George Santayana reminded us that “those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” And at stunning speed, it’s happening as Trump’s MAGA flailing has emboldened the left to return to the bad old days of rape hysteria. One day’s string of New York Times headlines tells the tale.
Hochul Names Letitia James as Special Prosecutor in Cornell Case
Cornell Students Call for Change at Fiery Public Meeting
Men Accused in Cornell Sex Assault Suit Give Varying Accounts of Night
How a Cornell Student Went From Shame to Action
N.Y. Lawmakers and Victims Push to Change Rape Law in Intoxication Cases
Parents Are Talking About Consent After Cornell Rape Allegations
It remains an article of faith under Feminism 4.0 that women are too helpless and frail to be capable of deciding whether they want to have drunken sex, or sex with multiple people, while simultaneously being strong and capable when it suits them. They still “believe the woman” no matter how many times the story changes and despite what the evidence shows, or fails to show, because the litany of excuses that render a “survivor,” the title given upon mere accusation to evoke mindless sympathy, that rationalize away every failing that would otherwise be expected of a normal, competent human being.
Having written about this at great length too many times in the past, there is no reason to repeat myself. Do you remember or are you condemned to repeat the past?
Nancy Rommelmann explained why feminists should neither need nor want the government in their bedroom. Camille Paglia too.
The eternally-validated Camille Paglia on the Cornell case.
“The sexual revolution must be undone because middle-class women can’t handle it. They cannot take responsibility for their own actions.”
pic.twitter.com/FEXSjUd7M0— Suffragent (@Suffragent_) October 1, 2026
Explaining what happened with the Cornell criminal and Title IX matters with facts, stripped of hysteria, Justin Dillon and KC Johnson, who stood as pretty much the lone voice of sanity during the Duke Lacrosse hysteria, called it as well.
The mob has now come for Cornell. And this time, it even has a superhero.
Last week, a female Cornell student claiming to have been gang-raped by members of the Chi Phi fraternity almost two years ago sued Cornell, Chi Phi, various Cornell administrators, and — by name — the seven Cornell students who were allegedly involved in the rape. The case quickly went viral, and the reactions have broken down along predictably partisan lines — with everyone from Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez to Hollywood actress Florence Pugh (who plays the Black Widow–esque Yelena Belova in the Marvel Universe) weighing in, and most people immediately assuming guilt.
Will the New York legislature finally close the “intoxication” loophole? You remember that “loophole,” right? It’s where women get to exercise their freedom to get shitfaced, have as much sex as they want and then get to decide the next day, week or year whether their voluntarily given consent at the moment, upon which their partner(s) relied, magically disappears and consensual sex becomes rape?
Let’s begin with the fact that there is no such thing as an “intoxication loophole.” The rape statutes in New York state already allow anyone to press charges, no matter how inebriated she (or he) is at the time of the assault. The statement from Cuomo’s office that current law “does not adequately protect victims of sexual offenses who could not consent to sexual activity due to voluntary intoxication” is untrue, or true only in the sense that the law does not specifically list “voluntary intoxication” as a category in which someone is unable to give consent. It also does not list “while playing hockey” or “baking brownies,” though during these voluntary activities someone also might not give consent. Should we list these, and if so, who decides what other things women are not capable of deciding for themselves?
Nancy wrote that six years ago, which explains why she’s talking about Cuomo as opposed to Hochul. Now, Hochul is milking this for her own purposes.
I want answers. And I want accountability.
I spoke with Cornell’s president today, and the university has agreed to bring in outside counsel for an independent investigation.
I’ve directed my team to look at what more we can do to strengthen protections for survivors.
This… pic.twitter.com/yDLOgi4svz
— Governor Kathy Hochul (@GovKathyHochul) September 30, 2026
There are two things that go wholly unmentioned and unrecognized by Gov. Hochul, who asserts that a sexual assault happened when that lies at the very core of the matter. The presumption of innocence and due process. When the governor, not to mention senators and representatives, proclaims that a crime has been committed first with an investigation to follow, the problem isn’t any lack of investigation. The problem is that the outcome isn’t what rape hysteria demands.
If the Cornell Jane Doe wanted to get drunk, get high, have sex with multiple partners, she’s fully entitled to assert her agency and make it happen. What she cannot do is change her mind afterward, be relieved of any responsibility for her choices, and turn her consensual sex partners into criminals.
Discover more from Simple Justice
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Kamala Harris.
“I know that every trial requires fairness and truth. Any trial that abandons the pursuit of truth cannot be considered fair or just.”
People claiming to know things they cannot possibly know are fools at best. No one will ever know what happened in the room the night of the event. The participants were reportedly all fucked up on alcohol and ketamine, which they shouldn’t be abusing at the same time anyway. Was anyone in the house sober at all? Memory is already messy enough as it is. It’ll be impossible to recreate exactly what happened based on what I understand from reports, and it’s her burden to put up the necessary evidence which simply might not exist.
Be brave and say, “I don’t know.”
Next mantra should probably be, “accusation is not proof.” Then, “conviction depends upon evidence and due process of law.” “Innocent until proven guilty,” doesn’t seem to be cutting it alone. I prefer, “I don’t know,” because I don’t know covers the rest once unpacked. But then, I don’t know.
As of right now it appears the two claims of the mob are false: 1. the police and district attorney took Jane Doe’s statement and then did nothing with it and, 2. Cornell only expelled two of the accused and made the rest write essays.
Hopefully, the NYT or some other outlet will release the full transcript of Jane Doe’s interview with Cornell PD, which was the basis for the shorter summary that was forwarded to the D.A. for legal analysis as to whether the events she described were rape under New York law. I’d like to read her summary statement as well. The NYT reported that she gave the statement over two days with a Title IX investigator and some kind of student advocate present. Afterward, the police typed up a summary of their interview. She read it and made twenty handwritten changes in the margins. The next day, she returned to the PD, reviewed the statement and signed it.
So, from what we know right now, the police interviewed Jane Doe and worked with her to prepare her summary statement, which she reviewed, changed twenty times and signed. Cornell PD forwarded Jane Doe’s statement to the district attorney for his review to determine whether a crime had been committed. The DA determined that the facts described by Jane Doe in her summary did not meet the elements of rape in New York. His office reached out to Jane Doe and offered to explain their reasoning to her but either they couldn’t reach her or she declined.
On the university side, they apparently suspended all of the accused right away to “protect” Jane Doe, without any due process or investigation first for the accused. The university then convened a staff fact-finding panel that met at least twelve times over a period of months. That panel interviewed Jane Doe one day, and then each of the accused on separate days. They perhaps deliberated over the testimony and other evidence they gathered during the other meetings. At the end of the panel’s investigation, two of the accused were expelled. Suspensions of at least two semesters were given to some or most of the others. I think one was cleared of any wrongdoing. The fraternity was banned from campus.
From the detailed accounts carried by AP, NY and CNN, it sure looks like her real complaint was that the frat boys spread the word al over campus. The impact of that publicity upon her reputation was, by the complainant’s own admission, the catalyst for her epiphany that an assault had occurred. It just isn’t credible, and all the nose ring feminarchists weighing in with their pseudo-psychovictimology aren’t credible either. On one wing of the wing-nuttery, the outrage mob descended to terrorize the family of a Marine sergeant who has never been to Cornell. It seems his name was similar to an intended fratboy defendant, and some yutz served him by mistake.