I have substantial reservations about the reporter. I am waiting for the investigative reports that lay out more facts. Again, sound journalism would have required more diligent fact-checking prior to publication. The causes for that (and making an "agreement" with "Jackie") have yet to be disclosed. There is evidence of fabrication but the degree and by whom has not been established.

This is an overstatement. The friends all believe she experienced a sexual assault that night.

All believe? I would say that's not an accurate read of what they said.

Anyway, I deliberately used the words "it appears" because we still don't know definitely if Jackie experienced any assault at all. I was also still leaning towards the "something MUST have happened to her" explaination. But the newest details of catfishing make that no longer the most likely explaination.

I think that Jackie may have some serious mental health issues, whether they were caused by a sexual assault or rape, or perhaps present long before the alleged/imagined rape, who knows at this point. And frankly, it doesn't make one bit of difference in my day-to-day life. As for the people who are obsessing over this article, they are starting to look bizarre in my opinion. I think that the greek life should be reinstated, but not at the price of making the entire greek community look like we are throwing tantrums. Seriously, there are less than two weeks left of the semester, do we really need freaking lobbyists to ensure that some Christmas socials happen? This entire situation is upsetting and did paint greeks in a bad light, but people need to get a grip.

Disagree. This is a situation which horrifies any fraternity man and especially alumnus volunteers. To think that your chapter which you have poured so much into could be kicked off campus because of false allegations like this without even a cursory investigation by the university or even your national organization is very troubling.

And what about our undergrads who could be labeled and maybe even charged and convicted as rapists mainly because they are fraternity men and y'know.. everyone knows we're all a bunch of rapists... because rape culture.

This isn't just a university issue. It's a cultural issue. I do a lot of child custody cases and it is very common for the mother to make false allegations regarding physical or sexual violence against the father... and if she makes it all up? There are basically no consequences.

And with some states adopting those "yes means yes" laws, we are now putting men accused of rape in the unique position of having to prove their innocence rather than the state being required to prove their guilt.

Do you have some actual statistics to cite on this? Perhaps your clients just picked some crappy people to marry, perhaps that might be part of the reason they are getting divorced, because they make crap up. But to say that represents our culture at large, I'd like to see some facts to back that up.

You know damn well that's not what these laws do.

You have been misinformed.

ETA: There is no "state" in the case of affirmative consent laws (yet) because the laws only apply to college kids. (Because that where there is a "crisis", natch.) But it most certainly does shift the burden of proof.

An accuser comes to the university with a claim of rape. The accused says they had consenual sex. Under the new law, the accused must prove that they obtained ongoing consent, throughout the entire sexual encounter. If they can't prove it, they are guilty of rape.

For more, DeltaBetaBaby, I suggest you read the editorial debate between Jonathan Chait and Ezra Klien.

It would be impossible to compile statistics like that, but in my practice, this is not at all uncommon. Certain opposing parties I encounter, I can even predict exactly what they'll do. They usually begin by accusing their husband of being physically abusive and/or having a substance abuse issue. Then, almost like clockwork, once that fails, there are allegations of sexual abuse of the children.

Googling the subject, child molestation allegations in divorce, I found quite a few websites, some which claimed a very low % of the allegations were false, while I found another which reported that 77% of allegations of child sex abuse in divorce were false. I question how one would even begin to come up with accurate numbers on that subject, but here is what I have experienced. Women make these allegations because it usually results in them getting an immediate "win" in court. Courts take a "better safe than sorry" approach and will typically order emergency custody to the mother while the Department of Human Services investigates. Even if the charges are totally made up, they false reporter is never charged with a crime and there's no civil remedy.

I am presently working on a case where the mother has reported over 30 times to child protective services trying to get them to find some abuse. So far, she has done so to no avail.

There is a HUGE difference between making errors on some of the details of a situation and the situation not having happened at all. This is the most basic of memory research, particularly in terms of memory for traumatic events.

When the primary "evidence" for suggesting it didn't happen is A) the fraternity SAYING they didn't have a party that night, and B) SAYING they didn't have a member with a role at the Aquatic center on campus, I think you're stretching pretty darn far to suggest it "doesn't look like it happened."

Why is what the fraternity is saying suddenly somehow more relevant or believable than what the woman is saying?

So basically what you're saying here is your position and perspectives are pretty clearly influenced by sampling bias.

We are way past the point of the primary evidence being anything the fraternity has claimed. You might need to catch up on the latest reporting.

We are still not sure she lied.

The guys who supposedly participated in this were not named so anything you say about naming perpetrators is out of place.

Yes the organization was named. But her organization was named too (UVa anti-rape org...whatever, forgot the name). If she was lying then that organization will be publicly smeared. That's Jackie's equivalent to a fraternity because it's her source of support in the community. And the community can blame it and protest for encouraging making up reports, whatever they feel.

But there's still a big difference in having a name released and having an organization's name released.

There is no doubt that Rolling Stone and Sabrina Rubin-Ederly are going to face civil consequences for their lack of due dillingence, and possible willful intent to smear Phi Kappa Psi.

But proving that Jackie was maliciously trying to smear the fraternities and the greek community in general, will be very difficult to prove. Unless there is more evidence along the lines of an admission that she made up the whole thing, I find it doubtful that she will even face any kind of university hearing. Even if there is, we will probably never learn about it, because it will probably remain confidential.

If her friends have solid evidence of catfishing or the fact that she conspired to libel a fraternity or certain individuals all along, they really should come out and use their real names, it would seriously give them more credibility.

It was mentioned that the fraternity could have been shut down with no investigation or recourse.... but that didn't happen. Actually, the exact opposite happened. The national office and locals clearly did their own legwork, as did the Washington Post; and if the university had investigated, they could or perhaps did present these findings. If anything, they come out ahead for suspending themselves, remaining calm and non-retaliatory, all while people were spray-painting and vandalizing their house.

Everyone should sit back, let the dust settle, and let more facts come out. Because with each layer of the onion, the accuser looks worse, and if greeks can remain calm and not take a completely defensive position, in the long run we look better.

If the catfishimg story is true, her motive looks more like trying to make Randall jealous and get his attention than any malicious ill will against against the fraternity or the greek system. They may have just been convenient targets.

Rolling Stone’s UVA disaster just got a whole lot worse

Bizarre new details are the most damning yet — but it's essential not to overgeneralize their importance http://www.salon.com/2014/12/11/roll...rce=newsletter

Salon's article does go back to the comments made earlier regarding possible issues about Jackie's emotional and mental state, which should be of concern here as well.

I think that UVA's student body is going through some emotional upheaval this semester in general, beginning with the death of Hannah Graham and ultimately coming to a head with this situation. I'm not familiar at all with the culture of UVA, but I think we'd all agree that it's a campus and institution that has over the years earned a reputation for high academic standing and reputation. If this has also created a culture of privilege and social norms that should not be tolerated regardless of an institution's lofty reputation, then by all means this has to at the very least serve as a sobering wake up call. I sincerely hope that Jackie is able to move forward in her life, whether she was truly an assault victim or not.

There is still so much we don't know. For one thing, we don't know what Ederly wrote and the Rolling Stone published was Jackie's actual account to her or if it was Ederly's embellishment to make a more spectacular and attention-grabbing story.

Both UVA and the office of the Attorney General of Virginia have initiated investigations, the findings of which have as yet to be released. Additionally, the President of UVA has convened an ad hoc committee comprised of alums, faculty, and student representatives which include members of the GLOs on campus to address the problems which have been revealed with students coming forward with their own stories as a result of the RS story. The president of the Inter Sorority council is a committee member. As reported in the Cavalier Daily and elsewhere, President Sullivan has found the ideas generated within this committee, especially from students, to be very good and workable ones.

UVA students, faculty, alums, and community members are very proud of their school, and are focused on correcting flaws in the system that have failed many.

It should also not be lost on anyone that President Sullivan initiated talks with some of the fraternities -including the one mentioned in the RS article- last spring, well before the RS article appeared. The school is also but one of 12 that will be intensely investigated under the Title IX requirements. Also WELL before the RS article.

Now back to my regularly-scheduled program, which in my case is the magnificent DVD of The Three Tenors Christmas Concert filmed in Vienna, Austria in 1999.

Which is precisely why I used the word "IF" in capital letters and in italics.


That's not my understanding. My understanding is that Jackie has given names and descriptions for the accused though, for the media, she asked that a pseudonym ("Drew") be used. Some kind of name had to have been given as one of the men suspected was phoned and questioned by reporters.

From the Washington Post, December 5th: "For example, an alleged attacker that Jackie identified to them for the first time this week — a junior in 2012 who worked with her as a university lifeguard — was actually the name of a student who belongs to a different fraternity, and no one by that name has been a member of Phi Kappa Psi. Reached by phone, that man, a U-Va. graduate, said Friday that he worked at the Aquatic and Fitness Center and was familiar with Jackie’s name. But he added that he never met Jackie in person and never took her out on a date. He also said he was not a member of Phi Kappa Psi."

(Source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/...bdc_story.html)


Phi Kappa Psi does apparently have the name of the accused as I believe I recall they made a statement saying that no one by that name is in their fraternity.

Now we have another report that Jackie presented one young man's photo to her friends as "Drew".

From Washington Post December 10th: "Also, photographs that were texted to one of the friends showing her date that night were actually pictures depicting one of Jackie’s high school classmates in Northern Virginia. That man, now a junior at a university in another state, confirmed that the photographs were of him and said he barely knew Jackie and hasn’t been to Charlottesville for at least six years."

(Source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/...y.html?hpid=z1)

This guy's photograph was being passed around as "Drew"? If I was that guy, I'd be freaked out.


You forgot the name of her organization? Interesting. I bet you remember the name of the fraternity in question.


No. Why would they be publicly smeared? (Heck, even you can't remember the name of it). They were not accused of aiding in any crimes here. No one has suggested that her rape support group ever encouraged her to lie about her experiences. I doubt the community will vandalize the UVA anti-rape support group meeting room like they did the Phi Kappa Psi house.

According to a report (see below), on January 9, 2015, the restrictions on UVA fraternities and sororities that were put in place after the Rolling Stone story first came out will be lifted. Reportedly, the Jan. 9 date for lifting the restrictions was part of UVA's initial plan:

http://gawker.com/frats-will-go-back...ary-1669283706

http://www.latimes.com/nation/nation...208-story.html

Navane: http://www.greekchat.com/gcforums/sh...d.php?t=145009

Btw, the only reason I know the name of the frat is because I read it every time I click this thread.

From your own quote: "For example, an alleged attacker that Jackie identified to them for the first time this week"

From what I've read it doesn't sound like she identified any of the alleged attackers until all of this started coming out and being investigated.

And there's a difference between what certain people who are part of the investigation know and what is released to the public. A vague description like blonde hair, blue eyes, junior who worked as a lifeguard in 2012 isn't going to identify anyone unless someone is familiar with who worked as a lifeguard that semester. And it's certainly not going to provide fuel to as many crazy people who are out there and send threats and stuff.

I'm not saying the fraternity shouldn't know who is accusing them or that investigators or journalists shouldn't know. I merely think it's unfair for her name to have been released to the general public.

The guy's name didn't come out to the public at any point (from when he was accused of the crime until now) so no I don't think it's fair that her name comes out to the public at this point in time. That's a double standard and her safety has been compromised while this is still being investigated. No, I don't think that's fair.

Was asked to post this directly here. robinseggblue posted a link to my OP: Side bar to over-all stories we all have been seeing about UVA. Given to past issues and problems that GLO's have had at SDSU one would have thought, hoped that they learned something by now.

Student Body President Pressured To Resign After His Frat Harassed Anti-Rape Activists

A student activist group at San Diego State University is calling for the resignation of the student body president because he belongs to one of two fraternities whose members are accused of waving dildos, throwing eggs and shouting obscenities at Take Back The Night marchers last month.
Marchers participating in the anti-sexual assault march reported taunts from the Sigma Phi Epsilon and Delta Sigma Phi fraternity houses, according to the Daily Aztec, an independent campus newspaper. Sigma Phi Epsilon members allegedly shouted obscenities at marchers, while Delta Sigma Phi brothers reportedly waved sex toys and threw eggs. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/1...n_6305258.html

I don't understand the notion of naming her to the public, either. What purpose does that serve beyond putting her safety at risk? I know that the fraternity was harassed and vandalized. That was bad. People should be punished accordingly. But we do not live in a society where we mete out "eye-for-an-eye" justice.

U-Va. uproar about Rolling Stone story spawns debate over fairness to fraternities http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/...9d7_story.html

Life After Rolling Stone: UVA Students See 'Jackie' As Opportunity To Reform Sexist Greek System http://www.ibtimes.com/life-after-ro...-greek-1749631

Excerpted: We call on the leadership of both our campus based professionals and our fraternities and sororities to work collaboratively with other campus partners, including administrators, to protect the rights of all students and work to improve the fraternity/sorority experience and the safety of our campus communities

This sounds very good to me and a step in the right direction. I will be very interested in seeing what new/revised protocols come out of these discussions across the country.

Fraternities have two choices: Keep the status quo, or usher in a new era of proactiveness in the face of sexual assault.

Fraternities in a Post-U-VA World

Whether Rolling Stone’s article is factual or not, fraternities have two choices: Keep the status quo, or usher in a new era of proactiveness in the face of sexual assault. http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...DB&via=FB_Page

Not only GLO's: It went on for FOUR decades.
Bob Jones University Told Sex Abuse Victims It Was Their Fault: Report http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/1...ushpmg00000052

CSU fraternity suspended after sexual assault allegation-CLEVELAND -- A Cleveland State University fraternity has been suspended until further notice after an allegation of a sexual assault against one of its members. http://www.wkyc.com/story/news/local...tion/20376871/

A Frat Boy's Confession: An Open Letter to the Fraternity Men of America

https://thejesuitpost.org/2014/12/a-...en-of-america/

ETA: I just noticed the second picture in the article (of the banner). It's pretty deplorable.

Bravo! Bravo! Bravo! These will be the fraternity men who are respected and admired on campus.

Excerpted:
How can we move forward? How can we candidly talk about the reality of sex and violence on campus? Brothers, we need your help. Women need our help. School communities need our help. Name the parasitic evil that sucks the life and love and joy from campus and from people’s lives. Name it for what it is – a rancid mix of immaturity and misogyny that lets boys be boys, teaches younger members to accept this as normal, and burdens women with pain, fear, and unreasonable expectations to correct the injustice themselves.
Naming the problem isn’t enough – we need to stop it. Naming something gives us power over it. So let us name the evil so we can keep it out in the open for all to see. Let us name the evil so we Greeks are transformed into leaders for supportive, healthy living for all college students. Let’s learn from our mistakes and, buoyed by faith in our letters, create a culture of care. Then, by loving all we meet, we can hope for a better university life.

Department of Justice: Rape and Sexual Assault Victimization Among
College-Age Females 1995-2013

http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/rsavcaf9513.pdf

Bob Jones University?? Lol SERIOUSLY??? Why would you think anything out of there has any basis in reality??

Honorgal, I hope you are not posting that to dispel the notion of a "college rape crisis". That is not at all what this research (that isn't the only study) does. We already know that college sexual assault and rape is not more prevalent than non-college sexual assault and rape. The "college bubble" is about social isolation and does not mean the rates would be higher than in the general population.

Some people might want to see the data for themselves, rather than have you (or the media) interpret it for them. If not, it's simply a tiny bit of wasted bandwidth here.

Anyhoo, as the numbers show, the 1 in 5 or 20% rate is actually 0.6% Just a tad bit of an exaggeration.

Not at all sure what you mean by "the college bubble" is about social isolation? Social isolation refers to a lack of interaction or contact with others. I think we would find more prevalence of that in non-student populations.

One of the interesting things here is that women in college are less likely to report. That in itself speaks to a problem with rape culture on campus and the type of backlash that would be feared by someone in the social isolation of a university.

It boggles the mind that the world of GLOs are acknowledging the problem and dealing constructively with it and *one* of the posters here continues on this sad and sorry campaign of denial. A dead end if there ever was one.

This sounds like "you stupid patriarchally oppressed girl, don't you realize you were raped? How dare you get on with your life with no issues?"

What is your post about?