Trump administration to revisit Title IX


I really don't think the federal rules are the core of the issue.

Yes, the rules require the schools to take action.

The rules don't require the schools to be stupid about it.

The core issue is that schools are just not good at being mini justice systems when it comes to addressing serious issues, they're not equipped, and never were. There's no reason to think they'd be good at it more than any other organization.

The schools can be stupid about it all on their own if they want to regardless of a federal rule, and I suspect some will continue to be that way.
 

I really don't think the federal rules are the core of the issue.

Yes, the rules require the schools to take action.

The rules don't require the schools to be stupid about it.

The core issue is that schools are just not good at being mini justice systems when it comes to addressing serious issues, they're not equipped, and never were. There's no reason to think they'd be good at it more than any other organization.

The schools can be stupid about it all on their own if they want to regardless of a federal rule, and I suspect some will continue to be that way.

I think when schools criminalize normal behavior via the affirmative consent rule that's a bridge too far.

Every one of us would be guilty of sexual assault vs our girlfriends, wives, etc. How does one prove affirmative consent to the EOAA investigator and/or SSMS panel? Serious question.
 


Oops wrong forum...

This should be in off topic with the rest of the politics garbage.

Nope, it's the right forum.

Title IX is a policy with broad applicability to athletics (including football), in case you didn't know. If you want to attempt to argue that what happened to our football players last fall/winter isn't related to football, be my guest. I'd love to see your reasoning for that argument.
 


Nope, it's the right forum.

Title IX is a policy with broad applicability to athletics (including football), in case you didn't know. If you want to attempt to argue that what happened to our football players last fall/winter isn't related to football, be my guest. I'd love to see your reasoning for that argument.

Yep.
 

Every one of us would be guilty of sexual assault vs our girlfriends, wives, etc. How does one prove affirmative consent to the EOAA investigator and/or SSMS panel? Serious question.

And equally as important, all of our girlfriends and wives would be guilty of sexual assault as well. Under the affirmative consent guidelines I've been 'assaulted' many times (usually when I'm hungover or already asleep). Lucky for the female 'offenders', I don't think their 'crimes' warrant ruining their lives despite the fact their advances were not welcome.
 

men and women are of equal dignity and of unequal utility. There, I said it. Now I feel better. Repeal Title IX.
 

It doesn't matter what the morons running the country do. The U is not going to change how they handle sexual harassment and assault cases. End of story. If you don't like it move to another state and good riddance to you. We go our own way in Minnesota. It has always been that way. Look it up.
 



It doesn't matter what the morons running the country do. The U is not going to change how they handle sexual harassment and assault cases. End of story. If you don't like it move to another state and good riddance to you. We go our own way in Minnesota. It has always been that way. Look it up.

Yeah, as long as they're athletes, not frat boys. Which doesn't seem to bother many people huh? And unlike charges against athletes, the frat boy stories do go away

- Police investigating alleged rape of U fraternity pledge
The case remains under investigation, and no charges have been filed.
By Libor Jany Star Tribune

http://www.startribune.com/police-investigating-alleged-rape-of-u-fraternity-pledge/415012874/

-An international fraternity quickly suspended an adviser to a local University of Minnesota chapter on Thursday after an e-mail he sent to members blasting rape accusers became public.

Donald Powell, 72, had been adviser for Minnesota’s Delta Upsilon fraternity for 10 years before he quit in July after other members expressed concerns that he was socializing with two former students who had been accused of raping a classmate.

Powell responded with a long e-mail sent on July 16, saying of one of the students accused of rape: ‘[His] sin-of-sins was, ‘he got caught’; but he got caught doing far less than many others, ‘including some of you’ have done, and it is ‘that hypocrisy’ that frankly, annoys me.”

He went on to say of the two women who accused the Delta Upsilon members of rape: “I’d like to slap [them] across the face.”

In his e-mail, Powell said he had worked with rape victims in the past at shelters. He included photo attachments of what appeared to be a battered woman, saying “this is what sexual assault usually looks like.”

Reached by phone Friday, Powell, who owns the Los Angeles-based Burbank Entertainment Group, said he’s served as a “surrogate parent” to chapter members for the past 10 years. He said he wrote the e-mail in part because he felt chapter members were being unfairly lumped in with the students accused of rape.


http://www.startribune.com/minnesot...ter-email-criticizes-rape-accusers/441026473/

- Daniel Drill-Mellum, 22, of Waconia, appeared in Hennepin County District Court on Monday afternoon in connection with attacks alleged to have happened last year at his off-campus apartment near the U and in a fraternity laundry room.

University police arrested Drill-Mellum on Christmas Eve, and he remained in Hennepin County jail until posting bond early Thursday evening. He was charged that same day with first-, second- and third-degree criminal sexual conduct in one case and first- and second-degree criminal sexual conduct in the other case.

The arrest was made by police on an airliner upon its arrival from Los Angeles early Thursday evening at Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport, an airport spokesman said. A law enforcement source said Drill-Mellum was returning from Australia, where he was working, to be a groomsman in his sister’s wedding shortly after the new year.

“It was a surprise to everyone that the police boarded the plane and arrested him,” said Drill-Mellum’s attorney, Debbie Lang, who added that her client was also attending school in Australia.

As for the allegations, Lang said, “Certainly, we will be contesting the charges.” She pointed out that prosecutors had initially declined to file charges soon after the second alleged rape and his arrest at that time. Lang said she’s interested in learning what prompted the county attorney’s office to change course.


http://www.startribune.com/charges-...rat-party-another-at-his-apartment/363639481/
https://crimewatchdaily.com/2017/01...-2-rapes-after-being-caught-on-christmas-eve/

- The email said the University of Minnesota frat was under emergency temporary suspension until a thorough investigation could be conducted.

The brothers soon learned that one of their own, physics senior Dawson Kimyon, had sparked the investigation.

“[Kimyon] is a good guy, smart. But he, for some reason, has all of the sudden gotten some unusual morality,” says Don Powell, the frat's alumni counselor. “He said to me he thought it was immoral not to send the email to international.”

But Kimyon refused to tell his brothers what he had told them, according to Powell. Kimyon not only found problems in his own fraternity but believes “the whole Greek system is out of control,” Powell adds.

A press release sent by the international chapter stated the investigation included “inappropriate chapter culture, behavior and operations.”

Fraternity brothers agreed to not comment on the investigation for now.

A story by the university’s student newspaper, The Minnesota Daily, focused on allegations of sexual assault that occurred two years ago. Those incidents involved two fraternity brothers who were accused of rape and sexual assault. The victims reached out to both the university as well as the international chapter.

Of the two students accused of sexual misconduct, one was expelled from the university and kicked out of the fraternity. The other was suspended for a semester. The school's Student Behavior Committee ruled that while he “did engage in non-consensual sexual contact,” his actions “were not malicious in nature.”

Neither was officially charged.

“This was all finished up last spring,” says Powell. “So the thing that really pains me is that it’s hurting every single person currently at the fraternity who had nothing to do whatsoever with these two guys.”

Yet the latest investigation may stem from new accusations.

Ten days before the fraternity’s suspension order, the school passed two new assault complaints to the university police department, both of which supposedly occurred at Delta Upsilon. It's unknown when the complaints were actually filed, or if police are investigating.

The first one is alleged to have happened on April 9, 2016, and was labeled as fondling.

The second occurred in spring of 2015 and was originally reported as assault, but was upgraded by the school as a possible sexual assault.

It is still unclear as to whether or not these incidents have anything to do with the ongoing investigation.


http://www.citypages.com/news/u-of-...nation-as-investigation-is-launched/414541363
 

Minnesotans react to Betsy DeVos' plans to change how colleges handle allegations of sexual violence on campus

... In practice, though, little may change on campus even if the government abandons current rules, says Kathryn Nash, a Minneapolis attorney who has worked with DeVos’ deputies to draft new regulations.

At this point, many colleges have spent years revising their policies and practices, “and I don’t see them moving away from that,” said Nash, a leading national expert on campus sexual assault.

She noted that they’re also required by a 2014 law, the Violence Against Women Act, to conduct fair and thorough investigations.

At St. Olaf College in Northfield, Vice President Carl Crosby Lehmann bristled at some of DeVos’ comments, but said he saw little to worry about.

“I take some heart,” he said, “that it’s not going to lead to significant changes that will require us to go back to the drawing board completely.”

Read more at: http://m.startribune.com/minnesotan...-violence-on-campus/443113693/?section=nation
 

UC responds to Trump administration’s Title IX changes

... UC Berkeley, like the Office of the President of the University of California, stands firmly in support of the profoundly important policies enacted in recent years that seek to ensure a more efficient and fair system for all parties in cases of sexual harassment and sexual violence. We want to assure you that the campus remains firmly committed to that ideal.

It is important to note that Title IX still remains in effect, as do UC policies, state laws and other federal regulations that provide procedural protections and prohibit sexual harassment and sexual violence, including sexual assault, dating/domestic violence and stalking.

Campus community members and visitors can continue to turn to the Title IX Officer for information about their rights and options for addressing sexual misconduct, the PATH to Care Center for confidential survivor advocacy and resources, and to our central campus resources website for more information.

Every member of our university’s leadership team has an unwavering commitment to equality and equity across the rich diversity of genders, sexual identities, religions, abilities, ethnicities and identities in our community. Those ideals underlie the original Title IX legislation. We have every intention of vigorously continuing our efforts to support, sustain and expand adherence to those values on this campus.

Read more at: http://news.berkeley.edu/2017/09/07/uc-responds-to-trump-administrations-troubling-title-ix-changes/
 

Minnesotans react to Betsy DeVos' plans to change how colleges handle allegations of sexual violence on campus

... In practice, though, little may change on campus even if the government abandons current rules, says Kathryn Nash, a Minneapolis attorney who has worked with DeVos’ deputies to draft new regulations.

At this point, many colleges have spent years revising their policies and practices, “and I don’t see them moving away from that,” said Nash, a leading national expert on campus sexual assault.

She noted that they’re also required by a 2014 law, the Violence Against Women Act, to conduct fair and thorough investigations.

At St. Olaf College in Northfield, Vice President Carl Crosby Lehmann bristled at some of DeVos’ comments, but said he saw little to worry about.

“I take some heart,” he said, “that it’s not going to lead to significant changes that will require us to go back to the drawing board completely.”

Read more at: http://m.startribune.com/minnesotan...-violence-on-campus/443113693/?section=nation

Orwellian.
 



Minnesotans react to Betsy DeVos' plans to change how colleges handle allegations of sexual violence on campus

... In practice, though, little may change on campus even if the government abandons current rules, says Kathryn Nash, a Minneapolis attorney who has worked with DeVos’ deputies to draft new regulations.

At this point, many colleges have spent years revising their policies and practices, “and I don’t see them moving away from that,” said Nash, a leading national expert on campus sexual assault.

She noted that they’re also required by a 2014 law, the Violence Against Women Act, to conduct fair and thorough investigations.

At St. Olaf College in Northfield, Vice President Carl Crosby Lehmann bristled at some of DeVos’ comments, but said he saw little to worry about.

“I take some heart,” he said, “that it’s not going to lead to significant changes that will require us to go back to the drawing board completely.”

Read more at: http://m.startribune.com/minnesotan...-violence-on-campus/443113693/?section=nation

You ignore the fact that the Dept of Education has the power to define what a fair and through investigation is and the standard of proof required for conviction. They can also require the separation of the investigation / prosecution and hearing functions. I don't like the EOAA investigating and then deciding punishment the functions should be separate.
 

Are we really entertaining Cruze's thoughts again. Really?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

I really don't think the federal rules are the core of the issue.

Yes, the rules require the schools to take action.

The rules don't require the schools to be stupid about it.

The core issue is that schools are just not good at being mini justice systems when it comes to addressing serious issues, they're not equipped, and never were. There's no reason to think they'd be good at it more than any other organization.

The schools can be stupid about it all on their own if they want to regardless of a federal rule, and I suspect some will continue to be that way.

If what you are saying is that the idea behind the rule is pure, but the implementation of the rule has been atrocious, then I think I might agree.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

If what you are saying is that the idea behind the rule is pure, but the implementation of the rule has been atrocious, then I think I might agree.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Agreed.
 

Release the Neanderthals. Poor persecuted men, woe is us....


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 

Of course schools are going to say they aren't going to change their policies. That's simply optics. They sure ain't gonna come out and say, "Thank goodness, now we can quit worrying about sexual assault!"

But I suspect that if you talked to some administrators over a few beers they'd admit things likely WILL change, and that they will secretly be happy to get better defined expectations of protecting the rights of the accused.

Why? Lawsuits. If you follow this issue, they are only getting more and more common since we visited this issue last fall, and Universities are losing cases (usually by settling as to avoid a trial) seemingly every week now. In fact, as success is piling up, it appears to me that legal arguments are starting to standardize. For example, it seems several lawsuits use an unequal treatment argument: woman accuses man under overly broad affirmative consent. But the consent policy is SO broad, it's very likely the woman violated it as well. Man accuses woman back and sues school if they don't pursue his claim with equal seriousness. Now what? Settle up and pay the man (and maybe the woman too!)
 

Release the Neanderthals. Poor persecuted men, woe is us....


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

These kinds of statements really put a point on the precise problem. You seem to be implying that you're less concerned with justice depending upon the gender of the people involved. It's a terrible and savage system. . . who cares, it's victims are just privileged men.

The moment you start negotiating justice for the sake of one group over another, you're opening the door to vile and dangerous ideology.

The scary thing is that people who hold these beliefs really believe their liberal and open-minded. They're toxic.
 

This is an excellent move. DeVos is correct when she said the expansion of Title IX has led to kangaroo courts on college campuses. The accused are treated like guilty scoundrels from the beginning of these "hearings."

Victim groups, while mostly very positive and necessary, have gone way over the line on this issue. These issues need to stay away from campus "courts."
 

Of course schools are going to say they aren't going to change their policies. That's simply optics. They sure ain't gonna come out and say, "Thank goodness, now we can quit worrying about sexual assault!"

But I suspect that if you talked to some administrators over a few beers they'd admit things likely WILL change, and that they will secretly be happy to get better defined expectations of protecting the rights of the accused.

Why? Lawsuits. If you follow this issue, they are only getting more and more common since we visited this issue last fall, and Universities are losing cases (usually by settling as to avoid a trial) seemingly every week now. In fact, as success is piling up, it appears to me that legal arguments are starting to standardize. For example, it seems several lawsuits use an unequal treatment argument: woman accuses man under overly broad affirmative consent. But the consent policy is SO broad, it's very likely the woman violated it as well. Man accuses woman back and sues school if they don't pursue his claim with equal seriousness. Now what? Settle up and pay the man (and maybe the woman too!)

It's an extremely delicate issue that needs to be navigated by an impartial, nuanced and confident leader. One of the biggest problems is the bureaucratic trolls these kinds of departments attract. People like Kimberly Hewitt are the foxes in the hen house.

The system is flawed and leaves a vacuum for "equity authoritarians" like the Kim Hewitt's of the world to exercise a ridiculous amount of power.
 

I think when schools criminalize normal behavior via the affirmative consent rule that's a bridge too far.

Every one of us would be guilty of sexual assault vs our girlfriends, wives, etc.
How does one prove affirmative consent to the EOAA investigator and/or SSMS panel? Serious question.

Well - in fairness, there first would have to be an accusation of rape.
 

Well - in fairness, there first would have to be an accusation of rape.

Yes. I'm simply illustrating the absurdity of a rule that knowingly tries to change how humans have interacted for millennia. Conveniently, it sets an almost impossible to meet standard should one's partner's memory of events be impaired, one's partner later have a change of heart, or embark on vengeance for various reasons, or need to defend their purity for various reasons. I'm not saying that's usually the case but there are certainly documented cases and studies showing this does happen at a significant rate. People do things for strange reasons and are not at all uniformly logical and fair, or always psychologically stable. There is never perfect "justice" under any system but the EOAA in current iteration certainly isn't a fair mechanism as most Americans understand it.

https://policy.umn.edu/operations/sexualassault-appa
 

These kinds of statements really put a point on the precise problem. You seem to be implying that you're less concerned with justice depending upon the gender of the people involved. It's a terrible and savage system. . . who cares, it's victims are just privileged men.

The moment you start negotiating justice for the sake of one group over another, you're opening the door to vile and dangerous ideology.

The scary thing is that people who hold these beliefs really believe their liberal and open-minded. They're toxic.

Well said, Bob. Articulated much better than I could do.
 

It doesn't matter what the morons running the country do. The U is not going to change how they handle sexual harassment and assault cases. End of story. If you don't like it move to another state and good riddance to you. We go our own way in Minnesota. It has always been that way. Look it up.

This is odd, because I've read repeatedly how the U just handled the football scandal by the book, the way the Feds require, if you don't like it, blame the Dear Colleague letter, or whatever. I didn't hear much about how the U goes their own way, and handled this the way they decided. Can't be both ways.

Finally this admin does something I agree with.
 



I am nearly speechless.

IF her account is accurate, and there is no reason to believe it is not based on the article, for her to say "Her friend started teasing her, asking how it had gone. R.M. was a resident adviser in her dormitory—someone tasked with counseling other students—and at that moment, she wrote, “as my RA training kicked in, I realized I’d been sexually assaulted” is scary.
 

Bottom Line (especially for all you parents of college age young men),

If a any woman accuses you of sexual assault for any reason without any proof whatsoever you will be expelled from university. Period. ANY reason. No witnesses. No evidence. No police report. No physical evidence. No history of any contact with the woman in question. Doesn't matter, you are expelled.
 

These kinds of statements really put a point on the precise problem. You seem to be implying that you're less concerned with justice depending upon the gender of the people involved. It's a terrible and savage system. . . who cares, it's victims are just privileged men.

The moment you start negotiating justice for the sake of one group over another, you're opening the door to vile and dangerous ideology.

The scary thing is that people who hold these beliefs really believe their liberal and open-minded. They're toxic.

So why would you imply that I am less concerned with justice? You come at the discussion from the wrong direction. It doesn't take much research to realize that we live in a man's world with all of the traditional biases. We are not very far away from a time when guys would brag about getting a coed drunk and getting a piece of ass. It is not all about persecuting poor innocent men, it is about giving women the strength to fight back against being treated like a sexual object. The world is changing and many do not want to lose there built in protections. Guys should just dial down their testosterone and look at it from the point of view from a young coed that gets treated like a tramp when they are sexually assaulted.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 




Top Bottom