The publication of a student column, part of a two-column display of opposing views, in the independent student publication”The Sundial” prompted the sudden cancellation. Come to think of it, maybe cancelling “Who Gets to Tell the Story?” made sense after all. The question had been answered! Only those who endorse the Left-approved story get to tell it in today’s society as it hurdles toward totalitarianism. Got it! Now let’s have a panel on “What’s a Woman?”
The offensive column by deputy editor Nikos Mohammadi and writer Christina Ma criticized the lopsided coverage of Lucy Craig’s late-hit accusations—you know, like Ethics Alarms has. Can’t have that! They argued that there needed to be balanced discussions regarding consent and personal responsibility, writing in part, “In a liberal society, women are allowed to make bad decisions, ones that may later reveal themselves as deleterious. The discourse, nonetheless, seems to omit the possibility that consensual sex, to the woman participating in it, can later reveal itself as traumatic and immoral.”
Mohammadi wrote later that his opinion piece caused him to be bombarded with online abuse and threats, including some “urging me to commit suicide or demanding that my career and life be destroyed.” He added that the Columbia Open Discourse Alliance condemned him as well as cancelling the event. This part of the story is mordantly amusing. The group wrote in a statement that “CODA exists because we believe in free expression and the open exchange of ideas, including ideas we disagree with” but then explained their opposition to the insufficiently woke opinion piece thusly: “We did so not in spite of, but because of our commitment to free expression.”
Oh. Well that perfectly reaso— Wait…WHAT???
Jonathan Turley’s comment on this Bizarro World logic:
“You canceled a free press event after two student writers expressed an opposing view of a story because of your “commitment to free expression”? That is akin to saying that your commitment to free exercise of religion compelled you to cancel religious services until others felt comfortable with the exercise of the right by different faiths.”
I think I can come up with a funnier analogy, but Professor Turley’s on TV, so I’ll go with his.
Still, perhaps we should be grateful to Lucy Craig, Gov. Hochul, the screamers, universities, the New York Times and the rest along with the anti-male, anti-fairness, anti-due process, anti-personal responsibility and anti-free speech hypocrisy they are proudly proclaiming. They are telling us exactly what they are, and the Orwellian future they have in store for us right before an election. How considerate.
This has had the beneficial effect of laying bare the whole ‘consent’ lie that has been pushed by HR departments for decades. The whole self-righteous ‘you just need to get consent, if you have a problem getting consent, you are the problem’ lie used to stop any reasonable question or anyone trying to point out that this isn’t how the world works is now evident.
Given the evidence that consent was obtained before, during, and immediately after the events, and the public considers them rapists, how can a man possibly know if he is having consensual sex with a woman or if he is raping her? With the current definition of rape, he can’t. Since what matters is ‘long term consent’ with no deadline, he can never know for sure if the sex was consensual as long as the woman is still alive.
Again, this was exactly the point I made in my last appearance on NPR, and my reward was being ridiculed by a woke Georgetown Law School professor and being banned from future broadcasts.
An interesting feature of the Cornell case is the fact Lucy was concerned about her sorority sisters thinking she was a slut. At some point in the past, women who were taken advantage of by bounders and cads were shamed and ashamed. I think this was an effective deterrent. Women steered clear of bounders and cads. If they fell prey to one, they kept it under wraps, unless and until they became pregnant (but effective birth control has eliminated that from the equation). Now that shame has been removed from the equation, a woman who falls victim to bounder or cad can become more than a bit of heroine by having the strength and fortitude necessary to expose the bounder or cad. I’m beginning to think shame was an effective governor in the murky world of extramarital sex. There’s simply no more “Uh, sorry, honey. You lose. You made your bed; you can sleep in it.”