What I find scary about the way Title IX is being used now is the lowering of the standard of proof to a preponderance of the evidence
If you filed a civil suit in court “preponderance of evidence” would be the standard that needed to be met. Title IX is a civil action, not a criminal action.
If you have a problem with “preponderance of evidence” then take it up with a few centuries of Common Law.
.
When you say a Title IX action is a civil action, what do you mean? Are you talking about cases that actually go to court? In those cases I have no problem with the preponderance standard, especially since there are many other safeguards for the defendant: a judge who is either making the decision or instructing an impartial jury on the standards, the right for the defendant to be represented by counsel, and the right to cross-examine your accuser, to name a few. I’m talking about the adjudications BY COLLEGES, often with students or deans as the decisionmakers, and with none of those safeguards for the accused.
You sound very dismissive about concerns that the accused receive a fair process. Would you be content to be fired, or to have been expelled from college, based on an accusation from one other person, with no corroborating evidence, and a very constrained opportunity to defend yourself?
Maybe the real issue is a change in the overall structure of courtship. The bar scene has had a forty or fifty year run but appears to be losing legitimacy in many circles: neither conservatives nor liberals are ok with this anymore. The workplace as meeting place, a common alternative is a legal landmine at best and a likely a suicide mission if the workplace is also an institution of higher learning. A digital matchmaker with full documentation and a full audit trail appears more likely.In any event, it looks like women will be more in control of the process, a transition consistent with women assuming more and more control in many institutions and the economy as a whole.
Marcotte’s piece is one big straw – dare I utter the word? – man.
Someone had to bell the cat. Kipnis has done so. Good for her.
There is a lot of discussion in the comments about the burden of proof and Title IX investigations as “civil actions”. Had this been a civil action in a court it would have been summarily chucked out. Why? Because the complainants lacked standing to commence a retaliation complaint. Retaliation is the inflicting of punishment on one who has harmed you - reprisal. In the context of Title IX, retaliation is action taken by an accused against an accuser.
Retaliation is not included as a concept in Title IX to empower anyone who feels the urge to punish ideas that they intensely dislike. The availability of a retaliation complaint is there to provide a remedy to an accuser who is retaliated against by an accused. The law firm engaged to investigate should have disposed of these complaints immediately after clarifying whether the remedy fit the situation of the complainant.
Of all the journalistic travesties in the article, one of the most glaring to me is that Marcotte (I guess in the name of feminism?) dismisses the critique of Kipnis, an accomplished academic with a compelling argument, as a silly attempt to be a “Cool Girl” as if no other motive could exist. It’s demeaning and sexist.
The uproar about Kipnis is from the tl;dr crowd. If understanding the context of her career is too much work for you how about not commenting on that about which you are a willful ignoramus. Kipnis is a heroine. Kipnis is the on front line against the thought police. Kipnis is the one who will defend a man jailed for 30 years because two moronic cops couldn’t tell the difference between someone with a fantasy about being an abducted child with a kidnapping pedophile. Kipnis is the gamer/porn defender who will tell the truth that there is no way to identify with what the viewer identifies. Could be the murderer/rapist, could the victim, could be the MF’n gun. People are diverse. Like Patsy Stone say “What do you mean? She has the whip”. All hail the death of the individual, all hail the death of intent and intellect. When you become as knee jerked as your opponent you’ve lost.
You know, for years and years and years, despite being a man, I considered myself a feminist. I support equal pay. I support a woman’s right to control her own body. I support a woman’s choice whether to enter the workplace or not. I believe firmly that a woman can do anything a man can do, given the chance. And because those chances have not been there for women historically, I firmly believe in giving women a slight bump up so that they can catch up in the workplace demographically.
But along come Amanda Marcotte and I realized that feminist is not the right word for me, because I don’t want to be associated with her and her ilk. The one’s who believe women are these delicate flowers who can’t take care of themselves, and men are monsters. All men. So guess what Ms. Marcotte. I no longer identify as a feminist. I identify as a good human being. But I will forever be slightly wary about anyone who claims to be a feminist. That is what the last year of your posts has taught me.
I like Amanda’s writing style and ability. A lot. But “Kipnis’s piece wasn’t just a poorly argued defense of professors behaving unprofessionally with students. Her willingness to pander to middle-aged men who want to hear that it’s cool for them to bang their students felt thirsty.” I seriously question Amanda’s reading ability. I just read and enjoyed Kipnis’s article, which is written in a style comparable to (a perhaps a shade better than) Amanda’s usual voice. Pandering? Thirsty?
Why is TPM picking up Amanda’s most amateurish work?
The professors work for the students. You’ve got it seriously backwards. Also, at what point was it cool to worry about whether everything is cool? Really, the definition of “cool” is to be cool about it - not to be worried.
Author: In the 6th paragraph, 2nd sentence:
Kipnis was put through the wringer (like a washing machine), not “a ringer”. For starters.
Thank you.
Unfortunately Kipnis’ second article is behind a subscriber firewall.
I was just about to write something like this. And even if Title IX is a civil matter, it has enormous consequences for someone who is accused of what is, at its heart, a criminal matter. Rape is a crime, rapists should go to prison, and it should be investigated by police, and tried by criminal courts, the people who have the resources to do it—and not university administrators, who are lousy at doing it. Even in a civil matter you have the right to have a lawyer present during a hearing.
Even though she was ultimately exonerated, the really appalling thing is that Kipnis was put through a Title IX investigation owing to a piece she wrote in the Chronicle for Higher Education (of all places), and that process itself was something right out of Kafka. Rape is a crime. Academic freedom is also something we should value no matter who threatens it.
Ironically, Marcotte achieved the same effect when taking on (and out of context) some blog comments of Scott Aaronson.
You know what, honey-pie? I’ve been a feminist and I’ll continue to be a feminist in spite of the fact that where the rubber meets the road, it can be a very complicated and scary place to be. And, ilk, oh god yes, I’ve seen the ilk, more than you have seen, probably.
And I’ve seen so many, both male and females, who claim to have identified as feminists, throw in the towel precisely because it is scary and complicated and just teeming with flippin’ ilk. No, not all feminists agree on things and some feminists are scarred by experience enough to believe men are monsters, and I don’t want to be associated with those kinds of convictions.
But I’m not throwing in the towel because I have a stake in feminism, and I’ve been slogging it out trying to drain the marshes with the alligators up to my neck for years and years and years. So if you’re going to cut and run because Amanda Marcotte or because whatever reason, go ahead and cut and run. And you know, there are all kinds of good human beings but when it comes to feminism, if you’re not part of the solution, you’re part of the pollution.
Which reminds me, you say:
You know, for years and years and years, despite being a man, I considered myself a feminist. I support equal pay. I support a woman’s right to control her own body. I support a woman’s choice whether to enter the workplace or not. I believe firmly that a woman can do anything a man can do, given the chance. And because those chances have not been there for women historically, I firmly believe in giving women a slight bump up so that they can catch up in the workplace demographically.
I’m curious as to what you have actually done over those years and years and years to effect change for women?
“I’m curious as to what you have actually done over those years and years and years to effect change for women?”
He has just expressed his support for feminist positions on the most important political issues facing women, and he presumably treats the women in his life in accordance with his stated principles. Is that not enough? Does he have to personally come over to your house, help out with housework, negotiate your pay with your boss, escort you to an abortion clinic, and so forth? What have you done for him lately?
Professor/student relationships have been part of campus life for a long, long time. I would agree that Professors should avoid relationships with students enrolled in their classes, as the conflict of interest is obvious. But college is not high school, and students are adults. The graduate students alleging the Title IX violation represent a curious brand of feminism that infantalizes the women it purports to represent.
Professor Kipnis’ critics are entitled to their opinions, but not redress. If their tender feelings can’t abide views contrary to their own, they should withdraw from Northwestern and return when they are mature enough to appreciate the non negotiable, fundamental value of pluralism.
Just because I refuse to be associated with the term feminist anymore doesn’t mean I am not going to continue to support equality for women. That is just ridiculous. No where did I ever say such a thing. All I said was I don’t identify as a feminist anymore. It’s just a label that has been co-opted by extremists.
The idea that if you aren’t part of the solution you are part of the problem is of course a silly concept. I am not actively part of stopping the genocide in Sudan, and yet, I don’t consider myself to be part of the problem. You can’t be active in every part of the world where wrongs are being done. You can’t even be an activist in every part of your own culture. Otherwise you would never be able to live. I am an activist for climate change issues. I’ve been to rallies, I have gone to my congressman’s offices. I have started an signed petitions. I helped my daughter start a recycling club at school. I have given talks to the public about climate change around the state of Texas (my doctorate is in climate change after all, so it seems appropriate).
But I have donated money to groups pushing female equality. I have sent letters to my lizard-brained congress people about bills that have to do with equality. As a college instructor, I take special time to focus on the women in my classes who feel they can’t do science or math because ‘they are just a girl’. I have convinced several of them not only that they understand science, but I have convinced several to pursue STEM fields. So while my efforts in day to day life may not have had a big impact of women as a whole, I have had a big impact on the lives of lots of individual women. I think that is just as important. I’m certainly doing more good for women than Marcotte and her ilk are.
So calm down, I am on your side. I just reject a single term.
Thank you ptr. You put down my thoughts in a much more succinct way than I could (or did). I appreciate the support.