"Mattress Girl" was not a "he said, she said" situation. Her allegations were PROVEN to be false. She was shown to be lying beyond a shadow of a doubt. In fact, if anything she was the one who raped him.
Feminists assert that women must have control over their own bodies. He refused to have sex with her, meaning the woman lost control of how her body was aroused. That apparently constitutes rape in the new feminism.
At about the 10 minute mark she goes off on the mattress girl case. She admits that corroborating evidence of criminal wrongdoing is lacking but then points out the police and DA's office have terrible records when dealing with these types of cases. She then asserts that a prosecutor wouldn't want to bring the case because of political fallout. In 2013. In a blue state. In a college town. Yeah. So is she saying the police and the DA's office were unwilling to bring to bare the naked power of the state to prosecute someone based on mere accusation without any corroborating evidence? I'm not sure that's a bad thing.
RadioFreeUtah yes, total misdirection. The messages she sent after the "rape" were damning. That's why no one would sentence the guy. Not some damn conspiracy theory crap about the DA or police.
Exactly, the DA was given a weeks (months?)-old accusation that not just lacked a modicum of corroborating evidence, but with so much exculpatory evidence in the form of her behavior after the alleged rape that even under a preponderance standard the university couldn't say the guy was guilty.
I guess a DA would also have to worry about the attorney for the defense, who is bound to be local, using the flimsy prosecution to turn out a civil suit for wrongful arrest, sucking money out of both the university and the local DA office and building a reputation off this case. That'll kill your reelection hopes pretty quick. I'm just spitballing; I don't know much about the Columbia Case.
Remember that feminists are Marxists. Even the mass killing of people on the basis of uncorroborated accusations is justified, as witness the history of Bolshevism, Maoism, the Khmer Rouge, Ba'athism, etc. In any event, we know what happened. Mattress Girl demanded sex, and the man refused. Thus she was "raped."
TL:DR --> women are scared to say no because they are concerned what the partner or potential ppl around would think, so they are demanding men to solve the situation for them by constatnly asking women if they are doing ok If you can't say no to people the world will grind you up and spit you out. If you don't like something, learn to vocalize it. That is the solution to these cases...
Seminko not to mention what a turn off a guy saying "are you okay?" Every five minutes is to the bulk of heterosexual or even bisexual women interested in men would find in such an overly and affected male/male sexuality in of itself.
I think it's pretty creepy to touch a stranger's boobs, butt, or genitals without even a howdy-do. I think it is creepy to take advantage of someone who is vulnerable to try and get sex is pretty creepy. But the idea that creepy = rape, or that if you can't prove you weren't creepy you should be assumed guilty is deeply immoral. People should make sure that their partners are cool with everything they do. And people should also be clear about what they do or do not want.
I dunno, I always appreciate a discussion of a media that would rather chase the salacious than plug away at the entangled and sobering, especially if it might risk admitting media complicity. +28:25
A personal hero of mine...our world is is DIRE need of more women like Paglia. I'm extremely depressed that our culture might no longer be producing women of her stature anymore. If so, we're simply fucked: no other way around it.
I wonder if she's given any consideration to the idea that young inexperienced men aren't experts on navigating intimate social situations it even reading general female moods. The onus of pursuit is almost exclusively on men. Does she think it's easy to put yourself out there for rejection? She seems to believe that in every case men act with confidence and full understanding of the situation. It's sexism.
Why is it that when you have an accident while driving drunk you are the criminal, but if you have sex while being a drunk woman, you are the victim? Emphasis on the "drunk woman" because drunk men having sex with drunk or sober girls will still be accused of being rapists if the girl claims it is so.
One of the most ridiculous Title IX cases was a drunk girl that gave her roommates boyfriend a blowjob when he was virtually passed out, and like a yr later after falling in with feminists decided that since she had been drunk she couldn't have consented and filed a complaint against the guy she had technically sexually assaulted.
My problem with the mattress girl case is that, according to the evidence, is that the accusation of rape was brought up after Emma ha basically been dumped. Also there was an outpouring of support for Emma, including a congresswoman from Missouri, and no such support or even getting Paul's story. His story may have come out, but Emma's story had more visibility and she is still profiting from it. It's cases like Emma's that, in my mind, undermines the accusation of rape and hurts the legitimate victims of rape.
The Mattress Girl admitted she lied and was proven to have lied. She ruined a young man's life because she was upset that he didn't feel the same way. Excuse me if I want her thrown in jail.
Nick is a heck of a journalist. Didn't hardly crack a smile at some of her statements that would cause a thinking person to crack up. Just asks questions to expose her ideology. Good work.
Schools have no legal basis to adjudicate crimes. While unfortunate for some crimes, we have no better system than to require evidence that proves beyond a reasonable doubt. Crimes that don't show clear harm or clear loss are very hard to prove.
Agreed, our legal system is so complicated in part because it actually takes a great deal of legislation and finely honed methods to prevent criminal procedures from harming more people than they help. If the courts and police are as bad about dealing with this as she says what makes her think that colleges will not be even worse? They have just as much conflict of interest as any controversy will hurt them financially and thus will take the path that gets the least bad press, not the one that is most fair or the standard of evidence which is most appropriate to the situation. At best a University can theoretically meet the same standard of the courts but in most cases it will not meet that standard in the procedures or the resources provided. Having a University cooperate with an investigation and put some measures in to deal with the situation on campus is one thing but having the university make any sort of final judgement seems ridiculous when the goal of a university is primarily to educate.
So women continually speculate about this subject and how men think and what they think about, and yet very rarely has a woman ever walked up to a man and asked "hey, what do you really think about this rape stuff?"
Vanessa is pretty much everywhere in this interview. She comes off as some feminist trying to advocate some middle ground without having compelling evidence.
The problem with the "yes means yes" policy is that there are usually no witnesses, meaning you're still back to the "he said, she said" predicament. The old standard was a public contract of consent (marriage) that left no doubt. Affirmative consent is simply a temporary "gotcha" question until everyone learns to claim that they got it, whether they did or not.
Yeah well the old standard meant any man wanting s3x had to find a mistress or mistresses after a couple years or after all the kids were born LOL. No one wants to bang a miserable middle aged broad just because "love"
Mattress girl has been proven to have lied about the situation and this is not recent news and I find it very difficult to believe that Vanessa Grigoriadis was unaware of this fact at the time of this interview. Thus shes either being willfully ignorant, in denial or just doesn't care because it doesn't fit her narrative. Kudos to Nick for being professional and getting this woman to show her true side while believing she's doing a great job of pushing her narrative.
This environment will become so dangerous, so unworkable from a practical POV of simply going to school full time and still having a social life, that it will inevitably lead to men simply avoiding college life. Women will have the on-campus experience without men being there, and men will educate themselves using alternative education methods, of which legitimate college degrees will eventually flow from online teaching. Men will have their normal social life where they live, not under the distorted social life of a college environment, and still get their college degrees. Win, win for men. Lose, lose for women and on-site campuses.
If someone isn't comfortable asserting their preference, may be that person shouldn't be putting themselves in a situation where any sane adult knows there likely be people who want to be engaging in sex. Maybe they shouldn't be consuming alcohol, or learn to regulate their alcohol with people they trust first. This girl isn't exasperating the problem, she's wrong about mattress girl, but she's being fair in the discussion. The problem starts WAAAY earlier. With single parent households, even earlier with welfare that break up low income homes. With anti family culture. But also with modern feminism culture.
Something critical that doesn't seem to be mentioned enough is: "Don't get intoxicated and especially not with random people!" I'm glad they brought up the drinking issue and the drinking age issue during this interview.
I wish he asked, did she only question women or men also? Seems like she is one sided . Why does she not talk about guys who get falsely accused ? Or jealous women who lie
AT Fly she questioned both. And she specifically talks about guys who are wrongly accused. She recommends that as soon as men are accused that they immediately get legal help until their parents so that they can protect themselves. She is not one-sided at all in regard to that.
It's great to see two different people with different views being able to have a meaningful conversation about such a sensitive topic. It's sad to see people instantly devolving to insults in the comments section.
That she's trying to strike a middle ground between the radical "all sex is rape" feminists and the more moderate "defining consent is a tricky thing, but women should be the only ones that get to decide the parameters" feminists is admirable to an extent. However, she misses, like they do, the fact that both positions are intellectually absurd and legally impossible to enforce without turning society into a matriarchal police state. So, in effect, she's trying to adjudicate between two groups which are both divorced from reality.
It's hard to adjudicate cases where the definition of consent is so fluid. I appreciate Reason for having this woman on so we can hear the bad arguments first hand.
When you get that "Yes" you better get it on audio, video, in front of 5 adult witnesses and in written form then notarized. Even after all that you can get screwed and in not a way you would enjoy.
I don't want to thumbs-down this video, because I think Nick did a good job of letting her present her case, and it's important to hear the argument. However stupid her argument was.
Vanessa Grigoriadis said today, in NPR’s Fresh Air, that a LESSER a standard than a preponderance of the evidence should be the case on campuses. What would that possibly be?
A lot of this is miscommunication on both ends in large part, there is a gap in relationship "etiquette" because that stuff has become old fashion, or past due... But it leaves a gap, men and women don't know how to relate to each other, and the messages they receive about both men and women is to a degree negative... So that sets the stage for mistrust, instead building trust, intimacy, friendship, and relating. Add to that a hook-up culture that some feel pressured to engage in whether they are ready for it or not... The dominant idea (not all of them...) of being a sexually empowered woman is very fucked up, its not really based on love, but more about being raunchy... Most people want to be loved, and appreciated for who they are, but our sensors are all fucked up, and our authenticity dims out...
Thing is... I have to build this software and I have to have a... hold on, and I hope you're sitting down... s h a r e d definition of consent. Not a "whatever any girl says at any time, subject to her changing her mind". Maybe all of this has already been tried, and the only thing that worked was what Christianity ended up promoting? Anyway, Emma being that discredited I just can't listen to someone like this.
Her first decent idea. 18 drinking age, put them in pubs where true "social drinking" exists. Kids are dropping Xanax bars doing shots (risking death doing so) and blacking/passing out. She also admits it's all a mess. And that the accusation itself is the worst. Again at least an admission that campus feminism is aimed to hurt boys.
5:00 Is she being serious? She just said that Katy Perry and Taylor Swift are "non-manufactured"? What kind and in which dosage levels of drugs is this woman on? Perry is the DEFINITION of "manufactured". I'm just shaking my head...what a strange interview for Reason to conduct. 25:29 Well lookie there...it's not all unreasonable. She actually has a nuanced point there: separating violence from non-violence. That's pretty common in our criminal justice system...too bad she doesn't trust the police to do their damn jobs. No, let's let PROFESSORS adjudicate rape cases? Amazing.
Only interesting part is about 45 minutes in where they mention the traditional college model is bound to burst. I would hope so. With the exception of a few majors, 4 years is entirely too long to get a bachelor's degree.
"No responsibility, really. No genuine academic interests. A hell of a lot of leisure time. A lot of time on your phone, a lot of time to hang out with your pals, hang out with your girls..." What the fuck is she talking about? I'm in college now. I have no leisure time - no time to hang out with my friends, and certainly no time to hang out with girls. I have loads of responsibilities, whether it's homework or responsibilities for groups or any number of things. Either I'm an exception to the rule, or this woman doesn't know what she's talking about.
The preponderance of evidence standard is terrible. Yes, there are rapists who will get away with it. What about the girl who hooks up with a guy, then wants to start dating, and when she gets rejected decides to punish him with a rape accusation? The idea that all she needs to do is text him "we need to talk" and he's guilty is 20 kinds of wrong.
"Demanding they get a question first and then give consent. I think that's super simple". Except that the woman can at a later time after the fact reverse that decision of consent and the guy is screwed if she does this. This woman is either clueless or in absolute denial. She's constantly engaged in double speaking saying one thing and then either directly contradicting it or implying contradiction later on.
I like the topic but the idea that she glossed over the that its ok for women to call men who that consider creepy out as rapists as a deterrent to other guys. I agree that the definition of sexual assault has been left for to long as a vague and open to interpretation charge. This was a good conversation starter. If you want men to be the flag holders for figuring out consent i have a few things i want in return.
Is she arguing that every university and college needs to appoint counsel to all parties in these cases for due process? Columbia has the financial means to do that. Not sure most do.
@21:53 I call BULL SHIT. FACT??? Woman are socialized to be "polite" in sexual situations??? Where is she getting her Kool aid from? Maybe it's the "pop" stars like Beyonce and Katy perry who she admits inspire girls to be super sexualized. Perhaps pop music should be responsible for socializing them to be "polite particularly in sexual situations". so the question then is why aren't we looking at the influence of sexualized pop culture as a possible instigator of these horrendous issues?
Here is the fundamental problem in my opinion: No one even remotely agrees on what constitutes consent. Ask ten different people and you'll get fifteen radically different answers. And even then, there is yet more disparity in the way people say consent should work, and the way they actually behave in real life. I'm generally of the opinion that we should be moving toward a culture of more explicit, affirmative consent. But that's never going to happen if we don't acknowledge that our current social norms are all over the place.
Andy Brice consent isn't difficult if you're just basically decent and intelligent. Take campus, rapes are lower than in the surrounding population. Consent is, in my opinion, a red herring. Objectively women are subjecting themselves to a LOT more sexual risk these days in compared to 60 years ago. They drink like fish. They get intimate - isolated and no witnesses around - with men they've just meet and know NOTHING about. They expose themselves to a LOT more different men. Throw in a handful of recreational drugs. And these women with their "my body, my choice" chanting are missing the part where it continues "my RESPONSIBILITY". Now we are at the core of what this is all about. Taking or running from responsibility? It's a miracle, or rather, quite well understood that the reasons why there so relatively few rapes in the West compared to the rest of the world had simply to do with the values, culture and customs. We deviate at our peril. "Now girls... try on this new suit called "Responsibility". If you don't like it, just return it with an undersigned note that you waive your right to vote from here on." Who, really, takes full responsibility for their life and just suck up the fallout? And why? Because when you're responsible you begin to THINK. So who runs towards responsibility, and who flee screaming from just the sight of it?
Yeah, disagree. In most instances that aren't sexual, it is fairly clear when consent is established. It's not like other aspects of the students lives grind to a halt because no one has any idea of what consent is. So what is so special about sex? Pinker points out that sexual language has a fair degree of plausible deniabilty built-in as certain parties feel affronted with a direct proposition (in fact in certain circumstances, it is considered harassment). I see a huge amount of disingenuous in the discussion and a a fair bit of social engineering consent, which, have at it- let people redefine social norms in a way that makes sense to them. However, we people start taking this gendered notion of consent, and applying it elsewhere (safe spaces come to mind)... well, the fault lines are starting to show.
Is this like like a stealth hit piece on the author? A revealing of someone who certainly does not "get it", and someone who supports the unsupportable? Her main best point, and it is not really good, is that "things have changed" since the archaic 2013's. Usually Reason highlights an interviewee who promotes the clear and obvious libertarian perspective, this one does not.
The girls might believe that they get to define consent but it will be the jury that gets the only real valuable judgment. I also get the sense that the writer’s views are more of her own rather than the views of the women she interviewed. She has far too much venom than a detached reporter normally has. It would be interesting to see if she has a date rape event in her past.
Settlement was media manipulation? It cost the kid his future thus grounds for settlement. No ones addressing drug cocky ailing either. Meaning booze with Xanax which causes blackouts so many will wake up to someone clueless of what happened.
Consent is a legal terminology. Defining consent has to do with reason, logic, and the parameters set forth by various segments of the justice system in the US. Defining a word is not an opinionated process. It doesn't care about your age, ethnicity, or genitals. You asking for a redefinition is fine, but as members of this society you have to understand that a new definition will affect others too. You do not own the concept of consent in any context, so please stop pretending that you're on some holy crusade. At best this will result in a slightly altered definition, and at worst the issues with redefining a legal term like consent that already plague us, as a result of unilateral action on the part of public universities, will be permanent.
Although I agree it is unfortunate that many people guilty of rape end up walking free due to a lack of evidence I would not change the process by which we convict because of it. There is a reason why we decided that an accused is innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. If there is some amount of doubt, even if you are 90% sure they are guilty, that 10% of doubt should be enough to let them walk free. Because if you don't then 1 in 10 people convinced end up being innocent and wrongly convicted and I would rather have 10 rapists on the street than 1 innocent person convicted. An innocent person convicted is the greatest injustice of all. It also serves as a standard to the police and prosecutors, if you give them some leeway they will become lazy and start making a half arsed job of it. Beyond a reasonable doubt makes them keep their standards high. Also universities should not start taking the law in their own hands and punishing people how they see fit, It should not be up to them to decide whether someone is guilty or innocent I don't care how good they have gotten at it. We have a judicial system, they should not replace it. And all though I do recognise that a university is unable to convict someone criminally, it is as good as. A guilty verdict from a university will ruin someone's life. So here is the question, if a court is unable to convict due to lack of evidence and not being able to 100% prove someone's guilt, than how can a university? And if they can't, how many innocent lives have they ruined because of their incompetence? Even if they are 90% accurate, which I highly doubt, but even if they are than 1 in 10 students who were expelled from university and had their lives ruined, are innocent and should never have been expelled and forever be labeled a rapist. That is something I think is wrong. And that is definitely not justice. Always remember an innocent person wrongfully convicted is the greatest injustice of them all by far.
We love saying women lie? We love to see villains loose. Duke lacrosse a bunch of white lacrosse players. Media and society were dying to convict those waspy kids.
I think the interviewer speaks a bit too often. He's talking maybe 20% of the time. Although he did his homework and had interesting asides, the goal of an interview is really just to hear the interviewee.
As Melvin waits, Zoe summons her moxie. Zoe I can’t resist. You usually move through here so quickly And I have so many questions I want to ask you. You have no idea what your work means to me. Melvin What’s it mean? Zoe That somebody out there knows what it's like to be ... (taps her head and heart) in here. Melvin Oh God, this is like a nightmare. Zoe Aw, come on, just a couple of questions -- how hard is that? As he hits the button, wipes his fingers, hits the button etc. Zoe How do you write women so well? Melvin (as he turns toward her) I think of a man and take away reason and accountability.
do reason tv subscribers forget that they bring on people to make entertaining video. but they might not agree with. they do it to have people of different idea express their view points even though they think some or all their idea is bullshit. so people will understand where they are coming from.
Reason, thank you so much for doing this interview!!!! It was really informative. I am a female hard-core libertarian, and I've been really disillusioned by the standard libertarian male response to this issue, a response which is apparent in basically every single comment below this video. The way that male libertarian's address this issue makes me reluctant to even identify as a libertarian in public. Their insensitivity to the female side of this issue is so embarrassing. Being a libertarian I obviously don't agree with making new legislation to deal with this or with just putting all the responsibilities on the men's shoulders. However, that doesn't mean that it isn't an issue and that we can't deal with it socially by educating young people and adults (both men and women) to have the tools to make better decisions and to behave differently.
"Mattress Girl" was not a "he said, she said" situation. Her allegations were PROVEN to be false. She was shown to be lying beyond a shadow of a doubt. In fact, if anything she was the one who raped him.
Una loca!! Cuidado!!
Feminists assert that women must have control over their own bodies. He refused to have sex with her, meaning the woman lost control of how her body was aroused. That apparently constitutes rape in the new feminism.
At about the 10 minute mark she goes off on the mattress girl case. She admits that corroborating evidence of criminal wrongdoing is lacking but then points out the police and DA's office have terrible records when dealing with these types of cases. She then asserts that a prosecutor wouldn't want to bring the case because of political fallout. In 2013. In a blue state. In a college town. Yeah.
So is she saying the police and the DA's office were unwilling to bring to bare the naked power of the state to prosecute someone based on mere accusation without any corroborating evidence? I'm not sure that's a bad thing.
RadioFreeUtah yes, total misdirection. The messages she sent after the "rape" were damning. That's why no one would sentence the guy. Not some damn conspiracy theory crap about the DA or police.
Exactly, the DA was given a weeks (months?)-old accusation that not just lacked a modicum of corroborating evidence, but with so much exculpatory evidence in the form of her behavior after the alleged rape that even under a preponderance standard the university couldn't say the guy was guilty.
I guess a DA would also have to worry about the attorney for the defense, who is bound to be local, using the flimsy prosecution to turn out a civil suit for wrongful arrest, sucking money out of both the university and the local DA office and building a reputation off this case. That'll kill your reelection hopes pretty quick.
I'm just spitballing; I don't know much about the Columbia Case.
Remember that feminists are Marxists. Even the mass killing of people on the basis of uncorroborated accusations is justified, as witness the history of Bolshevism, Maoism, the Khmer Rouge, Ba'athism, etc.
In any event, we know what happened. Mattress Girl demanded sex, and the man refused. Thus she was "raped."
Mattress Girl was all a lie though
The "rape" was so bad she came back for more "rape" like day or two later.
Her assertion that mattress girl tried to get him to have a conversation with her after the fact leaves out quite a few details.
She also made a porno reenacting the rape.
Ashley the Canuck found that out in Sargon's video and that made me sick. No real rape victim would do something like that
TL:DR --> women are scared to say no because they are concerned what the partner or potential ppl around would think, so they are demanding men to solve the situation for them by constatnly asking women if they are doing ok
If you can't say no to people the world will grind you up and spit you out. If you don't like something, learn to vocalize it. That is the solution to these cases...
The irony is if a girl is so passive she is unwilling to say "no" or "stop", the odds are if the guy says "is this ok" she likely will say yes.
Seminko not to mention what a turn off a guy saying "are you okay?" Every five minutes is to the bulk of heterosexual or even bisexual women interested in men would find in such an overly and affected male/male sexuality in of itself.
I think it's pretty creepy to touch a stranger's boobs, butt, or genitals without even a howdy-do. I think it is creepy to take advantage of someone who is vulnerable to try and get sex is pretty creepy. But the idea that creepy = rape, or that if you can't prove you weren't creepy you should be assumed guilty is deeply immoral. People should make sure that their partners are cool with everything they do. And people should also be clear about what they do or do not want.
This woman is ridiculous and an example of the problem.
I dunno, I always appreciate a discussion of a media that would rather chase the salacious than plug away at the entangled and sobering, especially if it might risk admitting media complicity. +28:25
Paglia would gut this woman apart.
A personal hero of mine...our world is is DIRE need of more women like Paglia. I'm extremely depressed that our culture might no longer be producing women of her stature anymore. If so, we're simply fucked: no other way around it.
I wonder if she's given any consideration to the idea that young inexperienced men aren't experts on navigating intimate social situations it even reading general female moods. The onus of pursuit is almost exclusively on men. Does she think it's easy to put yourself out there for rejection? She seems to believe that in every case men act with confidence and full understanding of the situation. It's sexism.
Why is it that when you have an accident while driving drunk you are the criminal, but if you have sex while being a drunk woman, you are the victim? Emphasis on the "drunk woman" because drunk men having sex with drunk or sober girls will still be accused of being rapists if the girl claims it is so.
One of the most ridiculous Title IX cases was a drunk girl that gave her roommates boyfriend a blowjob when he was virtually passed out, and like a yr later after falling in with feminists decided that since she had been drunk she couldn't have consented and filed a complaint against the guy she had technically sexually assaulted.
bluetrilobite Spot on!!!!
My problem with the mattress girl case is that, according to the evidence, is that the accusation of rape was brought up after Emma ha basically been dumped. Also there was an outpouring of support for Emma, including a congresswoman from Missouri, and no such support or even getting Paul's story. His story may have come out, but Emma's story had more visibility and she is still profiting from it.
It's cases like Emma's that, in my mind, undermines the accusation of rape and hurts the legitimate victims of rape.
The Mattress Girl admitted she lied and was proven to have lied. She ruined a young man's life because she was upset that he didn't feel the same way. Excuse me if I want her thrown in jail.
Nick is a heck of a journalist. Didn't hardly crack a smile at some of her statements that would cause a thinking person to crack up. Just asks questions to expose her ideology. Good work.
Agreed. I don't know whether to like for him or dislike for her.
silveravnt I had the same dilemma.
What a weasel this women is. Repeating "you must listen and and believe", without once saying the words.
Schools have no legal basis to adjudicate crimes. While unfortunate for some crimes, we have no better system than to require evidence that proves beyond a reasonable doubt. Crimes that don't show clear harm or clear loss are very hard to prove.
Agreed, our legal system is so complicated in part because it actually takes a great deal of legislation and finely honed methods to prevent criminal procedures from harming more people than they help. If the courts and police are as bad about dealing with this as she says what makes her think that colleges will not be even worse? They have just as much conflict of interest as any controversy will hurt them financially and thus will take the path that gets the least bad press, not the one that is most fair or the standard of evidence which is most appropriate to the situation. At best a University can theoretically meet the same standard of the courts but in most cases it will not meet that standard in the procedures or the resources provided. Having a University cooperate with an investigation and put some measures in to deal with the situation on campus is one thing but having the university make any sort of final judgement seems ridiculous when the goal of a university is primarily to educate.
So women continually speculate about this subject and how men think and what they think about, and yet very rarely has a woman ever walked up to a man and asked "hey, what do you really think about this rape stuff?"
Vanessa is pretty much everywhere in this interview. She comes off as some feminist trying to advocate some middle ground without having compelling evidence.
Yeah, but I have to give points to her method. That's really the point of Gonzoism: going the extra step.
The problem with the "yes means yes" policy is that there are usually no witnesses, meaning you're still back to the "he said, she said" predicament. The old standard was a public contract of consent (marriage) that left no doubt. Affirmative consent is simply a temporary "gotcha" question until everyone learns to claim that they got it, whether they did or not.
Yeah well the old standard meant any man wanting s3x had to find a mistress or mistresses after a couple years or after all the kids were born LOL. No one wants to bang a miserable middle aged broad just because "love"
Mattress girl has been proven to have lied about the situation and this is not recent news and I find it very difficult to believe that Vanessa Grigoriadis was unaware of this fact at the time of this interview. Thus shes either being willfully ignorant, in denial or just doesn't care because it doesn't fit her narrative.
Kudos to Nick for being professional and getting this woman to show her true side while believing she's doing a great job of pushing her narrative.
Can someone tell this lady that correlation does not equal causation?
This environment will become so dangerous, so unworkable from a practical POV of simply going to school full time and still having a social life, that it will inevitably lead to men simply avoiding college life. Women will have the on-campus experience without men being there, and men will educate themselves using alternative education methods, of which legitimate college degrees will eventually flow from online teaching.
Men will have their normal social life where they live, not under the distorted social life of a college environment, and still get their college degrees.
Win, win for men. Lose, lose for women and on-site campuses.
If someone isn't comfortable asserting their preference, may be that person shouldn't be putting themselves in a situation where any sane adult knows there likely be people who want to be engaging in sex. Maybe they shouldn't be consuming alcohol, or learn to regulate their alcohol with people they trust first.
This girl isn't exasperating the problem, she's wrong about mattress girl, but she's being fair in the discussion.
The problem starts WAAAY earlier. With single parent households, even earlier with welfare that break up low income homes. With anti family culture. But also with modern feminism culture.
Something critical that doesn't seem to be mentioned enough is: "Don't get intoxicated and especially not with random people!" I'm glad they brought up the drinking issue and the drinking age issue during this interview.
I wish he asked, did she only question women or men also? Seems like she is one sided . Why does she not talk about guys who get falsely accused ? Or jealous women who lie
AT Fly she questioned both. And she specifically talks about guys who are wrongly accused. She recommends that as soon as men are accused that they immediately get legal help until their parents so that they can protect themselves. She is not one-sided at all in regard to that.
"6k people were denied due process but let's talk about frats, because they promote gender norms or something."
This lady is insane.
Never seen a "TV anchor in a tank top!"
It's great to see two different people with different views being able to have a meaningful conversation about such a sensitive topic. It's sad to see people instantly devolving to insults in the comments section.
That she's trying to strike a middle ground between the radical "all sex is rape" feminists and the more moderate "defining consent is a tricky thing, but women should be the only ones that get to decide the parameters" feminists is admirable to an extent. However, she misses, like they do, the fact that both positions are intellectually absurd and legally impossible to enforce without turning society into a matriarchal police state. So, in effect, she's trying to adjudicate between two groups which are both divorced from reality.
Always staying subscribed. Mainstream media never covers what Reason does in the manner they do
It's hard to adjudicate cases where the definition of consent is so fluid. I appreciate Reason for having this woman on so we can hear the bad arguments first hand.
When you get that "Yes" you better get it on audio, video, in front of 5 adult witnesses and in written form then notarized. Even after all that you can get screwed and in not a way you would enjoy.
Must be nice to redefine "consent" to make yourself out to be virtuous. I said no the next day!! That's called guilt and regret, not rape.
I don't want to thumbs-down this video, because I think Nick did a good job of letting her present her case, and it's important to hear the argument.
However stupid her argument was.
Vanessa Grigoriadis said today, in NPR’s Fresh Air, that a LESSER a standard than a preponderance of the evidence should be the case on campuses.
What would that possibly be?
A lot of this is miscommunication on both ends in large part, there is a gap in relationship "etiquette" because that stuff has become old fashion, or past due... But it leaves a gap, men and women don't know how to relate to each other, and the messages they receive about both men and women is to a degree negative... So that sets the stage for mistrust, instead building trust, intimacy, friendship, and relating. Add to that a hook-up culture that some feel pressured to engage in whether they are ready for it or not... The dominant idea (not all of them...) of being a sexually empowered woman is very fucked up, its not really based on love, but more about being raunchy... Most people want to be loved, and appreciated for who they are, but our sensors are all fucked up, and our authenticity dims out...
Thing is... I have to build this software and I have to have a... hold on, and I hope you're sitting down... s h a r e d definition of consent. Not a "whatever any girl says at any time, subject to her changing her mind". Maybe all of this has already been tried, and the only thing that worked was what Christianity ended up promoting?
Anyway, Emma being that discredited I just can't listen to someone like this.
hey everyone, look at me!!!
Off the rails of logic at 10:00
Her first decent idea. 18 drinking age, put them in pubs where true "social drinking" exists. Kids are dropping Xanax bars doing shots (risking death doing so) and blacking/passing out. She also admits it's all a mess. And that the accusation itself is the worst. Again at least an admission that campus feminism is aimed to hurt boys.
Why is no one talking about how the crazy porn culture has a lot to do with all of this?
There is no 'porn' culture. Maybe you are projecting your personal issues onto others?
I like porn too bro
5:00 Is she being serious? She just said that Katy Perry and Taylor Swift are "non-manufactured"? What kind and in which dosage levels of drugs is this woman on? Perry is the DEFINITION of "manufactured". I'm just shaking my head...what a strange interview for Reason to conduct.
25:29 Well lookie there...it's not all unreasonable. She actually has a nuanced point there: separating violence from non-violence. That's pretty common in our criminal justice system...too bad she doesn't trust the police to do their damn jobs. No, let's let PROFESSORS adjudicate rape cases? Amazing.
Only interesting part is about 45 minutes in where they mention the traditional college model is bound to burst. I would hope so. With the exception of a few majors, 4 years is entirely too long to get a bachelor's degree.
I'm gay now because of Harpies like this
She also questions if universities are worth anything at all. One of the only good points she has
"No responsibility, really. No genuine academic interests. A hell of a lot of leisure time. A lot of time on your phone, a lot of time to hang out with your pals, hang out with your girls..."
What the fuck is she talking about? I'm in college now. I have no leisure time - no time to hang out with my friends, and certainly no time to hang out with girls. I have loads of responsibilities, whether it's homework or responsibilities for groups or any number of things. Either I'm an exception to the rule, or this woman doesn't know what she's talking about.
The preponderance of evidence standard is terrible. Yes, there are rapists who will get away with it. What about the girl who hooks up with a guy, then wants to start dating, and when she gets rejected decides to punish him with a rape accusation? The idea that all she needs to do is text him "we need to talk" and he's guilty is 20 kinds of wrong.
College men can only protect themselves 2 ways; completely abstain, our have her sign a contract. These women DESTROY men's futures.
"Demanding they get a question first and then give consent. I think that's super simple". Except that the woman can at a later time after the fact reverse that decision of consent and the guy is screwed if she does this. This woman is either clueless or in absolute denial. She's constantly engaged in double speaking saying one thing and then either directly contradicting it or implying contradiction later on.
I like the topic but the idea that she glossed over the that its ok for women to call men who that consider creepy out as rapists as a deterrent to other guys. I agree that the definition of sexual assault has been left for to long as a vague and open to interpretation charge. This was a good conversation starter. If you want men to be the flag holders for figuring out consent i have a few things i want in return.
The students are not assigned enough work and they are not concentrating on their core goals.
Is she arguing that every university and college needs to appoint counsel to all parties in these cases for due process? Columbia has the financial means to do that. Not sure most do.
@21:53 I call BULL SHIT. FACT??? Woman are socialized to be "polite" in sexual situations??? Where is she getting her Kool aid from? Maybe it's the "pop" stars like Beyonce and Katy perry who she admits inspire girls to be super sexualized. Perhaps pop music should be responsible for socializing them to be "polite particularly in sexual situations". so the question then is why aren't we looking at the influence of sexualized pop culture as a possible instigator of these horrendous issues?
Here is the fundamental problem in my opinion: No one even remotely agrees on what constitutes consent. Ask ten different people and you'll get fifteen radically different answers.
And even then, there is yet more disparity in the way people say consent should work, and the way they actually behave in real life.
I'm generally of the opinion that we should be moving toward a culture of more explicit, affirmative consent. But that's never going to happen if we don't acknowledge that our current social norms are all over the place.
Andy Brice consent isn't difficult if you're just basically decent and intelligent. Take campus, rapes are lower than in the surrounding population.
Consent is, in my opinion, a red herring. Objectively women are subjecting themselves to a LOT more sexual risk these days in compared to 60 years ago. They drink like fish. They get intimate - isolated and no witnesses around - with men they've just meet and know NOTHING about. They expose themselves to a LOT more different men. Throw in a handful of recreational drugs.
And these women with their "my body, my choice" chanting are missing the part where it continues "my RESPONSIBILITY".
Now we are at the core of what this is all about. Taking or running from responsibility?
It's a miracle, or rather, quite well understood that the reasons why there so relatively few rapes in the West compared to the rest of the world had simply to do with the values, culture and customs.
We deviate at our peril.
"Now girls... try on this new suit called "Responsibility". If you don't like it, just return it with an undersigned note that you waive your right to vote from here on."
Who, really, takes full responsibility for their life and just suck up the fallout? And why? Because when you're responsible you begin to THINK.
So who runs towards responsibility, and who flee screaming from just the sight of it?
Yeah, disagree.
In most instances that aren't sexual, it is fairly clear when consent is established. It's not like other aspects of the students lives grind to a halt because no one has any idea of what consent is.
So what is so special about sex? Pinker points out that sexual language has a fair degree of plausible deniabilty built-in as certain parties feel affronted with a direct proposition (in fact in certain circumstances, it is considered harassment).
I see a huge amount of disingenuous in the discussion and a a fair bit of social engineering consent, which, have at it- let people redefine social norms in a way that makes sense to them.
However, we people start taking this gendered notion of consent, and applying it elsewhere (safe spaces come to mind)... well, the fault lines are starting to show.
Is this like like a stealth hit piece on the author?
A revealing of someone who certainly does not "get it", and someone who supports the unsupportable?
Her main best point, and it is not really good, is that "things have changed" since the archaic 2013's.
Usually Reason highlights an interviewee who promotes the clear and obvious libertarian perspective, this one does not.
The girls might believe that they get to define consent but it will be the jury that gets the only real valuable judgment.
I also get the sense that the writer’s views are more of her own rather than the views of the women she interviewed. She has far too much venom than a detached reporter normally has. It would be interesting to see if she has a date rape event in her past.
Somebody married this woman???
Settlement was media manipulation? It cost the kid his future thus grounds for settlement. No ones addressing drug cocky ailing either. Meaning booze with Xanax which causes blackouts so many will wake up to someone clueless of what happened.
On 2 separate occasions Nick and Vanessa both pronounce etcetera, ek-cetera. Shit's real.
mark jeneson I'm surprised Nick would do that since he has a phd in literature or something. It's annoying to hear ek-cetera.
4:00 marriage vows are a pretty well established form of consent across all generations
Mumbo jumbo....right...
Consent is a legal terminology. Defining consent has to do with reason, logic, and the parameters set forth by various segments of the justice system in the US.
Defining a word is not an opinionated process. It doesn't care about your age, ethnicity, or genitals. You asking for a redefinition is fine, but as members of this society you have to understand that a new definition will affect others too. You do not own the concept of consent in any context, so please stop pretending that you're on some holy crusade. At best this will result in a slightly altered definition, and at worst the issues with redefining a legal term like consent that already plague us, as a result of unilateral action on the part of public universities, will be permanent.
Although I agree it is unfortunate that many people guilty of rape end up walking free due to a lack of evidence I would not change the process by which we convict because of it.
There is a reason why we decided that an accused is innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
If there is some amount of doubt, even if you are 90% sure they are guilty, that 10% of doubt should be enough to let them walk free. Because if you don't then 1 in 10 people convinced end up being innocent and wrongly convicted and I would rather have 10 rapists on the street than 1 innocent person convicted. An innocent person convicted is the greatest injustice of all.
It also serves as a standard to the police and prosecutors, if you give them some leeway they will become lazy and start making a half arsed job of it. Beyond a reasonable doubt makes them keep their standards high.
Also universities should not start taking the law in their own hands and punishing people how they see fit, It should not be up to them to decide whether someone is guilty or innocent I don't care how good they have gotten at it. We have a judicial system, they should not replace it.
And all though I do recognise that a university is unable to convict someone criminally, it is as good as. A guilty verdict from a university will ruin someone's life.
So here is the question, if a court is unable to convict due to lack of evidence and not being able to 100% prove someone's guilt, than how can a university? And if they can't, how many innocent lives have they ruined because of their incompetence? Even if they are 90% accurate, which I highly doubt, but even if they are than 1 in 10 students who were expelled from university and had their lives ruined, are innocent and should never have been expelled and forever be labeled a rapist. That is something I think is wrong. And that is definitely not justice.
Always remember an innocent person wrongfully convicted is the greatest injustice of them all by far.
Right?
We love saying women lie? We love to see villains loose. Duke lacrosse a bunch of white lacrosse players. Media and society were dying to convict those waspy kids.
I think the interviewer speaks a bit too often. He's talking maybe 20% of the time. Although he did his homework and had interesting asides, the goal of an interview is really just to hear the interviewee.
Didn't agree with everything she said and flat out disagreed with the mattress girl thing but good conversation to have.
Girl get a grip .. your interview with Mdm X is a verbal agressive statement of who you are, here i can see the proof of your crusade.
How about never drink? Save money, time, & energy, plus being safer.
As Melvin waits, Zoe summons her moxie.
Zoe
I can’t resist. You usually move through here so quickly And I have so many questions I want to ask you. You have no idea what your work means to me.
Melvin
What’s it mean?
Zoe
That somebody out there knows what it's like to be ... (taps her head and heart) in here.
Melvin
Oh God, this is like a nightmare.
Zoe
Aw, come on, just a couple of questions -- how hard is that?
As he hits the button, wipes his fingers, hits the button etc.
Zoe
How do you write women so well?
Melvin
(as he turns toward her)
I think of a man and take away reason and accountability.
5 minutes in, it is all about women controlling men. I expected better from Reason TV. I'm out.
You can rule the world, alone with you cats. Thank you and goodnight!
do reason tv subscribers forget that they bring on people to make entertaining video. but they might not agree with. they do it to have people of different idea express their view points even though they think some or all their idea is bullshit. so people will understand where they are coming from.
she had around 50% right on the money n the rest is way off... she had tons of bias n unrealistic prespective..
Great video
Yes means Yes is not a good standard.
I'm sorry but it's painful to listen to this author; I think she gets it. Her messages sounds like 'we believe all women' lite
"Right?"
Nope.
Yes means yes!
Out of touch
Non-manfuctured stars? Who is she kidding.
Such lefty bully tactics. Snarky and tough talk to intimidate.
Look young my butt🤣🤣🤣🤣
This woman adds nothing new or interesting to the debate. A book that would be a waste of time to read...I mean, its just more of the same.
A. Mercurus More ... more of the same debunked lies....
It would be like hard to have a conversation with her Right she is annoying Right. it would be hard to not roll your eyes at her Right.
Reason, thank you so much for doing this interview!!!! It was really informative.
I am a female hard-core libertarian, and I've been really disillusioned by the standard libertarian male response to this issue, a response which is apparent in basically every single comment below this video.
The way that male libertarian's address this issue makes me reluctant to even identify as a libertarian in public. Their insensitivity to the female side of this issue is so embarrassing.
Being a libertarian I obviously don't agree with making new legislation to deal with this or with just putting all the responsibilities on the men's shoulders.
However, that doesn't mean that it isn't an issue and that we can't deal with it socially by educating young people and adults (both men and women) to have the tools to make better decisions and to behave differently.
Thank you for this!! I hate what our campuses have become.
I,like,indian,music!