How Obama causes male persecution

A commenter asks about hte relation between college rape policies and the Obama administration. This 2011 story explains it:

Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. and Education Secretary Arne Duncan will announce on Monday a set of thorough guidelines for how schools and colleges should respond to allegations of sexual assault. Among them are that institutions should consider such allegations under the "more likely than not" standard of evidence, rather than the stricter "clear and convincing" standard that some now use.

The guidance comes in the form of a "Dear Colleague" letter from the Education Department's Office for Civil Rights designed to clarify Title IX regulations. The letter provides a detailed overview of institutions' existing responsibilities under Title IX when dealing with complaints of sexual harassment and sexual violence. ...

The letter includes other specific examples of what institutions can and cannot do under Title IX. For example, "mediation is not appropriate even on a voluntary basis" between a victim and alleged perpetrator, says the letter. Institutions are also responsible for taking the proper "interim steps" to protect victims, such as moving the alleged victim or perpetrator to a new class or a different residence hall, providing counseling services to the complainant, or prohibiting the accused student from attending class for a period of time. ...

The letter also states that in order for a college's or school's grievance procedures to be consistent with Title IX standards, the institution "must use a preponderance-of-the-evidence standard (i.e., it is more likely than not that sexual harassment or violence occurred)." That is the standard of proof established for violations of civil-rights laws, the letter notes, and therefore is "the appropriate standard for investigating allegations of sexual harassment or violence."

Grievance procedures that use the stricter "'clear and convincing' standard (i.e., it is highly probable or reasonably certain that the sexual harassment or violence occurred)" are not equitable under Title IX, it says.

The problem with this is that rape is a crime. If the college learns of a rape allegation, it should just turn the matter over to the police, as they are much better equipped to handle crimes.

Instead the college is expected to quiz the boy and girl, and if the girl is 51% believable, then declare the boy a rapist and take away his diploma or mete out whatever other punishment it can.

As I believe in innocent-until-proven-guilty, this is a very bad idea. Pres. Barack Obama is the most ideologically opposed to male justice of any President in recent years.

The issue goes to the heart of the legal distinction between civil and criminal cases. A civil case is usually a lawsuit between two private parties, and the court remedy is to require one to pay the other some money, based on a preponderance of the evidence. A criminal case is where the state tries to put a perp in jail, and guilt beyond reasonable doubt must be proved to the court.

Mediation is appropriate in civil cases, but not criminal cases. A civil case is just a dispute over money, so if the parties can agree to split it, so much the better. But a criminal needs to be locked up for the good of society, regardless of whether the victim wants it or not. In a statutory rape case, for example, the victim's opinion is irrelevant.

When the Obama requirements say that mediation is inappropriate, they are targeting criminal cases. But they want the college boy to be found guilty, without proof. So Obama is quite deliberately mixing up civil and criminal cases for maximum persecution of college boys being accused of a crime.

To see what kind of legal morass the Obama administration has led us into, NPR Radio reported yesterday:

The trend now, and what the White House recommended in its recent guidance to colleges, is toward what's called "affirmative consent." In other words, instead of the old "no means no," the idea now is that only "yes means yes."

But even that still leaves room for interpretation — or misinterpretation — since "yes" can be expressed nonverbally. ...

Some schools have tried to avoid the ambiguity by mandating that students get explicit verbal permission before making any sexual advance. (The only way around the rule is if students have a prior verbal agreement to use a pre-arranged hand signal.)

"It's on them to say, 'Can I do this?' And the person has to respond verbally, 'Yes.' And if they don't, it's considered nonconsent, and that's a violation of our policy," says Louise Smith, dean of community life at Antioch College.

Smith says consent by Antioch's definition has to be clear and enthusiastic. "I guess so" wouldn't cut it. Also, the Antioch definition says consent must be continually renewed each time things escalate to "each new level of sexual activity."

This sounds like a joke, but it is not. Thanks, Barack. My guess is that Michelle was the sexual aggressor when they were dating.

Here is Obama's Fathers Day address and proclamation.

AP reports:

The restless president, who has compared himself to a caged animal on recent wanderings by declaring the "bear is loose," took a long Father's Day weekend away with his wife and older daughter.

The visit to the desert resort area of Palm Springs is one of the ways Obama has been trying to escape during his sixth year cloistered in the White House.

That is pitiful. Oh well, I guess I should be happy that he has quit using Fathers Day as an excuse to bash dads. He does use it to promote a feminist agenda, and argues for laws requiring women to be paid more, saying "that benefits men too." Sigh. Has he ever done anything to benefit men?