2/3/2025 - Trump Orders Schools to Ease Sex Assault Rules
2/3/2025 - Trump Orders Schools to Ease Sex Assault Rules
The new Title IX rules will provide more protections for those accused of sexual misconduct, and eliminate LGBT protections adopted under Biden.
You're viewing part of a thread.
Which would you rather have: more rapes, or more kids kicked out of school for false allegations?
If this is a hard question, then I hope you gain experiences that make it easier to decide. Learning is important.
Plus, the false allegation thing is kinda bunk. If it happens, then sue them for libel. Since there isn't a lot of that going on, I think it's less of an issue than, ya know, rape.
Anecdotally, I know four rape victims that didn't come forward. I know zero men who were falsely accused. I'm sure I'm not special in this regard.
Which would you rather have: more rapes, or more kids kicked out of school for false allegations?
It's a false dichotomy. There are other ways to prevent rape at schools without throwing away due process.
Plus, the false allegation thing is kinda bunk. If it happens, then sue them for libel. Since there isn't a lot of that going on, I think it's less of an issue than, ya know, rape.
Yes, because common students routinely have 10s of thousands of $ to pay for lawyers to probably not even get back the same amount.
Anecdotally, I know four rape victims that didn't come forward. I know zero men who were falsely accused. I'm sure I'm not special in this regard.
So you are saying throwing away due process did not even work to make them come forward in the first place, since this was repealed just now.
If there were other ways to prevent rape, they would be there already. So you're clearly wrong.
I agree we should provide free law services to people without money so they can get justice just like the rich people. Let's do that. And we can do that without endangering young girls.
There is no due process being thrown away. These people aren't going to jail. They're being kicked out of school. A school can kick out a child for literally anything that isn't a protected class. Rape allegations seems like a pretty good reason to kick someone out, especially compared to some other reasons people have been kicked out, like protesting.
If there were other ways to prevent rape, they would be there already. So you're clearly wrong.
Ah, my bad. I did not realize a good government healthcare is not possible because it is not already there.
Also a shame safer roads are impossible to build, otherwise they already would have. Or walkable cities. Mass transit.
Yeah, something good not already existing clearly means it is not possible. I will give up any attempt to improve anything at once. /s
There is no due process being thrown away. These people aren't going to jail.
Oh, my apologies. Did not know anything that does not put you in jail does not deserve due process. You must be so angry at Luigi and his fans since clearly rejecting insurance claims is also not putting you in jail and does not deserve any due process. It is just financial ruin, same as having student loans without a degree. Not an issue at all. /s
A school can kick out a child for literally anything that isn't a protected class.
Ah yes, the "things are already bad so we should make them worse" argument. Also, its not even really true.
Seriously, what the fuck are these arguments of yours? You can't possibly believe them yourself. Are you just trying to retroactively come up with arguments for a policy you just insist on believing because the guy who said it had (D) after their name? Just making up arguments for others, without actually using them to shape your own opinions?
Ok, so you agree there aren't things in place to prevent rape. Only that there could one day be. Great. Go do that. The lack of its current existence makes it irrelevant to the conversation. That's my point.
Due process is very very clearly a legal term. Private institutions aren't required to follow anything like it. You need to differentiate between what IS and what you wish were the case.
I don't care who made the rule. Fuck the Democrats. I care that women who are raped are being silenced. It's literally that simple.
Go do that.
Go elect me for office and I will. Until then, there is nothing I can do for you.
Due process is very very clearly a legal term. Private institutions aren't required to follow anything like it.
What the fuck do you think we are talking about this whole fucking time? Title IX mandates a process schools have to follow. Trumps changes bring it closer to what is considered a due process. The whole fucking conversation is about whether that is a good thing.
You need to differentiate between what IS and what you wish were the case.
It literally IS. You are the one seething that men are now actually granted reasonable due process protections.
I care that women who are raped are being silenced.
How the fuck are they being silenced? It literally requires the opposite, that they testify properly.
I honestly can't make you understand this.
Just because a law says you have to do something doesn't make it due process. Registering your car isn't due process. You don't get due process unless you're in court. This isn't that. There is no court. A "hearing" of school officials isn't due process. There's no sentencing. There's no lawyers. There's no guilty or not guilty. There's a bunch of school admins doing a dance and then picking if you get kicked out.
How are they being silenced? Because anytime you make something harder, more embarrassing, or riskier, people won't do it. This is also not hard to understand.
Again, I can hear it in your words and tone. You WANT this to be true. You want women to be brave enough to always stand up for themselves. You WANT a fair process with legal style standards to impose true justice based on facts. This isn't that. It doesn't get you closer to that. All it does it shut women up by making it harder for them to do the right thing.
Just because a law says you have to do something doesn't make it due process.
So your entire argument is that I am misusing a word, because I am using it in the context of how it is commonly understood vs the legal definition? Yeah, great argument.
How are they being silenced? Because anytime you make something harder, more embarrassing, or riskier, people won't do it. This is also not hard to understand.
I understand that. I don't understand why you believe it is significantly harder or more embarrassing to have one more person (lawyer) in the room and to answer their questions, in addition to already having to tell the story to strangers appointed by the school anyway. It's nearly insignificant difference compared to how much damage false allegations do.
PS: If you want to pointlessly focus on word lawyering.
Citizens may also be entitled to have the government observe or offer fair procedures, whether or not those procedures have been provided for in the law on the basis of which it is acting. Action denying the process that is “due” would be unconstitutional. Suppose, for example, state law gives students a right to a public education, but doesn't say anything about discipline. Before the state could take that right away from a student, by expelling her for misbehavior, it would have to provide fair procedures, i.e. “due process.”
But I was never trying to talk about legal definition but the common sense right not to be punished by government law/regulation without reason.
Ah, okay. I'm sorry that I assumed you meant the word that you said and couldn't read your mind. I'll keep working on that telepathy, and you keep working on being accurate. One day we'll understand each other.
Now if what you want is fairness, explain to me how the administration on these panels can be unbiased when their salaries and jobs rely on the fact that they're not known as the "rape university". Explain to me how these victims could appeal an unfair judgment made by biased administration.
Our legal process is filled with ways to make sure you get a fair trial, and even then not everyone does. This kangaroo court they're setting up does not have any of those provisions and will not be fair. All it does is dissuade people from reporting.
Our legal process is filled with ways to make sure you get a fair trial, and even then not everyone does. This kangaroo court they're setting up does not have any of those provisions and will not be fair. All it does is dissuade people from reporting.
So your alternative is, let's not even try to have a court with evidence, let's just have one kangoroo decide whose life gets ruined based on their prejudices.
Now if what you want is fairness, explain to me how the administration on these panels can be unbiased when their salaries and jobs rely on the fact that they're not known as the "rape university".
How is that not the current situation already? Also, since when this does not work the other way as well, not wanting to be known as "university that protects rapists"?
Ok good. Almost there.
So both systems (current and previous) are horribly unfair and prone to abuse by the administration. Right? We now agree on that, yes?
If I have to pick between an unfair system with extra rape, or an unfair system with extra kids getting kicked out of school for no reason, I'm picking the one with less rape.