Skip to comments.The Rot At Duke -- And Beyond
Posted on 12/18/2009 12:15:54 PM PST by abb
Much of academia appears to have a disregard of due process and a bias against white males.
You might think that a university whose students were victims of the most notorious fraudulent rape claim in recent history, and whose professors -- 88 of them -- signed an ad implicitly presuming guilt, and whose president came close to doing the same would have learned some lessons.
The facts are otherwise. They also suggest that Duke University's ugly abuse in 2006 and 2007 of its now-exonerated lacrosse players -- white males accused by a black stripper and hounded by a mob hewing to political correctness -- reflects a disregard of due process and a bias against white males that infect much of academia.
In September, far from taking pains to protect its students from false rape charges, Duke adopted a revised "sexual misconduct" policy that makes a mockery of due process and may well foster more false rape charges by rigging the disciplinary rules against the accused.
Meanwhile, none of the 88 guilt-presuming professors has publicly apologized. (Duke's president, Richard Brodhead, did -- but too little and too late.) Many of the faculty signers -- a majority of whom are white -- have expressed pride in their rush to judgment. None was dismissed, demoted, or publicly rebuked. Two were glorified this month in Duke's in-house organ as pioneers of "diversity," with no reference to their roles in signing the ad. Three others have won prestigious positions at Cornell, Vanderbilt, and the University of Chicago.
(Disclosure: I co-authored a 2007 book on the case, Until Proven Innocent, with historian KC Johnson of Brooklyn College and the City University of New York's Graduate Center. His scrupulously accurate blog details the events summarized here.)
The two stated reasons for the revised sexual-misconduct rules, as reported in the student newspaper, The Chronicle, almost advertise that they were driven by politically correct ideology more than by any surge in sexual assaults.
"The first was... fear of litigation, as expressed by Duke General Counsel Pamela Bernard," as Johnson wrote in his blog, Durham-in-Wonderland. "Yet the policy Duke has developed seems like a lawsuit waiting to happen. The second factor was a development that those in the reality-based community might consider to be a good thing: Over a three-year period, reported cases of sexual misconduct on college campuses as a whole and at Duke specifically (slightly) declined."
But for many in academia, Johnson explains, "these figures must mean something else -- that a plethora of rapes are going unreported." Indeed, Sheila Broderick, a Duke Women's Center staff member, told The Chronicle without evidence that Duke had a "rape culture." And Ada Gregory, director of the Duke Women's Center, said that "higher IQ" males, such as those at Duke, could be "highly manipulative and coercive."
The revised policy requires involving the Women's Center in the disciplinary process for all known allegations of sexual misconduct and empowers the Office of Student Conduct to investigate even if the accuser does not want to proceed.
Duke adopted a revised "sexual misconduct" policy that makes a mockery of due process and may foster more false rape charges.
Duke's rules define sexual misconduct so broadly and vaguely as to include any sexual activity without explicit "verbal or nonverbal" consent, which must be so "clear" as to dispel "real or perceived power differentials between individuals [that] may create an unintentional atmosphere of coercion" (emphasis added).
The disciplinary rules deny the accused any right to have an attorney at the hearing panel or to confront his accuser. The rules also give her -- but not him -- the right to be treated with "sensitivity"; to make opening and closing statements; and to receive copies of investigative documents.
The revised policy, among other things, shows that Duke is still in the grip of the same biases, indifference to evidence, and de facto presumption of guilt that led so many professors and administrators to smear innocent lacrosse players as rapists (and as racists) for many months in 2006 and 2007. The centerpiece was the full-page ad taken out by the "Group of 88" professors, as critics call them, in The Chronicle on April 6, 2006, about three weeks after the woman claimed rape.
This ad stopped just short of explicitly branding the lacrosse players as rapists. But it treated almost as a given the truth of the stripper's claims of a brutal gang rape by three team members amid a hail of racist slurs. It praised protesters who had put lacrosse players' photos on "wanted" posters. It associated "what happened to this young woman" with "racism and sexism." It suggested that the lacrosse players were getting privileged treatment because they are white -- which was the opposite of the truth.
And in January 2007, after the fraudulence of the stripper's rape claim and of rogue Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong's indictments of three players had become increasingly evident, most of the 88 also signed a letter rejecting calls for apologies while denying that their April 2006 ad had meant what it seemed to say.
Among the most prominent signers of both the ad and the letter were Karla Holloway, an English professor, and Paula McClain, a political science professor. They also slimed the lacrosse players in opaquely worded, academic-jargon-filled individual statements full of innuendo.
This disgraceful behavior apparently did not trouble Duke's Academic Council, which in February 2007 made McClain its next chairwoman -- the highest elected position for a faculty member.
And just this month, the university's in-house organ, Duke Today, heaped special attention and praise on Holloway and McClain and featured their photos in a gushing five-part series titled "Diversity & Excellence," focusing on Duke's efforts to hire more black faculty members.
Academia's demand for more "diversity" may interact with the small supply of aspiring black professors who are well credentialed in traditional disciplines.
None of the five articles mentioned the roles of Holloway, McClain, and most of the African and African-American studies faculty (the vast majority of whom signed both the ad and the subsequent letter) in smearing innocent Duke students -- not only the lacrosse players but also the many others whom the letter fatuously accused of fostering an "atmosphere that allows sexism, racism, and sexual violence to be so prevalent on campus."
The three Group of 88 signers hired away by other leading universities are Houston Baker, Grant Farred, and Charles Payne.
Vanderbilt was so proud to have signed up Baker, a professor of English and African and African-American studies at Duke, in April 2006 that it prominently featured a photo of him on its website for months. This was shortly after Baker had issued a March 29, 2006, public letter pressuring the Duke administration to dismiss the lacrosse players -- whom he deprecated 10 times as "white" -- and all but pronouncing the entire team guilty of "abhorrent sexual assault, verbal racial violence, and drunken white, male privilege" against a "black woman who their violence and raucous witness injured for life."
For such conduct, the official Vanderbilt Register admiringly characterized Baker as Duke's "leading dissident voice" about the administration's handling of the rape allegations.
In June 2006, Baker falsely suggested that Duke lacrosse players had raped other women. In a pervasively ugly response to a polite e-mail from the mother of a Duke lacrosse player, he called the team "a scummy bunch of white males" and the woman the "mother of a 'farm animal.' "
In 2007, Cornell proudly lured another of the 88, Grant Farred, with a joint appointment in African studies and English.
This, after the following events: In September 2006 and before, Farred produced such faux scholarship as a nonsensical monograph portraying Yao Ming, the Houston Rockets' Chinese center, as representing "the most profound threat to American empire." In October 2006, Farred accused hundreds of Duke students of "secret racism" for registering to vote against Nifong, who was subsequently disbarred for railroading the indicted lacrosse players. In April 2007, North Carolina Attorney General Roy Cooper declared the players innocent. Then Farred smeared them again, as racists and perjurers.
Cornell elevated Farred this year to director of graduate studies in the African-American studies department.
Also in 2007, Chicago gave an endowed chair to Charles Payne, who as Duke's chairman of African and African-American studies had inappropriately authorized use of university funds to pay for the Group of 88 ad.
The fact that these five people of questionable judgment have subsequently won glorification by Duke or advancement to other prestigious positions may reflect the interaction of academia's demand for more "diversity" with the small supply of aspiring black professors who are well credentialed in traditional disciplines. These factors, amplified by politically correct ideology, have advanced many academics who -- unlike most African-Americans -- are obsessed with grievances rooted more in our history of slavery and racial oppression than in contemporary reality.
Try imagining a white male professor who had smeared innocent black students enjoying a similar path of advancement in academia today.
This author ought to have mentioned the horrific child-abuse scandal, keyword “Duke child Lombard”
“....with a joint appointment in African studies and English.”
the reimbursement for “joint appointment” is a paycheck for EACH appointment in the university setting. The fact that Cornell University tuition is $38000/yr..and that these students are debt-ridden to be “taught” his brand of nonsense..that in no way, shape, or form will ever earn them more than Burger King wages is something IMHO, pretty close to what the banking/finance industry was doing with Liar Loans
This rot is tolerated because conservatives are mired in the sports cult.
And, as an aside, it doesn’t surprise me that the party of segregation is now the same party of modern American apartheid.
Universities shouldn't even have policies concerning conduct that falls under state and federal criminal laws. These stupid "conduct" policies just provide politically correct half-wits a platform from which to impose their nitwittery upon the students.
To these folks the actual culpability of the accused is irrelevant. The purpose of a trial, in their minds, is not to determine guilt or innocence, it is to serve as a morality play in which the victim or oppressor status of groups are displayed. If innocent men go to jail as a result, that's just fine. They are guilty anyway because other white men in the past got away with oppression.
Luckily the white students in this case had the resources to defend themselves. It makes on wonder how many less well positioned white males have been railroaded on the presumption of guilty.
They harass White males, but will always welcome a certain number of them for their money. White males pay full tuition while others pay less thanks to the White males.
Redistribution of income in action.
And for that matter, males of any description or position...
All of these so called prestige universities recruit from the east coast ivy league left. One isn’t even safe in Durham, anymore.
White males are personna non grata on campus.
Meanwhile, the serious schools who make a conscious effort to avoid this malady will attract students interested in serious, marketable discliplines like engineering, math and the hard sciences.
Those white males are TARDS!
It isn't clear in the context of Taylor's piece, but the 'farm animal' email was late on Dec 31, 2006, after all had been revealed. After the NC State Bar had filed on Nifong.
It sounded like ol' Houston was in his cups, and couldn't help but reveal how he really felt.
Who will then return to their homes in Mumbai and Beijing.
Lower standard of admissions
Lower costs of education via financial aid and grants
Easy coddled, Marxist-inspired majors
Protected college policies and purposely segregated clubs, associations and organizations, typically funded by the school
Easier entry into graduate or professional schools
Preferred entry into the workforce
Effectively un-fireable upon hiring and employer under constant scrutiny of not advancing or increasing the pay of the aforementioned under contant threat of litigation
And, top top it all off, a mainstream media that refuses to show anything unbecoming of anyone of a certain ethnicity(ies)
What a crock, and people wonder why logical people hate the lie of political correctness?
Who would rape a Duke woman?
Carolina is just down the street
The child sex abuse/incest/rape case is a County issue not a Duke issue.
It doesn’t get much play because it doesn’t fit the paradigm. But. The various “innocence projects” use DNA and other newly available evidence to re-examine convictions. By far the most common conviction overturned is rape.
To be fair, this is at leaast partly because DNA evidence is more likely to be available. But it does make you wonder.
Sounds like a few cases of industrial strength DukeLax is needed to flush out the crap listed here.
At least 88 doses.
I don’t think you meant to direct that to me, but there is a recent case of a Duke admin employee adopting an AA child and offering him up for sex on the internet.
Thanks for the sonar, abb!
I meant to mention - welcome to FReerepublic, btw.
I’ve read pieces from retired police officers and detectives that indicate that as many as forty to fifty percent of rape charges filed at police stations across the country are in fact false accusations.
In all likelihood, this white male professorate is collectively projecting their individual aggressive sexual fantasies toward the co-eds in their charge.
This is almost a certainty. Distance learning a la The University of Phoenix will displace traditional colleges. Customizable, valuable courses that end in vocation. Immediate update to curricula. The textbook racket is over (the Kindle will do that anyway). Heck, even sports teams will exist, with students using league-approved avatars. No steroids, no phony "student athletes" facade and hoepfully the death or dramatic overhaul of the NCAA. These online communities will be augmented by local clubs that will provide an outlet for social networking and certain extracurriculars (even dating).
And why not? The cost for upper education is absurd and modern universities breed elitism (overwhelmingly characterized by strident liberalism). Tenure is a cancer in that it suspends accountability.
This will happen in my lifetime and I am 50.
I’d value a MIT or Caltec degree over an Ivy at this point
Who will then return to their homes in Mumbai and Beijing.
Because there is no work of the sort they are trained for in America any more.
You might think that a university whose students were victims of the most notorious fraudulent rape claim in recent history, and whose professors -- 88 of them -- signed an ad implicitly presuming guilt, and whose president came close to doing the same would have learned some lessons. The facts are otherwise.Thanks neverdem.
Be kind. The news that Saab is being put to sleep has left most Duke professors suicidal.
If sports are so damn important to the college's prestige, they should pay the players and contract with the NFL, NBA, NHL, etc. to provide farm teams.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.