anonymous said...

When I was at law school at Michigan, it was by far the most "diverse" and "liberal" environment that I ever had been or will ever be in again. The sheer variety of people, not only different races and religions, but also the variety of foreign students, was quite impressive. Michigan did have its share of conservative students, in addition to a large contingent of very liberal students and professors. My views were relatively conservative and I was in the minority, but I did enjoy the very civil give and take on a variety of subjects. (I am not seeking comments on the related but distracting issue of how Michigan achieved diversity).

After about a month, I realized that for a small minority of students this environment, by far the most racially and politically diverse environment one could imagine, the environment was still a living oppressive hell of racism, sexism and all related sinful "isms." There was literally nothing one could do or say short of complete ideological capitulation (and Michigan was pretty far along that scale), that could convince these folks otherwise. It was mind boggling, and made me realize that for some portion of the population, internalized fears and concerns made it impossible to ever have an objective view of the world.

Anonymous said...

I will have a piece tomorrow on Lew Rockwell's site that deals with the dynamics of race on elite campuses. KC's points in this post are well-taken.

This notion that an elite campus like Duke is a racist hellhole where women are being raped on a regular basis is just ridiculous. These faculty members are people who have too much time on their hands, to paraphrase the cheap shot that William Chafe laid on KC today.

Anonymous said...


i dont; mean to demean your post, but your post reeks too much of 'i am a victim' mentality.

Anonymous said...


I would suggest that if women wanted to reduce being "subjected" to "date rape" (which I do not condone), women not drink any alcohol when they go to parties.

Anonymous said...

6:11pm Bill Anderson & KC:

"This notion that an elite campus like Duke is a racist hellhole where women are being raped on a regular basis is just ridiculous."

Victoria Peterson apparently begs to disagree.

Council OKs Central Campus

Read my email to dabodayuz to see how I really feel about her... ;>)

Anonymous said...

From the article I posted at 6:18pm:

"Peterson's comments drew the immediate ire of several council members, who sought to invoke rules limiting comments directly to the rezoning matter as she loudly asserted her First Amendment rights to free speech."

I can just imagine the head-bobbing & finger-waving... Uh UH, sisster girrrlll! lol

Anonymous said...

"Sexual assault" is not a precise term. I have no doubt that hormones rage at Duke as they do elsewhere. But,...

1) The G80+ have offered no evidence that Duke has an unusual problem in this regard.

2) The lacrosse team members are reputed to less likely to be frustrated by women than other students. I'd guess the incidence of sexual assault (however you defone it) among Duke lacrosse players is zero.

Anonymous said...

Where is the judge? This case is actually on judge #3. Yes, that's right, there were 3 judges-judge Stephens, Judge Titus, and now there is Judge Smith.

Anonymous said...

Good news is he's back in town (not a local Judge).

Anonymous said...

The reporting of the Duke case on this blog has been excellent. I can't praise it enough. But there does seem a high incidence of rape and sexual violence on college campuses, and most of it is not reported. It may be that this is similar to (or even lower than) the incidence of rape of non-college women of the same age-group (it's difficult to make comparisons, as diffent surveys use different methodologies), but in any case it is much higher than the rate of reported rape. As far as I know, the best survey addressing rape of women on college campuses is the 1997 NCWSV study, in which 2.8 percent of the respondents were classified as victims of rape or attempted rape in the academic year. Fewer than 5 percent of these were reported to law enforcement officials. The report is here:

Anonymous said...

Just wondering...

Has anyone got comparison rape statistics between the town and the school?

Might be interesting to see which is safer if you happen to be a young lady. Data on illigetimate births and relative abortion rates might be instructive as well. Of course, when you get facts rather than using dogma, it's sometimes embarrassing.......

Anonymous said...

Do those data apply to graduate students as well? There are over 10,000 students at Duke and I suspect that those data are relevant to the whole group, not just the 6000 UG's, making the percentages even smaller.

Where are the data to back up the claim of "sexual violence to be so prevalent on campus?”

They are speaking about that which they believe to be true, but not that which is actually true.

In research, one usually has a theory, makes hypotheses based upon that theory, and then evaluates real world data to see if one's hypotheses are supported in the real world with the data.

In this case, their hypotheses are not supported by the data. There is no significance to their theory or to their hypotheses.

Can they please stop making Duke look like it is filled with idiots?

Anonymous said...


O my, the brainwashing really worked on you I see. I'm also an '06 grad (not of Duke) and I think you're confusing buyer's remorse with rape. It's not rape if both parties are drunk and after the fact one of them feels bad about having had sex. It's not rape if neither is capable of giving or understanding consent. It's not rape if it's not forced--no matter what pc claptrap they feed you at college, what is called "date rape" is not, by any reasonable definition rape. To call it such is to demean REAL rape, a terrible crime of aggression and power, having essentially nothing to do with sex.

If you're going to allow women to cry "rape" after having sex they regret or wouldn't have consented to if they weren't massively drunk, then it seems to me only fair to allow men to charge women with rape if, under the influence of drugs or alcohol, they have sex with females they'd never have touched sober.

For the record, I'm a woman. And it scares me that women my age are so eager to be victims and so loath to take full responsibility for themselves and their own actions.

The notion that Duke is a "social disaster" or that they have serious problems with sexual "assault" is laughable. Except that the way members of the Duke faculty and administration are persecuting members of the student body is not the slightest bit funny.

Anonymous said...

well, i think it would be an interesting comparison to have a look at the crime stats from the historically black college located nearby, NC Central. Personally, i'd rather take my chances at Khe Shan than spend a sat night on the campus.

and as for this sat night untold stories of sexual assualt drivil, that is just a back door to make false claims. surely people do things they regret. sure, some men probably did get aggressive. but i don't feel that badly for someone who casts this kind of allegation, but refuses to give the accused a chance to respond. haven't we at least learned that much from this episode? and hell for that matter, 1/2 of those "untold stories" might have been made up too. we need way more information before we can admit the fact that sexual assualt is a serious problem on campus merely because a bunch of hens got together to gobble about how there aren't any good men around.


Anonymous said...

Bill Anderson

Please post your Lew Rockwell piece.

Just speculating: Do you point out that there is more likely to be contentious group politics on elite campuses because the untalented victim studies profs there need to justify their parasitism?

Do you also point out that what happened at Duke is a major problem for the elite diversity pimps?



Joe said...

Suppose Duke has a pandemic of racism and sexual assault.

As far as this case is concerned, so what? In what way does this case illustrate that pandemic?

Answer: ONLY if the alleged assailants are presumed guilty.

This case does, in fact, illustrate racism and dishonesty: only in an atmosphere of dishonesty and racism could professors get away with this without being canned.

Anonymous said...

I'm not 6:01, and we may be getting a bit off the main topic of this thread. And, up to a point, your post (despite the snarky quotation marks) is logical--undoubtedly women who don't drink at parties are somewhat less likely to experience date rape than those who. But the implication of your post seems to be that it is entirely up to women to avoid situations in which they might experience date rape, rather than at least in part up to men to control themselves and use good judgment about when a woman a) is clearly saying no or b) is not in a condition to give meaningful consent. Some people have used the same type of logic (I'm not one of them) to argue that the lax team, by hiring strippers and drinking, were essentially themselves responsible for having been falsely charged with rape.

I might also add that, based on personal experience (and I'm going back to college experiences from over 30 years ago), it's not always necessary to have been drinking to be the recipient of unwanted and very agressive sexual contact from a "date" or acquaintance, though I was lucky enough not to have been raped.

Anonymous said...

Can someone please disclose any hard data that suggest there is ANY relationship between a college campus and rape that does not obtain outside such environs?

Jeez, some people are easily bullshitted.


Anonymous said...

Well, one of the NCCU students
was shot to death a couple of weeks

Anonymous said...

To: 6:32

Never, ever trust surveys. It’s virtually impossible to get accurate and honest answers. The questions can be easily phrased to get desired results, and answers can be manipulated to get desired results. You quoted that respondents were “classified” into categories. If you were accurate in that quote, manipulation was done since, the question should have been a simple Yes-No. Either they were or weren’t raped or victims of attempted rape.

The “classification” indicates that questions were phrased in a certain way and then “interpreted”. It would also be necessary to know who conducted the survey. Too often surveys are conducted simply to provide cover for a point of view.

No too long ago, I had to help prepare survey questions for one of our accounts. Like many surveys, these were done as publicity stunts so you’d read a news story saying “According to the latest XYZ poll of business executives”.

The target was mid level execs in publicly held companies and the topics were about their outlook on conditions. We wanted honest answers so the questions were phrased in a simple and straightforward manner. We could not get honest answers. In far too many instances, these execs would say that things bad everywhere BUT in there own company, even when the company’s stock was in the tank and it was losing money. It’s sort of akin to voters saying that Congress is doing a lousy job but their congressman is great.

We just changed the whole thrust of the publicity stunt and got out a story about the fact that mid level execs often had an all too rosy attitude about their employer based on the 3 Gallup surveys we’d run. Then we gave up.

So again, never ever trust surveys. It might be honest, but there’s a good chance it’s not.

Anonymous said...

I googled 6:01's publication reference and found the website:

I don't doubt that date rape is a problem, whether it's buyer's remorse or simply poor communication fostered by alcohol.

The site contends that 2 complaints of sexual assault occur every weekend at Duke. At another point it is claimed there is "atleast one" claim of sexual assault each weekend. Perhaps someone could call the Women's Center at Duke and ask about these claims.

No one would reasonable argue against the notion that "no means no" even if both parties are drunk.
I wonder if the claims are really that blatant.

I did find a couple of phrases that jumped out. The title of one of the pages is "How does sexual assault look like at Duke?" Pretty similar to the "social disaster" comment. The page shows mock ups of torn out snippets from pages of writing, also similar to the format of the "Listening Statement". Included was this definition of sexual assault: "Obscene comments or gestures, unwelcome physical contact - simply making someone feel uncomfortable sexually."

I think discussions about date rape and how to keep it from happening are quite useful. It's no secret that men tend to push for sex more than women do. It would be helpful for young men and young women to recognize that communication of wants and desires, and the lack thereof, is important.

Anonymous said...

The stripper has no clothes

Ann Coulter attacks NY Times reporting and the Gottlieb "4 month later report from memory"

Anonymous said...

Victoria Peterson gets bitch slapped (at least the town has a backbone):

"We cannot allow a university to have rapes on that campus, many times, and nothing has ever been done until we have a young woman go public trying to have justice and we rake her across the coals. No. We cannot have no more expansion of this university until they clean up their mess."

Peterson's comments drew the immediate ire of several council members, who sought to invoke rules limiting comments directly to the rezoning matter as she loudly asserted her First Amendment rights to free speech.

After Peterson interrupted council member and Duke employee Mike Woodard when it was his turn to speak, Mayor Bill Bell said he would ask her to leave if she opened her mouth again. The board then quickly voted to approve the measure as Peterson sat silently in the front row.

She's on the same meds as the FA.

Anonymous said...

Come on KC - those stats are completely disingenuous !

Since men think of sex every 7 seconds, the # of sexual assaults at Duke are in the millions !

-- these quasi-proffs know what you're thinking and when so be on your best behavior !


Anonymous said...

Forget sending emails to some of the Duke faculty members. Perhaps some diapers, pacifiers, and baby food would be more appropriate.

Dukex4 said...

re: the Editors of Saturday Night

The following letter to the Editor is in today's Chronicle -- anyone else think this is not a coincidence that it is in today's paper?
In October of 2003, a student at Duke was sexually assaulted by a stranger. In an effort to extend the dialogue about sexual assault, the survivor wrote a piece in The Chronicle asking for students' stories and opinions. The founders of Saturday Night: Untold Stories of Sexual Assault at Duke then compiled those narratives and commentaries into a publication that was distributed to the Duke community.

In the three years that have passed, groups of students and administrators have worked assiduously to increase awareness about sexual assault and Duke's policies. However, the number of sexual assaults on Duke's campus-and in society at large-is still unacceptable.

For that reason, we write again. We ask those of you who have been affected by this form of violence to send us your stories and opinions. We want and welcome submissions from survivors, friends of survivors, anyone with opinions or ideas about solutions, and also from those who have perspectives differing from the existing dialogue.

And, if you're a survivor, we re-offer the definition provided by Duke's official sexual misconduct policy: Sexual assault is any sex act (oral, vaginal or anal) against your will, without your consent, or when you are unable to freely give consent. Whatever the circumstances, there is a place for you in the fourth edition of Saturday Night.

The dialogues that the first three editions of Saturday Night started are vital. We hope that the new perspectives in the fourth edition will not only continue these dialogues but also start moving people from words to actions. We have to hold each other accountable in order to make Duke a community where sexual assault is unacceptable.

If you would like to share your stories and opinions, please send them to We will be accepting submissions through Jan. 28. Please indicate in your e-mail if you're willing to allow your contribution to appear in the next edition of Saturday Night. All submissions that appear in the actual publication will be anonymous, and the only person who will know your identity is our Submissions Editor.

The Editors of Saturday Night

Anonymous said...


I can't read Ann Coulter. Her writing is just awful.

Who is this woman? How did she become a pundit?



pantapon rose said...

I just can't get over the shock that the President, the alumni, and the rest of the faculty are letting this group of professors destroy the school's reputation. Do they not see it? Are they just too closed in? Just about everywhere I read about this the consensus is that this is dragging the school further in the mud. How are they letting this group of malcontents destroy the reputation that Duke has built up over decades? It's just insane to me.

Anonymous said...

JLS says...

I guess the rump Group of 88 were not satisfied with the view of the parents on 60 Min. Afterall they had only scared the parent of white male away from sending their kids to Duke.

But now if your child is female or of color they want you to know that there is this pandemic of racism and rape at Duke. So I guess no parent should be willing to send their child regardless of race, color, creed, national origan or sex to Duke. In fact might tuition checks to Duke be a prima facia case for child abuse?

re: Joe I typed out a response to anon 6:01's anecdotes about date rape, but then came to your conclusion. For someone to come without data and tell someone with data to stick to what they know about, well it is waste of time to engage.

Anonymous said...

I have often been impressed by the depth of material covered by this blog and the fact that kc johnson has been able to come up with an in depth post (and often more than one) every day.

However, there have been a few instances where I thought that stretches were made that damaged the righteousness of this blog's cause. Discounting the argument that sexual assault cases go widely unreported is an example of this.

There is probably an unprecedented breadth and depth to the arguments that can be made critical of the various actors in the lacrosse case. Most of the time, this blog has has done a good job or rooting this criticism in solid arguments and core American values and made the case about righting moral wrongs by extremist thinkers and their enablers (even as some who might agree with the cause shun these values or are extremists themselves).

I think that the 88's position is weak enough that KC and his supporters shouldn't have to pour it on by discounting the problem of sexual assault on Duke or any other college's campuses. A major part of the rigteousness of criticism of those who continue to use such a phony hoax to support an agenda is that the lies and improper behavior in this case make it that much more likely that true victims of sexual assault go unprotected.

People should not follow in the path of the Nifong and the 88 leaders aby using the case to back their own agendas. This includes smiling with glee when criticizing the fact that those involved are liberal (even though there actions are not liberal in any accurate sense).

I believe that the current letter by the 87 stems from a concern that a backlash from the case will lead to a denial of the issues about race and sexual violence that they hope to use it for. I believe that is a mistake to continue to try to use such a travesty of a case to promote these issues. Neither KC or anyone else should prove them right by denying the issues that they seek to address.

Anonymous said...

Just saw the DA and Sheriff in Missouri at a press conference. Looks like Nifong has shown the DAs how NOT to communicate with the media. This can only be good. Presumption of innocent and no comment on the evidence.

Anonymous said...


My point is not to suggest that "only women are resposible", but that BOTH men and women are; and neither should be given power to criminalize the other. It's entirely possible for a drunken man to act like an ass--to engage in what you call "aggressive sexual behavior". It may not be possible for a women to fend off such advances entirely, being subject to groping, etc. But consider how difficult it is for actual intercourse to occur if the woman doesn't wish it to occur.

I would also say that if the pair are drunk and one thinks she was "into it" but she can't actually remember but is sure she didn't/wouldn't have given consent, it's just one of those things you chalk up to stupidity and move on. Today's victim-centric university culture calls this rape.

Overall I think teachers/professors/administrators are doing a horrible job of preparing students for life--especially students in ideologically recognized "victim" groups. If things don't go their way, they're taught to scream about bigotry or abuse--rather than to fend for themselves.

Sad. And off topic for this blog....sorry :)

Anonymous said...


Right on. Saw one of Missouri press conferences over the weekend. One DA said because of "ethical rules," he was not in a position to comment on the question posed.

Anonymous said...

This actually looks like it will be a good movie

Welcome to Durham, USA

I will give $100 for every sighting of Precious.

Or one of her shoes.

Anonymous said...


I have to respectfully disagree with your commentary. If someone claims sexual assualt, they must come forward in order to have that claim examined. I do not and I will not take for granted that "sexual assault" is some major problem on campuses. People with claims should bring them forward or be silent.

Their silence probably does have as much to do with the ambiguity of the situation as it does with potential shame. These "victims" simply state that they were sexually assaulted and we're supposed to take their word for it. But we don't get all of the evidence. There could be facts that suggest that it wasn't an unwilling act, but one that is regretted. It could be that no sexual assault occurred, but someone is trying to make a polical point e.g. a hoax. And many more explanations. But we do not know until the facts are examined.

Instead by hiding behind the "everyone knows that sexual assault is a problem" people who push that drivil without a shred of evidence that has withstood examination. I would argue the refusal to insist on facts got us into the duke lax case.

here you had white perpetrators, a black woman. in other words, the politically correct victim and the politically correct perpetrators. those who hide behind the "everyone knows" position, then get to generalize from stories like this and say, see we told you. and then you get demonstrators demanding castration because "everyone knows" this is how white men look at black women etc.

nope, can't agree with you without facts from a victim and an opportunity for the accused to be heard. otherwise, you get a witch hunt.


Anonymous said...

7:14--agree. i've tried to address this myself, but few people are interested

7:18--of course women get raped and don't report it--this is a societal problem, not a sui generis University one

check the FBI's rape offender statistics--rape is primarily perpetrated by blacks and Hispanics

do you get that info in women's studies courses?


Anonymous said...

The entire debate over how often sexual assualt is reported on the Duke or other campuses is one of those pointless debates instigated by those without sufficient facts.

I say pointless because 1) everybody agrees that rape and sexual assualt are horrible, like many people I have been close to people who have been raped, and, in my case, my friend was raped on a college campus and 2) there is no sure way to determine how often such assualts occur on any particular college campus. All we know for sure is that Duke could have rapists, just as a policeforce, or a hospital, or a public housing project, or a law firm, or any other university. The issue is whether Duke has an epidemic of sexual assault by the students and the answer is almost certainly no. I went to Duke, my brother went to Duke, my nephew went to Duke, i know many people who just graduated and who graduated some time ago. I also served on the undergraduate judicial board and was exposed to some of the seamy underside. There is no epidemic, based on my extensive knowledge. Walk around the Duke campus. Are you really likely to be attacked by a Duke student? Come on.

The debate is a sideshow because it forces you to either minimize the seriousness of rape or agree that its a problem. But that choice is a false choice.

Anonymous said...

Used the link to Ann Coulter's article on the NYT - per Ann "accuser told so many different stories, the Times was forced to give her Jayson Blairs old job." Whether you are a livel or conserative, almost noone can write as well or as funny as Ann.

Anonymous said...

If there is lot's of "sexual violence" on the campuses of American universities then the solution is simple.

Seperate schools and universities for men and women.

Have the women teach women, and the men teach men.

But then watch as the men streak ahead and the women get left behind.

And then you'll realy hear some screaming fromt the feminists about the "patriarchal conspiracy".


Anonymous said...

The posts in support of the presumption of innocence and other Due Process guarantees fascinate me. This is the bizarro world (Seinfeld) indeed.

I have spent my career trying to keep you off juries in the belief that you "conservatives" had prejudged my poor minority clients before the presentation of evidence and that you believe the police only arrest guilty people.

Fairness - as a conservative concept - Imagine that!

Better late than never!

Anonymous said...

I think it is only fitting that KC be allowed to write the first review on Amazon

Your name here

Before Reyn Bowman or KKK Karla beats him to the bunch.

Anonymous said...

To Johnboy 7:01

"Never, ever trust surveys. It’s virtually impossible to get accurate and honest answers. The questions can be easily phrased to get desired results, and answers can be manipulated to get desired results."
You are being too negative about surveys in general. Comments on classification are off base.

There are always Bad Actors out there. However, the vast majority are be creditable.

Agree that wording of questions is critical. One should always ask who sponsered the survey and what the number of respondents.

If objective is to mislead , then it can be done. Data tortured long enough will almost always confess.

Anonymous said...


From the posts I've read at this site, the people posting appear to be both liberal and conservative. I've also read posts from republicans and democrates on this site.

Generally, injustice is opposed by all good people.

Anonymous said...

So according to the Duke 87, Duke University is an institution that is overun with rapists, racists, bigots and sexual harrassers. They think so highly of their students. If I was a student at Duke today I would be pissed that as a student I am being nationally portrayed as the Duke 87 state. As a parent I would not allow my kids to apply to Duke at all. Duke thanks tot he Duke 88 and Duke 87 have made the Duke name synonimos with vulgar and dispicable. Enrollment is already down. But it can go much lower as these idiots are allowed to teach there.

Hey said...

Any number of sexual assaults greater than 0 is unacceptable.

The problem with groups focusing on this issue is that they are always expanding the definition of sexual assault. It is the same as how the definition of "binge" drinking has been expanded to between 2 and 5 drinks in a night, depending on body weight (most thin young women qualify as bingers on their second drink), or how MADD wants the legal blood alcohol limit to be 0.00.

This attitude leads to the Antioch College sexual harrassment code, which required specific permission for every action. Without that specific, express permission, a sexual assault was considered to have taken place. Saturday Night Live had a famous skit lampooning this attitude.

All parties need to take responsibility for their actions. In the real world, much activity takes place under the influence of alcohol (it's kind of why Alcohol is such a popular drug). Don't do anything that makes your partner uncomfortable, and immediately stop any activity once you are aware that your partner is uncomfortable with the behaviour. Communicate clearly, especially when you do not like or are uncomfortable with the situation. Own your decisions and don't turn regret into an allegation.

Defining "sexual assault" as
"[o]bscene comments or gestures, unwelcome physical contact - simply making someone feel uncomfortable sexually" is complete and utter idiocy. Date rape and acquaintance rape happens, but when it does it's the same thing as stranger rape: against your will. Remorse doesn't make it rape, and refusing an advance doesn't make it "attempted rape".

Anonymous said...

So there's a huge problem at Duke with rape, sexual assault, and racism.
Isn't it great the Duke lacrosse team did absolutely nothing to contribute to those problems?
They should held up as examples for good citizenship in the Duke community.

Anonymous said...

The new-and-improved G87 is really hurting Duke's reputation. I can understand a large campus having one or two--or even five or ten--professors that are out to lunch...but eighty-seven? Even if that number is a small proportion of the total faculty...eighty-seven.

Eighty-seven professors.

Anonymous said...


The problem isn't the "out-to-lunch professors": that's the result of the problem

The problem is that white society has been pandering too long to blacks. It's as simple as that. I sometimes wonder if the Lubianos and Holloways of the world really believe their own bullshit.

Dear Professor Holloway,

My name is Roman Polanski. I'm the newly installed president of Duke. Duke has decided to defund your program because it is academically and intellectuaally worthless.


Yours sincerely,


Anonymous said...

Hey said "All parties need to take responsibility for their actions. In the real world, much activity takes place under the influence of alcohol (it's kind of why Alcohol is such a popular drug)."

It has gotten so bizarre that a drunken man can be arrested for rape if he has sex with a drunken woman. He is the only one deemed responsible and therefore is arrested. If both were drunk she is seen as a victim and he the perpetrator. This has led to interesting questions about two drunk lesbians having sex and later deciding it was rape. Who would be held responsible? Zen koan #556

Anonymous said...

Thanks 7:31:

"The debate is a sideshow because it forces you to either minimize the seriousness of rape or agree that its a problem. But that choice is a false choice."

There are gray areas here....

Anonymous said...

right on KC

Anonymous said...

you are a bunch of losers for eating the shit KC feeds you every day. you all deserve each other.

Anonymous said...


Explain your remark. Show me facts. Show me insight.


Go back to your welfare state, loser.

Anonymous said...

KC just wishes he was at a place like Duke where if 88 professor's say something then people acutally listen. Since nobody give a shit about him tucked away at Brooklyn College living in his own pathetic existence with no friends and no life.

Anonymous said...

you would think someone living in brooklyn might choose to focus on some the problems surronding him in his own community. Oh, I forgot brooklyn has no problems. no crume, no racism, no drugs, no thugs. durham the only place with issues therefore deserving KC's and everyone else's full attention.

Anonymous said...

8:22; 8:24

Umm, have you ever been to Brooklyn?

Anonymous said...

All of these emotionally charged arguments are utterly useless. You cannot refute or defend a claim using data, unless you ACTUALLY present the data. Assumptions, faith, speculation, emotion, guesses, hunches, feelings, etc., have little to do with the correct answer. WHAT IS THE PERCENTAGE OR RATE OF RAPE AND SEXUAL ASSAULT AT OTHER UNIVERSITIES AND IN THE GENERAL POPLULATION?????????? THEN HOW DOES DUKE COMPARE?????????

Anonymous said...

"Sexism" and "racism" - this PC lynch mob should be looking in the mirror.

Anonymous said...


I agree with you. What we're really trying to di is evacuate all academic welfare recipients from all institutions of higher learning.

Can you deal with that?

I'd really like to dialogue with you.


Anonymous said...

yes, i have f***ing been to brooklyn, it is where I live. As well as I have been durham because it's where i am from. As I have been a student at NCCU, Duke, and CUNY.

Anonymous said...


If you have something really worthwhile to say, people will listen no matter where you are from. If you don't, then being from hoightytoityland isn't going to help.


KC has already taken his toll on Brooklyn College.

Cedarford said...

Adding this old but excellent commentary from the NYTimes on critical race theory applied in postmodern academia. Then the commentary was on the Tawana Brawley hoax and activists "deep belief" in her "cause". Courtesy of

1997 article by Neil A. Lewis (TimesSelect link):
Critical race theorists, who are on the faculty at almost every major law school and are producing an ever-growing body of scholarly work, have drawn from an idea made popular by postmodernist scholars of all races, that there is no objective reality. Instead, the critical race theorists say, there are competing racial versions of reality that may never be reconciled.

Many theorists say that because few whites will ever be able to see things as blacks do, real racial understanding may be beyond the nation's reach....

Some theorists go so far as to say that what really happened in a particular incident may be no more important than what people feel or say happened. For example, some argue that even though Tawana Brawley, then a teen-ager, made up her account that a gang of white men, one with a badge, raped and defiled her in New York in 1987, her story is still valid because it offers truths about the oppression of black women.

In her book "The Alchemy of Race and Rights" (Harvard, 1991), Prof. Patricia Williams of the Columbia University Law School appeared to suggest that it made little difference whether Ms. Brawley had made up her account. The teen-ager, Professor Williams wrote, was the victim of an unspeakable crime "no matter who did it to her -- and even if she did it to herself."

"Her condition was clearly the expression of some crime against her, some tremendous violence, some great violation that challenges comprehension," Professor Williams said. "Tawana's terrible story has every black woman's worst fears and experiences wrapped into it."

Critics of Professor Williams's comments, however, note that a New York State grand jury investigated Ms. Brawley's story and concluded that she had made it up. Professor Williams, Professor [Suzanna] Sherry wrote, seems "unable to distinguish between Brawley's fantasized rape and another woman's real one."

In a recent interview, Professor Williams said she had been misinterpreted. She meant, she said, that the debate about whether Ms. Brawley was telling the truth obscured that she was a troubled minor.

"Her needs were not dealt with, as they should have been with any child," Professor Williams said. Further, Ms. Brawley was transformed into a stereotype of "black women as hard women who can never really suffer any violation," she added.

The NYTimes article then went on to discuss other scholars deeply worried that a rogue element of critical race and gender theorists existed on most faculties at most top campuses (Columbia had the most focus for their statements supporting Brawley). That growing concern existed that their philospohy and actions would prove deeply damaging to universities and societies in general.

Discussion of how some university professors were beginning to challenge critical race theory.

Obviously, not soon enough to save Duke from some massive damage by the Gang of 88 and the irresolution of Duke Administration trying to appease them.

Anonymous said...

This post raises some interesting questions. There is certainly something important about the statistics of verifiable rapes. It is a concrete number.

My surmise is that the figures presented by KC Johnson in the post represent cases in which significant violence occurs, usually perpetrated by a stranger. The element of coercion comes from either physical violence, the threat of violence or the use of a weapon such as a gun or a knife.

My sense is that these crimes are considerably more traumatic for the victims because of the serious threat or actuality of physical harm. These crimes can result in significant injuries or death. It is exactly these types of sexual assaults that are the most odious.

The accusations against the lacrosse players were along the lines of this type of rape. Had the accusers allegations been true, she would have suffered noticeable injuries and no such signs of harm were detected by the medical personnel who examined her.

Regardless of what ideologues will say about what constitutes sexual assault, it is clear that there is a wide range of behavior ranging from unwanted flirtation to violent rape. Clearly much of this is unpleasant and some is illegal but what the statistics Johnson has reported suggests is that very little of it rises to the level of what was alleged to have been done by the accused lacrosse players.

The letters of the group of 88 want to lump an entire range of sexual behaviors into the same category as that which the accuser alleged. If you accept the view that at a party where men and women voluntarily get drunk and a woman reaches into a guy's pants or a man grabs a woman's behind or one dance partner starts aggressively kissing the other without reciprocation, that such acts constitute sexual violence on the order of a violent rape then you can justify some of what is in the letter.

To most of us, raping someone with a knife held to the victims throat is a far more serious crime then pinching someone's butt at a party or aggressively propositioning someone at a party that is fueled by too much drinking. The group of 88 (and 87) seem to be making the argument that the two are equivalent. They seized on the story of the accuser to dramatize their condemnation of what most people consider far more ambiguous transgressions. When the accusations were exposed as false, they fell back on their claims that what they were complaining about was similar to behavior that is common at Duke. As far as they were concerned, marching outside the player's house with a sign that said "castrate" was deserved whether or not they were guilty. And much of what was said by the 88 and echoed in the statements of many students and top administrators administrators, clearly implied that the boorish behavior of hiring strippers and underage drinking wasn't all that different from committing a violent rape.

While they would all probably recognize the terrible harm that they have done to the accused students and their families, they don't seem remorseful because they feel the students deserved it even if there was no assault of any kind.

I thought that bearing false witness violated one of the ten commandments. And the sixth amendment to the constitution grants the accused the right to confront their accuser, precisely to prevent the kind of miscarriage of justice that is threatened in this case.

To the group of 88 and their supporters, bearing false witness, even if it could send the students to jail for 30 years for a crime they did not commit, is less serious than being drunk and hiring strippers. That is the moral calculus that seems to have governed Duke for the last ten months and it is appalling that so many can still cling to such moral insanity.

Anonymous said...

"In fact, it is such a problem that just a few years ago a group of students put together a publication entitled "Saturday Night: Untold Stories of Sexual Assault" and it was so well recieved that they have made it an annual publication, filled with new submissions every year. In the future, I would hope that you can stick to covering topics that you have a little more firsthand knowledge of."

Yep, we had this hyperbolic stuff at our school too (I graduated a year ago). Its popularity was two-fold. The women were brainwashed by the ideological soulmates of the Gang of 88, and the men were just looking to get laid [legitimately] by smiling and nodding.

It is always convenient when the scourage is declared unverifiable and dovetails with societal PC trends.

Michael said...

Why would a professor from Brooklyn be concerned with this case?

Mrs. Seligmann provided the answer to that on 60 minutes. Any parent or person with responsibility over children and young adults should be able to understand this.

Anonymous said...


You're too nice. These pathetic excuses for human beings should be drawn and quartered for their "insight" and "commentary". This is a civilized society....we don't countenance your bullshit.

Anonymous said...

KC just wishes he was at a place like Duke where if 88 professor's say something then people acutally listen. Since nobody give a shit about him tucked away at Brooklyn College living in his own pathetic existence with no friends and no life.

Ahhh, the Gang of 88 are back with their envy on their shoulders.

Anonymous said...


Thanks for such insightful commentary. I for one have reviewed the positions of the G88 and have come to the conclusion that they're full of shit. Sorry, I can 'em as I see 'em.

Anonymous said...


I happened to be visiting Heather Mac Donald about 13 years ago. At the time Patricia Williams was teaching at Stanford. A Stanford Law graduate, Mac Donald--now a scholar at the Manhattan Institute--was incensed that Williams had a position there and showed me a letter she had written to her former Stanford mentor.

Mac Donald later told me that a lot of distinguished professors at Stanford wanted her to leave--eventually, she did.

I know for a fact that she's considered a joke at Columbia, and that most law students will not take a class with her.

"Critical race theory" is just another academic euphemism for blacks' inability to compete.

Don't you know it's "racist" nowadays to utter the word quality.

Again, whose fault is this?


Anonymous said...

Anonymous 8:36

You rule, dude!

Anonymous said...

No one with a brain wants to be in Durham - Certainly not KC or Bill A. We are talking the boonies, folks - Not NYC or an hour from DC.

Anonymous said...

No one with a brain wants to be in Durham - Certainly not KC or Bill A. We are talking the boonies, folks - Not NYC or an hour from DC.

M. Simon said...

Interesting letter from a Duke Prof at Winds of Change.

The prof is anon, but I consider Winds and the poster (AMAC who posts here) reliable.

Anonymous said...

KC has done a great service to the countries justice system and the american people. See how the DAs and police are now talking about the rights of the accused. We must be getting some trolls from the other blogs. I think Ann Coulter is a genius. Her statement "Women greatly reduce their chances of getting raped and murdered if they are not drunk alone on the street at 2:00AM" could not be more true.

Anonymous said...

8:24 - You seem to confuse listening and laughing.

Duke University has 87 Professors the rest of us laugh at on a regular basis.

And for the poster who states the attended Duke, NCCU and CUNY, please be advised that I am also a Chinese Jet Pilot.

No, I swear.


Anonymous said...

Any time you read "critical" in front of something, think "marxist." Now, I would call it "marxist logic," but that term is an oxymoron. One cannot apply logic as we know it and then give it a "marxist" prefix.

If you remember the piece Yolanda Carrington wrote for the marxist publication, she spoke of rape in the abstract, so it really did not matter if there was a real live rape that night at Buchanan Ave. The lacrosse players were white, and Crystal is black, so there was a rape, even if it did not actually happen.

This is the marxist mentality, and if you are trained formally in logic like I am, it will drive you nuts. Think of trying to apply actual laws like this, and you get a sense of why this particular case is an Alice-in-Wonderland kind of case. We are seeing the application of "marxist law" and, frankly, it sucks.

Anonymous said...

KC is it yet time for another Q & A?


Anonymous said...


I think you are missing the biggest type of sexual violence that they are protesting, and is certainly prevalent. That would be having a penis inside your pants, or condoning having one.


Anonymous said...

Rp--Are you some time-invested moron? Ann Coulter is brilliant. She makes your writing look like what it is--chicken scratchin'.
People are always envious of smart women who are also attractive.

鬼佬 said...

I think you are missing the biggest type of sexual violence that they are protesting, and is certainly prevalent. That would be having a penis inside your pants, or condoning having one.

Actually, I think the issue is having a penis, period, whether you keep it in your pants or not.

Anonymous said...

To the 9:23

Women in general, should not (emphasis multiplied) have to fear being raped whether they're alone and out at 2 am or with a group of girls hanging out in the afternoon.

Clearly it is safer to stay in large groups and parade around during the daytime.

Is Coulter a genius? I think not,but she does make a fashionable and cogent point.


Anonymous said...

So are the Duke 88 putting the orginal Ad back on the web servers?

Anonymous said...

Naturally, you do realize that some of the most radical femi-nazis believe that any sexual intercourse between a man and a woman is by definition a rape?

Enough of this foolishness however, I'm still looking for whether a rape occurred involving the three Defendants. Oh, look, the accuser cannot "recall."


Anonymous said...

9:38 re Coulter


I'll respond to you, but I don't understand that expression.


Anonymous said...


Ann, is that you?

I'd put a bag over your head and do you doggie style.

Can't we all get along?

Barack Obama

Anonymous said...

Cognitive Soulmates:

Barack Obama
Ann Coulter
George Bush

Michael said...

I think that the average person would think twice before taking on Ann

Ann Coulter

For another perspective, there's also this shot

Anonymous said...

9:39 Being street smart includes being aware of your surrounding, who is near you and what is going on. Any women not concerned with getting raped and murdered on the street is an idiot.

Michael said...

re: 10:21

Same goes for guys. There was a case in Texas recently where a robber went around robbing and raping guys.

Steven Horwitz said...

Just a quick "exactly" to 7:18's comments about there being no need to dismiss the legitimate claims of unreported sexual assaults/misconduct on the Duke (and other) campus in order to make the point that the lax players were railroaded.

Those of you who are dismissing the reality that 6:01 talks about are playing into the hands of the G88 and others like them.

I'm not a Marxist/leftist gender/race person. I'm a libertarian economist. I'm also an administrator on a college campus. The reality is exactly what 6:01 described. I saw it happen in various ways a couple of times this year and I only know about the ones involving a quarter of the student body.

It is completely consistent to acknowledge the problem of sexual assault on college campuses and to defend the lax players.

Anonymous said...

all right it's late me and ol' boy KC are heading to get any girls who have been drinking tonight. Because any girl who is out in NYC after 10pm on a weeknight and has been drinking deserves to be taken advangtage of by a stong male type. so here we go KC

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

10:30 - Will she recall it, though?


Anonymous said...

Although most of the Group of 87 (now) are trained to think myopically and find anything at variance from their view that their environment (on the Duke campus, one of the most privileged on the planet), is fatally racist and sexist, I am astounded at their latest missive, if only for its phenomenal lack of common sense and timing. Look, if one deigns to complain about sexism and racism, and at the same time to support a previously hostile anti-student position (perhaps an understatement) don't do so when the hoax before us is evolving into not just a hoax, but a situation of unyielding government incompetence and evil. And don't do so in implicit support of an accuser who has lied and perverted most every corner of the justice system, degrading the cause of legitimate victims of racism and sexual violence at the same time. Their defensiveness and total lack of connection to reality is incredibly troubling. In this regard they are honestly no different than Saddam Hussein's military spokesman, declaring Iraqi war victories as American tanks were rolling behind him. They have cast themselves not as intellectuals, but as fools with no common sense. Of course, one might say they don't care - but at 42 grand a year for tuition, people may put up with what they view generally as harmless Marxist drivel, but they sure as heck are not going see value in the brand if it is perceived fools are at the helm. By the way, although the neo-Marxists would not recognize me as a "customer" (that implies the existence of a market), but I am the ideal customer Duke seeks and must have to stay vital as it presently seeks. Both my spouse and I are alums, we have high school age children with grades and scores well above Duke's mean averages, and I am by nature inclined to be ridiculously loyal to the place - I am the child of an unemployed single mother who went to Duke on an athletic scholarship and I am (at the risk of a lack of humility) exactly what Duke would view as a success story. They not only paid for my education - it was athletic scholarship or community college for me - they pushed me to complete an honors program and obtain admission to a top flight graduate school. I thought I could never repay Duke - ever. And oh, yeah, I now have some money too. More than enough to pay tuitions and then some. But it is not going to Duke - because if while at some level I can live with theater of the absurd professors in the humanities and departments existing mostly to assuage white guilt, there's no way I can support people who have zero common sense, can't even have the minimalist discipline required to keep their mouths shut at a moment when every fact screams it is the only thing to do (except apologize, which they won't do), and who ignore the immutable value and non-relativist value that adults have a responsibility to treat 18-22 year olds fairly and responsibly. Again, I would say to the Group of 88/87 - rationalize all you want - but try, simply try, and find an alum who has more reason to be loyal and devoted to Duke than me - (there likely are many others like me - but I am a good example), and then try to discern how it is that every shred of incredible goodwill I felt toward the school has completely dissipated. That my friends, is an incomprehensible accomplishment.

Anonymous said...

Hey KC have you ever gotten laid in you life. Nope. That's what I thought. Maybe you should become a stripper in durham. You would probaly make more than you do at Brooklyn College and have more fun.

Anonymous said...

Well said, 10:38

Send your children to Emory


Anonymous said...

Then the next time NCCU has a frat party they can have you over to do your thing and brand you ass so everyone will know for certain that you are the jackass that you are. plain and simple.

Anonymous said...

don't worry my children are going to duke for undgrad econ classes, brooklyn college for a masters in history and Emory for a PHD becoming a full on lunatic

Anonymous said...

10:43 - Stop playing on your Father's computer and go to bed.

Anonymous said...

10:43 - When she makes some comment about motion in the ocean, do you believe her?

Anonymous said...


Hey, 10:43, playing with Mr. Pillow does not count as getting laid. Trust me, the real thing is better.

Anonymous said...

Hey, 10:45! Seems like you have a serious obsession problem. But don't worry, eventually the Lax three will be exonerated, the Duke 88's "priveliges" will be curtailed, Duke U's rankings diminished , Nifong disbarred, and Durham penurized.

And KC will move on to something else. Of course, your pathetically envious focus will have to be targeted elsewhere, unfortunately. What a shame to be you!

Anonymous said...

The new vision of Duke has now been categorically framed by the Group of 88/7 (for the second time). Duke can only be:

A) a hate filled and dangerous campus where racial and sexual discrimination abounds within it's student body

B) a hate filled and dangerous campus where racial and sexual discrimination abounds within it's faculty body

Anonymous said...

All this discussion of women's culpability in rape cases makes me wish I could download Camille Paglia's "Sexual Personae" for all, especially young women to read. (Don't hate me for loving Camille.) She does not blame the victim, but she does suggest strongly that women have set themselves up as victims by ignoring the fact that men (as another poster already pointed out) think about sex every 90 seconds.

Oh, and Michael, come on with the photos of Anne...I once dated a guy who'd take me to the NRA range in Fairfax every weekend and I always made sure I wore a cute dress and did my hair b/c it was ultimately a date. Anyway, a guy I worked with came in and saw me shooting (and to compliment myself, my amazing accuracy) and I realized then (as Camille Paglia pointed out) that guys do think about sex every minute and a half and that sometimes, the guy who's thinking about it is also turned on by cute chicks with guns. I think Anne's counting on this to keep up sales and counter her shrill ugliness.

And yes, I'd be happy to challenge her on a range any day.

All this is purely academic. Rapes happen everywhere but not at 610 N. Buchanan and the 88/87 know this.

Durham Mommy

Anonymous said...

11:08 - You have harped on something that Duke, if they had any brains, should be worried about. I think the days of Duke being a top 10 school are numbered because of this. Their status as an institution has taken a terrible hit. Instead of mending fences, their faculty, oblivious to public perception, have instead tilted their lances at windmills. They, and the school, look like fools at this point. It will take years to fix this damage, if ever.


Michael said...

re: 11:25 PM

You miss the point. She'd actually shoot the guy.

Anonymous said...

So, what do you think Nifong is doing now? I mean, besides conferring with his lawyers? He must be popping FlintStones vitamins and watching Project Runway.

What a freak!

Anonymous said...

I read the third edition of "Saturday Night: Untold Stories of Sexual Assault" cover to cover some months ago. As I recall, several of the stories related to incidents that happened to students prior to college, some in other countries and cultures. The majority of the rest were date rapes and did seem genuine, though the degree of culpability was acknowledged as being slight in some cases. At the time, I thought it very enlightened that this was published, that it might help to raise awareness all around and reflected well on Duke. Several of the stories were touching and some of the writing was much, much better than either of the G88/87 letters.

There were two or three that had to do with black-on-black rapes, a large enough fraction that I concluded that this must happen more often than other combinations, so to speak. The one story that I remember as seeming the most violent was specifically a female Duke student who was raped by a non-Duke-affiliated black male. (And no, it didn't seem violent just because the male was black.) This has now been some time ago, but I think that a couple of the stories had to do with gay date rape.

I regret to say that I am now a more skeptical consumer of this sort of information. I don't doubt that these things happen, but I wonder if perhaps multiple pieces were authored by the same person or if the entire work was distorted in some way. I can now see someone "finding their victimhood" under the direction of one of these bent "teachers".

What it comes to for me is that enough has been done to the players and to Duke as a whole. That none of the original signers has offered any sort of apology staggers me and is the most damning thing about the G88. To have all these months of silence followed by a piece that must have been proofread hundreds of times and that garnered this much support that only further disparages Duke is nothing but inflammatory.

The damage this does to actual rape victims and to the credibility of such victims is significant. There is no acknowledgement of this and seemingly, no concern either.

I also believe this was more about race than sex and that there are some that are using talk of sex/rape as a cover, throwing it in as an attempt to broaden the appeal. What I really suspect can’t be produced is any evidence at all that Duke is any sort of racial problem. In fact, one could make a case that Duke goes to incredible lengths to overcompensate for a non-problem (at least relative to the amount of attention it receives). In spite of this, it is not enough for some and no opportunity is missed to further savage Duke with no care whatever and certainly no remorse or sense of accountability.

Is it unreasonable to resent this? I have no doubt that much of the racial tension is manufactured. Would it be surprising to find some of these professors doing a Tawana Brawley to their own e-mail accounts or posting blog messages that can then be cited as evidence of racists? If so, recall the Chronicle poll that was being manipulated by someone using a faculty computer and the inconsistent explanations of the G88 letter. No credibility. I have concluded the biggest racial problems Duke has are being paid to do great harm to the University. In addition, this feeds racism. This is an obscenity, akin to provoking a war so you can sell weapons to both sides. The tension is being fed, created. The town is clearly corrupt and Duke has a truly difficult position. I just feel very badly for Duke, though not so much for a number of individuals. This whole thing amounts to an undeserved and very, very damaging attack. Sad to say, but it seems likely that it was largely racially motivated and a good bit of the motivational material is produced internally.

Anonymous said...

Oh my God. This hit me like a lightening bolt when I mentioned the Group of 87 tilting their lances at windmills.

I have finally realized the cruel moment when reality imitates fiction.

Crystal is Michael Nifong's Dulcinea. He was bound to save her virtue, refusing to see her for who and what she was. As enraged as Don Quixote was at the traders from Toledo who he saw as insulting his Dulcinea's honor, Nifong sprang to the offensive to save Crystal's. Like Sancho, Wilson played along with the charade in order to preserve the appearance for his chivalrous knight.

His delusion has now become painfully apparent in my mind now. This is a sad moment.


Anonymous said...

Tell me if I get it: there are two superimposed "worlds", two planes, Reality and Super-Reality. Facts are limited to Reality, but in Super-Reality lies the Truth.

In Reality, call CGM a stripper/psycho liar/etc., and Nifong a rogue DA and phenomenally brazen dumbass -- but in Super-Reality CGM is an innocent victimized truth-teller and Nifong...well, alright, he's still a dumbass.

The LAX players are, in Reality, obviously innocent of the charges; in Super-Reality, they're just as obviously guilty. Many - most - are guilty with them.

The G88-87 understand Super-Reality; that's what they were actually listening to and are still listening to. Almost all posters on this site are hopelessly mired in Reality. They can't possibly hear the music of the Super-Real spheres.

Close enough? I got me 42 grand. Can I get into to Duke?

Anonymous said...

The worst crime to which I had knowledge of while at Duke was the brutal rape of a female student by a non-student black man. But it wasn't treated as a racial issue as much as a tremendous tragedy. The woman (a friend, but not a close friend), recovered from her significant injuries and evinced a dignity that was tremendous. On a personal note, I remember feeling tremendous remorse because I had just run through Duke Gardens (where the rape occurred) a mere five minutes before it happened and felt terrible at not being able to prevent it. Prevent it, you say? Did I have big muscles? No. But I was easily the faster runner at the school and in town - ranging from 400 meters to up to the distances - and would have run to the ends of the earth to identify the rapist - with a real certainty that he could not have escaped on foot without some fairly solid opportunity for identification on my part. Warmed up as I was - a sub 50 400 meters - or a 4:15 or so mile - even on the roads, just wasn't very difficult. And even the fastest of criminals - well, they just aren't in that kind of shape. It was one race I am sorry I missed. Now that would have been an opportunity for justice, although Karla Holloway would have found me part of a greater social construct for doing well in the the shorter events I ran against mostly black competitors.

Anonymous said...

The real issue is do you want to be right or not raped and/or murdered?

Cedarford said...

6:01PM -
Sorry, you are just echoing marxist, black racist & rad feminist drivel that various areas of society occupied by elites are the true "hotbeds" of crime. In this case sexual.
Anyone the radicals expect to "buy" into the "epidemic" of crimes can easily see from examinations of records of students before they attend elite schools and afterwards that these high performers have crime rates far lower than the average.

Man-hating feminists have sites and "fabulist" stats like this, everywhere. Any analysis of the facts shows they are rectal-plucked crap, lies used as indoctrination tools to radicalize and spread fear in gullible new female "fishes" coming on campus.

Anonymous 8:36 - To the group of 88 and their supporters, bearing false witness, even if it could send the students to jail for 30 years for a crime they did not commit, is less serious than being drunk and hiring strippers. That is the moral calculus that seems to have governed Duke for the last ten months and it is appalling that so many can still cling to such moral insanity.

Well said, and that is why the Rump Gang, to their shock, are being denounced on and off Duke campus as clueless manipulators and apologists. After 35 years of shoveling crap on students and the public, people have now intuitively grasped that what was once "harmless 1st Amendment rights expresion of harmless white, male, Asian, class-hating Faculty nutballs" has now crossed the line into dangerous and threatening cabals out to damage their foes and destroy lives.
The days of tolerating the intolerant under shields of PC and victimology are finally beginning to end.
Profs that have lived all their lives in this are shocked that their critics now are not backing down as soon as various "white-male-wealthy-Asian banana- guilt cards are played. Shocked that their mendacious "we are sorry you are too stupid to get our thank you and listening letter", or their droll non-apology letter, did not "educate the ignorant" as they thought it would.

Anonymous said...

1027 - I just can't believe whatever is happening on college campuses as described by 601 is that horrific if the effect on your social life of reporting it, is a reason not to report it.

From 601 --This is because in many cases the sexual assault is committed by an acquaintace, member of a social circle, or even a friend - and filing official charges that will almost certainly dismissed just isn't that attractive when it means you will quite possibly also ruin your social life

Cedarford said...

Anonymous 2:10 and filing official charges that will almost certainly dismissed just isn't that attractive when it means you will quite possibly also ruin your social life...

If that is true and pursuing charges of various absolutely trivial "sexual assault charges of "boy-leering at victimhood embracing butch-girls, inappropriate tongue in drunken dancing, and "sexual assault by rump-touching or obligatory BJs for a ski weekend" fall to a social pariah status? Well, perhaps then it is time to talk about the vapid little female minds who play the "I'm a victim of agreeing to go to Aspen for free in return for sex!" Or - "I plastered my body against this 19-year old guy and licked his neck but never signed written consent for him to caresse my boobs!!".

Let alone the horror of "ruining a vacuous bitch's social life" from a bull dyke who says any interaction where a *spit* man is involved in any activitity with a babe is worse than murder. Equivalent to male Cro-Magnons insensitively saying having bad breath or wearing 5-years out of style clothing is terrible, thus a major crime, because it ruins silly dumb little teen bitch's social lives...

Anonymous said...

Those interested in this case should post-fiasco become a rump group ourselves; devoted to decency in academe, honesty in prosecutors and the pursuit of truth, justice and the American (as in US Constitution).

Anonymous said...


From the DOJ Bureau of Justice Bulletin: Criminal Victimization Survey 2005, September 2006 (NCJ 214644)

The average Victimization rate for 2005 per 1000 (Rape - Sexual Assault) in the US (excluding kids 12 years and lower) is

0.9 (2002-03)
0.8 (2004-05)

The numbers (per 1000) given by Mr Johnson are:

1.5 (2000-05)
3.3 (2006)


If I didn't do any mistakes (people are more than welcome to check the information just to make sure...), the rate of sexual violence at Duke is near double the average in the US in one instance and more than 3 times in the other.

Now, given the term "sexual misconduct" used by Mr Johnson can be interpreted in other ways than "sexual violence", those numbers could mean nothing. But still, as low as they are for Duke, in context of the whole country, the numbers seem to be indeed quite high and something to be concerned about, no? (Gee, maybe the 88 will use this when they get spanked in court?)

Before being crucified, I want to state for the record that I believe those kids to be innocent and the Group of 88 wrong in their rush to judgement (and subsequent smokescreen letter/explanations in order not to apologize). I just don't want to become like some enablers and grasp at *anything* remotely tangible to make a point.

Truth should be the most important thing in this case, for any party involved in this pathetic hoax


Anonymous said...

It is extremely difficult to talk about the prevelance of sexual misconduct without better hard data. No doubt sexual misconduct occurs and should be condemned.
The idea that sexual misconduct is rampant on the Duke campus, however, seems unlikely to me. When I was in high school I knew several students who went to Duke and many more who went to other elite universities. The several I knew who went to Duke were outstanding indviduals with exceptional character. I would describe similarly the others I knew who went to other elite institutions.
Now my own daughter is in high school and I know many of her peers who will likely attend elite institutions. These are all kids who are well-rounded, highly motivated and demonstrate the high degree of discipline to acheive in the upper levels of academics. None of the kids I knew in high school or that I now know as my daughter's friends are the type of people who are likely to exhibit racisit or sexist attitudes, let alone engage in sexual assaults.
Of course, perhaps some do and will, but really those who are able to be admitted to elite institutions do not strike me as a high-risk population to contain rapists and/or racists. I am not claiming to have data, but this strikes me as a common sense conclusion based on my experiences.

Anonymous said...

Having read this entire thread is strikes me that no one has asked the question :

who among the signers of the listening statement refused to sign the statement of this new cohort ( 87).

And more importantly , why ?

Lets be post structurally adept and create the answer to that question ourselves , to suit our truth and trust that our truth will win .

They dropped out because to continue is proof that they have a need to explain the impression that they have created .

Anonymous said...

The new ad mentions the "alleged rape." Does anyone know what they are referring to?

Anonymous said...

I couldn't agree more. Dook, like many other college campuses, is overrun by racism. For instance, we can look to the admissions offices at any number of campuses ("Ann Arbor holding on line one..."), or the infamous "two stacks" of applications in Chapel Hill.

I trust the 88/87 will be working dilligently to cure this race-based discrimination. The alternative is that they can stand by while the standards are lowered based SOLELY on the race of the applicant; a stance which tacitly endorses the statement "That SAT score is pretty good for a black person."

Anonymous said...

Seb at 8:06:

Recheck your mathematics, hombre.

2 reports per 6000 is 1 per 3000 and 0.33 per 1000.

The average of the 4 years prior was 0.8 reports per year, same population, for a rate of 0.15 per 1000.

I'm pretty sure that's in fact quite a lot less than the national rate.

Anonymous said...

Ah yes, "the alleged rape."

I presume they are referring to the formerly alleged rape, a/k/a "the once and future rape allegation."

See CGM accounts # 1.1, 1.3, 1.4, 2.0, 2.1 and, 3.0 [but check back for updates; new versions are being beta-tested right now].

M. Simon said...

anon 4:07PM,


M. Simon said...

Here is a little ant-PC screed I wrote:

Corruption of Blood

Anonymous said...

Unlike the rumpers( presumably)I did some research on reported sex related offenses at Duke.The statistics presented by KC accurately reflect those published by Duke's office of Judicial Affairs as presented on their website. These stats relate to reported incidents of sexual misconduct by Duke undergraduate students. I compared these to crime statistics published on the Duke police website as required by the Clery Act. These statistics relate to reported crimes committed on or around the Duke campus by students and non students. These stats , which are shown for calendar years 2003, 2004 and 2005, when compared with the stats shown on the Judicial Affairs website, show that most sex offenses are committed by non students. I also spoke directly with an individual from Duke police and he confirmed that most high end violent crimes were committed by non students. The Clery Act stats. also show that there were no hate crimes by prejudice, i.e by race, religion etc.reported for 2003, 2004 and 2005.

We know that not all sex related offenses are reported at Duke and everywhere else. We just do not know how many are not reported. We also know that there is some over reporting of these offenses( e.g. the lacrosse case). We also know that there are not many reported caes of sexual misconduct at Duke.Given these facts,no reasonable person could conclude that sexual violence is prevalent on Duke's campus. The statement by the " rumpers" is unsubstantiated and irresponsible,as it unfairly portrays Duke students as racists, sexists and violent sex offenders. It also portrays Duke as accepting this bad behavior. Duke's reputation continues to be damaged by these professors. It's time for the President to stand up for his students and reject the false claims of these agenda driven faculty members who apparently are not concerned with the welfare of most Duke students.


Anonymous said...

My apologies; I must've read the article when the deciman was missing.

So in this case, those numbers shows that the occurence of sexual violence/misconduct is LESS than the national average, hardly the picture the 88 wanted us to believe in.

Again, my apologies for this mistake