University of Virginia president Teresa Sullivan’s premature accusation against fraternities illustrates the standard of justice for men accused of rape.  Therefore, there is a need for a new standard in judging rape accusers: Lying Until Proven Otherwise.  Making this a publically-stated default position blunts the feminist charge of insensitivity towards alleged victims. University Administrator to Female Student: “I’m sorry, Ms. Led, I can’t help you with your complaint because of the Lupo Higher Education Act of 2016.  My hands are tied.”

If a purported victim didn’t fight back; didn’t scream; has no injuries; does not mention the use of any weapon; was within 20 yards of a hundred people who would have instantly defended her; admits that she never indicated that her alleged assailant should stop; is afraid of her alleged assailant without specifying exactly what threats, if any, he made to keep her from talking; is afraid of her alleged assailant because of undocumented threats he allegedly made to keep her from talking, threats totally out of character for him; glosses over the physical act in her description of her ordeal; doesn’t use the word “rape” but let’s others use it; went on future dates with her alleged rapist after the incident or otherwise maintained a documented, cordial relationship; had to be convinced by someone else that she was raped; is afraid of her university’s mascot, statues, or hit songs; and didn’t report anything to the police until much later (if ever), we should now take the initial stance that she is a liar, which includes naming her—since by assumption she is not a victim—if the media mentions the name of the accused.

(Ironically, the University of Ohio accuser did go to the police that same night, but of all the recent rape accusers in the news, there is the strongest evidence against her that she had consensual relations, since about two dozen people saw it and captured it on video.)


Crying Wolf: Feminist Carolyn Luby says this University of Connecticut logo promotes “rape culture.”

A good example is the Tucker Reed case, which Occidental College professor of politics, Caroline Heldman, and her student, S.C.U.M. myrmidon Baillee Brown, discuss in a dangerous and misleading article, “Campus Rape: Why Not Law Enforcement?


It’s rather gross to go through the details, but here is Miss Reed’s own account:

He and I ended up making out on my couch. When he started taking off my clothes, I moved the make-out session to my bedroom in case my roommates came home.

Eventually naked, in my bed, my date told me he wanted to have sex. I told him repeatedly that I did not want to.

All of us agree that at this point she has not given consent. “That I wanted it to be special.” She has not given consent. “That I wasn’t ready.” She has not given consent. “That having sex so soon would ruin our relationship.” She has not given consent. “But it happened anyway.” She gave consent!

Not sure about that? Reed continues: “I told him he was hurting me and I tried to pull away.” First of all, it’s he-said-she-said—sorry if our code of justice is too exacting for Heldman and Brown, but, regardless, the act’s hurting doesn’t mean “stop” and (trying) to pull away doesn’t mean “stop,” as anyone who has engaged in the act would know: it can mean “stop,” but it can also not mean “stop.” If Reed had said, “Stop,” that’s a different story, but she didn’t.  (I’m using the exact same logic applied to the woman on the street who recorded men chatting her up in New York, after which many feminists collectively ordered men to only attempt to say, “Hello,” to a woman if she tells them they can: women are adults and can and will make their desires known.)

Reed continues, “He pulled me closer. In the end, after he was done, I interpreted it as a ‘misunderstanding’—surely he’d just been too drunk to listen.” Ignoring the fact that under feminist interpretations of California law she’d be the rapist (she gives no indication that she had been drinking, but states clearly that she knew he had been drinking)—Reed is stating that she did not consider it rape, but later retroactively withdrew consent.

I had continued to see my rapist. He’d told me he was in love with me and wanted to marry me.

And when did she withdraw consent? “It took me a year to talk openly about my experience.” A year? OK, fine. So that’s when she went to the police? “I told my best friend.” No, she went to the police two years later.

She knows English. “No” means “no.” She’s heard that expression 1,000 times and could have said it a thousand-and-first time herself.

We all get it. One can create a scenario that we all would agree was rape where the woman does not say, “Stop.” But for Heldman and Brown to claim that this is such a clear-cut case of rape (or a case of rape period) is appalling and I hope someday soon we will see successful defamation lawsuits.  There is already a petition on to fire University of Virginia president Teresa Sullivan.

The new standard of justice—Lying Until Proven Otherwise (“the Lupo Doctrine”)—goes against our white-knight upbringing. But every revolution begins with one man saying, “No.”

And meaning it.

Read More: Say Hello To The New Definition Of Rape

Send this to a friend