Sharia obligates a man to assume total responsibility for the behaviour and wellbeing of his wives and daughters. Also his mother, if she outlives his father. If he fails to provide for them, or if they break any laws, he could be held accountable. In some ways, it's an even worse deal than living under western feminism.
Although the Russian government is at odds with the Western Hemisphere, the culture of Russia is not all that dissimilar. The women there act the same way as women anywhere with the same wants and desires. They're out of control as much in Russia as in NA. Even China has out of control women too despite the CCPs clampdown on extreme feminism.
It's communication technology not global economy. The more exposure women get to what things are like outside of their immediate bubble of reality, the more it warps their views. Men also, but women are far worse for it.
As long as it is a real court and not those kangaroo court.
And that's the crux of the issue. What the women's groups are looking for here is to use the school's investigatory system against the accused so that there's an official "found to have committed the act" entry into the record and the accused can be expelled and have a permanent black mark. They're not interested in due process, as that would mean some/most of the people accused would be found "not guilty" so to speak.
The problem with sexual assault investigation is that it often amounts to he said/she said. Absent violence, there's no physical evidence to differentiate someone who was a victim from someone who simply had morning after regrets. In those cases, American legal tradition says the benefit of the doubt should go to the accused. By trying to get a preponderance of the evidence standard, they're trying to ensnare people by getting the institution to say "well he probably did it so I'll just expel him to be safe".
Even then, there's an inherent problem. Even if you end up winning the trial,the trial process itself is punishment. The cost, the personal and professional grief and damage, the time involved in the trial, all of it is punishment even if you win in the end. (It's the same thing with a lot of law enforcement activities - go after a little guy, and browbeat him into some minor confession under threat of "we'll drag you through the courts for years if you refuse to confess")
And the atmosphere created by the threat of these lawsuits is toxic. I'm a college professor, have been for a decade. There have been multiple times I've talked to other professors, or other professors have come to me and basically said "Hey, I'm meeting with a student a couple days from now, you mind hanging out in the office or in the office next door during the meeting? Because I'm worried she may make up blatant falsehoods if she gets upset and I want a witness present"
If a situation like that does escalate, acquittal is obviously better than conviction, but neither is justice. Justice is the people who are lying simply to punish people they don't like getting the same penalty they're trying to inflict on other people. And until that happens routinely, this situation is not going to be fixed no matter how many of them are proven liars in court.
Your not wrong. This is the actual text of Title IX:
No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance, except that:
It goes on to list a bunch of exceptions (boys scouts, Amer an legion youth activities) and definitions and administrivia.
The law does not require schools to make specific types of investigations into sexual assault allegations, or even that they be investigated at all. The school simply has to treat everyone equally, which could mean that they don't do anything at all because there are school not a police agency.
20 U.S. Code § 1092 requires universities to report crime statistics but very clearly states:
(2)Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to authorize the Secretary to require particular policies, procedures, or practices by institutions of higher education with respect to campus crimes or campus security
Honestly, the smartest way to deal with this is for universities to have a policy that that all crimes are referred to law enforcement, the university takes no opinion on the guilt or innocence of accused people, and stays out of the investigation entirely, and any university discipline will take place only after conviction in a court of law.
...Don't most schools use either "punish both parties, perp and victim" or "highest unrealistic standard of proof imaginable" for physical altercations? I don't think I've heard of a single school that had a policy of "more likely than not" for determining justice in physical fights/beatings.
I've heard millions where the beat up person gets suspended too. And I've heard millions where they do jack shit. But I've not heard of one where they seek preponderance of evidence.
If they actually use their physical assault policy, it'd be "well, YOU say you got raped, but that's contributing to a culture of violence at our school, so we're expelling you". Because that's how schools treat physical assault.
The main cause that rape cases are not processed enough is not because of some regressive leftist conspiracy theory but rather police understaffing, it might as well be the same as the infamous breadlines of the DMV and similar government automobile license agencies.
Will a female complainant be kicked out if the investigation determines the allegations to be likely untrue? If not, that's hardly "equal."
Every day Islam looks more attractive.
islam is right about women
And troons and gays...
Shiites think troons aren't gay.
Sharia obligates a man to assume total responsibility for the behaviour and wellbeing of his wives and daughters. Also his mother, if she outlives his father. If he fails to provide for them, or if they break any laws, he could be held accountable. In some ways, it's an even worse deal than living under western feminism.
Correct. No society has an answer for the internet. Even if you ban women from the internet, the men turn into simps.
Although the Russian government is at odds with the Western Hemisphere, the culture of Russia is not all that dissimilar. The women there act the same way as women anywhere with the same wants and desires. They're out of control as much in Russia as in NA. Even China has out of control women too despite the CCPs clampdown on extreme feminism.
It's communication technology not global economy. The more exposure women get to what things are like outside of their immediate bubble of reality, the more it warps their views. Men also, but women are far worse for it.
Don't teach women how to read.
Who, women? Except in Russia and China the women can still force what they want. The women aren't any better there.
Bad luck for them, male students falsely accused have won nearly all trials based on the preponderance of the evidence standard.
As long as it is a real court and not those kangaroo court.
And that's the crux of the issue. What the women's groups are looking for here is to use the school's investigatory system against the accused so that there's an official "found to have committed the act" entry into the record and the accused can be expelled and have a permanent black mark. They're not interested in due process, as that would mean some/most of the people accused would be found "not guilty" so to speak.
The problem with sexual assault investigation is that it often amounts to he said/she said. Absent violence, there's no physical evidence to differentiate someone who was a victim from someone who simply had morning after regrets. In those cases, American legal tradition says the benefit of the doubt should go to the accused. By trying to get a preponderance of the evidence standard, they're trying to ensnare people by getting the institution to say "well he probably did it so I'll just expel him to be safe".
Even then, there's an inherent problem. Even if you end up winning the trial,the trial process itself is punishment. The cost, the personal and professional grief and damage, the time involved in the trial, all of it is punishment even if you win in the end. (It's the same thing with a lot of law enforcement activities - go after a little guy, and browbeat him into some minor confession under threat of "we'll drag you through the courts for years if you refuse to confess")
And the atmosphere created by the threat of these lawsuits is toxic. I'm a college professor, have been for a decade. There have been multiple times I've talked to other professors, or other professors have come to me and basically said "Hey, I'm meeting with a student a couple days from now, you mind hanging out in the office or in the office next door during the meeting? Because I'm worried she may make up blatant falsehoods if she gets upset and I want a witness present"
If a situation like that does escalate, acquittal is obviously better than conviction, but neither is justice. Justice is the people who are lying simply to punish people they don't like getting the same penalty they're trying to inflict on other people. And until that happens routinely, this situation is not going to be fixed no matter how many of them are proven liars in court.
Repeal the 19th.
"We shouldn't have to be honest!!"
Colleges don't need to have their own "trials" at all to deal with civil or criminal offenses of any kind.
If an offense was committed, there are perfectly good civil and criminal courts set up for this very purpose.
Your not wrong. This is the actual text of Title IX:
It goes on to list a bunch of exceptions (boys scouts, Amer an legion youth activities) and definitions and administrivia.
The law does not require schools to make specific types of investigations into sexual assault allegations, or even that they be investigated at all. The school simply has to treat everyone equally, which could mean that they don't do anything at all because there are school not a police agency.
20 U.S. Code § 1092 requires universities to report crime statistics but very clearly states:
Honestly, the smartest way to deal with this is for universities to have a policy that that all crimes are referred to law enforcement, the university takes no opinion on the guilt or innocence of accused people, and stays out of the investigation entirely, and any university discipline will take place only after conviction in a court of law.
...Don't most schools use either "punish both parties, perp and victim" or "highest unrealistic standard of proof imaginable" for physical altercations? I don't think I've heard of a single school that had a policy of "more likely than not" for determining justice in physical fights/beatings.
I've heard millions where the beat up person gets suspended too. And I've heard millions where they do jack shit. But I've not heard of one where they seek preponderance of evidence.
If they actually use their physical assault policy, it'd be "well, YOU say you got raped, but that's contributing to a culture of violence at our school, so we're expelling you". Because that's how schools treat physical assault.
The main cause that rape cases are not processed enough is not because of some regressive leftist conspiracy theory but rather police understaffing, it might as well be the same as the infamous breadlines of the DMV and similar government automobile license agencies.