For those in the DC area, my colleague, Stuart Taylor, will be speaking tomorrow afternoon at 5pm, at the Independent Women's Forum, on the case. A rumor exists that the parents of DIW staffers will be in attendance as well.
For more information, see here.
Taylor will be joined by Christina Hoff Sommers, whose work on the US educational system is first-rate; the event moderator will be Jeffrey Toobin.
The forum will explore not only the legal aspects of the case but also the media and academic aspects of the misconduct.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
102 comments:
Any chance on an mp3 or a video of the forum? It would be great to listen in on a pro-player forum. I'm guessing that this forum will be a tad bit more open than the G77 forum.
DIW staffers? Am I missing something?
Christina Hoff Sommers is a sane feminist.
Of course, this means that "mainstream" feminists (who represent a "mainstream" of maybe 5% of US women) hate her guts. She is obviously doing something right.
Have not read "War Against Boys" but I enjoyed "One Nation Under Therapy" which she wrote with Sally Satel.
Is this the sort of thing that gets onto C-SPAN? Any chance that the already overworked DIW staff can let us know how this goes down?
SAVANT
Coach K had it Exactly right in the Costas interview om HBO. - Worth seeing in its entirety.
When asked about Duke reaction to the lacrosse controversy - Coach K said.
"Look these are our kids.
we are going to support them because they were still our kids...I don't think we did a good job of that."
Chafe and the other 86 did exactly the opposite with demonstrations, Ads, and public statements. Right now - today it is very apparent they still don't support their students.
When asked about Duke's public image. Coach K said.
"A lot of people feel we left the kids unsupported."
This is why so many people are Upset Shocked and Angry at the faculty, Broadhead and the Administration.
The kids deserved thier support and did not get it.
Damn, damn, damn - I might have gone with a little more warning. Read "War Against Boys". Comports with my son's experience.
Yeah, to be sure, Duke, as a university, did not support its students and that the students deserved such support.
But it's what Duke *did* do to the students that is far, far more offensive. Duke, as an institution, actively screwed these boys and, moreover, placed them directly into legal jeopardy.
3:24pm Eric:
When asked about Duke's public image. Coach K said.
"A lot of people feel we left the kids unsupported."
Including Coach K. Sorry, Eric, I can't give K any kudos for speaking to Costas this week.
He was as cowardly as anyone at Duke, and remained silent when it mattered.
Congratulations on the invitation Stuart Taylor...and good luck.
They made an excellent choice.
Break a leg.
GP
[Mike Krzyzewski] was as cowardly as anyone at Duke, and remained silent when it mattered.
He said in another interview people look to him as a basketball coach to comment. He is also a special assistant to the the President, yet people wanted him to comment as a basketball coach.
And if he would of spoke, dont you think the CCI'ers would be up in arms about an athletic person commenting?
Sorry, Coach G didnt comment. The womens golf coach didnt comment. He just waited for facts, like everyone else should have.
My apologies for helping to hijack this thread. I shouldn't have responded to the Coach K commentor.
Hopefully we can get back to Taylor & IWF.
Locomotive breath 3.:27 said...
Damn, damn, damn - I might have gone with a little more warning. Read "War Against Boys". Comports with my son's experience.
I think this is where it starts.
A female elementary school principal in one of our wealthy communities here was placed on leave of absence for sending pictures of nude 5 or 6 year old boys peeing in flower pots to her teachers from her home computer.
One of the little boys had 10-15 sanity napkins pasted to his body.
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/4617924.html
Many of the teachers don't see why the neighborhood is so wound up about this.
Gary Packwood sez:
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/4617924.html
Here is a link to that article.
Gary:
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/4617924.html
Will we be seeing any anonymous quotes from the DIW staff?
I, too, think that the Bob Costas interview with Coach K is worth seeing as it supports many of the good qualities of the Duke athletic program, which has consistently required of athletes a selfless commitment to a common purpose and at the same time a dedication to academic integrity. However, I think the criticism of Coach K for his failure to speak out before now is unfair. According to the interview, Coach K volunteered to play whatever role President Broadhead thought appropriate during the controversy. Moreover, that role was to be in the capacity of an assistant to the President and not as the Duke basketball coach. Given the fact that the basketball coach at Duke is clearly more well known than its President and probably compensated at a significantly higher level, I thought Coach K's reluctance to upstage his President and to defer to his judgment was appropriate. It is easy to criticize Broadhead's tardiness in confronting the harm done to the Duke students, but it might have been very disruptive to the University, without any compensating benefit to the students involved, to have its star coach out in front of the administration.
Anon 4:31:
"Appropriate"? "Disruptive"? Folks, while these kids are being *royally* screwed by Duke, remain in serious harms way, run up million dollar+ legal bills, and have their reputations shredded, we're concerned about that idiot Brodhead's ego and the potential for "disruption" flowing from Coach K "encroaching" upon Boadhead's "turf"? Are we serious?
Once it became clear that Duke was actively (and passively) meaning to do these boys real harm all bets were off. While polite company may recoil, let's face reality: in some instances serious push-back becomes necessary. Survival mode, folks. The boys' moms get it. Sure, it's neither pretty nor fun--but necessary nonetheless.
Real leaders--such as what Coach K likes to promote himself as--don't shirk when duty calls. He's a West Pointer for God sakes! I can only hope he knows what he *should* have done all along. Heck, all he had to do was *follow* the brave lead of the women's lax coach.
For this reason alone (Coach K's shameful "duck") I hope the Duke b-ballers exit the Dance promptly so that Durham can get back to the serious business of ending the Hoax.
4:51
This comment is absolutely horrendous. Why are you not ragging on any other coach for saying something. In the early going, the right response by anyone associated with Duke is lets wait and see. K, as a basketball coach, has no dog in this fight.
For this reason alone (Coach K's shameful "duck") I hope the Duke b-ballers exit the Dance promptly so that Durham can get back to the serious business of ending the Hoax.
First off, sportss is healing, hopefully Duke will go far.
Second, the Duke women will go far.
third, I am under the impression not many in North Carolina root for Duke
Christina Sommers first book critical of what she calls gender feminism was "Who Stole Feminism". It is an excellent reference for what has gone wrong in universities concerning political correctness. Though it deals with feminist politics, it could equally apply to most of the other "protected classes".
She is a very good person to have talk about the issues surrounding the role of the group of 88. In particular she has debunked a lot of the "noble lies" that the 88 have been peddling to justify their ad and other public statements.
It would be very good to get a transcript of the forum or at least a good synopsis.
Matthew 4:51:
"Why are you not ragging on any other coach for saying something."
Fair point, as far as it goes. But, for starters, Coach K doesn't appear to feel chilled now, does he? And, more to your point about me selecting Coach K (whom, up until now, I admired greatly), Coach K almost stands alone among his peers in promoting himself as a "teacher of leaders." He does the corporate lecture circuit on this very point (leadership) for substantial supplemental income. I also believe (but do not know for certain) that he wrote a book on the subject. Finally, he didn't have to prejudge *anything* by merely reminding all--publically--about the presumption of innocence. Given his public stature, surely that wasn't too much to ask, was it? Instead, he did nothing, at least publicly. Candidly, his recent interviews convey (to me, anyway) some level of palpable guilt for not having done precisely what I suggest.
As a service academy grad myself (USAFA), I know well Coach K did not do well by his alma mater. I--and hopefully we--rightfully expect more from our Corp of Cadets. West Point invests our money in developing leaders, not followers. And leaders lead, not follow. We deserve nothing less. Certainly the lacrosse kids deserved it.
And, as an aside, even upon reflection I do not find any basis for your characterization of my prior comment as, in your word, "horrendous." But I'm willing to leave that judgment to others.
To the 2.53:
DIW has a staff of . . . one :)
According to the N&O article, Coach K did speak out months prior to the Costas interview.
Perhaps not as loudly as you would have like, but he did speak out. He does deserve credit (you decide how much) for that.
If you want to get your feathers in a ruffle, look into WHY it is taking NC Bar to decide the obvious. Are they constipated?
I'm 6:04. Sorry for the oops.
I meant to type "look into why it is taking NC Bar so long to decide the obvious".
My bingers don't always do what my frain requests. :)
5:23 is right on. I've felt the same way about Coach K. As a leader in this case he was AWOL.
Unfortunately there are others who's leadership is AWOL, including the govenor and Brodhead.
How do you explain the web of wrongs by public officials to our newly dispachted troops, those actively serving, the injured and their families. This is not the fruit of democracy they are fighting for.
North Carolina & Durham officials need simply to be brave and face the results of their actions/inactions, like several Walter Reed officials have done.
I really would like to hear how you are going to define several of the personality types that teach in the Angry Studies departments at Duke.
That would be a stretch for me as I would end up talking about situational insanity...probably.
How do you discuss an academic's teaching effort ...when their world is not fenced around with facts or proofs or thoughts of "objective truth"?
After about two lectures, I as a student, would feel that the juice is not worth ...the squeeze...and drop the course.
The excuses being made for Coach K would have more resonance if we didn't have an example like women's lacrosse coach Kerstin Manning Kimel to refer to. If Coach Kimel was able to demonstrate leadership and courage at a time when it was very difficult to do so, surely the great Coach K, probably the most prominent coach in all of college sport, could have, and should have, done the same.
beckett
The "Coach K" for whom I have the most respect is Kirsten Kimel, who coaches women's lacrosse at Duke. I had the privilege of meeting her a couple of weeks ago, and I think she is something special. She is the kind of coach I wish could have coached my oldest daughter.
(K.C., speaking of daughter, I am in Chattanooga visiting with my oldest daughter and son-in-law. Things have turned out much better than I could have hoped last Christmas. I'm very grateful today.)
Somers is a serious scholar, and my wife a few years ago gave me her "War Against Boys" book. I have a lot of respect for her, and had she been at Duke, she would have been a voice for sanity. I am so grateful for the Christina Somers and K.C. Johnsons out there who take their jobs seriously and do not turn their classes into propaganda mills. They set a good example for the rest of us.
Those of you who are in college teaching can understand my point. We are in positions of trust, and we cannot break that trust. What Peter Wood did last year is unforgivable, not to mention the rest of the G88. Believe me, not all professors are like that.
Pure speculation.
Do you think that Coach K was afraid, at that early stage of mass hysteria, to say anything because it might taint him as a racist...and thereby compromise his recruiting ability?
Ha, KC, very good. I only wish I lived out that way and enjoy a chance to meet you. Hope you have great evening and keep up the excellent work !!
BDay
Who is lined up to bring the string for this forum's demonstration?
Oh, for a moment, I forgot what is under consideration this time. There will be adults at this forum, discussing the issues at an adult level, so it won't be necessary to have string available.
At the risk of taking anothter beating here, didn't Coach K say in his interview that he thought something awful had happened at that off-campus apt? (not his actual wording). Seems I read this in Michael Gaynor's column yesterday.
If that's the case, Coach K acted as most of us did, true? None of us really knew at the time that the so-called rape was a hoax. But nobody here is "getting on his case" for scoring last in support of the "boys"?
Christina Hoff ... a sane feminist? And the mainstream feminists (95%) hate her guts?
Actually, I would probably identify better with Hoff. I'll have to find her site
"None of us really knew at the time that the so-called rape was a hoax."
True: none of us knew it was a hoax, but neither did we know that the charges were justified, either.
Do you think most people at first assumed that the charges were legit? I hope that's not the case.
I recall hoping those charges weren't true, but thinking that there should be a harsh reckoning either way -- if the charges were true, that a very heavy penalty must be paid, and if they weren't, that a very heavy penalty must be paid.
Then I waited to hear what evidence had led to the laying of charges. Nifong's overly-dramatic behavior, and stories of the gathering vigilante mob very quickly made me suspicious that justice was suffering.
Didn't it affect you that way?
If not, why not?
Yes, in the beginning, I thought the charges were true. Yet, at the same time, I wrestled with "why these guys would want to rape a black stripper"! It never made sense.
By the way, how did the incident attract national attention in the first place?
It wasn't until prostitute Crystal Gail Mangum started to change her story that I realized the case was false. My girlfriend had been raped here in Durham and she knew every detail of that evening. How could Crystal be so unsure of the time of the attack and number of attackers? Because she was making it up as she went along. I told anyone who would listen to me that "not-so-Precious" was full if it and found scant support for my opinion. Of course, the locals here elected Nifong later that year, so there you go.
So, while not in the avant garde, like Monsieur Chafe, I figured it out pretty quickly.
So, while Coach K. is a dreadful example of what our Military Academy's can produce, he is still slightly better than Annapolis' shame, Jimmy "I never met a despot I didn't like" Carter.
Coach K, also known as potty mouth, whines again. Underwhelming.
JLS says...,
1. Ms. Hoff-Summers first book was excellent. The IWF with her and Taylor should be excellent.
2. Coach K was not a good leader on this. No one was required to go as far as the women's team in supporting the players claim they did not do it, but the most visible member of the Duke athletic department could have lead by arguing against the rush to judgement. The recruiting excuse is in fact the opposite of leadership, ie following the crowd out of personal self interest.
3. Duke losing in the tournament would only please the anti-athletics 88 gangsters. So while I am not a Duke fan, I will be rooting for my Gators and not concerned one way or another about Duke unless they meet the Gators which would have to be in the final four, I think.
7:54
You bring up a good point: "why these guys would want to rape a black stripper"!
Rape statistics back up your point. White male raping black female incident rates/1000 are very low. Certainly much lower than black male raping white female incident rates/1000.
While some might debate that the difference is due to overzealous prosecution of blacks, what we observe in free society also tends to back up your assertion. We observe significantly fewer white male/black female couples than vice-versa.
The conclusion is, and some may utter that it is a racist conclusion, but generally speaking, white males don't find pure black females attractive.
Something funny going on over at AG Rud - looks like the comments have been taken off. That includes Professor Selke'd piece about Rus essay. Would one of the computer types zip over there and see what is happening?
In KC's 3/11 Sunday Review, an "anon" told me that black males rape women, regardless of race, on an average of twice a week in Durham. Do these black rapists act alone, or do they operate as part of a gang?
third, I am under the impression not many in North Carolina root for Duke
Mar 14, 2007 5:00:00 PM
With greatest respect, you are seriously mis-informed.
Regarding your friend, so sorry. And you are right! A real victim does NOT change her account of rape. The details are forever etched in her mind.
The story never hung together - no way did these guys touch those dirty women. UGH- anyway, MLK said "In the end, we will remember not the wrath of our enemies, but the silence of our friends" Bill A..Coach Kimel is a shinning light in a sorid mess. I don't care about basket ball or Coach K - never knew who he was until the hoax. Staff of ..one, KC - your are the best.
I've never been a Duke fan. I'm a tarheel only because my daughter graduated from there.
Hoff's IWF .... acronym for?
First I heard about the hoax was in the newsgroups and there was heated debate over there from the beginning.
Georgia far-from-a-girl
They act alone, using force and weapons. They are supported by a thug culture, their mothers, and the non-policing of vast swaths of downtown.
But what the hell does that have to do with this subject - you are never going to remake the LAX non-rape into something that fits your experience. So either get educated or stay on topic.
Once again, I am sorry for your experience, and I know that it can never be healed. But perhaps you belong on another forum.
I had a look at Rud's blog and it appears that he has wiped all of the comments on not only the Duke LAX threads but all of his threads.
Perhaps it was deliberate or maybe it was a mistake. Remember that this is the Einstein that doesn't know the difference between Reply and Reply All in his email client.
KC, it might be a pain to have moderation turned on, but could you leave it on? It seems to be hit and miss on when it's on, and I can tell which threads are unmoderated pretty quickly. You don't want to give the G88ers any further ammo that this is a racist site.
To 523 et al I sort of agree
But listen to what coach K says
Costas
"why did you wait so long before saying anything."
Coach K
"I met with my college president and I told Dick Broadhead. If you need me. If YOU need me. You tell me and then put me in a position where I am not the basketball coach but I am that special assistant to you."
"Dick Broadhead did not bring me in."
To most of America, Coach K is the only recognizable figure at Duke.
I think Coach K actually believed in the Special Assistant to the President title. He was letting the administration speak with one voice.
Also not a lot of other professors or coaches have spoken out.
That being said Coach K is late
Frederick Hess has an article "In Loco Parentis...or Just Loco" looking at the Duke fiasco.
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MGQ3NDY2OGEwODIwZmM4N2Y2MGYxMmFkZTQ4NzQ5NzY
For those of you who did not get a chance to read Perdue Professor Thomas Selke's piece - he commented on his disappointment on the caliber of Ruds comments and analysis. Hopefully someone can find it and reproduce here.
To anon 9:21:
Please "read" the posts. My questions concerned Christina Hoff Sommers and IWF, and Coach K.
I am NOT an 88'er. I am very interested in what KC has to say, and the responses he generates.
Don't you realize that, by spewing such venom, you fuel Group88's cause?
Thomas Sellke here.
Yesterday I sent my Purdue colleague Professor Rud an e-mail.Here is the relevant part:
Professor Rud,
I was gone over the week-end and too busy yesterday to reply to you.
I have followed the discussion on your blog concerning the Duke rape hoax.I had some points to make,but they have almost all been made now (very well,probably better than I could have made them) by others.I have not been favorably impressed by the quality of your commentary.Just about everything you have said on this Duke rape hoax issue has been shown to be silly,and with no substantive rebuttal from you. The "thoughtful" comment that you included from your friend Len Waks is similarly unimpressive.The other commenters are wiping the floor with you,but Waks can't tell the difference between that and mindless namecalling.(Can you tell the difference?) And then there's Krista Simons,who seems to have been a faculty member here at Purdue a few years ago.She argues that university athletes be held to high standards of conduct as representatives of their institutions,but she ignores the reprehensible behavior of the "Group of 88" at Duke,who as faculty (i.e.,employees,versus paying customers) should clearly be held to standards at least as high as the standards for athletes. Don't you think it's reasonable for readers of the recent discussions on your blog to ask,"What the hell kind of intellectual standards do they have in the Purdue College of Education??"
Here's a question about your "Terrific commentary, especially in light of the sickening display of sham virtue by the students involved and the parents determined to “get” Nifong." I take it you were accusing the parents as well as the students of "the sickening display of sham virtue." Can you tell me what justified this accusation? As has been pointed out to you in case you were not aware,the players admitted that the party was not something to be proud of.So,do (or did) you think that the players were not morally entitled to defend themselves against their vilification as rapists and accessories to rape,in a case where there was no rape? Now that (I hope) you've been convinced that there was no rape,can you say what you as the parent of one of the lacrosse players would have done differently from what those parents did,especially those parents whose son's were randomly chosen by the accuser to be charged with rape?
I have the impression that gang rapes at fraternities are very rare.The fact that Sanday had to use a false accusation of gang rape as an excuse to discuss her book FRATERNITY GANG RAPE seems like additional evidence for that.Plus,her getting lots of basic facts wrong concerning the Duke hoax makes me skeptical of anything she claims.I think she's probably a buffoon. (See also KC Johnson's comments on the Sanday article.)Do you still think her article is "terrific commentary"?
I found Sellke's page but nothing on Duke Lacrosse. I did note that he coauthored a paper with Herman Rubin who is also a Professor in the Statistics Department at Purdue and who provided me with guidance on math education when our kids were young. He would be the type that would rail against guys like Rud and the G88 in the misc.education newsgroup.
I'll send an email to Professor Sellke to see if he could provide a pointer to the document that you mentioned.
Well, I guess I don't need to send him an email as he responded personally.
Thomas Sellke here,again.
After I sent my e-mail yesterday to Professor Rud (excerpted in my previous comment here),Professor Rud quickly sent an e-mail to me in reply.He wrote that he was interested in "talking about broader cultural issues",which apparently did not include the anything I was asking about,or the issues that had been raised by commenters on his blog.He suggested that I phone him or meet him.However,I thought he should explain what he meant by "broader cultural issues" to the commenters on his blog,so I posted the above excerpt from my e-mail on his blog,suggesting as well that he inform all his readers about the "broader cultural issues" stuff.
You won't find my e-mail excerpt or any Duke lacrosse comments on Professor Rud's blog anymore,though.It appears that he has flushed all that down the memoryhole.
So Professor Rud got a lot of apparently unwelcome traffic and commenters via this mention on D-i-W last Sunday. Apparently he didn't like the way his flippant, anti-student, pro-88 posts looked when compared to the notes contributed by his commenters at Culture of Violence, Perfect Storm, or Blogging and Dialogue. As of tonight, the dozens of Hoax-themed comments are gone.
A.G. Rud is truly a doubleplusgood blogger.
Just a reminder how seemingly-tolerant and open-minded people sometimes aren't.
James Howard and "Sixties Liberal" had some thoughtful and perceptive pieces at Rud's site. I hope they can pull them from caches or hard drives and post them here for a probably more appreciative readership.
Here's one of my comments that the good professor apparently wished to push down the memory hole. Emphasis added.
3/11/07 11:30am
Prof Rud,
Most bloggers write to be read; you seem to take this occurence as your misfortune. Despite your put-upon tone, you've kept the comments of your earlier post intact. Given the exchange between you and 'James Howard' that it includes, that decision is to your credit.
Alas: you were lazy in that earlier post in pontificating on a subject about which you were largely ignorant. Here, you renew that sloth by declining to learn the facts and re-evaluate your stance.
Even Gramsci's disciples--if they wish to be informed about the Duke Lacrosse Rape Hoax--read KC Johnson's blog.
To end this comment on a more agreeable note: following the evolution of the Hoax motivated me to read "I Am Charlotte Simmons," and I thought it contained valuable information about the social scene at Duke, which is of course the context in which these events have played out.
Two suggestions: (1) Check out "Bonfire of the Vanities;" its concept of "The Great White Defendant" is as relevant to the Hoax as Wolfe's latest. (2) On your next scan of "Charlotte Simmons," attend to the hypocritical, opportunistic character of Professor Quat. In the disgraceful conduct of Duke's Hard Left faculty, Life has once again imitated Art.
AMac
If the Sellke email to Rud is authentic, it looks like he gave a beatin' to a cretin.
Christina Hoff Sommers at the IWF on Duke Lax? Should be excellent. Who Stole Feminism and War Against Boys are two books that go into great detail about the the G88 type and how they operate. She skeweered Carol Gilligan in the War Against Boys. Systematic, logical and thorough.
She will be speaking this summer in DC on a conference on "Boys and the Boy Crisis" along with Warren Farrell, Matt O'Connor (F4J) Glenn Sacks, the authors of Legalizing Misandry Paul Nathanson and Katherine Young and a number of others. You can get more info here if you are interested.
I realized today that KC and this blog remind me in some ways of the watergate coverage of the 70's. Thank you KC for holding accountable those who have previously slithered away untouched.
"... the reprehensible behavior of the "Group of 88" at Duke".
I've had my head in the sand believing that the Group88's agenda was to make students aware of the "violent culture" on campus.
Okay, call me ignorant, but what did they "really" do? (I'm here to listen and learn)
Georgia non-girl,
You have asked that question twice here - now go back and read all of KC's posts. Go back as far as you can endure. You must educate yourself, yourself.
When done your question will be answered and you can chose which side you are on - civilization, civility, decency, the rule of law, or with the Group of 88 and Brodhead.
georgia girl:
I was skeptical of the charges from the first moment I heard them. As I've said before on DIW, and contrary to the risible position taken by UPenn "scholar" Peggy Reeves Sanday concerning male group dynamics, I felt very confident that the chance that 40 plus "bad apples" at an elite university all happened to be on the same athletic team and attend the same party, and all 40 sat by and allowed a brutal crime to be committed in their presence in a small one story bungalow, was not merely vanishingly small, it was as close to impossible as a gust of wind blowing through a junk yard, leaving a perfectly constructed 747 in its wake.
Males do bond, that much is true. They can and do develop intense and true feelings of loyalty to one another, especially when embarked on a shared endeavor of some difficulty and challenge. But males also have something else of importance in the complex arrangement that comprises the group dynamic, i.e., a highly refined sense of justice. That sense is related to issues of status, and in fact an argument can be made that our entire system of laws springs from the lessons of status, and its lesser consort, justice, that have accreted over the centuries.
"Bad apples" exist, of course. But unless a male group is led by one, and has been conditioned extensively in the ways of badness, most members of any male group will fall into normal, law-abiding ranges of behavior. The Duke lacrosse team not only does not fit the criteria of badness, it resides on the opposite end of the spectrum for men, i.e., a group of males striving to achieve something of value --- athletic success in an elite forum, a top university.
In those circumstances, there is no chance that more than 40 athletes, with all that at stake, would slip into criminal behavior, or the coverup of criminal behavior.
beckett
Beckett -
Well said - you know that thought flitted through my mind at the time, but it was swept away by the events as they unfolded. There is a decency that exists in humans, well most of them, that would not have allowed events to unfold as various liars, criminals, politicians, ivory tower dwellers and journalists would have us believe.
Thanks for stating that so clearly.
The conclusion is, and some may utter that it is a racist conclusion, but generally speaking, white males don't find pure black females attractive.
Yes, that is a racist - but nonetheless accurate - conclusion.
Even Spike Lee in his 1991 flick Jungle Fever asked the question why the black male is (almost) always much more physcially attractive than the white female in inter-racial relationships.
Thomas Sellke here,yet again.
I've just seen that Rud has put an "Update" on the Duke hoax on his blog.You'll have to scroll down a bit to find it,under PERFECT STORM.
Rud refers in his "Update" to "the trolls who spewed their anonymous venom" whom he has "expunged from this blog."
My opinion was that the commenters were mostly quite civil in the process of pointing out how silly Rud was.I think the "venom" in my e-mail was
characteristic of the tenor of the comments,and that e-mail at least is still available,so you can have a look at that to guess whether Rud's "troll"
descriptions are warranted.
My own "venom" was obviously not anonymous,but it was expunged,too.
Anon 10:33
Polanski - is that you?
KC - got moderation?
Man, draggin' Spike Lee into this is truly scrapin' the bottom of the barrel!
OMG - Rud not only banished us, but also his fellow Progessor Thomas Selke who critized his commentary. Of course, we are all trolls (where did this naive guy get that word?)
Thanks again, Professor Selke for being an honorable guy. As Rud has all of our email addresses, how can he call us annonymous? He also has a moderator on his comment page. I don't expect to see mine.
How come Rud does not know that the cover up is worse than the crime?
The women I know who have been raped have told me that they remember every detail clearly. What is interesting here is that the so-called "anti-rape" groups were the biggest apologists for Crystal, despite the fact that she changed her stories and offered conflicting explanations.
The stuff of "she was so traumatized that she could not remember was and is nonsense. Had she told a consistent story, the activitists would have told us that consistency was proof. Thus, they tell us that both consistency and inconsistency simultaneously are proof of a rape.
People, this simply is illogical. These folks simply wanted to make accusations without proof. That is all there is to it.
Becket, only lately have I begun to understand the tension in Durham. Thanks for your views on group dynamics, and for stating that "bad apples" do exist. I agree that it's very rare.
The Durham situation sounds like reverse racism at its peak. And they're winning. Again, excuse my ignorance.
Georgia Girl
Read - then your ignorance will need not be excused. Go back a month. It's all on the right hand side of KC's blog page.
This is beginning to become a witch hunt with all the folks going after Coach K for his so-called lack of 'leadership'. I don't recall where he had anything to do with this. He is not the AD or President. He did not sign on with the gang of 88. He did not go to any pot-banging rallys. He is not a lawyer, judge ,or prosecutor. He simply waited for the facts to emerge...
If you want to blame people for lack of leadership, point at those who should be in this fight: the Gov., the NC AG, Alberto 'you're fired' Gonzales. These people are elected or appointed to uphold our constitutional rights and the law. Yet they continue to sit on their well-fed behinds while this farce continues.
My guess is that the AG's SS squad will come up ewith some new charges: Curfew violation!
Rud and Nifong have in common that they both want to rewrite history.
And for those of you who are wondering if Alberto Gonzales will step in and do the right thing? Just look at his ethics now in regards to the recent firings. Don't count an anything 'ethical' from this guy.
Firing political appointees is how business is done in Washington. Clinton fired them all, not just 8. Get with the program.
Thomas Selke, Rud suggested that you phone or meet with him, but you declined, insisting that he first explain what he meant by "broader cultural issues". Couldn't he have explained that to you had you agreed to a meeting?
Georgia Girl - you are part of the group of 88 under deep cover after all. Thanks for playing, now move along.
anon, it is "you" under a deep cover ... and you are very cowardly for doing so. Your anger is sooo transparent.
KC took off moderation. Perhaps he thought that we could be civil or maybe doing the moderator was straining the DIY staff.
If KC doesn't have to moderate, he has more time to write posts here. I know what I'd prefer he spend his time on. And we can help by being civil here.
I posted the following to Professor Rud's blog. I don't expect it to appear there.
__________
Professor Rud:
The facts of the Duke case are indeed far more important than some race/gender/class metanarrative.
The lack of a rape sort of makes your story of "simmering gang rape" moot, does it not.
The problem for the Leftists at Duke is that they are so clearly wrong about the rape hoax that it calls into question anything they have ever said, written, or taught. Of course, they have a story to tell. We have race, sex, and class issues in this country. But, how much credibility does the Gang of 88 have? You seemed to find out that this case was a gross miscarriage of justice in 24 hours. The buffoons at Duke have not figured this out in a year!
The 88 have not made enemies because of their interest in race/sex/class issues. They are despised because they have put their ideologies above their humanity and certainly above the humanity of the three students who are on trial for their lives.
For me, the choice between ideologue and human being is easy. How about you?
Thomas Sellke here,replying to
georgia girl.
Rud,in his comment at INSIDE HIGHER ED on the Sanday article and also on his own blog,slandered the Duke lacrosse players and their parents,with no idea of what he was talking about.He admits in his most recent blog Update that he did not know the basic facts of the situation,though he seems to think the players are such scum that there is no need to apologize for slandering them.
The commenters on Rud's blog brought up several issues that almost anyone would regard as broad and cultural.For example,does the behavior of the "Group of 88" show that large parts of academia are dominated by Professors with little sense and/or integrity?
Does the abuse suffered by the lacrosse players,which no respectable university would stand for if the victims of that abuse were black,show that the hierarchy of "privilege" described by PC theory is in fact inverted at elite universities? Rud had and has absolutely no interest in addressing broad cultural questions like those.In a final comment on his blog,I guessed that for him "broad cultural issues" meant nothing more than parroting the PC line on "race",
"privilege",etc.And it turned out I was exactly right! Have a look at his Update!
Finally,here is my reason for asking Rud to discuss his "broad cultural issues" in his blog comments and not just in a private conversation with me.Over the last few days,Rud adopted a "rope-a-dope" response to the comments pointing out his silliness,simply not responding substantively to much of anything.He seemed to hope that the commenters would soon lose interest and then leave him at peace in his PC dream palace,without him having to admit to any error
or apologize for anything,and it looked like that strategy was working.Since he had publicly slandered the lacrosse players,
I thought he should face continuing pressure to explain himself in public.
GA girl 11:07 PM --
In KC's weekend post concerning Rud, you commented that "Rud nailed it." Later, you commented that you hadn't even read Rud's post or the comments made by those who had, in which they took him to task because of his overwhelming ignorance of the facts of the case.
Had you bothered to read Rud's blog, you would know that Rud is channeling the G88 in his reference to "broader cultural issues" and any discussion with him would be a total waste of time.
The broader cultural issues related to the Nifong Scandal case have nothing to do with rape, sexual violence or kidnapping, the charges officially filed against the LAX 3. That's because no rape, sexual violence or kidnapping occured on March 13-14, 2006 at 610 Buchanan Street. Rather those broader issues concern a crooked DA and Durham Police Department, a racist and sexist (against white males) G88, cowardly politicians (Easley, Cooper) and Duke administrators (Brodhead, Moneta) and a whole host of others. But NOT rape; there wasn't one, OK?
Other people here have suggested that if you want to get into this game that you educate yourself by reading some of the posts from the past. It will take you several hours to get up to speed, but a lot of the people who comment here have done that and if you want to engage them and be engaged in a meaningful dialogue you will need to make that investment. While doing so, you need to set aside your personal experience. What apparently happened to you has absolutely no relevance to the Nifong Scandal case.
SixtiesLiberal, Kenny, per, James Howard --
I have a cache with mostly-complete comments from the three Duke Lacrosse Rape Hoax posts at Prof. Rud's Moo2 blog. Email me if you're missing copies of what you wrote, for re-posting elsewhere.
Memory Holes... they just aren't what they used to be!
amac-2007 at usa dot net
"naked unlovelness" "structural inequality" WTF = I quess you have to be there. Professor Sellke - you are a star. Have asked daughter to attend the forum tomorrow night in DC. Hopefully, she can find staff parents and give all of our best.
Professor Tom - Do you have to see this guy in the faculity lounge or dinning room? Wow
Prof Rud's latest thread is Essai: A Letter to AMac (Re Duke Lacrosse Context). Since I'm mentioned, I have responded--probably for the last time over there, since it's tiresome to write with the knowledge that the host is willing to delete the words on a whim.
-----
Prof Rud,
I will be brief, as I don't know if this comment will pass moderation or, if posted, be retained.
Thanks, I guess, for the essay. A couple of things.
First: your choice of website to link to for insight into the case is very peculiar. I could suggest much better--but try Google, for starters.
Second: You say you have "more than average knowledge... of the issues of the case and surrounding the case." Yet earlier today you updated the "Perfect Storm" post, writing, "But the trolls haven't addressed the probablility of sexual assault, demeaning behavior, racism, and execrable conduct reported upon that evening."
A strange sequence of assertion and auto-rebuttal.
Serious students know that there was no sexual assault of the alleged victim at the lacrosse team party. In fact, you are in as much jeapordy as Seligmann (You can prove you weren't even there? So can he!) Your other allegations have some substance, although you have distorted the record. But I won't go into it. Too long, and been done before. Again, see Google.
Third: As I explain in my comment/essay at J-in-C, I'm somewhat sympathetic to some of your general concerns. However, like the Group of 88, you chose specifics of the Duke Lacrosse Rape Hoax to illustrate those broad concepts. In this, sir, you are wholly in error. You have adopted a position whose only defense is polemics.
I think that when a person realizes that they have assumed a mistaken position in a debate, they should change it. If, as in the Duke Hoax example, people have been harmed, apologies and amends should be offered.
At base, it's as simple as that.
At least Nifong could make me laugh with his double talk. Rud is just pompous and thats never funny. He can go back uner his rock now - fifteen seconds is over. BTW, some Tl posters are indicating that Reade's family are having real finical difficulty. Is their a fund just for Reade and how do we access it? Need to make donations again.
Ga. Grrl
Anon 11:11 here - you are right - I am angry - angry that you keep asking to be spoonfed an opinion rather than reading and forming one yourself. Angry that you keep trying to remake a non-rape into your personal story of rape.
But I am not ignorant of the facts of this case. "Rud nailed it" indeed. Maybe that sort of statement deserves pity more than anger.
Thomas Sellke here,for a few (last?) comments,in case anyone is still checking in here.
Rud's office is in the building next to mine,but I've never met him.I don't even remember any dealings with anyone in the Purdue College of Education in my 23.5 years at Purdue.(Interesting evidence of the balkinization of academia,what?)
Though the comments on his blog are gone,Rud's "essai" (Is that precious,or what? As in:
cute: obviously contrived to charm; "an insufferably precious performance"; "a child with intolerably cute mannerisms") gives the same impression of his mentality
as did his blog comments.Again,we have the reference to "facts" in quotes,
facts being always provisional and contested,dontcha know.
(He seems to have forgotten to include "socially constructed.")
It must be that in his professional milieu,this tired cliche still counts as evidence of deep thinking.In the blog comments,on the other hand,one could almost hear the snorts of derision.More generally,we have the same empty jabbering on PC themes.For example,"Culture of privilege: By this I mean students who attend elite private institutions." Well,so what? Why does this definition of "privilege" make "privilege"
a concept that explains anything important?
Finally,as AMac points out,there is the very curious choice of the "Collin Finnerty"
webpage that Rud links to.Rud seems to think that one can gain important insights into the Duke "rape" case and more generally into the violence of American culture by looking at this stupid piece-of-dreck "Collin Finnerty" website.Well,Professor Rud,there is a lot of dreck on the internet,and its existence says something about the world we live in,but this particular piece of dreck is no more enlightening than any other.You'll learn a lot more by spending your time reading Durham-in-Wonderland than by reading this "Collin Finnerty" thing.
Essai- Is that special or what?
Prof. Sellke (9:55):
FWIW, I too, was somewhat stunned (naively so, I'll admit) not only by Rud's "musings" but by his decision to expunge critical comments as well. On the one hand, it's his blog and he can do what he wants. On the other hand, even though he's at an education dept, he works in the academic world (or, presumably, likes to think that he does) where "erasing" commentary just doesn't hack it. Finally, Rud's own idiotic comments launched the responses. Just because the comments undressed his "logic" is no reason to "run-and-hide." The guy has to "man up," if that's possible for him.
Given that you're evidently local (at Purdue--great aero and astro engineering depts., BTW), if you're at all inclined I'd urge you to reach out to Rud and explain to him how truly stupid and silly he looks. I know I'd be genuinely curious at your report about his response--maybe others on this blog would be as well.
Professor Tom: There are a few thousand folk checking in everyday. I hope you will continue to be one of them. Really enjoy your insights - whether I agree with them or not.
Thomas Sellke,in reply to the comment at 10:59AM.
I think I'm just about the last person who could have a worthwhile discussion right now with A.G.Rud. After all,I'm a venemous,evil troll (in his eyes),
probably somewhere near Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh on his current list of least-favorite people.Plus,everything I would have to say to him concerning "how truly stupid and silly he looks" (as you put it) has already been said,much of it said by others in his blog comments.
I think A.G.Rud is heartily sick of this disturbing encounter with facts and ways of thinking that are not compatible with the dream palace where his mind dwells.I think he's pulled up the drawbridge of that dream palace,and that the drawbridge is going to stay up for quite a while,if not forever.
But,hey,A.G.,if you're reading this and I'm wrong about you not wanting to talk to me,give me a call or shoot me an e-mail!
Professor Sellke, or anyone else-
I looked at Rud's post, but I couldn't find the "Collin Finnerty" link, is there anyway you could post it.
Thomas Sellke here,replying to the comment from 4:12PM.
Hey,isn't that interesting?Rud seems to have removed that link from his "essai".The link is in AMac's comment at 1:40AM,though,and here is the url again:
http://www.collinfinnerty.us/
Matthew (5:00) wrote: "First off, sportss is healing, hopefully Duke will go far."
"Healing"? Well, let's hope not given what just transpired in Buffalo.
Yeah, like I said (4:51, 5:23).... Now that the Duke (men) got whacked in the first round, maybe the village idiots in Durham can attend to the real business at hand--closing out the Hoax.
Hello
http://www.georgiawrestling.net/ - levitra drug
A good thing regarding the use of Levitra is that its impact can be seen within a short interval of time.
[url=http://www.georgiawrestling.net/]buy cheap levitra[/url]
You just don’t need to practice this drug for ages.
cheap levitra online
You will come across the drug Vardenafil under the trade name of Levitra in the medical stores near you.
Официально по договору сделаем на частных лиц и сотрудников предприятий карты метро в сеть супермаркетов Метро Кэш энд Керри:карта клиента metro с вашей фотографией(делается при вас в самом магазине МЕТРО),с индификационным номером,кодом,магнитной полосой, названием предприятия, от которой вы будете нами зарегистрированы. Вы можете проводить с собой двух человек. Карточки metro оформляются: на граждан России и иностранных граждан.Оформление производится без предварительной оплаты, то есть вначале мы регистрируем вас,вы получаете карты метро, потом оплачиваете. Оплата производится в течение одного рабочего дня после оформления через Сбербанк РФ ,немецкие супермаркеты Метро Кэш энд Керри работают круглосуточно.Срок действия пропуска в метро 3 года, по истечении этого срока договор перезаключается по взаимному согласию сторон.Для оказания этой услуги мы находим юридические лица, у которых есть свободные места в этих немецких магазинах ,и заключаем с ними соответствующие юридические договора, по которым фирмы обязуются предоставить вам право пользоваться их местами в этих гипермаркетах сроком на три года. Оформление производятся в разных немецких гипермаркетах Метро Кэш энд Керри, по выбору юридических лиц в соответствии с их территориальным месторасположением. Получив карты метро в одном из немецких магазинов Метро Кеш энд Керри вы можете ей пользоваться в любых других магазинах этой сети торговых центров МETRO Cash and Cаrry в России и за границей.
[url=http://www.metro-carry.ru/23-5.php ] ПОМОГУ С КАРТОЙ МАГАЗИНОВ МЕТРО ![/url]
[url=http://www.metro-carry.ru/22-11.php ] алкогольные напитки цена москва метро ![/url]
[url=http://www.metro-carry.ru/37-1.php ] www metro-cc ru работа ![/url]
Hello all
zithromax online
Nervous system side effects are dizziness, headache, somnolence and vertigo.
[url=http://www.fitzsoft.com/]zithromax price[/url]
Cardiovascular side effects are palpitations and chest pains.
http://www.fitzsoft.com/ - zithromax pills
Since this drug belongs to Pregnancy category B, there have been no evidence that it will not farm the fetus.
Hello
http://www.sharemicrosoft.com/ - cheap diazepam
Valium has been successful in satisfying the needs of the people, hence you can rely on it.
[url=http://www.sharemicrosoft.com/]valium no prescription[/url]
Valium provides a lot of medicinal uses.
buy cheap valium
People also used it for treating alcohol withdrawal and benzodiazepine withdrawal as well.
Привет!
Стекло — очень авангардный и экзотический материал, для смелых и обеспеченных людей.
Одним из приоритетных направлений деятельности фирмы является проектирование, производство и монтаж [url=http://artsteklo.net]Ограждения из нержавеющей стали[/url]
Мы делаем все:стеклянные перегородки, Стеклянные козырьки ,Лестничные перилла из нержавеющей стали
От имени руководства Компании «АртСтекло» позвольте поблагодарить Вас за оказанное внимание.
Подробней на сайте
http://artsteklo.net/
Наш адрес
Санкт-Петербург
Уткин проспект д.15, литера Е
тел./факс: (812) 326 – 92 – 10
Maybe memebers have opinion what are some real benefits of obtaining turnkey affiliate websites? previous month I'm was thinking to obtain one? Can members have opinion of any great website to get some more reviews or opinions which site can get large profit? I found this website
[url=http://www.home-businessreviews.com/Turnkey-Affiliate-Websites.html]affiliate websites[/url] - owner told that he had incredible good profit using these affiliate marketing websites. He claims that he earns many thousands of cash each month with these websites. sorry for offtopic.
This is site I 'm talking
http://www.home-businessreviews.com/Turnkey-Affiliate-Websites.html
Post a Comment