The worst of the draconian sexual assault directive that the Department of Education issued on April 4 likely will soon become a law enacted by Congress. U.S. Senator Bob Casey (D-PA) has introduced legislation to combat sexual violence on college campuses called The Campus Sexual Violence Elimination Act (SaVE Act) (S.834), cosponsored by Senator Patty Murray (D-WA). The SaVE bill is found here. It amends Title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965.
Among many other problems with this legislation (including the fact the word "victim" is used in excess of twenty times instead of "accuser" or "alleged victim"), the bill mandates the following regarding college disciplinary proceedings:
"Each institution of higher education participating in any program under this title . . . shall develop and distribute . . . a statement of policy regarding . . . Procedures for institutional disciplinary action in cases of an alleged incident of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking, which shall include a clear statement that-- (I) such proceedings shall--(aa) provide a prompt and equitable resolution; (bb) be conducted by officials who receive annual training on the issues related to domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking and how to conduct an investigation and hearing process that protects the safety of victims and promotes accountability; and (cc) use the preponderance of the evidence standard."
PREPONDERANCE OF THE EVIDENCE STANDARD: The SaVE act would do legislatively what the Department of Education has already done by executive branch fiat: it would articulate a policy decision that it is acceptable to risk holding more innocent persons (almost exclusively males) responsible for wrongs they did not commit.
The vast majority of institutions of higher education currently apply the "clear and convincing" evidence standard, which means that to find an accused responsible for sexual assault, the school must produce evidence that unequivocally establishes a very high probability that the alleged assault occurred. The only reason they do this is to insure that innocent persons are not held responsible for wrongs they did not commit because it widely accepted among civilized persons that it is far worse to hold an innocent man responsible than to allow a guilty man to escape accountability.
The new law would require schools to switch to the "preponderance of the evidence" standard, which requires only a slight probability that the male committed the offense in order to punish him. This law most certainly will increase the risk of holding innocent persons responsible for wrongs they did not commit.
ONE-SIDED ASSISTANCE FOR "VICTIMS": Beyond that, the persons who conduct this hearing are to receive training about how to conduct a hearing "that protects the safety of victims and promotes accountability." Nowhere in the bill is there even a hint, much less any requirement, that they should receive training about protecting the rights of the presumptively innocent who are accused of these offenses. "Promoting accountability" means that the persons conducting the hearing must be instructed on handing out appropriate punishments for offenses (it is widely believed by the persons pushing for this law that males accused of sex offenses on campus typically do not receive sufficiently severe punishments).
There is no provision that the accused are to receive representation of counsel, or that they even have the right to representation of counsel at the disciplinary hearing.
In contrast, the "victims" are to receive, among other things, the following: an explanation of their right to notify proper law enforcement authorities, including on-campus and local police; the option to be assisted by campus authorities in notifying such authorities; contact information for victim advocacy, counseling, health, mental health, legal assistance, and other services both on-campus and in the local community; an explanation of the availability of a victims' rights advocate to assist in reporting an incident and in locating and
utilizing victim services; and a description of how the school shall help to enforce any order of protection, no contact order, restraining order, or similar lawful order issued by any criminal, civil, or tribal court, if the "victim" has informed such institution of such order.
A good article about the new bill is found here: http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2011/04/the-save-act-trading-liberty-for-security-on-campus/237833/
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
21 comments:
So this is not yet law.
Is it too late to lodge a formal protest?
Is it too late to call the sponsors? Is it too late to call the gender who MIGHT be affected, or their parents, and urge THEM to call or email the sponsors, or he person signing the bill?
Unless it's happened about an hour ago, it is NOT too late.
You will be surprised how quickly these bullies back down when one stands up to them with calm, hard facts.
Totally sickening. The fact that nobody even thought to object to the rampant assumption of victimhood paints an ugly picture of how widespread the insanity surrounding sexual assault has become.
Not too late to protest. But the Senate is very likely to pass this overwhelmingly.
So it's guilty until proven innocent.
Those who have been advocating recording video round the clock don't sound quite as crazy any more do they.
Campus Sexual Violence Elimination Act (SaVE Act)
how do they get "save" out of that? what retards thought up this bill? oh yea it was a democrat
You know, I think I have a better idea for colleges. If they think a crime has been committed, their involvement should begin and end with dialing 911.
"The Campus Sexual Violence Elimination Act"
Apparently some of the thousands of statutes on the books that criminalize rape and sexual assault aren't enough.
The worst part about this is the ones who manufacture the "training" mentioned in the proposed law are rape-culture activists.
The comments section to the linked Atlantic article is encouraging.
FRAs, and the shaky reliability of Koss' 1 in 4 statistic are discussed.
There is hope yet.
Very thin silver lining: a federal law, if shown to be as discriminatory to men as many individual school policies (and a judge or 5 agrees), will overturn not just one school's policies, but the policies of all schools in the nation.
Of course, that requires that the statute first be used against at least a few reasonably-innocent men.
sarcasm on:
It is time for us men to start wearing hidden recording devices 24/7 as a backup should we ever get accused. Then again, it is probably illegal in some states and some situations. I can also imagine in today's society introducing a recording to prove innocence only to be told that evidence is not acceptable in court.
:sarcasm off.
This is America's belated response to Duke Lacrosse, and to the news of Crystal Mangum's arrest for murder: a resounding FUCK YOU to the falsely accused.
The gender-raunch community will continue to "Empower" themselves, by perverting mens and boys basic constitutional rights to "Equal protection under the law".
You see, basic equal protection, is very intertwined with a degree of truth...As in, did the girl get raped, or was she lying??
The American gender-Raunch community will continue to pervert our legal concepts of what is, is, and will remove truth from the equation...As long as this perversion of truth furthers "gender-Raunch Empowerment."
Not all boys are feeling like their not wanted on university campuses, just the heterosexual ones.
Very thin silver lining: a federal law, if shown to be as discriminatory to men as many individual school policies (and a judge or 5 agrees), will overturn not just one school's policies, but the policies of all schools in the nation.
...kinda like in family court?...or kinda like child abuse cases?
You really live in lala land to believe that.
The gender-raunch community now have the heterosexual womens vote as a solid Alliance. But there is that growing knawing problem in college womens souls that ..."there's something wrong here, where are all the men (heterosexual men??)"
If the American gender-raunch community lose their alliance with heterosexual women, then things will change fast.
For definition purposes here, I'm curious how we should be drawing the line and defining gender-raunch and radical-feminism. Are commentators using them loosely as one and the same or are they distinctly different for most people? For example when commentators use the term gender-raunch to reference the bias against men on campus or the values of American women, I'm not sure if they are also or not referring to radfems and to what degree.
Call or write your congressman's office.
A phone call is best.
You'd be surprised how effective something so simple is.
Atlas, thanx for asking. The term "gender-raunch" feminism is an amalgamation of the two most dominant forms of modern feminism, gender-feminism, and raunch feminism.
one recent example of "gender-raunch" feminism, versus "equality feminism" of 25 years ago; is the "professor raunch" scandal we heard about in the news about a month ago. About a month ago a this professor took a saws-all with a dildo strapped to the end of it, to a womens vagina, as a class project.
"Equality feminists" of 30 years ago would have have demanded this "proffessor raunchs" resignation for sexual objectification of women. On the other hand neo "gender-raunch feminism" would stand behind this professor Raunch, and his saws-all dildo contraption, and view anything raunchy like this, as a way of "Empowerment".
Gender-raunch don't like sports, and they don't like heterosexual males, and they barelly tolerate heterosexual women.
In the eyes of gender-raunch...the only "pure" feminists are lesbians.
Anon at 4:28PM,
Thank you for your reply and the thoroughness of it.
I do still have some questions:
Am a correct that gender-raunch then overlaps with radfeminism? They both seem on the extreme end to me. Then again, some radfems can be heterosexual. Also, if gender-raunch hates or wants separation from men wouldn't they be against a male professor using a dildo on a female during a class demonstration though maybe be ok with a female professor doing it?
I believe "gender-raunch"; for historical purposes; is more accurate than simply "radical feminism".
anon @9:27
Thank you.
Call or write your congressman's office.
A phone call is best.
You'd be surprised how effective something so simple is.
Good advice.
I wish everyone would do it.
Post a Comment