Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

America’s New Sex Bureaucracy

tabletmag.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 387 posts

Re: America’s New Sex Bureaucracy

#11

Post by sneak »

mieseratte wrote: post #4

For the life of me I don’t understand why government funded institutions run their own tribunals. Send it through the proper court system, if the accused is guilty you can expel them cleanly.

The problem is that it is reasonable to expel people (and, indeed, to want to expel people) with a much much lower burden of proof than would be required to lock them in a cage.

There absolutely should be a different standard for “can continue to be in this school” and “can continue to walk down the public sidewalk”, and also decided by different people.

Re: America’s New Sex Bureaucracy

#12

Post by mieseratte »

sneak wrote: post #11
mieseratte wrote: post #4

For the life of me I don’t understand why government funded institutions run their own tribunals. Send it through the proper court system, if the accused is guilty you can expel them cleanly.

The problem is that it is reasonable to expel people (and, indeed, to want to expel people) with a much much lower burden of proof than would be required to lock them in a cage. There absolutely should be a different standard for “can continue to be in this school” and “can continue to walk down the public sidewalk”, and also decided by different people.

Why should they have a lower burden of proof?

Re: America’s New Sex Bureaucracy

#13

Post by Sophistifunk »

sneak wrote: post #11
mieseratte wrote: post #4

For the life of me I don’t understand why government funded institutions run their own tribunals. Send it through the proper court system, if the accused is guilty you can expel them cleanly.

The problem is that it is reasonable to expel people (and, indeed, to want to expel people) with a much much lower burden of proof than would be required to lock them in a cage. There absolutely should be a different standard for “can continue to be in this school” and “can continue to walk down the public sidewalk”, and also decided by different people.

No, it's not. "Sneak was expelled from harvard for raping somebody" is not something you want people reading without getting your day in court.

Re: America’s New Sex Bureaucracy

#14

Post by seph-reed »

mieseratte wrote: post #10
RcouF1uZ4gsC wrote: post #3

>But after a lifetime in service of the feminist cause, she took on the case of a friend whose son she came to believe had been wrongly convicted of rape and won his acquittal on appeal. This is one of the big ways in which sexism is a much more tractable problem than racism and less potentially explosive. Women and men both have members of the opposite sex that they genuinely love. I have heard that fathers with dau…

Given the popularity of social justice causes, I have a hard time believing this is a material factor. People seem rather up in arms about racism or even just adverse impact on this day and age.

Up in arms is very different from understanding/empathizing. IMO, it's generally an indication of the opposite.

Re: America’s New Sex Bureaucracy

#15

Post by drewrv »

The way this article conflates sex with sexual assault really creeps me out. The first sentence states:

Four feminist law professors at Harvard Law School have been telling some alarming truths about the tribunals that have been adjudicating collegiate sex for the past five years.

No tribunals "adjudicate collegiate sex". They adjudicate sexual assault.

Re: America’s New Sex Bureaucracy

#16

Post by drharby »

mieseratte wrote: post #10
RcouF1uZ4gsC wrote: post #3

>But after a lifetime in service of the feminist cause, she took on the case of a friend whose son she came to believe had been wrongly convicted of rape and won his acquittal on appeal. This is one of the big ways in which sexism is a much more tractable problem than racism and less potentially explosive. Women and men both have members of the opposite sex that they genuinely love. I have heard that fathers with dau…

Given the popularity of social justice causes, I have a hard time believing this is a material factor. People seem rather up in arms about racism or even just adverse impact on this day and age.

Seemingly not rascist and being rascist are two distinct qualities. It has been my experience on the receiving end of rascism that it is done quietly with plausible deniability

Re: America’s New Sex Bureaucracy

#17

Post by mc32 »

sneak wrote: post #11
mieseratte wrote: post #4

For the life of me I don’t understand why government funded institutions run their own tribunals. Send it through the proper court system, if the accused is guilty you can expel them cleanly.

The problem is that it is reasonable to expel people (and, indeed, to want to expel people) with a much much lower burden of proof than would be required to lock them in a cage. There absolutely should be a different standard for “can continue to be in this school” and “can continue to walk down the public sidewalk”, and also decided by different people.

At the same time someone’s standing shouldn’t be in danger due to a malicious accusation.

This is a really hard problem because you want victims to be helped and not have to go through a grueling process for something they didn’t bring upon themselves, but simultaneously you don’t want to enable false accusations which would put undue burden on someone who didn’t bring that upon themselves either.

Re: America’s New Sex Bureaucracy

#18

Post by mieseratte »

drewrv wrote: post #15

The way this article conflates sex with sexual assault really creeps me out. The first sentence states: Four feminist law professors at Harvard Law School have been telling some alarming truths about the tribunals that have been adjudicating collegiate sex for the past five years. No tribunals "adjudicate collegiate sex". They adjudicate sexual assault.

By virtue of creating ill defined, capriciously enforced rules they govern acceptable conduct on an complicated issue with no clear answers.

I’ve said before, while affirmative consent is a great standard to strive for, I’ve had enough relations in my day to know it’s also a standard that doesn’t hold up to reality. By the standard I’ve both been a victim of and committed assault, yet it was all kosher. Neither party would consider it so.

Re: America’s New Sex Bureaucracy

#19

Post by hammock »

mieseratte wrote: post #4

For the life of me I don’t understand why government funded institutions run their own tribunals. Send it through the proper court system, if the accused is guilty you can expel them cleanly.

The answer is in the article: Title IX requires them to. Specifically, the new federal guidance that was issued during the Obama administration.

Re: America’s New Sex Bureaucracy

#20

Post by mieseratte »

drharby wrote: post #16
mieseratte wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given the popularity of social justice causes, I have a hard time believing this is a material factor. People seem rather up in arms about racism or even just adverse impact on this day and age.

Seemingly not rascist and being rascist are two distinct qualities. It has been my experience on the receiving end of rascism that it is done quietly with plausible deniability

If it’s plausibly deniable, how do you know it’s racism?
Post reply on HN