Wasn’t planning to mention this story, but the rape allegations on Cornell University’s campus has set the US ablaze — presumably as part of this election’s October surprise.
Democrats plan to gas up mentally ill females by highlighting the Clancy trial, the Cornell 7 story, and the execution of the first female inmate in decades is kind of ingenious but utterly destructive long term.
All of these stories are built on bald faced lies or lies by omission. Millions of dollars is being thrown at leftist online personalities and foreign bot farms to push it. I bet they highlight a few more before November. …
Don’t forget that Obama and his acolytes put these incredibly cynical and societal destroying political ops on steroids w/ the Trayvon Martin Hoax. In a just world, these bad faith actors would be put on trial in the public square and summarily punished. …
Leftist politicians are exaggerating and milking it already, even though it happened in 2024. For example, AOC makes WILD claims on Cornell 7: “Seven men drugged and gang raped a 20-year-old woman. They lured her into a frat house, drugged her with ketamine, and took turns gang raping her for seven hours.”
Contextual truth: The statement given by Jane Doe in 2024 states that she voluntarily used drugs, she engaged in consensual sex, and snapchat messages from Jane to the accused men have been revealed in which she doesn’t blame or accuse them of wrongdoing.
It is necessary for you to believe this young woman did not lustily agree to be gangbanged. By white males (also a brown one and an Asian one but never mind that.) Through the first Tuesday in November, anyway. …
They’re wagering that every GOP candidate will be asked about it by their media flying monkeys within the context of the lawsuit’s framing for the next 30 days. They’re also hopeful someone will say something incredibly stupid & crass about it, and win them a few days’ newscycle. …
Have you noticed the Cornell rape allegations have created far more outrage among women than the 250,000 British girls raped by Muslims. I wonder why that is?
Caitlin Flanagan at The Free Press:
The strongly felt and often poorly reasoned emotions surrounding this ghastly incident have grafted themselves so perfectly over those surrounding the Lindsay Clancy trial that the motor was already in third gear. There is a very large number of men who hate women and an equally large number of women who hate men. In all of my long life, I’ve never seen the sexes pitched against each other at this level of contempt, and it’s a frightening thing. Driving the rage of both sides is that the event appears to be neither a hoax nor a straightforward case of rape.
A huge number of men are still festering over the excesses of #MeToo. They feel that they let their guard down at the beginning, and they have steeled themselves against its return by regarding women with suspicion and contempt. Matt Walsh, the William Blackstone of X—always alert to the crimes of women and their most prudent punishments—has determined that women who commit rape “hoaxes” should be sentenced to the same amount of prison time that the defendant, if convicted, would have served.
Many men’s hatred of women is matched by an equal number of women’s mistrust of men; and the internet encourages both sides to give voice to their most extreme feelings. A lot of young women think this Cornell mess is going to light the match that burns down everything from sloppy police handling of rape accusations to the looming, powerful presence of fraternities.
It is not. …
The emotional thunderstorm won’t so much fade away as it will be replaced by the next red-hot call to climb in a tent and stop some other horrible practice. …
In the main, fraternity members tend to be many of the things college women don’t like: conservative, suburban, usually white, almost always straight. They stand for everything that campus chic stands against, and in particular, they stand against all that is holy to a majority of college women.
There ought, therefore, to be no problem keeping women safe from fraternities, which — as I have known for decades — are extremely dangerous places for them. And yet, year after year after year, young women of all political and ideological stripes flock to their parties, even though they know how dangerous those places are. …
That’s the saddest thing about these old rituals. What attracts women to those parties — late at night, like Jane Doe — to walk alone to a fraternity house and take her chances? What she’s really looking for is a man. And she has no idea how to find a good one.
Camille Paglia makes a critical point:
@dash_eats Paglia makes a parallel point to yours in a separate interview. https://t.co/WIJRkCsIm4
— Nate P. Hall (@Nate_PHall) October 2, 2026
Lacoon of Troy expands on Paglia’s point:
Paglia’s point is that women have been raised in a way that makes them naïve. They believe that the suburban, middle-class setting is the default condition of the world, and that the rights they have go with them anywhere, even to a foreign country or a bedroom during a drunken party. …
Written history is only about 2% of all human history. And this post-1945, “rules-based order” we’re living in is only about 2% of written history. And written history comprises things like mountains of skulls, banners made from the skins of enemies, torture as part of the legal system, defiled corpses, and cities given to soldiers for three days of rape and plunder with no rules.
The World Wars industrialized it. None of the progress of the 200 years of “enlightenment” prevented it, either. Keep in mind that Germany and Japan signed the Hague Conventions in 1899 and 1907. Paper rules burn easily. That’s what makes the “oh, we’ve evolved past all of this” argument a load of nonsense.
This postwar order, this illusory anomaly we’ve lived in for 80 years, was built by people who were scarred by two World Wars in 33 years. Orders are never permanent. Every previous order fell, and this one will too, except we’ll have drones and AI to make even bigger mountains of skulls next time.
And this is where Paglia’s statements become more important because in a real breakdown, the people with weapons and the will to use them will control the food, fuel, and shelter first. You know who does that the most? Men. The tech level doesn’t matter, either. It never has. From melee weapons, through missile weapons, to firearms, to drones, conflict has been the province of men. Testosterone and its resulting aggression reign supreme. They end up dominating everyone who doesn’t have resources, and eventually you get stability.
Do you know what’s downstream from that? Patriarchy.
That’s the irony facing the women that Paglia’s discussing here: what they despise the most is the only thing that will save them when this order is gone someday. If you don’t believe me, then look at how many patriarchal societies still exist in the world today, or read about the sack of Berlin in 1945.
Paglia is right: women should be treated as adults. And that includes women understanding what their rights are protected by.
UPDATE: Eric S. Raymond:
Anybody who’s being honest about the Cornell rape accusations needs to confront a basic fact about the way many young women in American society behave.
We are constantly exhorted to believe that intoxicated women are incapable of giving consent, and booze-lubricated sex should be considered rape.
But young women not uncommonly get drunk in public to disinhibit themselves and signal sexual availability. This gives them the get-out-of-guilt card that they’re nice girls, but the booze — or some guy — did it.
I’m not writing today to either approve or disapprove of that particular mating behavior. What I’m here to point out is that the no-drunken-consent scolds are being deeply dishonest.
This bullshit needs to stop. The pretense that intoxicated women don’t routinely put themselves in that state to collect sexual rewards is — hypocritical is just not as strong enough word. It’s corrosive.
It’s corrosive of trust. Corrosive of good morals. How can we expect young men to have any respect for what older adults tell them about sexual right conduct when we start by laying this whopper of a lie on them?
It used to be we could sort of tolerate this nonsense. But the corruption of the term “rape”, the removal of the assumption that physical coercion is involved, makes it much worse. A guy at a party has to deal with the possibility that the chick with booze on her breath who has obviously decided he’s her stud for the night might turn around and hit him with a “rape” accusation that will ruin his life a week later. Even if he was objectively as kind and loving and willing to take no for an answer as anyone could ask for.
Is this fair to anybody? It’s cruel to men, likely to make them angry and uncaring. It infantilizes women.
Wouldn’t happen under Sharia law.