The state police investigated, and, like so many other reports of campus sexual assault, determined that the claim was "a complete fabrication." Worse, "the student who made the report has made several other false reports and the [state police are] seeking charges against her."
So, what was the university's response to this crime? Perhaps signs in the dorm halls saying something like this: "Rape is a crime; so is making a false rape claim"?
Nope. In response to the false rape incident, Spring Arbor University has taken measures to guard against -- you guessed it -- rape. Specifically, the university has increased security on its residence halls as a precautionary measure. The exterior doors of the residence halls, which house about 1,200 of the university’s 1,700 students, had been locked from midnight to 7 a.m. but are now locked at all times. You see, the false rape scare exposed the school's vulnerability to rapists, and, once again, a crime that did occur -- a false rape claim -- is used as the occasion to scare people about a crime that did not, rape.
Note what the school does not do. The school does not explain why the still-unnamed apparent false accuser was permitted to be enrolled in school even after having allegedly made "several" other false reports. But, hey, what's the harm of having a serial false accuser on campus? After all, who could she possibly hurt?
Campus security measures prompted by rape fears are common. Implicit in them is the idea is that the men-folk need to be kept at bay, and that men and women need to be essentially segregated to keep the women safe.
But the schools don't really buy into it. In one breath, colleges urge women to fear men and urge men to feel guilty for being born with penises. In the next, colleges invite those penises to move in with the women. Gender-inclusive housing, where kids can pick a roommate of the opposite sex, is the latest trend on campus (not at Spring Arbor, but at many public colleges). Forget all the enhanced the security measures; forget the carefully drafted policies designed to keep women safe and that spell out who's allowed in the dorms; forget replacing doors on dorm buildings that may not adequately keep the men out. The roosters have been officially ushered into the hen house.
How does gender-inclusive housing square with the idea that almost all campus sexual assaults are supposedly of the "acquaintance" variety, and that the chances of sexual assault occurring increase in direct proportion to the opportunity to commit the offense? I mean, inviting an 18-year-old boy to sleep next to a woman from whom he wants to -- to use the parlance of "rape culture" -- "get some" would constitute more than ample opportunity, wouldn't you say? According to the experts, the main reason young people commit sexual coercion -- the offense du jour that colleges are increasingly punishing -- has nothing to do with “power” or the desire to subjugate women, it’s due to perpetrators’ sexual arousal. And all due apologies to the gender experts, an 18-year-old guy sleeping next to an attractive young woman can tell his penis all night long that gender is just a "cultural construct," but that won't make his erection to go away. That desire certainly doesn't give him license to rape, but it gives him a motivation to cajole the woman for sex.
Do the colleges not see any connection between no-consequence sex, on the one hand, and unsatisfactory sex, on the other -- whether that unsatisfactory sex be actual sexual assault or consensual sex that the woman later regrets and wrongly labels rape?
UCLA just became the latest to say there is no such connection between gender-inclusive housing and sexual assault: "Another concern – that this housing option could increase instances of sexual assault, also has no basis in reality. Officials at Brown University and UC Riverside said there have been no reports of assault in gender-inclusive residential areas."
You see, it's all part of the campus sex kabuki dance. Colleges pay lip service to the paid sexual grievance industry that promotes rape fear to justify its existence, but at heart, colleges don't really buy it.
Is it because colleges are mostly run by libertines?
I'll leave that for you to decide. More likely, college administrators are simply acknowledging what every rational person not drunk on gender politics already knows: "rape culture" is bullshit. While rape is certainly a problem -- after all, one rape is one rape too many -- it is n't "normalized" on campus among its male student population. Because if the feminists were right, rape would be rampant on campus, and we would be talking about banning boys entirely, not inviting them to live in the same dorm rooms as their victims.