UM makes Time magazine and not in a good way

[Plainsman]

Just got the mag yesterday and haven't had time to read the article, but UM is the focus of an extensive piece about the sexual assault/rape problem on college campuses today with a prominent two page shot of Main Hall headlining the story. As I said, I haven't read the story yet but this is potentially devastating for the U. Hope the story isn't as bad as it looks.

This was a great article for UM. Learn to read!

I have actually known how to read for quite some time, having read beginning in grade school and continued over the years all the way through graduation from a college doctoral program, but nice attempt at junior high school sarcasm.

And, having read the article, I am mystified as to how you reached the conclusion that this is a great article for UM. I completely fail to see how it is a positive thing for UM to be featured in a national magazine as the sacrificial lamb and centerpiece regarding the analyzation of a countrywide problem of sexual assaults and rape on college campuses. This article could just as easily have been written without singling out UM or any other college, since the authors concluded UM's situation is, unfortunately, merely the norm. In short, if one college had to be picked to inflate the drama of the issue, I would just as soon have had it been Harvard or Yale or any college but Montana. Capice?

I disagree. UM had already been "branded" at a national level.

"sacrificial lamb?" How so? I think that was DOJ and NCAA, not Time.

"This article could just as easily have been written without singling out UM or any other college"............ It could have been written differently but the point of the article was U of M was made out to be a monster, and it really wasn't. Are there some other universities that were also known (at a national level apparently) as "the rape capital?" The point was we are not deserving of the name.

Well, I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.

 

[signedbewildered]

"Well, I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree."

I haven't a problem with that. *shrugs shoulders, kicks dirt, cracks beer*

 

[UMGriz75]

Engstrom will live in infamy. The following is written by KC Johnson, the history professor that early saw the "Duke LaCrosse" charade for what it was, blogged about it during the entire unfolding, and was proven correct.

Here Come the Lawsuits over Sex Hearings:
Accused Males Take on Columbia and Drew -

"Colleges and universities almost certainly face a deluge of lawsuits from accused males over the mishandling of sexual misconduct hearings. Columbia and Drew, for instance, have joined the ranks of universities sued by male students claiming that unfair processes led to disciplinary action against them.
...

Punishment First, Judgment Later

Civil libertarian critics, such as FIRE and Hans Bader, have pointed out the disturbing nature of OCR's demanding colleges implement "interim" measures that amount to a punishment first, judgment later. The Parisi case is a good example of the toll that such policies can take on the innocent; he's suing Drew on the grounds that the university's treatment of him discriminated on the basis of his gender.

"A second recently-filed case, at Columbia, is more typical of the recent spate of Title IX cases. (Both parties are anonymous in the complaint.) Five months after what the complaint describes as a brief hookup, the Columbia accuser filed a college complaint against a male member of the Columbia crew team. The accuser hadn't sought medical attention the night of the incident, and she never reported it to the police. She did, however, text the eventually accused student, expressing concern about how the tawdry nature of their hookup would affect both of the students' social standing if word of it spread. In the end, Columbia deemed the accused student a rapist and suspended him for 1.5 years.

"An Absurd Definition of 'Sexual Assault'

"Instead, consider Columbia's extraordinarily broad definition of "sexual assault," which goes far beyond anything in the criminal justice system, in two respects.

"First, the university defines sexual assault as not only rape, as understood in the criminal justice system, but also "any intentional sexual touching, however slight, with any object without a person's consent. Intentional sexual contact includes contact with the breasts, buttocks, groin, or touching another with any of these body parts, or making another person touch any of these body parts; any intentional bodily contact in a sexual manner." How many people would consider such behavior--while indefensible--to constitute rape? To Columbia, however, forcible sexual penetration and nonconsensual "sexual touching, however slight" are both "sexual assault." And the fliers suggest that the message has been received.

"Second, while the university notes that sexual assault, by definition, comes without consent, it modifies this provision in a critical way: "Alcohol and other drugs can lower inhibitions and create an atmosphere of confusion over whether consent is freely and affirmatively given." Taken literally, then, any alcohol use by the female party to sexual intercourse could call into question whether a Columbia tribunal will subsequently brand a male student a rapist, since even if the female gave consent, the university claim non-consensual contact on grounds of "confusion over whether consent is freely and affirmatively given." ...

"As colleges adopt a de facto presumption of guilt in undertaking investigations for which they are in no way competent, they will be hit with more and more of these kinds of lawsuits. And it's fair to say that the presidents and administrators of these institutions are bringing it on themselves."

Ours did. He led the way.

http://www.mindingthecampus.com/originals/2014/05/here_come_the_lawsuits_over_se.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

[NativeGriz]

There were other women involved, and the invesigation involved them and their dealings with both campus security, MPD and to a lesser exrent the county attorneys office... The focus here went to Johnson, but the DOJ had little if anything to do with Johnson. If anything the Johnson case was an attemp by Fat Freddie to divert attention from his office and show he was tough on rape.

If you are referring to the same incident I know about, that case had even more holes in it including compelling evidence the girl initiated actions that eventually led to "consensual" sex. I don't remember all the details, because I was hoping this was behind us, but there appeared to be really good reason for prosecutor to drop it because there would have had no chance of prosecution and yet GF calls out "gang rape ignored" - BS. Despite that, players were still disciplined because some players allowed themselves to be in a position that put a bad light on UM. RP was very proactive in this area. This came up as they were boarding the plane for Sam Houston for playoff game. I think it affected focus on how we played the first quarter of that game.

 

[tnt]

There were other women involved, and the invesigation involved them and their dealings with both campus security, MPD and to a lesser exrent the county attorneys office... The focus here went to Johnson, but the DOJ had little if anything to do with Johnson. If anything the Johnson case was an attemp by Fat Freddie to divert attention from his office and show he was tough on rape.

If you are referring to the same incident I know about, that case had even more holes in it including compelling evidence the girl initiated actions that eventually led to "consensual" sex. I don't remember all the details, because I was hoping this was behind us, but there appeared to be really good reason for prosecutor to drop it because there would have had no chance of prosecution and yet GF calls out "gang rape ignored" - BS. Despite that, players were still disciplined because some players allowed themselves to be in a position that put a bad light on UM. RP was very proactive in this area. This came up as they were boarding the plane for Sam Houston for playoff game. I think it affected focus on how we played the first quarter of that game.

I don't know the specifics of either of the cases or the outcomes. They are the ones who filed the Civil Rights Claim. One was NOT part of the alleged gang rape are referring. In any event The Johnson Case is not what caused the shit to hit the fan with the DOJ, nor were all the civil rights claims in regards to the MPD and County attorney related to campus events. If you take the Johnson case out of the mix because of the obvious emotion involved, the Time Article makes more sense. (as do the actions on campus and within the MPD) and represents U of M in a very favorable light.

 

[uofmman1122]

There were other women involved, and the invesigation involved them and their dealings with both campus security, MPD and to a lesser exrent the county attorneys office... The focus here went to Johnson, but the DOJ had little if anything to do with Johnson. If anything the Johnson case was an attemp by Fat Freddie to divert attention from his office and show he was tough on rape.

If you are referring to the same incident I know about, that case had even more holes in it including compelling evidence the girl initiated actions that eventually led to "consensual" sex. I don't remember all the details, because I was hoping this was behind us, but there appeared to be really good reason for prosecutor to drop it because there would have had no chance of prosecution and yet GF calls out "gang rape ignored" - BS. Despite that, players were still disciplined because some players allowed themselves to be in a position that put a bad light on UM. RP was very proactive in this area. This came up as they were boarding the plane for Sam Houston for playoff game. I think it affected focus on how we played the first quarter of that game.

I don't know the specifics of either of the cases or the outcomes. They are the ones who filed the Civil Rights Claim. One was NOT part of the alleged gang rape are referring. In any event The Johnson Case is not what caused the shit to hit the fan with the DOJ, nor were all the civil rights claims in regards to the MPD and County attorney related to campus events. If you take the Johnson case out of the mix because of the obvious emotion involved, the Time Article makes more sense. (as do the actions on campus and within the MPD) and represents U of M in a very favorable light.

I'll agree with everything you've said except for the Johnson case not being what caused the shit to hit the fan. It was specifically that, along with the press surrounding the "gang rape football culture" bullshit that was the tipping point.

If those two things never happen, we're still playing Pfluball and we're being left out of national publication articles about rape.