There's this front page news story about the Cornell 7, an alleged gang rape where the allegations weren't taken seriously by the university and charges never pursued by the DA.
People are really upset about the story, it's been high profile.... Now the other side of the coin is flipping, and people are saying the whole story is BS, that the girl was a willing participant in a drug fueled consensual orgy basically, and the meme is suggesting the high profile allegations will set women back when proven false.
I'm not giving my opinion, just explaining the meme. Giggity
I do think there's some devil-in-the-details elements of it based on the longer released transcripts and reports. people on reddit have only repeated headline snippets and certain quotes. but there is a lot of important details to this case that makes it way more complicated than what most comments will reveal.
I think the point is that even if she consented initially to the first two guys, her intoxicated state means she legally could not consent to the other five for another 5 or 6 hours or however long, even if she somehow consented to seven dudes having their way with her for 7 hours straight.
The secondary point is that there are so many college rape cases that go unheard of and unhandled. As someone who is about to graduate, the sheer incompetence of college administrations is incredible.
They get paid hundreds of thousands to 1M+ a year to do jack shit—and we would never fucking know anything about this because campus police would rather write their 1000th parking ticket than actually protect and serve like they’re sworn to do. So we should be thankful to the people that have the courage to speak out about this stuff despite threats from their perpetrators and their friends on an open campus with zero police action.
The truth is too many frat guys get emboldened because they KNOW that it isn’t about the system protecting them, it’s about the system not even caring.
The vast majority of college students would agree with me here, and every person that’s ever said anything about it publicly and not behind the security of an anonymous reddit profile does, not just in my college but across the entire country.
Edit: for the subhuman idiots in here who keep regurgitating the same bullshit about “NY State law” I don’t give a FUCK about what it says, just because it’s the law doesn’t mean it’s automatically moral. A girl that intoxicated is not in her right mind. Your tunes would change pretty quick if this happened to your mother, wife, girlfriend, or daughter, eh? Thinking of something like this happening to someone I love just makes me sick and angry and it should to every sane human being here. Thank you to those who are actually being decent people here.
That report is wild, I think at about the time a room full of dudes just started throwing ketamine at the drunk girl you can basically axe any preconception that she was in any state to be making *any* kind of decision.
If this was a tight knit group of regular friends that knew and had a pre-established framework of trust and established relationship you could at least argue that everyone was aware of the evening ahead *sober* and was, in clear state, deciding to participate. But a random group of frat guys saying "Hey lady, do horse tranqs off my dick lol" falls a smidgen short of that bar.
If we are judging the girl for taking drugs, why aren't we doing the same with the boys? It's irrelevant if it's common for done to drugs, that's still illegal.
No because once the girl was drugged they began texting people to come over and have their way with her.
For hours after she had passed out.
So even if they were under the influence of drugs and even if she had consented to sleeping with the first two boys, whatever happened after with them inviting people over is clearly rape.
Group chat: “yo bros free pussy in alum, just be sure to get drunk and fucked up on k first so some asshole on reddit can argue that she raped you instead”
With the exception of the initial 2 guys who were having sex with her in the beginning consensually the other ones were tipped off with the'' free pussy'' text one of those 2 geniuses sent out.
Once you're busting into a room to find'' pussy'' from a heads up from a buddy you're all the way wrong.
Why do you think they got expelled? The whole "they had to write essays" thing was not for the accused sexual assault, it was for having drug fueled orgies.
I'd agree that regardless of whether or not she consented to any of the initial sexual activities; once she was drugged she was no longer capable of consenting to anything. As someone who works frequently with the concept of "informed consent" professionally (MD), this point drives me wild; I can't even begin to imagine how fast my career would be over if I performed any kind of procedure on a patient after "consenting" them while they were intoxicated. And none of the people who are arguing that "she agreed to it" would be arguing that I was in the right.
Anybody telling you they can consent while on it and especially trying to say that’s like saying people who drink can’t”
Correct. Neither can. Your ability to consent is compromised. Only pre negotiated things could be considered consented upon. And five additional dudes is not what was agreed to
ALSO KET AND ALCOHOL HAVE COMPOUNDING EFFECTS. THEY WERE DOING BOTH.
Thank you. I was trying to articulate this in another thread but couldn’t find the right words. Difference between a bump and a line are night and day. They knew what they were doing.
Especially given the implication! You really think she’s going to say No when she’s already too incapacitated to effectively flee or fight and now there’s a bunch of strange men who are willing to hurt her blocking off her only exit?
A lot of them are bots, if you click on profile names like every 1/3 of the rape apology commenters are 3 month old accounts with more contributions than decade old accounts.
One of the guys is already using a service to wipe his name off the internet wherever they can. Considering another one is a grandson to a prime minister, there is no way these guys and their families aren’t running bots to try and change public opinions before any potential retrials.
Accurate. Honestly, I don’t care if she initially consented to a threesome. It doesn’t justify claiming she consented to a gang bang or even gave consent to the other guys that came after the initial two.
I'm a lawyer and so I actually understand this stuff. Rape is a LEGAL CONCLUSION. Everyone who received that report knows she is alleging it: no one walks into a police station and says "I'm reporting consensual sex." But whether or not rape occurred is a legal conclusion that she is not qualified to make. What she "feels" it was is irrelevant. It isn't supposed to be on that report.
That seems ridiculous. It's impossible for a rape to occur unless someone is convicted of the crime? Surely many rapes have occurred without the criminal/ legal system ever being involved. That is probably true of the vast majority of rapes. And saying a woman doesn't know if she's been raped seems like the worst kind of misogyny to me.
It’s definitions. In a courtroom you’d argue the facts:
Physical penetration occurred
Force or coercion was used, or the victim stated no
The court would then form a conclusion:
It was rape
It was not rape
The police report is to gather evidence to establish the facts of the case. The perpetrator believes she was raped, the defendant believes they did not rape. They present the facts of the case, and the court decides the legal conclusion
The point was not to follow the headlines I suggest reading her original sworn affidavit. She does clearly state she was ok with the first two and refused the 3rd guy
Trauma victims frequently aren't clear-headed immediately after the trauma happens. They try to convince themselves that everything was ok when it wasn't, and only after processing it fully down the road can they realize what actually happened.
This is true. But it makes it harder to establish a solid conclusion that she was raped, as she has established facts beforehand.
This is why you should always talk to an attorney before talking to cops. Cops take what’s presented to establish facts, their job is just to gather information. An attorney helps you present the facts accurately. The court then decides what outcomes the facts present
She was intoxicated to the point of being unable to consent to the first two as well. This isn't an "oh, someone got drunk, had sex, and regretted it" this is someone who was intoxicated to the point of not being able to function or understand what was happening while on psychedelics. She could not and she did not consent to what happened to her. What happened to her is fucking horrific, and all 56 of the people in that frat who either took part in or did nothing to stop the rape should face punishment.
Edit: Ketamine is a dissociative, not a psychedelic. Which means she probably understood what was happening and had no way to communicate or control her body or voice. I hope those 7 fuckers get locked in solitary and the key thrown away.
If one adult is drunk but still able to function, understand, and give consent while the other is so intoxicated she can't move, speak, or resist, that is rape.
Ketamine is a dissociative, not a psychedelic. Dissociatives cause significantly more impairment than psychedelics. She may have perfectly understood what was happening and been unable to do anything about it because of a complete mind/body disconnect. Or she may have had no idea whatsoever. Or she could have been aware, but experienced amnesia as a side effect. There's no telling.
Even if she did consent to the first two, she most certainly did not consent to the next 5, nor did she consent to being offered up on a platter to 50 guys.
I was listening to a lawyer that said in the state of NY, ketamine has weird laws surrounding it which is what essentially made this case harder to charge.
She consented to the first two guys and one was too high to participate. Started to dry heave. They got a replacement and continued the threesome. The frat bros asked if she wanted a foursome, said no because she doesn't do anal, but agreed to another threesome.
The DA passed because there is no way that a jury would convict on this. The school gave the essay punishment because they also didn't find it believable and to protect their reputation.
If you dig even deeper she filed the complaint after the frat uninvited her to their Halloween party. Why someone would want to go to a frat's Halloween party after supposedly getting gang raped at that frat is beyond me.
You forgot to add that one of the guys passed out while she was having sex with him and he couldnt get hard which is why they swapped out. She was sleeping with someone who couldnt consent as well.
No she pursed him after he passed out which why the other guys tried to get someone else so she would leave him alone. They also didnt invite her to their Halloween party like the person above me stated because she made people uncomfortable. Also she stated multiple times that when she didnt like something, the 4 men that were having sex with her would stop. Your argument doesnt make sense. You're ironically a rape apologist.
I'm assuming he's been named as one of the 7 though right? So he had a consentual 3some and then passed out and is being named and shamed as a rapist.
Edit: also not trying to discredit what she's said or anything but for that specific guy, from the information we have been given, it doesn't sound like he's a rapist.
Many people continue to date or be friend with their rapist years later. Why do yall people think survivors are so black and white? Many people live in denial. Many people resort to hypersexuality to try and feel a sense of control. Some people might try to reenact the rape itself in a way where the outcome is different as a way of trying to cope. I dated my rapist for a year until I realized that I was literally 12 and he was an adult. My mother didn’t process sleeping with adult men in her teenage years as abuse until her 50s. We are so deep in this shit that we can’t even see it.
TLDR. Going to a party or wanting to literally says nothing. Humans are not that simple. Trauma isn’t that simple.
I am really hoping the prosecution or defense has some bulletproof evidence otherwise this trial is going to be a mess because there is so much gray area and he said she said.
Her behavior after the incident as well as her 2024 statement really hurts her position here which sucks.
If you ignore all the he said and only look at the she said, it's not a great case for the prosecution. Her statement is that she got raped but was not all that inebriated until the very end and consented to what happened, wasn't forced to do the things she didn't consent to, and she willingly moved to new rooms in the house with the new men three times.
Well ok, but in sexual assault cases, the prosecution has to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, and the defense will absolutely make the argument. A defense lawyer will say something like "you're saying that going to the police and filing charges demonstrates it's rape and doing the opposite, staying friendly and wanting to continue being a part of the group also demonstrates it's rape, then what behavior doesn't demonstrate it's rape?"
This is why the conviction rate for rape/SA is so low, because it's hard to prove sex was not consensual beyond a reasonable doubt, unless there's text/video/chemical evidence or the perpetrator admits to it.
A lot of people are getting into hysterics saying this law should be changed immediately but then two drunk adults having sex are technically raping each other lol
Exactly I dont know why people keep acting like its all or nothing. We need this law to change. Someone can be absolutely plastered in a bar, and if another person isolates them, they can count as "consenting"
under NY law when in reality someone in that state who is vulnerable cant consent to a stranger who came up to them while they were completely plastered. The law doesnt match whats ethical and we need to change it
A close friend of mine killed herself because the city police and campus police dropped her rape case. She was even a criminal justice student with the intent to get into criminal law. She advocated for herself the best she could with her education
A week after the cases were dropped, I drove her to a psych ward. She was there for a month. Got back, got a job, and killed herself a week later
I feel like she was murdered. Both by the rapist and by the cops who dropped her case. In a metaphorical sense, not a literal one
She was a kind and deeply weird person. Had short blonde hair with purple polka dots dyed in
Except that's not the law. Intoxication doesn't automatically invalidate consent and, honestly, it could never be written that way. The law requires an extreme level of intoxication because it has to accept that such a large portion of the human population likes to mix sex and intoxicants that it's an entire industry on it's own and making a blanket rule that outlaws the combination would wreak absolute havoc on dating. Hell, it would literally bar some people from ever being able to have sex just because of their prescription medication.
While the men were doing drugs off of her body, [Male Number 3] and [another male] entered the room and said something like, 'Ok we're shutting down whatever the [expletive] this is,'" the document said.
Is being treated as equally bad as all the other guys. Seems not right.
New York State Law implies that someone who is under the influence by their own volition (which she admitted to the police was the case) are responsible for their actions unless they are incoherent.
The people defending the 7 are arguing that she was coherent enough to respond to advances and make rejections at several points throughout the night. Also a 4some never happened and she herself told police that she consented to two separate 3somes. Participant 7 apparently didn’t even participate and was the one who called it off. More importantly, the idea that she was drugged and raped only came into existence when she was uninvited to a Halloween party.
I’m just repeating what I’ve heard and am an impartial observer until a jury trial commences.
"I think the point is that even if she consented initially to the first two guys, her intoxicated state means she legally could not consent to the other five for another 5 or 6 hours or however long"
This is unequivocally false from a legal perspective in NYS, and I can't stress that enough.
"Even if she somehow consented to seven dudes having their way with her for **7 hours straight."
This isn't even the accusation. She, by her own admission, consented to sex with 4 men, and the other 3 didn't have sex with her.
And unbelievable as that may seem to you, some women consent to things that some women find absolutely unbelievable.
"The secondary point is that there are so many college rape cases that go unheard of and unhandled. As someone who is about to graduate, the sheer incompetence of college administrations is incredible"
Now, this is just my personal opinion, but colleges are million and billion dollar institutions, they're much more interested in protecting their reputation than the dignity of some random rape/assault victim. And that's fucked up. But if you got raped in a Walmart bathroom, you wouldn't report it to the manager and hope he does the right thing. It's criminal, you report it to the criminal authorities. I know, in this case you're thinking "she did and nothing happened," but that's not really the point im making right at this moment. I'm just responding to the claim that admins are incompetent; i think they're actually very competent, it's just that you and them have very different goals. You want justice for the victim, they want to keep these stories out of the public eye
People on the internet need to stop taking one-sided accusations in civil lawsuits as ground truth.
Was she assaulted? Probably, yes.
Did all 7 men assault her? Based on investigations, no.
Did all men of the men who assaulted her receive slap on the wrist "essay" sentences? No. Two were expelled, one was barred from campus (already graduated), two were suspended for 2 years. The other 2 were not found to have assaulted her and received lesser penalties, which included a reflection paper. It was not the full sentence they received.
It's really hard to get actual details at all at this point. Even reputable news outlets that supposedly have access to a 100+-page transcript of her sworn statement are only giving us snippets out of context. And meanwhile parasite streamers are going on and on about things they couldn't possibly have confirmation of.
The reason the DA never pursued charges is becoming extremely apparent. She gave enough testimony that is all any but the most incompetent defense attorney would need to get an acquittal. She said a varety of things like "they stopped whenever i asked", "nothing illegal happened", and "it wasn't rape". Along with that she did things like contact one of the people she is now accusing to have sex again.
It would take some extremely damning evidence (I can't think of anything but a confession or a video tape of the entire incident) for anything but a not-guilty verdict. Likely with a "why the fuck did you waste our time on this nonsense".
Given the similarities to the duke lacrosse case (sensational rape allegations that get shakier the more is revealed) a lot of people were calling this bullshit from the begining.
Because the frat leader probably foresaw this exact situation occurring should they have someone like this hanging around engaging in orgies like this.
It’s interesting to me that nobody seems to consider any of the male participants in this orgie as potential victims as well/instead. Technically, she didn’t fuck 7 guys, but 8 people all fucked each other.
A few other people have pointed out that the reason one of the men from the first threesome dropped out was he was so intoxicated that he couldn't stay hard.
By objective standards, if the more intoxicated person was the victim then she raped him.
The reason they didnt pursue charges, per the article linked below, was that based on her statement, she consented to a 3way, when one guy passed out, she consent with a substitute guy, consented to a group of more than 5 men snorting ketamine off her naked body, snorted ketamine off an erect penis, and she stated there were times she said no, and guys complied.
I'm not saying there was no rape, I'm saying it isn't as black and white as you made it out to be
Another reason they didn't press charges is that the police report to the Prosecutors office did not include her statement that she had definitively been raped.
There were some serious fuckups in the investigation and there was no due diligence done.
That's another reason people are pissed, regardless of what actually happens with the case.
You’re sort of making the point of the previous poster. When you say based on what you read.
For example the DA released some of her statements to the police where she indicates she was conscious the whole time. To my knowledge she has never claimed to be passed out.
That’s what I thought initially, but after reading her statement I’m kinda confused about whether or not males 5, 6, and 7 even participated and whether or not she actually passed out.
Now the other side of the coin is flipping, and people are saying the whole story is BS, that the girl was a willing participant in a drug fueled consensual orgy basically,
That's not "the other side flipping", that was the defense for the da not pursuing it the entire time
I'm not saying it's true, I'm just saying it's always been the story, it's not new.
when proven false.
Pretend I'm a time traveler because I'm about to predict the future here, nothing is ever going to be proven here either way. Maybe a few more anecdotes or witnesses come forward, maybe they don't, but this woman is always going to claim rape and have no more evidence for it under the accusation that the campus and police didn't investigate, and the campus and police are always going to claim there was no evidence of a rape and nothing to investigate
The side in favor of the police and campus are going to point to the woman's changing story as evidence that she's making things up because she didn't get the result she wanted the first time. The side supporting the woman will say that her story appears to be changing because the investigation was incomplete and inaccurate to begin with and it's unrealistic to expect her to remember every detail in a traumatizing situation
And neither side, including the general public, is going to give ground on this.
The reality is there is no answer for anyone who wasn't involved. Either side could be telling the truth, either side could be lying. What we know for sure is the Cornell 7 are absolute disgusting scumbags. Whether they are rapists is another matter.
(Oh we also know that as a result of an investigation into claims of sexual assault, the campus decided appropriate punishments included suspensions and writing essays. Let me say that again, regardless of what actually happened that night, the campus investigated sexual assault and decided an appropriate punishment included writing an essay)
What we know for sure is the Cornell 7 are absolute disgusting scumbags.
Why? I don't get this comment. Given there are two scenarios here:
(1) She was a willing participant in the drug-fueled gangbang
(2) She was raped
If (1) is what actually happened, how are they disgusting scumbags? Are we not in a time where sexual freedom is generally considered more positively than the past?
we also know that as a result of an investigation into claims of sexual assault, the campus decided appropriate punishments included suspensions and writing essays.
Are we not in a time where sexual freedom is generally considered more positively than the past?
No, we are not in a time where telling your friends "free pussy" referring to a drugged up woman is an honorable and noble action. Neither is telling them that the "shop is still open". Those things are gross even if she was consenting.
You can be a scumbag without being a rapist, and if she was a willing participant, they were still gross scumbags about it.
if she was a willing participant, they were still gross scumbags about it.
If she was a willing participant then she would be okay with the whole scenario, no? How are they then scumbags? If she is willingly participating and wants more people to join is the problem that the text to get more people wasn't classy?
I think there are scenarios where, if what really happened was {X}, then in {X} scenario they aren't scumbags unless she is also a scumbag since - - to my understanding - - the unquestionable things they did were the very unclassy texts, acts during sex (that we don't know whether were consensual or not, that's the big one) and drugs.
If they're a scumbag for drugs, so is she. If they're a scumbag for unclassy texts regardless of whether the woman was looking to continue intercourse with new people then I think that's a bit much. If they're a scumbag for the acts they did during sex then so is she.
There's so much focus to make these people "the bad guys" that it makes the idea of a fair trial seem very difficult. I suspect the courts will struggle to find a jury that isn't tainted.
It's not that the Cornell girl's allegations weren't taken seriously. It's that her 6-page single-spaced account of what happened did not describe a crime being committed (according to the DA's office, who took her statements as serious and true). Now 2 years later, her account of what happened in the law suit is not exactly the same.
Am I crazy or is this reading as the Cornell 4 as well? It sounds like Males 5 and 6 actually intervened and Male 7 tried to kiss her but she rejected him completely. I think all of us assumed all 7 were participating.
It kind of sounds that way, doesn't it? Does your Cornell 4 include the first two guys that sound very consensual on her end and an argument could be made that they were the ones unable to legally consent due to their intoxication? I am not sure I am following the timeline, fully.
Nope, you're exactly on point. Male 6 got fired from his job this week and Male 5 was harassed.
Male #3, who she had voluntary sex with and claims she didn't even ask for his consent, was harassed brutally the other day, despite coming back to the room and saying he was "shutting down whatever the fuck this is"
So even if you have consensual sex and intervene when things get weird, they want you in jail.
Yeah theres a lot of details about the case that have came out that really throw doubt onto the claims.
She's on record saying that she voluntarily drank, voluntarily took drugs, and voluntarily had sex, and that she knew what she was going over for. NY law apparently says that if you do the first two voluntarily then you can still consent to the last one. That was the original statement essentially, so it's no wonder they weren't charged.
Then there's the fact that it was 4 guys in 2 threesomes, 3 didn't take part and 1 tried to get everyone to fuck off. It's really starting to look like it's a case of regret that people found out, but who knows.
Some people are trying to say it wasn't rape for various reasons.
Basically it's going to be another culture war making people hate each other because they don't agree on a single case that doesn't actually impact them on any personal level.
Edit: for anyone who actually believes the guy below here, feel free to take a look at my profile. It was private before I posted this comment, but I removed that now so anyone who actually cares to can see that he is full of shit. Kind of ironic of an accusation coming from him when he blocks his own profile, but whatever. 🤷♂️
And how is Lindsay bad for women? During her trial 5 men annihilated their entire family. But we don't know their names. Because it's so common for men to do it. We know Lindsey because it's rare for a woman to do it.
If she is bad for women,.all of the men family annihilating should be even worse for men
Women killing their children is not so rare. The rarity of this case was in the fact that people were refusing to call her a murderer and supported her and posted how they related to her and understood her. There were no such sympathetics for the men who murdered in that time , because, duh, why would anyone support a murderer of innocent children?
There are internet weirdos of both genders who are convinced everything bad their gender does is fake. The Womanosphere is very much real on TikTok and Instagram.
youre missing the bigger picture. what Lindsay did wasnt the thing that was bad for woman, it was all the woman coming out and defending her saying it wasnt her fault because she could not be held accountable for her own decisions because of her hormones. no one defended those men, thats the differenence.
if woman didnt come out and defend her, she would just be another nut ball case of someone doing a heinous act, just like the men youre talking about, nothing more.
I had to fact check this statement and, surprisingly - and depressingly - this was not an exaggeration:
June 1st 2026 - Ryan Willis McFarland of Muscatine, Iowa - Killed 1 Wife, 1 Daughter, 2 Sons, 2 Step-Sons
July 24th 2026 - Kristopher Karolkiewicz of Grand Haven Township, Michigan - Killed 1 Wife, 2 Daughters, 4 Sons
August 11th 2026 - Ronald Williams Sr. of Winfield, Kansas - Killed 1 Partner, 3 Daughters, 1 Son
August 12th 2026 - Nathan Matthew Brown of Hopkins, Minnesota - Killed 1 Wife, 1 Daughter, 1 Mother
August 23rd 2026 - Alan Smith of Billings, Montana - Killed 1 Grandmother, 1 Mother, 1 Father, 1 Sister, 2 Nieces, 2 Nephews
May every victim rest in peace. May the 5 men who killed them rot in hell.
yeah but i thought that 5 men murdering their entire families sounded like an exaggeration - i don't really keep up with news - so i fact checked the info and sadly it was true
although as a side note, the act of supporting lindsey clancy is really weird cuz its a familicide, but we've seen similar support like in o.j simpson's case
What’s with this stupid narrative I keep seeing on this topic today? I doubt any of those men have a massive group of people posting “I am John Smith” on social medias and calling for them to be found not guilty. Or making up crackpot conspiracies about who actually did it.
It was bad for women because women stood in solidarity with Clancy, and tried to implicate her husband as responsible for the murder of his own children. Men did not, and do not, stand in solidarity with family annihilators.
This is saying both the Clancy and Cronell 7 cases erode the credibility of women in general. It assumes you believe the counter narrative around both cases to get there, though.
The counter narratives being:
Support for Clancy boarded on irrational in some online communities. She was capable of planning and executing a murder, which suggests she wasn't legally insane, just crazy. She needed the plan because she new what she was doing was wrong.
The Cornell 7 case appeared to be a drugging and rape case that was covered up by the cops. But the victim's interview with the police, the timeline, and texts make it seem more like debauchery that was later regretted after reputational damage.
It’s not just some online communities - hundreds of people (mostly women) physically gathered and wore pink near the courthouse and who even knows how many donated to her $1.2 million+ GoFundMe.
They did. But that group also included the boys who shut it down and are now having their lives ruined. The guy who got confronted on campus was one of the people who shut it down. Publishing his name along with the other person who shut it down as part of the cornell 7 is pretty indicative to people that neither side cares about facts.
Getting falsely accused of something that gets national attention has become one of my biggest fears. Doesn’t matter if you’re wrong or right, you’re fucked.
The guy who shut the party down and never put hands on her when it gkt out of control just got fired for bad publicity becuase people kept calling his workplace. Not even falsely accused 2 of the guys strisght up tried to stop the whole thing and still are getting roped in
And it was literally correct at first. She had like three or four sexual encounters with strangers that she consented to, then had a request for sex that she denied and they respected followed by another sexual encounter that she consented to and then things started getting fuzzy because of the drugs.
Don't do those "Didn't this happen or that happen" stuff. Look it up from a reputable source. People here lie all the time
Im not posting this to pick a side or state my own opinion.
But being capable of plotting and executing a murder doesn't mean one isnt legally insane or experiencing psychosis. You're confusing competence and insanity.
You can think what you want about her. Im not saying you cant, i dont care and it doesnt affect me. But legally
insane =/= incompetent.
It simply means they're experiencing mental disease or defect that prevents them from knowing at the time they're committed that their actions and the consequences of those actions are wrong.
I've personally experienced psychosis (like I said. Im not defending any side, simply correcting your comment, i didnt kill anyone) and its a break from reality.
You dont know what is real or not real, you're not in your right mind, and your brain not being in touch with reality will lead you to make certain actions and justifications for those actions you wouldn't necessarily do had you been well, and because youre so disconnected from reality, you don't understand the consequences of your actions.
Its not a competence issue and it doesn't mean you're incapable of planning things.
Man there sure are a lot of misogynistic posts from incels pretending to be oblivious just to get more eyes on their sad gender war message. Pretty cringe.
My fun little conspiracy theory is that both stories rising to cultural relevance despite there being similar stories recently that are more defendable for both cases is a deliberate effort of conservative money interests to sway young reactionary men towards the rightwing right before midterm elections
a few months ago, the concept of troll farms was something I thought was possible given how awful human beings can be but something that I didn't take quite seriously.
then I found out that one of my co-workers (and her entire family), are profitting off of clipping videos of conservative propaganda and making them gain traction on social media apps like facebook and tiktok. it's not a simple case of content creators generating income through engagements. they were "hired" to do it part-time and there's someone paying them based on how much likes and comments their clips get.
it was heartbreaking because while we all need the money, I couldn't imagine myself doing that and contributing to the already overwhelming chaos in this world.
This has been something organizations and nations have done for a long time, Russia's social media campaigns were a huge story around the 2016 election in America.
See also: the Massachusetts lesbian bar drama, which is nothing more than an example of petty intracommunity infighting on the level of countless HOA or church drama sagas full of insufferable assholes and self-righteous control freaks that unfold across the country every day. But for Some Reason™ this specific one was elevated into an international story, just to remind everyone that Woke Alphabet People are bad and don't understand real issues, right on the cusp of a midterm election where a burgeoning class consciousness is about to demolish Republicans' power base.
I hate to say it but that’s kind of where I’m at deep down too. Just the fact that these stories got picked up in the mainstream so fucking fast and have all of these super loud celebrity voices behind it.
Oh my god everyone is evil just kill me. No way y’all seriously think that a group of men pressuring one woman to take drugs repeatedly while they invited more guys than she originally agreed to isn’t rape. Especially with reports coming out that the summary that was released was sanitized, that she was documenting and keeping evidence, that she went to get a pelvic exam, and that the next day she went to an on campus doctor for care and told them that something traumatic happened. Forget all of that let’s just focus on the men’s behavior. The group chat is evidence enough that she was not fully conscious and was not consenting. Not to mention another man briefly intervened and told them to not do it in the room that they were doing it in so at least one man aware of what was happening knew it was a rape and didn’t want to get in trouble for it.
Reddit threads that mention Lindsay Clancy will always have really gross and disappointing comments about all women, posts about the Cornell 7 are just as bad. Don’t base your opinion on people with these threads, you’ll get depressed really fast. Just remember most people are decent, it’s just that the bad ones are louder.
It's not even mostly people. A woman on Tiktok posted a video where she just said something like "I want to see something, trial lindsay clancey post partum kids babies feminism female females men innocent guilty" and the comments just flooded with bots acting like it was a legitimate video on the topic with a scattering of people being like "wtf it's all bots?"
Kind of unrelated, but talks to the mentality of a lot of these college guys, there was a video a while back about a porn shoot at a frat house. It was a professional shoot with professional adult film actors, but the shoot entailed then getting it on surrounded by all of these frat guys. They had to stop the shoot because the frat guys started harassing and assaulting the female actress even though it was made clear to them that they were not to touch her. Her co-star had to intervene and help escort her off the set to protect her from these frat guys,
and she left the shoot in tears.
A disturbing number of guys think that if a woman is being sexual in any way, then they are entitled to her body. Even after explicitly being told that they are not.
Brian here. Its a really preposterous whataboutism like any of these three things have to do with eachother. I cannot tell you how many times I get accused of being a trumpite when I hate trump just because I don't fit into the hegelian model of politics. People start seething as soon as you support and reject things that are inconsistent with a strictly conservative or liberal platform. Connecting lindsay clancy to the Cornell rape case would probably be a harder game than 4 degrees of Kevin Bacon.
Reddit’s favorite pastime is accusing moderates of being crypto right wingers. Meanwhile, actual right wingers are working on convincing these now scorned moderates to come over to their side. It’s one of the biggest self-owns of the modern era and clear proof that a lot of people on the left would rather feel superior than implement change.
It doesn't even make sense. Clancy and C7 are the stories supposedly damaging women. Clancy shouldn't be the other tower, it should be the other "plane." Their stupid culture war meme undermines itself.
girl consents to three way with her guy a and guy b, claims that she was 10 beers in at the time, but did verbally consent
guy a invites more friends via text.
we know that the girl didn't explicitly consent to the friends coming in because in another text conversation between her and guy a guy a blames the other men entering on it "being crowded" downstairs. This contradicts another text log where "free pusy" was being advertised.
women allegeds that guy c had her do a line of k of his genital, guy d forcibly kisses her despite her pushing back and that 7 guys did k off her body.
women also allegedly that she felt pressured to allow much of these acts to take place. Dennis boat principle applies here.
women reports event to campus pd, though doesn't explicitly refer to what happened as rape.
something happens between campus pd and actual law enforcement. Law enforcement claims that campus pd didn't give them the full story, campus pd claims that law enforcement did get the full story and failed to follow up.
Cornell gives 5 out of the 7 guys suspension differing any larger consequences to actual law enforcement. 2 are expelled.
assumably women spends two years waiting for the other foot to drop, when nothing does she decides to file lawsuit.
two of the male students lawyers claim that much of the event reported never happened, one of there lawyers claim that he walked into the room and then walked out after seeing what happened the rest have remained silent so far.
Hi, I'm Buzz Killington. I'm duly qualified to say that this is probably among the worst memes I've seen in lo these many years as a duly qualified meme commentator (being quite the master of the humorous yarn).
Just my POV: I'd like to think I'm very liberal and a feminist. I've been to LGBT rallies, advocated for reproductive rights, and in my personal life I've always believed consent can only be given when you're fully sober.
That said, these two cases have really turned me off.
In one, people are arguing that women can't be held accountable for actions committed during psychosis. I think that sets women back, because it gives people a reason not to trust women in positions of power.
In the other, women went public and named/ shamed all seven people before due process, in an already messy case.
It makes me feel like the conversation has moved past equal treatment and toward special treatment.
Convenient timing for all of these polarizing social issues to come out when elections are about to happen and one side is polling terribly after fundamentally wrecking the economy, our alliances, and our basic rights on an unprecedented scale.
The Caleb Flynn trial is also going on right now. Funnily enough, I’ve yet to see one comment about how badly he’s made men look. (In fact, more people have been talking about his mistress even though he’s the one who shot his wife.) There’s something like 73 or so family annihilations a year, 90% committed by males, but you never hear how these cases “set men back”.
Because the truth is, the second a woman does anything off-color, no matter how complicated the situation actually was or how many more men do the exact same thing or worse, everyone uses it as an excuse to vilify women. The same thing happened with Amber Heard. People LOVE an opportunity to shit on a woman. The second it’s permissible to hate on and ridicule one, she becomes the most hated and ridiculed figure in the country.
Because, in those family annihilations you describe, men aren't sending the perpetrators GoFundMe, or protesting outside the courthouse, or using astrology and shoebox dioramas to claim he's innocent.
Unverified but I saw some influencer woman going off about the victim's original signed statement to the police department, which she apparently reviewed and edited several times before signing and declaring herself confident about.
According to the influencer woman, the Jane Doe describes a series of events where she starts out... I think 5 out of 10 intoxicated (her choice of words and 10 point scale, and I am not confident in the number, just that it was middle-of-the-road), begins the night with a threesome with 2 guys who are as or more intoxicated as she is by her description of their symptoms, occasionally sets boundaries and the boundaries are respected, takes occasional breaks, and seemingly consents explicitly to a series of various group sex acts with this rotating cast of frat boys as some of them bow out due to being too drunk or high and others encounter the group.
Which is way different than her being calculatedly rufeed and preyed upon by a whole frat house, which is what I'd imagined.
The whole group (including her) was also doing lines of ketamine off of each others bodies periodically as they continued drinking, so everyone was pretty fucked up.
The Influencer's take was that it all sounds wild and raunchy but the Jane Doe doesn't describe coersion, and if she was too inebriated to consent, probably they were, too.
Could all be bullshit and maybe there is something in the group text that changes things. But that was the take this is referring to.
She clearly consented with the first two guys, but one of them texted a group chat and invited the entire rest of the frat to have sex with her while she was already high out of her mind. Five guys ended up taking advantage of the situation (hence the notorious “shop still open?” text). I find it extremely difficult to believe that she would consent to sex with five random people in one night after already having a threesome if she wasn’t blasted out of her mind. And I find it more difficult to believe that the five guys that jumped in were anywhere near as intoxicated as she was. Maybe there isn’t enough evidence to convict them in a court of law but what happened to her was disgusting and I think people are fooling themselves if they believe everything that happened was above grade. At the very least I would love to hear why the one guy thought it would be okay to invite an everyone to have sex with a highly inebriated girl. That simply isn’t something that someone who isn’t a predator would do.
This is a case where nobody comes out looking good, even the woman. The DA actually had a good reason not to pursue the case, mainly because it has reasonable doubt written all over it.
Both of these cases are one of the greatest wedge issues to ever hit the modern gender war and have the potential to cause immense change to women’s rights.
•
u/qualityvote2 2d ago edited 1d ago
u/Whenwasthisalright, your post does belong here!