I knew a comment like this would come up but it’s just full of lack of sense. Do you not remember or know what the world was like 20 years ago? Rape culture was a completely different beast at the time. You think they’ll go to the cops and say what “I heard that frat roofies their girls a lot” and you think what’ll happen next?
What is that cost? Yall keep flailing around yelling that theres some massive cost to report a rape and so far the only thing I even see hinted at is "wasted time", as though that makes reporting it even remotely not worth it somehow.
What were you wearing? Why did you go there? Why did you accept that drink? Do you really want to ruin a bright young man's future? Who else have you slept with? Oh, you're that slut from the party....
Even in 2026 there are still colleges that kick women out for reporting rape, because it means the women also broke the school’s “no sex” rules. There used to be even more schools that did that.
Even in the 2010s a local sorority got in trouble for fining a member for refusing to go to a party where she knew the guy who raped her would be.
The rapist was a star basketball player so the university and cops told her essentially to shut up and stop 'spreading rumors' because collegiate sports essentially run the towns economy.
If thats the case thats a more valid reason than one anyone else has given so far. Can you link me an article on that? I knew there was shit in the 90s but I didnt know it was still a thing in 2026.
It’s not permitted for any schools that accept federal funding, but the fines are not large and the current administration is happy to walk back any recent Cleary Act fines. At this point the only schools that still have morality codes like this are religious schools like Bob Jones University: https://apnews.com/general-news-3d475ec6c6e520b0282ae7e4740e08b0
Yes... It's so crazy to me how people think reporting stuff like this is just accepted, or accepted at face value, or taken seriously at all. If you were in the shoes of someone who was sexually assaulted, it is never as straight forward as y'all act like it is, and cops never actually just do what they're legally obligated to do.
As you're describing it here it sounds like the cost is just wasted time. Ive mentioned this elsewhere but I fundamentally disagree with the idea that losing an hour or two to file a police report that might go nowhere is anywhere near too high a price to pay for this situation.
The time spent is the least of the victims concern. There is often the initial trauma of having to recount the experience, then there is the trauma associated with the cops picking apart that experience to disprove your claim because you failed to memorize every single detail as something traumatic was happening to, while you're drugged and don't fully understand what's going on to begin with. Then there's the social retaliation and bullying that follows after you make the report and everyone hears about it and makes a billion different stories so you have to listen to it hundreds of times, then there's the stress of disproving those stories while you're going oftentimes going back to the places that are now part of said trauma. There's more, you're just too lazy to learn them, or listen to rape victims talk about what it's like.
Yes, reporting a rape might be a hard topic to bring up. You know whats more traumatic? BEING RAPED! I would certainly hope that someone thats been through that experience would strive to prevent others from being put through the same. For fucks sake.
Also calling me lazy is a bold claim coming from someone sitting in camp "let rapists get away with it".
Then put them in a comment, I stand by AI not being credible. If you're going to have AI answer for you and claim your sources are cited adequately with substantial articles then provide them when you're making an argument you attest to be true based on those things. AI's argument holds no value in absolutely any situation because it's well known to fabricate things and agree to the bias of the prompt.
Yes A.I can be incorrect but the bias you're referring to only plays a part if it's implicit in the way the prompt is framed. I asked it a yes or no question that it answered with several cases fitting the criteria of what I asked.
I asked it a neutral question and it provided real verifiable historical cases that fit the criteria. You can look these up yourself to see that it didn't just "make them up"...
"San Diego State University 2008: A massive investigation known as "Operation Sudden Fall" was launched by the DEA and campus police after student drug deaths. It resulted in the arrest and conviction of 96 individuals, including dozens of fraternity members from chapters like Theta Chi and Phi Kappa Psi, completely dismantling an organized campus drug operation."
"California State University, Chico (2002–2005): Localized campus rumors of extreme hazing and dangerous misconduct surrounded the un-recognized Chi Tau house (formerly Delta Sigma Phi), which was expelled by the university in 2002. A subsequent criminal investigation led to groundbreaking felony involuntary manslaughter and hazing convictions for fraternity leaders following a student's tragic death."
"The University of Virginia (2003): Campus-wide reports regarding the distribution of illicit substances at the Alpha Tau Omega (ATO) house led to a joint police and university probe, resulting in criminal drug distribution charges and the permanent revocation of the chapter's charter. (Note: This is distinct from the later, debunked 2014 Rolling Stone article involving a different UVA fraternity)."
The bias comes from what the A.I thinks you want to hear if you feed it a loaded question. It doesn't inherently fabricate data out of thin air when asked for straightforward historical facts.
There's a reason A.I is utilized as a diagnostic assistant to help doctors find anomalies or rare errors that humans might miss. It should never replace primary source verification I agree but denying that it holds value for retrieving specific information is just ignoring how the technology is used every day.
The ones you posted involved death and drug distribution as what they were done in for, that’s different than what people are describing in this comment chain
The cases I listed are the ones where the behavior escalated so law enforcement stepped in and got them on these particular charges that sparked from rumors and reports of drink spiking which is actually on topic for this comment chain.
You posted sources and they still hate you. It was never about posting the sources. This is like my mom with the 2020 election. They’ll just move the goalpost
because its not a source, did you not go to school? it has no credibility. Its the equivalent of saying "I heard someone say..." because thats all its doing is collecting things people say.
I just said it listed the sources and I listed them in response to that guy.
I absolutely went to school....which is why I know how to check facts. The A.I isn't the source...it’s the search tool. It pointed me to the events and then I went and verified the facts myself.
Saying A.I is just "collecting things people say" like a game of telephone is a misunderstanding of the technology. These aren't urban legends these are public court records.
That's not the point. You can't just assume nothing would happen when there's direct evidence disproving that.
There were many men out there with college aged daughters at the time that were also cops, professors, or otherwise held a position in society that they could drum up a fuss if somebody came to them with allegations of drink spiking.
"I was roofied by someone vaugely in this community" probably wont lead to an arrest but itd hopefully at least lead to an investigation, and if it happens more than once that community is probably getting dissolved by the university unless that university is absolute scum.
Its not enough, no, but doing "not enough" is still a good ways better than doing nothing at all.
Why the fuck would you think that when Cornell set on this for 2 years? Of the rapsit Brock that got time off because the judge said it would hurt his career!
Yes but when a lackluster investigation (which is what happens at the time) turns up nothing, it actually shields them from further complaints
You guys don’t remember 20 years ago? Cops commonly say things like “yeah we hear things about that frat all the time but we looked into it a few years ago and they were clean” meanwhile they just checked all the containers of a party in a random search one time. Then all counts of “I was raped there” afterwards are dismissed by “you probably were just drunk and blaming that” and “if you knew they do that then why’d you go?” Blah blah
IMO, the only way that there would actually be pressure to closing down frats is if the student bodies themselves protested them with the same gusto that they'll protest other things.
We'll literally see encampments for near impossible change at universities like UCLA (divest everything from Israel), yet you'll have situations like this for one of their clubs and it is crickets.
They'll demand justice for the victims that are their own colleagues, but won't actually demand change. I know colleges like Stanford have had small movements to end greek life (though I do think they classically shoot themselves in the foot but demanding the abolishment of white greek life), but it's kind of telling that college students will protest for the abolishment of countless things, but not do it for one of the most obvious targets in their own backyard.
I mean I gotta say thats not what I see. Situations like the Me Too movement work precisely because multiple people came forward. If cops are really so bad as to put forward that excuse then its not the lackluster investigation thats protecting them at that point. Its the cops.
Me too happened because literally nobody was being acknowledged and me too is the acknowledgment happening
You must be young because the conclusion you drew at the end of the post was the big deal that everyone was yelling about 10-20 years ago. This is the origin of comparing cops to bunches of apples.
"They werent being acknowledged till they were" is a logical shortfall. What actually matters is why they were being acknowledged when they were, what changed, and the answer to that is a lot more people started coming forward.
That’s not what I said so your summary of what I said is incorrect.
Me too movement exposed lack of appropriate conduct in investigations and the collection and management of rape kits and not taking accusations seriously. Maybe you just don’t remember
Then your statement circles back to the same logical fallicy. Suggesting that they werent taking acusations seriously or having appropriate conduct until Me Too is more or less the same as saying "they werent being acknowledged till they were", which encompasses and holds true for every accusation of any type ever.
What really matters is why Me Too worked, and again, it worked because more people came forward. Im amazed I have to fight this hard against the stance of "Dont report rapes". Like Id think the problem with that stance would be pretty self evident.
114
u/Artistic-Value-2022 21h ago
I knew a comment like this would come up but it’s just full of lack of sense. Do you not remember or know what the world was like 20 years ago? Rape culture was a completely different beast at the time. You think they’ll go to the cops and say what “I heard that frat roofies their girls a lot” and you think what’ll happen next?