Notre Dame Faces Lawsuit For Wrongful Explusion, And These Cases Are Getting WAY Too Common.

According to this, a former Notre Dame student who has filed a lawsuit against the university using the pseudonym “John Doe,” is accusing the school of launching a discriminatory investigation against him, which ultimately resulted in his expulsion.

NDU found John guilty of stalking, dating violence, and harassment of his ex-girlfriend (who’s being called “Jane Roe” in the suit), and expelled him just three weeks in advance of his graduation.

This is one of many similar cases being filed by young men all over the country, who are being accused of harassment and sexual assault and facing the consequences for those crimes without due process.  The reason?  Universities have bent over backwards to respond to the debunked claim that “1 in 5 women will be sexually assaulted in college” by “over-correcting” and making criminals out of men without giving them a chance to tell their side of the story.

John Doe is asking for damages (amount not disclosed), and he also wants the chance to take his final exams and graduate.   He claims that Notre Dame has “created an atmosphere of institutional hostility toward accused male students.”

Here’s the backstory:

John and Jane dated for about a year, and had what his lawsuit describes as an “intimate but tumultuous” relationship.  John became depressed after the suicide of colleague, and started having suicidal thoughts of his own.  When John and Jane broke up in November of 2016, Jane filed a complaint with Notre Dame, accusing John of sending her endless text messages threatening suicide and harassing her.

So what did Notre Dame do?  They automatically filed her complaint into the “Sexual Assault, Sexual Misconduct, Dating Violence, Domestic Violence, Stalking, and/or Hostile Environment Policies” category.  This meant that the investigation was focused on sexual motivations, and the university chose to ignore critical pieces of evidence from John.  Namely:

1.  They didn’t consider video evidence of Jane telling a friend, “I want to fuck up [John’s] reputation; I want to make sure he never has a girlfriend… here or anywhere…and I want him never to be able to have a social life.”  YIKES.  THAT SEEMS KIND OF RELEVANT.
2. They “cherry picked” text messages, which didn’t show the full story.
3.  They didn’t contact John’s witnesses.
4.  They didn’t consider the expert opinion of John’s therapist, who apparently would have confirmed that ties between John and Jane had been completely severed.

The suit states, “The University’s conduct was so severe, pervasive, and objectively offensive that it denied John equal access to education that Title IX is designed to protect.”

A judge will rule this week on a temporary restraining order that would allow John to take his finals and graduate, and neither his attorney nor the school’s attorneys would comment further.

A whole bunch of similar cases have been filed all over the country, and are either pending or have been settled, including suits against the University of Miami, Cornell, University of Texas, Clemson, and Purdue.

Now, the way these complaints are SUPPOSED to work is that each student, the accuser and accused, is to be treated EQUALLY during an investigation.  But because there is such a push by feminists and other SJWs to go after men, and because universities are scared of being accused of not taking women’s sexual harassment claims seriously enough and are therefore minimizing the rights of male students, we can expect to see more and more of these cases.

Listen – sexual assault is wrong.  Obviously.  But so are false claims of sexual assault.  This all reminds me of an article we wrote for the Indianapolis Star a few years ago. 

In it, we talked about sexual conduct policies and consent rules on campuses.  Some policies actually state that the withdrawal of consent, “can be based on an outward demonstration that conveys that an individual is hesitant, confused, uncertain, or is no longer a mutual participant.”

Let’s just unpack that.  Aren’t MOST initial sexual encounters fraught with hesitance and uncertainty?  And more importantly, as we wrote about these policies, “A woman can claim that you should’ve been able to tell she was hesitant or uncertain because of things she didn’t say.”

Consent rules on campus fail to hold women to ANY ACCOUNT for their behavior.  And because it’s simple for women to throw down the sexual assault card, even when it’s simply because they regret throwing themselves at a guy the night before, it’s happening more often.  And guys must shoulder all of the responsibility.

As we pointed out in that piece:

If a guy has been drinking heavily, he’s responsible for his behavior. If a girl has been drinking heavily, she’s not responsible for her own behavior. In no other instance is this true (both sexes are responsible if they choose to drink and drive, for example).

 

In the case of John and Jane Doe at Occidental College, both were drunk. Both agreed to have sex. Jane even asked if John had a condom, and texted her friends to announce her plans to have sex. But John was held entirely responsible and was the “only member of the pair obligated to evaluate the mental capacities of his partner.” Jane was faultless. She regretted her actions, and therefore decided John had sexually assaulted her. How is this OK with anyone?

What’s most ironic about the current sexual climate on campuses is that feminists actually created this problem.  They fought for their sexual liberation, insisting that they were entitled to the same kind of sexual freedom that men enjoyed, and now they’re demanding universities create complicated policies to protect them from all of the mean, scary boys they were so determined to sleep with.  They want sexual freedom, but refuse to take responsibility for their own behavior.

Expect a lot more John Doe cases to come.  I’m just sayin’.