Flagged as irrelevant to Hacker News' core purpose, and somewhat inflammatory to boot for those not marinating in campus culture wars all the time.
[deleted]
America’s New Sex Bureaucracy
131–140 of 387 posts
Re: America’s New Sex Bureaucracy
#132Earlier quoted context omitted.
For starters its a civil vs criminal distinction.
The government is imposing penalties for criminal behavior. Classifying that as "civil" is a farce.
It would be ridiculous to have every school policy passed by state and local legislation. That power is delegated to academic reagents.
Because it's not a law, it can't be ruled on in court.
Because it can't be ruled on, they use this form of arbitration to solve what would be a civil matter if the school was a private entity.
Its not nearly as unreasonable as you make it seem.
Re: America’s New Sex Bureaucracy
#133For 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.
If I run a startup, and one of my employees is making other employees uncomfortable, and he keeps getting accused of harassing other employees, and is generally just making some of my best engineers unhappy, hurting productivity, and ruining our carefully constructed culture... ...I can fire him. I mean, obviously I need to go through the proper HR procedures, follow local employment law, respect the terms of his con…
Universities are not businesses. If they're being run like businesses...they're not serving a function as University any longer.
Re: America’s New Sex Bureaucracy
#134Earlier quoted context omitted.
The standard at my college was any alcoholic consumption meant you could no longer consent. If I had a beer and had sex with my girlfriend it was considered sexual misconduct under the definition of consent the school provided.
What if you both had beers? You'd both be considered to have committed an offence?
Of course not. He would have been the offender.
Re: America’s New Sex Bureaucracy
#135>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…
"No one will ever win the battle of the sexes; there's too much fraternizing with the enemy."
--- Henry KissingerRe: America’s New Sex Bureaucracy
#136I think it's pretty clear that Title IX courts could do a much better job of protecting the due process rights of the accused. I think it's possible to take a nuanced position that advocates for better due process rights while still fundamentally respecting the advances we've made in protecting the interests of women and other underrepresented groups . ...but without that last part, the position I just outlined sound…
In your comment you seem to value who someone “is” (i.e. what their label is) more than you value what they have to say. Your reasoning for why the non-italicized portion is not good enough is “conservatives say that”. The reason you offer for why the professors get a frosty reaction is “they could be mistaken for stealth reactionaries”. Perhaps it’s less important to consider what label you can assign to someone and…
Didn't I just say that I agreed with the core argument of the article? I just wanted to make sure we all understood that this isn't a case of a "woke" (for lack of a better term) person concerned about moderating the worst excesses of the movement, it's a case of someone who wants to dismantle the whole thing.
And it's absolutely relevant what a person "is." If NRA TV uploaded a special report on gun control, it matters that you know it was produced by NRA TV. I can't believe I'm even having to argue this point.
Finally, I didn't defend students/academia reacting incorrectly to the professors, I just said I understood. A lot of people are (rightfully, I think) sick of neoliberalism's "free marketplace of ideas" approach to permitting right-wing toxicity, and can get carried away when they think that's what a speaker is relying on. That doesn't make them automatically right.
Re: America’s New Sex Bureaucracy
#137Earlier quoted context omitted.
As one potential example, though I'd want to see more data on actual relationships, regions with more immigrants tend to have warmer feelings toward immigrants, even among the non-immigrant population.
Because the non-immigrants who don't want to live among foreigners tend to leave and/or not move in. Simple self-selection. Real life example of someone like this would be John Cleese, who moves from London to Bath after London lost its English identity. Compare: People who eat burgers like burgers more than people who don't. Is it because eating burgers makes you like burgers, or because only people who like burgers…
John Cleese lived in the US for 10 yers and married three Americans.
I think it's clear he's fine with foreigners, and that London quote got way overinterpreted.
Re: America’s New Sex Bureaucracy
#138Earlier quoted context omitted.
If I run a startup, and one of my employees is making other employees uncomfortable, and he keeps getting accused of harassing other employees, and is generally just making some of my best engineers unhappy, hurting productivity, and ruining our carefully constructed culture... ...I can fire him. I mean, obviously I need to go through the proper HR procedures, follow local employment law, respect the terms of his con…
"A university is a business." This is a massive false equivalence. For one thing, most of the "employees" in your metaphor are eighteen to twenty-two years old. Not to mention the fact that students are regularly put through the ringer and expelled on the first accusation. It's hardly akin to the "repeat offense" scenario you outlined in your first example. And comparing being expelled for an alleged sexual assault t…
Employees come to a business and exchange their money for goods and services?
Re: America’s New Sex Bureaucracy
#139For 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.
I can see expelling people for things that are not crimes, such as cheating on tests, or breaking any number of arbitrary rules
But having a lower standard of proof means expelling people who haven't actually done what you're expelling them for. That's a whole other thing, and I'm very hesitant about it.
Of course, when the expulsions almost only happen to members of one gender, on the say-so of members of the other gender, it gets extra complicated.
Re: America’s New Sex Bureaucracy
#140The fact that this revelation could only be communicated by women, and even then not without consternation, is evidence of the successful weaponization of victimhood by modern intersectional feministism. This is a symptom of a greater degeneracy in academia, driven primarily by progressive activism, wherin objectivity of argument evaluation is presumed to be impossible, and superseded by value judgements based on fee…
You've been using HN primarily (in fact exclusively, it looks like) for ideological battle. That breaks the site guidelines, regardless of which ideology you're for or against. You've ignored our requests to stop, so we've banned this account.
If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email hn@ycombinator.com and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the rules in the future.