University of Oregon Wikipedia commons

University of Oregon men face witch-hunt rape accusations

In early May the University of Oregon dismissed three basketball players from its team amidst a fire storm of controversy over a sexual encounter which took place at an off-campus party on 8 March 2014. The encounter was detailed in a police investigation report which was leaked to the media, and charges of favoritism to college athletes soon carried the headlines in news reports.

A campus activist group, “University of Oregon Coalition to End Sexual Violence” mounted protests to pressure the administration to respond decisively to what its members characterized as gang rape. The local newspaper, The Register Guard, applied political pressure to the University of Oregon to make “examples” of the three alleged assailants, Damyean Dotson, Brandon Austin and Dominic Artis. News articles quickly appeared in the Wall Street Journal, the L.A. Times, the New York Times and ABC News. Much of the coverage speculated about the possibility of a cover-up in order to allow the three players to have participated in college basketball’s celebrated March Madness tournament.UO’s athletic director Rob Mullens and coach Dana Altman were soon fearing for their jobs. On 9 May they held a press conference to denounce the three students. President Gottfredson told the media:

“The type of behavior in the police report, released this week, is utterly unacceptable and will not be tolerated. I understand and empathize with the outrage people feel. As a father I was appalled at what I read. As president of this university I am angry and disappointed over this profoundly disturbing incident.”

Gottfredson went on to describe the complainant as “the survivor” and asserted that student privacy laws prevented him from disclosing information about students. Yet he announced the suspension of the three male students and that they were dismissed from the team. “They will not be playing basketball at Oregon again.”Just what could spur such controversy, worthy of national attention? The short story is less interesting. But let me relate it in distilled form: It turns out that the actual events shrink to an understandable form as long as Artis-Dotson-Austin-Police-Report without imputing one’s own sexual preferences into the rights of others.

A female student named Amanda Jasmine went to a party in a house off campus. Before going to the party she consumed some peach flavored alcoholic beverage. Witnesses later said they did not believe her to be drunk.

Amanda Jasmine flirted with three basketball players and the four of them went into a bathroom and engaged in sex acts with each other. Another woman entered the bathroom and sought to join in. Her interest was rebuffed and after a break the four returned to the bathroom where she performed oral sex on the three players (see KVAL video of Kelsey Alston).

Soon she left the party with them in a cab and went to the apartment of Dominic Artis. There they engaged in group sex and afterward Artis invited the woman to spend the night and she accepted. The others left. In the morning two students had sex with each other before the woman took a cab home.

Later that day (the day after the party) Amanda Jasmine went to the apartment of a friend of the players.  She spoke with him about her experience and eventually the two of them had sex.***

This synopsis of events could have been deduced by university administrators who read the police report. They could have and should have concluded that four students had engaged in group sex. No university policy prohibits group sex, and the sex lives of students is not the business of university administrators. Now to add the complicating factors. It was the father of Amanda Jasmine who called UO police on 10 March, two days after the party. They left phone messages for Jasmine but she did not return the calls. On 14 March she contacted the Eugene police who then went to interview her for the first time. A different officer interviewed her again later to sort out what the first report termed “inconsistencies.”

The inconsistencies resulted in a decision by the Lane County district attorney’s office to not file charges. In an interview a local TV news reporter persistently needled district attorney Alex Gardner and suggested that the three male students should “get their day in court” in order to prove their innocence (see KVAL video “sexual activity isn’t necessarily criminal”)

Much to the disappointment of sexual assault prevention activists, the D.A. did not find evidence of sexual assault. Amanda Jasmine had opportunities to resist or escape and she did not. She elected to spend the night with Artis, and texted him the next morning that she’d made it home safely via taxi cab. She told police that, “We were all drunk and it got a little bit out of hand.”

A witness told police that Jasmine appeared to be flirting with one of the male students after she’d given him oral sex in the bathroom at the party. Jasmine told police that she allowed the three men to sexually touch her. “I think I just gave up. I let them do whatever they wanted. I just wanted it to be over and to go to sleep.” When the New York Times ran its first story on 6 May, reporter Joshua Hunt deceptively reduced that statement to, “I think I just gave up.”

Also absent from the NY Times story is Amanda Jasmine’s statement to police, “I want them to get a slap on the wrist.”

After the police report was leaked to the Register Guard newspaper, protests generated outrage and outrage generated more protest.

Protesters on campus held signs declaring:

“I live in a rape culture”

“Passes on the court, free pass from the courts”

“UO: Expel Rapists”

There was no evidence that a rape had been committed, yet the administration began to encourage outraged protesters in various ways.

President Gottfredson told the UO faculty senate on 14 May:

“President Obama has identified sexual assault at colleges and universities as a significant threat to our campuses, our communities, and our country. The White House Task Force reports that nationally, one in five women is sexually assaulted while in college. One in five. This is shocking to many people. It is appalling. But I promise you, this figure does not shock the good people on our campus, and others across the nation, who work in student health centers, campus counseling centers, and Dean of Students offices. Those who work every day to protect students and to provide them with support services, advocacy, and education regarding sexual violence are all too familiar with this statistic.”

The ‘one in five’ statistic has been refuted by several researchers, notably Christine Hoff Sommers. The inflated ratio is achieved by placing unwanted attention into the same definitional category (sexual assault) as rape.

Psychology professor Jennifer Freyd was interviewed on Oregon Public Broadcasting and boasted that she’d just attended President Obama’s announcement of the White House Task Force to Protect Students from Sexual Assault.

Freyd has capitalized on the opportunity the alarm has generated. That she herself has fed the controversy by repeatedly stating false statistics on the rate of sexual abuse may not escape the scrutiny of the ethics panel of the American Psychological Association. Ethical standard number 5 states:

“Psychologists do not knowingly make public statements that are false, deceptive or fraudulent concerning their research, practice or other work activities or those of persons or organizations with which they are affiliated.”

Other ethical standards prohibit human rights violations, and misuse of the psychologist’s work.

Freyd’s professional activities have focused on what she calls “institutional betrayal.” Her questionnaire to detect institutional betrayal is designed to measure whether an institution responds adequately to sexual assault.

Question 13 of one version of the questionnaire asks, “If you told anyone about your experience/s, how did they react?” The three players, had they been asked this question would have been quick to answer:

‘The police interviewed two of us and we told them what happened. And they listened to recordings of phone conversations we had with the woman who engaged in group sex with us. They declined to file charges, even after the D.A. reviewed the evidence.’

Could there be a deeper betrayal than ruining the lives of the three young men? Rape accusations are forever. A Google search of the term “UO rape” produces thousands of instant hits. Those can’t be erased.

Now to answer the question: yes, there is a deeper betrayal. The following paragraph is from ABC news:

“Speaking to reporters on Friday afternoon, coach Dana Altman said the decision to dismiss the athletes from the team was ultimately made in the “best interest” of the players, the team and the university because of the intense scrutiny they faced. The players were no longer on campus.”

So you see, their lives were ruined for their own good.

How is it possible to turn reality so completely on its head? It was years in the making, of course, built on hubris, tradition–and money, the mother’s milk of corruption. Now faculty members want a full accounting of how this incident could have happened. Which is to say, they want to cover up what has really happened.

Carol Stabile is the director of the Center for the Study of Women in Society at UO. She spoke as a member of the faculty senate on 14 May:

“We need an investigation that is fully independent of the influence of big sports or the Greek system,” Stabile said. “We need an investigation that asks the hard questions about system breakdowns in our policies, procedures and campus climate. And then we need to look the answer in the face, publicly and bravely. Anything less just isn’t going to cut it.”

The hard question which has no chance of getting asked on the UO campus is this:  Why do we refuse to consider that the woman, Amanda Jasmine, lied?

There is more than sufficient evidence that she wanted to be with the players, wanted to have sex with them, and then misled police and university officials about what actually happened.

Professor Freyd zealously promotes a need for “campus climate” surveys, her own specialty, and Gottfredson dutifully beats the same drum, claiming that it will address sexual assault on campus. But who needs a weather report then you’re drowning in a deluge?

The climate is impunity for female students who make false allegations. There is no survey to discover the amount of fear male students have about becoming the target of false allegations. It can happen as a result of simply asking a classmate for a date, and it can happen after consensual sexual activity between a male and female student.

At a few universities male students have begun to assert their rights to due process by filing civil suits against university administrators.

In April a suit was filed by engineering student Drew Sterrett against University of Michigan. Sterrett’s suit alleges that he was denied due process rights after that university suspended him for sexual misconduct following an investigation that grossly violated his rights to due process. Sterrett charges that the encounter was consensual, and that the investigators suppressed evidence of consent. Remarkably, his dorm mate was in the top bunk while the two below engaged each other with enthusiasm. (Sterrett v U. Michigan)

Earlier this month a male Columbia University student filed a complaint in federal court in New York. “John Doe” was suspended for sexual assault based on a preponderance of evidence, the standard promoted by President Obama. Five months after a single sexual experience in a dorm bathroom, for which “Jane Doe” first retrieved a condom, the female student decided to report the experience as non-consensual. No police report was ever filed, and Jane Doe never sought medical attention. Therefore the only evidence was her verbal representation.

John Doe’s attorney told a reporter from Legal Insurrection, “Particularly of note is the fact that even the complainant believed the sanction to be too severe and personally appealed the decision.” The suit cites lack of procedural safeguards to be the basis of presumed guilt.

The culture of impunity on campuses has become a cancer so aggressive that absurdity is allowed free rein. For example, at the 14 May University of Oregon faculty senate meeting Dr. Freyd read from a letter she wrote two years ago “portending a sexual assault problem at UO,” wrote the Oregon Daily Emerald reporter.

We should be alarmed, right? Here is a credentialed faculty member who warned of something two years ago which has now resulted in great personal harm to a student because the warning was not heeded.Reciting her letter, Freyd read: “Currently, the University of Oregon fails to comply with its obligations under Title IX regarding sexual harassment and its discriminatory impact on students. We cannot wait until a Penn State-type incident occurs until we take these issues seriously.”

In the alarmist tornado over Eugene, gloating has become a substitute for academic integrity. The Penn State case happened because real sex offenses were committed against minor children who had no ability to consent. There was a cover-up which destroyed the credibility of the athletic department and perhaps the university in general.

To compare the UO situation to Penn State is profoundly stupid and inappropriate. But to brag to the faculty senate that you warned the administration (Gottfredson was present at the meeting and had addressed the senate) reflects nothing less than a depraved political agenda. Freyd’s payoff appears as demand number three in the Coalition to End Sexual Violence’s list of demands to Gottfredson : more funding for “climate research.”

The university president has hinted that he will meet the demand, which is to fund more surveys designed and administered by Freyd and her students. Of course, no climate survey is going to prevent students from having consensual sex; neither will any survey prohibit a student from lying about her participation in sexual activity.

Personally, for a long time I have been aware of the trend on campus toward unequal justice. When this incident broke into the headlines I decided to follow it in detail. The hypocrisies flowing out of the university became so great that I filed a complaint of Title IX violation with the Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights.

The complaint can be viewed on my Facebook page, along with supporting evidence and some comments which illustrate how political correctness has mowed down support for Constitutional rights. Naturally I’m being called “rape apologist.”

Federal intervention is needed at University of Oregon because the University of Oregon has inverted the presumption of innocence into a presumption of guilt. Male students are presumed guilty, even when there is evidence demonstrating that the accuser is not telling the truth. The office of student affairs, responsible for enforcing Title IX, is a violator of Title IX and so cannot be trusted to enforce it. That’s the real cover-up.

The complaint argues that to falsely accuse of sexual misconduct is itself sexual misconduct. Male students who would shout “Whore!” at a female student would be disciplined for contributing to a hostile environment. But female students who publicly declare innocent male students to be rapists, well, they get grants and publicity, and the general endorsement from the university administration.

It’s hard to keep count of the number of times Gottfredson has verbally endorsed Obama’s sexual assault task force. He repeats the mythical “1 in 5″ with such passion he appears to be self-flagellating in a ritual enacted in the suffering hope of retaining his job, which really does appear to be at risk. A faculty member’s website posts daily entreaties for Gottfredon’s firing or forced resignation.

Indeed, the president of the university shows no ability or interest in putting a stop to the gang which I’ve begun to call the new McCarthyites. It is a fitting pejorative for people who destroy others with character smears designed to cast themselves as defenders of virtue and morality. Like McCarthyism, there is a political objective. President Obama is pandering to a student voting block which Hillary Clinton will rely on heavily when she runs for President of the U.S. The University of Oregon is a vast bevy of Democratic voters, especially every four years. The critical key is to motivate voter turn-out.

I am not personally acquainted with any of the three (now former) basketball players. That does not matter, as the attack on them is an attack on the rights to presumption of innocence and privacy. For example, if the university president had called a press conference to denounce a softball team member as a disgusting lesbian, I would join the protest to protect her rights to access higher education, and I’d join the loudest of demands for firing the president. But that is only a hypothetical incident. Reality rarely drops itself into your lap as a warm, fuzzy gift.


Kelsey Alston on KATU dissenting witness

Eugene Police Report pdf

Kevin Hornbuckle’s Title IX Complaint

UO Coalition to End Sexual Vilolence

UO promo Freyd takes part in White House announcement.

UO Coalition to End Sexual Violence presents demands

UO Pres. Gottfredson’s statement to faculty senate 14 May

“Sexual activity isn’t necessarily criminal”

NY Times story 6 May by Joshua Hunt

Sexual Assault: What are the real numbers? (Christina Sommers/AEI)

University of Oregon’s Timeline of Events

About Kevin Hornbuckle

Kevin Hornbuckle is a working class father and retired bus and truck driver living in Eugene, Oregon.

View All Posts
  • Justice4All

    Well done sir. The OU case has eerily similar parallels to the infamous Duke Lacrosse players case, in fact so much so that when I read your article I thought I was re-reading parts of Until Proven Innocent, the excellent book written by Stuart Taylor Jr. and KC Johnson that detailed the shameful injustices of the Duke Lacrosse players case in which 3 completely innocent players attended a party and then were falsely accused of rape. There too a rush to judgement led by feminist and community political activists pressured the university president to quickly denounce and remove the players before the facts were known. Shameful and outrageous the lack of fairness in these type of matters, a witch-hunt to brand men as rapists exists today for sure on all American college campuses.

  • gary959

    Sorry, but I didn’t know where to post this info about the White House petition listed in Hot on the Web:

    Saw this on and thought it inapproriate. You can flag it as such by signing in and then mark the petition as inappropriate, as it calls a whole movement a terrorist group, which violates the stated terms of its moderation policy – it may be defamatory, definitely fraudulent, and since no group is named specifically (smart for them, for it would be defamatory and actionable), outside the scope of the federal government. I will make a video on this piece of BS.

    • politicalcynic

      Hmm-if they allow that petition, can we create one about feminism? After all, they have actively supported legalizing the rape of men by eliminating male victims from the law, and have actively supported stripping men of their rights to due process and the presumption of innocence. They have also used violent or quasi-violent tactics to silence men’s rights speakers. I’d say they fall squarely within their own definition of organizations that be defined as human rights abusers and possibly terrorists?

      • Chris Wedge

        Plus, we could name names.
        Because it wouldn’t be libel, would it?

        • Dagda Mór

          This must be done!

        • politicalcynic

          As long as the statements are true they are not libelous or defamatory.

      • Sadman365

        Forget about all that. They call for the extermination of all males. Their sites are full of fantasies about torturing and killing males even babies. Their terrorists leaders have it written in their books. If feminists and feminism isn’t terrorism, I don’t know what is.

  • DukeLax

    You take these new campus Kangaroo rape courts run by gender-studies students, and add to that the “manufactured statistics Alliances” from American law enforcement that are hiding the true percentages of false rape accusations from the public….And you got the perfect recipe to pervert the course of justice.

    • DukeLax

      I believe that since the feds started offering money for American law enforcement ( around 25 years ago) to manufacture statistics for them…..what has developed is that Law enforcement has developed a “conflict of interest” in their duties to protect American male tax payers.

      • Jesse James

        Yeah, having police arrest men because they are not talking to da wymmins will be a real hoot; a-la Treblinka circa 1942.

  • politicalcynic

    Sad as it is, the best options here are these:

    1. The players should sue the university. They may also wish to consider suing the media outlets who basically tarred and feathered them without any actual journalistic integrity;

    2. If you are a male in college, do not date, engage in sexual activity with, flirt with, or otherwise socially engage with females at any time. In circumstances where you MUST interact with them, record everything. And if they complain about it, simply state point blank “Given the current feminist driven witch-hunt hysteria against males, it is too dangerous for any male to associate with any female unless absolutely necessary, and only when the interaction is recorded.”

    Of course the added benefit to item 2 is that I imagine if all men started doing this (and not just on campus) feminist outrage would be terribly entertaining.

    • Dagda Mór

      They’re probably safe enough if they have sex with women who aren’t students at the same university, that way the police would have to get involved. Or even better avoid having sex with women in the same town. For certain values of safe. Assuming university witchhunters aren’t just taking complaints from random people who walk in off the street.

      How much hotter can the water get before the frog jumps out?

      • Jesse James

        Well, considering that it takes a considerable, and earth shattering, Geo-thermal event for the ocean to raise even a few degrees; I say the frog is pretty much Duck Dynastied.

    • Bryant Suiskens

      i have a much better option for 2: bring a legal contract that a women has to sign so her consent is undisputable

      • politicalcynic

        Feminists will just claim she was forced by the patriarchy to sign the contract and that it is therefore null and void. :)

        • Bryant Suiskens

          Doesn’t matter, legal is legal. plus, whether it is possible to read the confirmation of the other party also classifies as a easy alcohol test.

          • Darryl Jewett

            “Doesn’t matter, legal is legal.”
            Since when? Apparently you and I aren’t living on the same feminist planet.

          • alex brown

            are you a freeman on the land or something? lolol

            Legal is legal? The state breaks it’s own laws all the time, it can ignore the laws at a whim.

          • Bryant Suiskens

            Is a legal contract not a valid way to prove that there was consent.

            well, of course, a women can say that she signed it under force. so, we also need police surveillance, 3 witnesses and a audio recording of the signing moment. better deal?

          • Darryl Jewett

            Look how well marriage contracts and even prenuptial agreements have worked as legal contracts for men. The marriage contract is the only contract I think in the history of the world in which the one who defaults (almost always the woman) is not penalized but actually rewarded to extremes instead and the one who doesn’t default (almost always the man) is actually punished to extremes.

          • MrSonicAdvance

            Consent can be withdrawn at any time, so written consent is irrelevant. The only way to guarantee consent is for the woman to cry out “Yes!” in response to each thrust. 😉

          • Seventh Reaper

            Wrong – she has to say it so loudly the entire complex can hear it 😉

          • Jesse James

            Ok, I just have one question…does the notary public get to record everything that happens in the bathroom?

        • OldandNavy

          Noice! Everyone was thinking it.

      • destroy_all_monsters

        There’s no way to make that enforceable.

      • Bluedrgn

        Nope. No mater what she supposedly agreed to in the contract, all she would need to do is say she stopped “enthusiastically consenting” at some point, or that she only signed the contract so that he would stop pestering her and let her sleep.

        It’s always rape when the female decides it was… even if she is withdrawing her consent the next day, the next week, or ten years later (at least according to feminism).

      • Correctrix

        Don’t be silly. Such a contract is unenforceable and would make her dump you. Just record the encounters. Audio should suffice.

    • Vương Vi-Nhuyễn – 王微軟

      Feminists are basically creating a culture where all men have to be gynophobic at all times… this is not healthy for anyone (socially)…

      • politicalcynic

        Yep-and then they cry about it. “Where are all the GOOD men”; “I can’t get married”; “My male friends won’t help me have a child”. We’ve seen ALL of those (and more) from feminist writers just in the past year.

        Feminists have been busy making their bed for 40 years…now they can lie in it…alone…

  • Andrejovich Dietrich

    Why does this story sound familiar?

    • Mark Samenfink

      something having to do with Lacrosse, perhaps?

      • Andrejovich Dietrich

        Thats the one…I see Academia and militant feminists are very slow learners. Well given the capacity for non hate thought the latter will always pursue the Wicker Man agenda. But the former kind of makes you not want to send your kids to these Institutions of Lowest Common Denominator learning.

        • Darryl Jewett

          Slow? Feminists are psychopaths. An important characteristic of psychopaths is that they are incapable of learning at all. To learn one has to be willing to learn from failure. To learn from failure, one has to acknowledge that s/he has failed. To acknowledge that one has failed, s/he has to acknowledge responsibility for the failure and hold oneself accountable. Feminists have no agency and will not accept responsibility for anything. When ever they fail, they always blame someone else. Therefore they can’t learn.

          • Andrejovich Dietrich

            I really am of the opinion that there needs to be some sort of rating for these institutions. A femterminate scale or some such. I have 2 children in College. Of which the mother contributes nothing, and I contribute all. I don’t want to send any of my money to a known misandric institution.

  • Mark Samenfink

    I know this is… somewhat unrelated, but Peter Nolan is on 4chan right now advertising his special brand of crazy, and even /pol isn’t buying into it.

  • Kevin Hornbuckle

    False allegation of sexual abuse is sexual abuse. The University of Oregon has committed gender-based discrimination against the three male students. Its handling of this matter make it clear that discrimination will affect other male students in the future.

  • Omar

    In one of his State of the Union adresses (it was that bad) Theodore Roosevelt spoke about the problem with false accusations of rape. See, the easiest and fastest way to hang a black male back then was to just have a white women point at him and say he raped her. Sometimes just saying he said something or whistled would do. No need for trial, just the emotional lynch mob circumventing any sense of justice even in cases where it was obvious she was lying. He warned that this would carry over and be a mainstay in every part of society. He was kind sorta maybe accurate

  • Eon24

    This is quite intimidating..

  • Darryl Jewett

    “The Penn State case happened because real sex offenses were committed against minor children who had no ability to consent.”
    Although I was not in the courtroom, I am not aware of any substantive evidence against the defendant, enough witness either recanted their testimony or their testimony was not credible or was inconsistent, enough people who know the defendant including his wife assert to this day that the defendant could not possibly have committed the crimes of which he is convicted, and others support her claim.
    I’m not aware of any concrete and physical evidence supporting the defendant’s conviction. Only witnesses. Finding enough people to bear false witness against an innocent man for political expedience is much easier than proving a man’s innocence which is why we have due process including presumption of innocence. In this case, the defendant’s right to due process including presumption of innocence was violated. The defendant is likely innocent and I always challenge those who keep propping up this case as an example of something other than the violation of an innocent man’s civil rights. Happens all the time.

  • thatdogguy

    All it takes is an accusation. The news media can’t wait to play up the story of the “victim” with all the trimmings. The school, afraid of being accused, gives in to the lynch crowd and executes the accused.
    All it takes is an accusation. Be afraid. Be very afraid.

    • DukeLax

      That is why the “American big 5 media” is becoming more and more irrelevant to Americans every day.

  • reuvenavram

    It seems to me that this girl raped 4 men.

  • fidelbogen

    Never forget that the university setting is not only a microcosm, but a crystal ball for what the future holds if certain trends continue, and spread into society at large.

    So just look at the university setting if you want to know what the feminist future is going to look like. Then, armed with that knowledge, ask yourself why men and boys should have any social-contractual obligation to a feminist social order.

    That, in a nutshell, is what “MGTOW” is really all about. It isn’t “personal” – at root, it’s a political thing. It’s men looking out for number one in a world that treats them like dirt.

    • Darryl Jewett

      Men no longer benefit from a civilized society so why should they contribute to or participate in one? If they no longer benefit from a civilized society then coercing and forcing them to contribute to and participate in one is slavery. And then it’s not a civilized society any more. It’s uncivilized. A society isn’t civilized and doesn’t even exist in the first place unless the contribution to and participation in it by men is voluntary.

      • Jesse James

        Far be it for me to challenge a couple of the more respected older gentlemen here; but I have to disagree.

        Considering the fact that if we allow them to run everything, precisely into the ground, we will still be left with whomever they lose it to. I seriously doubt the next ruler will really care about how bad we were treated by our previous mistresses. We will just be ordered to make more high heeled pumps. Give up our taxes, fight their wars, and die in their harder forced labor…………?

        I think we are screwed either way yes?

        • Darryl Jewett

          No. (Did you expect me to agree? lol) It’s a matter of proportion. Most women (most but not all) consume more than they produce (basic marketing data and labor statistics from just about any source all agree). Most men and some women 9but not many) produce more than they consume (same marketing data and labor statistics). That a country lead by civilized humans (mostly men but some women who support them and both of whom produce more than they consume) rather than uncivilized feminists (mostly women and some male feminists and mostly men who are enslaved to both) will be a population that produces more than they consume and does not need to fight as many wars. See? Math.

  • PaulMurrayCbr

    “So you see, their lives were ruined for their own good.”

    The betrayal of student athletes by the system is not anything remarkable. The college athlete system chews up and spits out enormous numbers of young men, who risk injury every weekend for no remuneration, almost all of whom never make a living from sports and waste the best years of their lives doing “media studies for athletic scholarship students” instead of learning something useful.

    If college sports was simply banned the colleges would be better off financially and culturally; and so too would the young men who might get into trade school and do well.

  • DukeLax

    I had a “Dukes list” a few years ago, that labelled the worse 5 colleges in America to be a male student. Im going to have to up date it, and i would like to do a reader voting poll this time, to get a more accurate opinion of the ” worse offenders”. This may help some male students decide where they don’t want to attend college.

  • Mike Rainbow

    I live in Springfield OR, and this is appalling to see. I have been arguing in favor of the MHRA for two years to my family, and they have made it clear that “Male Problems” are not a problem in the US. In England, Canada, etc, but not here. I hate that I have this gem of evidence to prove them wrong. Hopefully it will hit home, though.

  • Draigo Luther

    A couple of things:

    First, I am a diehard supporter of the University of Oregon, Especially the Football and Track and Field programs. So I have to admit from the start, my opinion is biased.

    Professor Freyd had accused her father of sexual abuse, in the past, and rejects any notion that false accusations could exists in sexually based crimes. Needless to say she comes from a very biased position on all this. and we have this person teaching students? Disgusuting

    • OldandNavy

      I think that parents of the young and hopeful don’t do enough vetting or research into the specific staff that will be “hands on”, as it were, with the curriculum chosen by their precious little ones.

      I wonder that if they did, a different organization than the one they researched as a whole might seem more appealing.

  • Dennis Markham

    Hey guys: can you please please PLEASE raid this article:

    I call one person a “sack of dogshit” and now I’m banned from Telegraph. After about 300 posts there.

  • Tom Golden

    Thank you Kevin for an excellent summary of such a tricky problem. Years upon years of male cowardice to say no to the one-sided misandrist feminist lackeys has built the web of rules, laws, and attitudes that punish innocent men. What will it take to dismantle such hatred? Let’s hope these young men sue the crap out of that school.

  • Heisenberg

    This is sickening. My Alma Mater …. So, the DA’s office determining that they don’t have enough evidence to support the allegations somehow equals these guys getting tossed from school? The general public needs to be educated in how prosecutors offices speak. Them saying “We can’t prove it” does not necessarily mean “We think no wrong doing occurred.” What the laws knows and what the law can prove rarely meet. The bottom line is, that the truth of what happened will never come out because you have three young Men – African American too boot; being everything short of convicted beyond a reasonable doubt, and you have a young woman who is worried about being labeled a slut by her family and friends. Because being called a slut is so much worse than being called a rapist. I guess that feels trump faks once again …

    • Kevin Hornbuckle

      It is interesting to read the words of UO’s SWAT (Sexual Wellness Advocacy Team). When people question the woman’s disposition about having sex after the alleged assault, SWAT scolds that this is irrelevant and such questions amount to “slut shaming.” However, whether the woman resisted is a matter of law. So it is a necessary and reasonable question.

      Do the new McCarthyites on campus really care about the dangers of “slut shaming”? No, they care only about creating a crime where none exists. If they cared about sexual freedom, they wouldn’t hold rallies supporting false rape allegations. Four people behaved like “sluts” it seems, but only one gets to use the ‘no slut shaming!’ defense. The other three are guilty, BECAUSE they behaved like “sluts.”

  • kyle

    How about, the “McRapeyites.”

    • OldandNavy

      Pretty good but…

      Doesn’t roll off the tongue quite right. I don’t have anything better, mind you, but I’ll roll it around for a few.

  • OldandNavy

    Week stated, Kevin. I don’t read much off you, hope to see more.

  • Jesse James

    To call these feminists “McCarthyites” is an insult to that demagogue. He at least actually caught some communists, and thus cemented his perverse lust for power to continue what originally seemed like a noble goal.

    These lower, much lower, level form of ingrates are far less intellectual, or astute, in their pursuits. It is like claiming to want something more intellectual, so you leave your Stanford philosophy class, to go sit in at the latest rendition of “Ode to my jock strap” after freshman football practice at your local middle school.

    Like the middle school intellectual savant, these ingrates do what they are told by their feminist overlords…..I mean teachers/professors.

  • J.G. te Molder

    So, Jasmine wanted her “rapists” to get a mere “slap on the wrist”, and nobody but the police and DA realizes what this means; producing a witch hunt on campus despite the fact that the police made no arrests and the DA won’t take it to court?

    Any male student reading this: stay the fuck away from women while you’re on campus! Trust me; pussy ain’t worth it, it ain’t that great, and there’ll be plenty. Hell, if you have to have sex while you’re a student; do it with a woman who is not a student.

  • mediahound
  • Keeping it Real

    I would love to go to sleep with a pretty girl on each side. But three guys and one girl? That’s clearly homo. These guys should have gotten support from their campus gay student union.