Woman Swears ‘I Wasn’t Raped,’ University Kicks Out Male Student Anyway

[Esquilax]

Yes

In this case this man was unfairly persecuted by a Nazi like Feminist movement if the story the OP posted is indeed accurate.

I feel like you don't have an amazing grasp of what the Nazis used to do, Drich.

There's such an easy solution to every single case like this:

1) Universities make it a policy (if they haven't already) to kick out students who are convicted of various crimes by a court of law.
2) Universities stop doing internal investigations of crimes and leave that to the proper authorities.

Seriously, it's that easy. There is no reason for a university to be involved at any stage of this until one of their students is actually convicted of a crime. Innocent until proven guilty is something universities teach in law courses, and it's something they should start actually honoring.

In an ideal world, you'd have a point. In the world we live in, where huge backlogs of rape kits exist and sometimes get ignored for years, with that practice being justified with "well, most rape cases are fake anyway," then you kinda need a little more oomph. Honestly, I'm of the opinion that this is more than a one step process, so to speak; university policy and the way we interact with and talk about rape cases generally need to be changed. Like, this case in particular highlights a number of problem areas- it's evidently ridiculous on the face of it, but to attempt to extrapolate out from a single incident to invalidate feminism, as some in this thread have attempted, is equally ridiculous- but it gets increasingly hard to address them in the face of all this political maneuvering.

There is an extremely valid discussion to be had about the apparent lack of nuance in the Title IX investigation process here, given that it seems the student was suspended based on a momentary, accidental penetration that the woman didn't want until the guy put on a condom. But it becomes hard to have it when the first few comments want to leap directly to Nazis.

That said, I don't see how "innocent until proven guilty," is relevant to this case at all. Police routinely investigate people regarding criminal activity, and that doesn't come with a presumption of guilt, just a presumption of investigation. Even in this specific case, the suspension happened after the investigation turned up things that, within the context of the investigation protocols (which, again, I happen to think are ham-fisted and inaccurate in this instance) made him guilty. Discussing the merits of that verdict is one thing, but I see no reason to assume the verdict was made before the investigation.