The Abuse of Sexual Assault

The other day, I ran across this story in the sports pages. The sporting news often resembles the police blotter, so this is not a unique news item. I usually skip these stories, but something about it peaked peeked piqued my curiosity. The accused in this case is a college football player charged with “sexual assault” along with some other crimes. Like most people, I hear the word sexual assault and I think rape, but then I remember the mountain of rape hoaxes on the college campus and I’m immediately skeptical.

In this case, the player is charged with two counts of fourth degree sexual assault, crimes resulting from the cops trying to arrest him and underage drinking. Sandbagging is the standard procedure these days so even the smallest crime ends up in a litany of charges. Because cops and prosecutors are mostly incompetent, they use the sheer mass of the system to bludgeon those caught up in the system.  The idea is to bully the accused into taking a deal, which makes life easier for the cops and prosecutors.

Of course, the charge that will ruin the kid’s life is the sexual assault charge. Looking at the news story from when it happened, you get to see the absurdity of the charges. In Michigan, fourth degree sexual assault is basically aggressive touching, at least when it is between adults. It is always leveled at males, who get into some sort of beef with a female. Two fully clothed people on a city street are not engaging in anything sexual, but that does not matter. It is the go-to charge against young males in an altercation with a female.

Common law defined rape as unlawful intercourse by a man against a woman who is not his wife by force or threat and against her will. These days, rape is legally defined as unlawful intercourse against the will of the victim. In other words, the sex of the parties and the use of force are no longer relevant. Attempted rape, of course, is a failed attempt to commit rape. These are concepts that everyone understands, with deep roots in western legal tradition. They don’t require further explanation as the definitions are clear.

Assault is a bit different. Most people think of assault as physical contact where one person causes bodily harm to another. That’s not the legal definition of assault. In the law, assault is an intentional act by one person that creates an apprehension in another of an imminent harmful or offensive contact. Put another way, assault is when one person does something to cause another to think they are under threat of harm. What most people think of as assault, the law defines as battery, which is why you hear the phrase “assault and battery” in crime stories.

The point here is the law has had, for a very long time, a definition for forcible sex, assault and battery. A reasonable person, particularly someone on a jury, could review the facts and testimony and render a judgement. That should have been enough to cover what happened in this Michigan case and all others like it. Maybe the accused was threatening the woman and she had a reasonable concern for her safety. That’s assault. It is patently absurd to attach sex to it, raising the specter of rape in the minds of the public and a potential jury.

But that is where we find ourselves in the modern age. We have expanded the definition of a sex crime to include anything that may give a woman the blues. The lunatics in charge encourage young women on the college campus to scream “fourth degree sexual assault” whenever they feel bad about a random hookup, which they are encouraged to do by the same lunatics. Inevitably, these cases end up dismissed, but you still have the waste of money and the ruination of reputations.

The fact is, there is no such thing as a sexual assault. The law often conjures terms, from commonly understood words, that have meanings well outside of the component words. It is almost always a hangover from the past. In the case of “sexual assault” it is a modern attempt to alter the relationship between the sexes. When was the last time you heard a woman charged with sexual assault or a man charged when the victim is another man? The answer is most likely never as it almost rarely happens.

It is yet another example of how the Left carves out authoritarian safe spaces, so it can run wild against its enemies. The war on men would not get very far in a fair fight, because as Hitler said, there’s too much fraternizing with the enemy. The expansive use of the phrase “sexual assault” in the laws allows every deranged co-ed in America a free shot at a male that vexes them. It’s how the mentally unbalanced young woman at Columbia was indulged well past the point where it was clear she needed psychiatric help.

Rape is a very serious crime, which is why we send rapists away for long stretches in nasty prisons. Attempted rape should be similarly punished as we know that sex criminals can never be rehabilitated. This is where penal colonies make a lot of sense. Sexual assault, on the other hand, is a made up crime that is entirely political. It is a weapon used by deranged feminists and lazy cops to bludgeon young men for the crime of having a penis. It’s also why these cases have such a startling low conviction rate. It’s also why so many young women put themselves in dangerous situations.

That last bit is the worst result of the expansive use of sex crimes in the war between the sexes. Young women are led to believe the law is a force field around them, insulating them from their idiotic decisions. That leads young women to going out, getting knee-walking drunk with strange men and then waking up with regrets, if they are lucky. You can bet that some portion of the “rape” problem in Europe has something to do with unattached young woman staggering around wasted at all hours of the night.

For just about forever, humans understood that boys and girls were different, requiring different rules for both. Women need to take care to protect themselves from men and men need to take care of their women, so they are not assaulted by strange men. That is biological reality and the only way our species survives. The abuse of sexual assault is just one of many examples of what happens when the Assemblywomen becomes a law book, rather than a comedy.

42 thoughts on “The Abuse of Sexual Assault

  1. When was the last time I heard of a man accused of sexual assault on another man? The Milwaukee police officer who shot Sylville Smith was accused of sexual assault in October.

  2. This kind of thing seems to be getting a lot more attention as of late – but it has been going on for a LONG time. When I was in college more than 30 years ago, I spent a decent amount of time reading the “feminist” literature of the time – and you could see clearly the same type of anti-male-accuse-them-all-of-rape thing going on then – as is going on now.

    The seeds for what seems to be very prevalent now – was sown at least as far back as 30 years ago – and has it’s roots before that. Go read some Andrea Dworkin – and you’ll see where it originates from.

    Being informed about this stuff – definitely changed my way of thinking – and made me much more cautious and wary of relationships with females in general. There are certain types of women – that I steer well clear of. The false rape accusation charge thing is definitely real – I had a variant of it happen to me. I think women just have some sort of ‘natural’ tendency to throw around rape charges – and it has something to do with what seems to always end up at #1 in the list of female sexual fantasies.

    As far as the war of the sexes and fraternization thing – there seems to be a trend going on which I have just come across recently : MGTOW. Seems like more and more males are figuring out that getting too far involved with women can lead to some pretty disastrous consequences for their lives. Not sure how prevalent it is – but it’s out there enough to fill up at least a couple of Youtube channels.

  3. In regards to Germany this was a result of magical thinking. One he other hand the way Europeans have related to one another has been unchanged for thousands of years – the problem was conflating the two.

  4. On a tangential note, wait until men who identify as women (is this a trans-gendered male or female??) begin competing in what is now women-only sports events such as track and field, basketball, cycling, swimming, etc.,
    The femi-nazis will be in a pickle over this because if they object – and they will – they will be accused of homo/transgender-phobia.
    Even a “guy” that says he is a female can kick ass in a women’s event requiring speed, endurance and power. This was recently demonstrated in a elite women’s bike race in which some loser/also-ran “male” cyclist who identifies as a women, won a race in which he was the only born-male cyclist.
    This must have really pissed off the gals, especially considering that many gal elite cyclists (and basketball, soccer, etc females) are lesbos.

    Frankly, I can’t wait to see this really take off; it will be like Hitler’s Nazis vs Stalin’s Bolsheviks.

  5. The Obama administration mandated kangaroo courts for campus sexual encounters that women regretted. They weaponized Title IX and opened a Pandora’s Box that will likely never be closed.

  6. This is a true story. We know the guy in question. We’ve seen the court records and talked to the prosecutor.

    Our friend and a buddy were in their late teens. They were at a park with some younger girls, age 14 and 15. There was some beer and pot. They were doing the sort of horseplay young people do. Cops arrested both boys. One was charged on the pot and beer. Our friend was charged with sexual assault for touching one of the fully clothed girls on her breast. He was convicted. It was a misdemeanor. He did not serve any jail time, but did community service.

    He is in his mid 40s. He has to register as a sex offender every time that he moves. The cops use this as a way to throw him into jail when he forgets to register. He’s never had any other sexual offenses, just drugs. When we talked to the prosecutor, she said she had no idea how it would impact his life. She is willing to work with us to get this conviction cleared, so that he doesn’t have to register. She said the sex offender registry should only have people that could be a threat, not something minor like this. Of course, we need money to do this, and will likely work on it when we sell the house. It really is an abuse of the system, to have someone register for over 20 years for a misdemeanor offense.

  7. The missing element in your great article is mens rea. I remember back in the day I was taking some pre-law credits when the stalking era came to reality. The reasonable man standard would never pass any of these abuses of sexual assault charges if the mens rea requirement hadn’t been put away on the shelf of history. In order to profit politicians with pro women laws a chargeable crime had to be codified and stalking was the new cause. To seal the deal a man could be charged with stalking for as little as showing up at a public place the same time as the female victim. No other overt action required. The mens rea was taken for granted and all required was for the victim to feel threatened even if that emotion was totally ridiculous to a reasonable man/woman. Mens rea has never been taken off the shelf again. Ever since that insane policy was given the legislatures stamp of approval justice or innocence rests in the mind of the victim. Her thoughts or delusions cannot be known before hand nor disproved in court. Pray some day the wisdom of common law gets a new hearing.

    • Stepson had a court issued restraining order against his girlfriend. He went to get gas and she happened to work at the gas station. He really didn’t know she was working there. It’s a fairly small town. Of course, she said he was stalking her. The courts, decided not to pursue it, since he just paid for the gas and left.

  8. In the 80’s a family lawyer told me a wife could falsely claim abuse by her husband & have him removed from their home, allowing no contact with his wife or children, & to pay to fully support them in their accustomed lifestyle however impoverished that might leave him. The husband’s eviction would happen immediately with the man having no say in any short-term court proceedings. In the long term the man at great personal expense, which after paying her support he may not have, could appeal & present his side; however, family court would be stacked against him so that the mostly likely outcome would be a court confirmation of whatever accusations the wife submitted. That is, if a wife was prepared to lie, she could pretty much have her way in family court.

    Quite a number of articles have described the anti-male family court system. At least 1 & probably several books have been written on it. On article reported that many men sit in prison for refusing to pay child-support they consider unjust. A NYC man was ordered to pay child-support to his ex-wife living with another man who was the father of the child. So a cuckolded man lost his wife & the child thought his & must pay to support the child living with it’s natural parents. Another NYC man immolated himself outside a family court building following divorce proceedings, presumably to protest his treatment there.

    Our recent college sex-abuse against men increases the danger to men. All this may explain something I’ve only recently heard about on Youtube:

    MGTOW, pronounced “mig-tow.” It stands for Men Going Their Own Way. It’s new to me & I know little about it, how old, how popular, whether it is growing, a fad or much, but basically, men who’ve had enough. Whatever MGTOW’s history or future, I understand its appeal.

    • And we continue to lose the demographic battle. In fact, as fighting the battle with one hand tied behind us wasn’t enough, now we are in the process of binding up the other one.
      The Muslims have faith and fecundity going for them and are increasingly able to opt out of ‘Family Court’ in favor of Sharia.

      No, I don’t expect Trump to fix this one for us. I don’t know how it’s going to get ‘fixed’.

      • In sharia law , assault is a requirement . But there are no “progressive ” feminists that say a thing.

      • Thanks, Dan. I think I’ll order that one.

        My wife stormed out of the house and went missing for a week. The police came by and told me to prepare for the worst.

        So, I went to Goodwill & brought all her clothes back.

        [They learned to laugh in the USSR as well].

      • I was in court four years. One morning, waiting my turn along with several other cases, a motion for such and such was being presented by the ex-wife’s attorney for Dr. X’s failure to pay rather enormous monthly sums, but the Judge quickly ruled that he had in fact lived up to his agreement in transferring 40% of his income to her, and that as a fully employed transmission mechanic it could not be demonstrated that he was shirking his legal duties. The pews came alive in choked laughter.

        Then there was the fellow in Florida about twenty years ago who, after being ejected from his family and investigated for molesting his daughters, found the trio of investigators together at their place of work and killed them all. But most of us just take it, obviously.

        • The husband’s losses are not always 100% unfair, depending upon point of view. I had a wealthy Architect friend who divorced with a settlement his wife signed. She did well, but he retained significant assets & continued his high income practice with no further obligations to his ex-wife. With his new freedom, he developed a public reputation as a playboy cavorting with several young, pretty women (he & his ex-wife were probably mid-50’s). His wife took him to court demanding more money & whatever their settlement agreement he had to pay her atty fees & his. Rumor (only, no facts) was his young women made her very angry & she wanted to hurt him. The court ruled in his favor & she received no more money. She began doing that over & over, several times & always with the same result, she lost the case. Eventually, & I don’t know how many years & attempts later, the court finally told her enough, and issued an order she could never sue him again over the settlement. It cost him significantly more than he settled for because of his ex-wife’s several suits, but he remained well off & was a happy, fun guy, liked by nearly everyone, except, of course, his ex-wife.

    • Yes – start watching the videos. As a “movement” – it seems rather new as I just came across it myself.

      But as I said in the prior responses – I completely understand where they’re coming from as I took the red pill more than 30 years ago. I live in MA – this state has one of the worst as far as an anti-male court system.

      There have been cases (as you described) – where men were forced to pay for children that were not theirs – and were conceived thru cheating by the wife.

      I believe the man you’re referring to who immolated himself – was just north of me in NH.

  9. To make things worse, in the federal system, and in many state systems that are modeled on it, the traditional rules of evidence on character/past conduct evidence have been deliberately inverted in the case of sexual assault prosecutions.

    Under Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b), the prosecution is not permitted to introduce evidence of past similar crimes/conduct in order to show that, on the occasion in question, the defendant acted in accordance with that character. Thus it is not permissible for the prosecution to introduce evidence that the defendant committed a prior theft (or that the defendant has a reputation for thievery), for the sole purpose of arguing that, clearly he must have committed the theft in question (although evidence of past conduct can be introduced for other purposes).

    However, in sexual assault cases, the Violence Against Women Act (enacted under Clinton) created an exception.

    Rule 413 allows the prosecution to admit evidence of the defendant’s prior sexual assaults “on any matter to which it is relevant”, which thus allows the prosecution to introduce evidence of the defendant’s past sexual assaults in order to argue that he committed the sexual assault in question.

    Further, under Rule 404(a)(2), a defendant may introduce evidence of the victim’s character and past conduct, as evidence that the victim was the aggressor in the case in question, or as evidence that the victim is lying or unreliable. If the defendant does so, then the prosecution can respond in turn by introducing character evidence about the defendant. However, the prosecution (except in sexual assault cases) is not permitted to initiate the character evidence battle. The rules give the defendant the keys to determining whether or not to open up a character evidence phase of the trial.

    Given that, you would think that in sexual assault cases – though the prosecution is given the unique authority to initiate character evidence to the detriment of the defendant – at least the defendant could then respond by offering character evidence about the victim. But you would be wrong.

    Federal Rule of Evidence 412 disallows evidence of the victim’s past sexual behavior or past sexual predisposition. Thus while the prosecution is allowed to initiate evidence of the defendant’s past sexual misconduct, the defendant is not permitted to respond by introducing evidence of the victim’s sexual history or sexual conduct. For sexual assault cases, the normal structure is completely inverted.

    Thus, the Federal Rules of Evidence are premised on the notion that defendants should not be incriminated in court by reference to their past conduct.

    Except in sexual assault cases.

    And as to the character of the victim, which is ordinarily fair game for the defendant to present to the jury, juries are not permitted to hear about the victim’s past sexual escapades.

  10. Sort of on topic: attended with my wife a Christmas concert of Mannheim Steamroller at a large State University. My wife loves their music while I just endure it and consider it to be a husband’s duty as did the husband in the couple sitting next to us who like me never clapped. Lots of co-eds in attendance. Lots of them. So many were FAT, FAT, FAT, and moved in parcels of three or four. Not many by comparison of boys there. Wonder why?

    I can remember when I was in college 1959–63: girls were svelte, really. Big changes in half a century. Who would want to “assault” most of them?

    Dan Kurt

  11. There is a YouTube of an interview of college students and relationships between men and women students. The female students droned on and on about all aspects of the thing. The males refused to speak, and sat there mute. The interviewer asked the females, should the males choose to speak on the subject, would it be considered “mansplaining”. The females enthusiastically agreed. The males remained mute. End of interview. Higher education is finished, stick a fork in it.

  12. ” . . . unattached young woman staggering around wasted at all hours of the night. ”

    The waste of unattached young women HAS reached staggering proportions. Maybe Joe Biden could chair a commission to address this problem. ( I started to write we should put top men on the problem, but that would have been in very poor taste, wouldn’t it? )

  13. I can’t be sure, but it sounds like he is being charged with sexual assault based on his resistance to being arrested by female police officers. To me this raises the stakes in any interaction with female officers for the future. We already know that female officers are more likely to use deadly force, which has already raised the stakes. Once the criminal public and the public at large are aware of the fact that arrest by a woman might lead to multiplication of spurious charges, the lives of female officers will be at more risk and a further escalation of the problem can be expected to ensue.

  14. You’ll know America’s balkanization is complete– and the system has lost even vestigial legitimacy — when the pendulum swings the other way (as it will). She’s there on the stand, her face a rainbow of bruises, seventeen specialists testifying to horrific internal injuries, and the jury says “she got drunk and went home with a football player? And he’s black? Obviously a hoax. She regretted it, then slammed herself in a car door twenty times.” At which point we revert to the state of nature, and I for one hope the entire university “safety” apparatus is the first to enjoy it to the full.

    • I’m not sure it gets quite that bad, but I know if I’m on a jury I’m coming in as a skeptic. If we don’t have physical evidence of forcible sex, then I’m a really tough sell. I’m someone who think rape should carry a trip to the penal colony for life. It’s just that the abuse of “sexual assault” has reached a point where you can’t be too cynical.

      As is always the case, Progressive causes always end up destroying those they claim to be helping.

  15. Robert Stacy McCain has been blogging about this (also on what the scourge of feminism has done to the Western world) for years. A staunch defender of men and manhood.

    He is a former journalist and professor. Knows his shit.

    The womyn who bring these baseless charges against men should be counter-charged with hate-crimes (Alynsky rule: make the other side live up to their own rules and expectations).

    • We’re going to see a decline in these “campus tribunals” because the falsely-accused and slandered men (who are usually denied due process and the right to confront their accuser) have been taking these schools to court. in some cases they’ve been run off campus, and had these tribunals follow them to their new school to harass them there.

      These schools often have huge endowments, making them prime targets for defamation cases. The recent UVA fake rape scandal shows that these cases are VERY winnable.

      • That’s the interesting downstream element to the rape hoax stuff. The boys will begin suing the schools and winning. That puts the schools in an untenable position. The weird result is they will close down frats, but bring back single sex dorms.

        • Both of which would dramatically improve the educational impact of the schools. The Greek system serves no real value or purpose, and it’s sorting and grouping mechanisms would be quickly replaced by groups affiliated by field-of-study which would be a much more worthy and useful organizational structure on campus.

          • Yeah, because who needs freedom of association, right? Like most things at college/university, the value of the Greek system depends upon the effort put forth by the individual.

          • Having gone to Catholic schools, I did have too much exposure to the Greek life stuff. The frat guys I knew were all d-bags, but I’m told there are many good frats. My guess is the Greek system moves off-campus or dies off. Insurance costs are already killing them.

          • Females are taking over higher education both as students and as professors. Men are bowing out. If the gynocentrism continues – I can see male presence in higher education being drastically reduced. Which IMHO means that alternative methods of education will rise up – and the current system will begin to implode.

        • It’s deeper than that. As I posted in the earlier responses: I knew about this crap and recognized the trend more than 30 years ago when I was in school. You could see it very plainly forming up – and there were cases even back then. It affected my thinking the same way knowing that any type of person could cause you serious un-repairable harm – would affect any rational person’s thinking.

          This stuff has been permeating and seeping thru society for decades now – it has materially affected the way men and women interact with each other IMHO. The MGTOW thing I referred to earlier – is basically men doing an Atlas Shrugged – and bowing out of the game. Their premise is that men can survive without women – far easier than women can survive without men – and this applies across the board of human experience.

    • With title IX the schools get fined by the government if they don’t use the tribunals. They will probably continue to take thier chances with student lawsuits over government ones.

  16. It’s one of the reasons why the nevertrumpers tried “battery” against Trump’s advisor. It was completely phony, but, in our modern age it just doesn’t take that much. Borrowing a phrase about indictments in Texas, you can pretty easily charge a ham sandwich with “battery”. The case was ultimately tossed out, and the accuser revealed as a phony, and so nevertrump moved on to the next page in their playbook (taxes, I think)…and returned to sex later in the fall (nearly successfully, if not for Jim Comey).

    I have a son and two daughters. I worry about my girls growing up in a hyper-sexualized world where they are seen as targets. As I told my 16 year old, “Being a man I know what men are thinking”, and she needs to dress and carry herself appropriately. When I was a kid, I might have counted myself lucky should a friend happen to swipe a copy of Playboy from his dad’s nightstand. Today, much as we try to lock down the internet around the house, I know full well that my teenage son is aware of, and has watched, pornhub. I worry that he will grow up with a distorted and deranged view of women. So, we spend a fair amount of time in church, and teaching him how to act like a gentleman. I can’t stop the information flow, but my wife and I can demonstrate what a healthy and respectful relationship looks like.

    Much of the problem, as your column implies but does not explicitly say, is that we are raising a generation of boys not men, and a generation of sluts not women. That’s not to say the human impulses are somehow different today. The difference is that there is no brake on the behaviors. So, that dude in Michigan is a 10 year old boy in a young man’s body fighting with a woman instead of treating her with respect. (and, vice versa) I see it in some of the young students I teach, some as young as 5 or 6, who talk to their mom’s and to my female employees in highly disrespectful tones. There’s no respect. The only brake on the behavior is when I intervene.

    It’s not like their dad is going to.

    • I doubt women and men fighting is a new phenomenon or happening at a higher rate. The difference is simply that we’ve had 30 years of universities pushing out lunatics with degrees in activism getting more and more men prosecuted for smaller and smaller slights.

      As much as men are ingrained to believe our women are delicate flowers we probably need to face the fact that thier is a significant amount of lunacy that is quite vicious from the opposite sex and pretending that it’s everyone else’s fault they are acting that way isn’t going to cure it.

      • This is exactly what the MGTOW stuff I’ve seen is saying: women are far from being delicate flowers – and are in fact pretty deceitful and uncaring. It’s going to get called misogyny – but if you listen to their claims – it makes a lot of sense to me – after 52 years of being exposed to females.

    • Started out pretty well, until the obligatory man-bashing. No woman is inherently deserving of any iota of respect by virtue of her genitalia, it must be earned.

      What you have failed to realize is that in every society, men simply respond to women. To the teachings and values of their mothers, the people who raise them, and the values of their future mates. No one needs to be a “gentleman” to get the loose women we have these days, so no one is, period. Why waste the effort?

      In the traditionalist model, women are “heavily encouraged” to pretend to be better than they actually are. By acting the lady, avoiding promiscuity, putting breaks on their naturally disgusting behavioral inclinations such as hyper-gamy, for example. Boys then look around to perceive these ladies and respond to it, by turning into what you call gentlemen.

      Today we look around, for better or worse, to see that all the ladies are gone and there are only sluts. Why is anyone surprised, or dismayed, to see that no one is willing to act the gentleman to the slut? Sure, there are still some “good” women here and there, but we both know that the ratio is such that it I may as well default to slut meeting mode. Innocents will suffer, yes, but there are always innocents whenever efficiency is concerned. The world is like that.

Comments are closed.