D '10 says:

I hate it when law-illiterate morons threaten to take legal action against people for non-crimes. Get your act together Yale Women's Center.

January 21, 2008 7:18 PM

Y '11 says:

I hate it when ignorant morons hold up a sign that is derogatory to women in front of the parent organization of the support group for rape victims on campus. The Yale Women's Center should clearly respond to this photograph. There is a case to be made for sexual harassment here, and sexual harassment is a crime. Get your act together, Zeta Psi.

January 21, 2008 7:37 PM

Y '10 says:

sexual harassment involves a hostile or abusive work/educational environment. this is both hostile and abusive.

January 21, 2008 7:49 PM

YLS '09 says:

Dear "D'10"I feel beholden to report that the Supreme Court disagrees with your interpretation of what is and what is not sexual harassment. In its 1999 decision, Davis v. Monroe County Bd. of Educ., (119 S.Ct. 1661), the Court extended the liability of Title IX to include "student-on-student" sexual harassment.

January 21, 2008 7:57 PM

Chartertiger says:

who were these guys sexually harassing?

January 21, 2008 8:04 PM

Y' 11 says:

This is CLEARLY sexual harassment. This is a disgusting demonstration of misogyny and biggotry- I hope that the Yale Women's Center takes Zeta Psi down.

January 21, 2008 8:07 PM

yale slut says:

Keep your laws off my 3rd way feminism!

January 21, 2008 8:07 PM

Columbia '11 says:

YLS '09. I'll hope that your mastery of the law is better than your mastery of the complicated comment-posting mechanism. I don't believe anyone is questioning whether student-on-student sexual harassment is a crime, but whether or not it has actually taken place here. The picture is obviously offensive, however the men pictured are not sexually harassing anyone pictured (except perhaps the Woman's Center building itself). Who is it exactly who is being harassed? I would guess that that would depend on how the picture was (or maybe intended to be) distributed. Though I'm no law student.

January 21, 2008 8:08 PM

Y '10 says:

Yes, but if they simply took a picture and uploaded it on facebook, who was sexually harassed? I fail to see an individual who has standing... Had they sent it to the women's center

January 21, 2008 8:09 PM

Uncle Toby says:

Between the stoner at bottom right, doo-rag at center and all-around idiot at left, I wouldn't be too offended. Are we sure Vayner isn't hiding in this photo somewhere?

January 21, 2008 8:09 PM

Y' 11 says:

This is CLEARLY sexual harassment. This is a disgusting demonstration of misogyny and biggotry- I hope that the Yale Women's Center takes Zeta Psi down.

January 21, 2008 8:12 PM

Y '11 says:

How about the members of the Yale Women's Center to start. Or women at Yale in general. As a woman at Yale, I certainly feel harassed by this photograph. The picture was posted on facebook though, by a boy without privacy limitations, so that everyone on the Yale network could view it. I don't know how a court will consider this form of distribution.

January 21, 2008 8:14 PM

Y '11 says:

Regardless of whether or not a court of law would declare this photo to constitute sexual harassment, this picture is disgusting, and should nauseate and infuriate any person who considers him or herself a decent human being. I personally hope each and every one of those boys gets exactly what he deserves: a visit to ExCom and a swift kick in the balls.

January 21, 2008 8:24 PM

Y' 09 says:

This is free speech baby ;-) There is no grounds for a suit, especially since no reasonable person--representative of community standards--could ever take this picture seriously. These are fraternity pledges, this is COLLEGE, let boys be boys. If you don't like what they say, then don't talk to them, sleep with them, or go to football games at all for that matter. But I can tell you one thing, plenty of girls still will ;-).

January 21, 2008 8:27 PM

linz says:

In my personal experience, I have found the members of the women's center board to be some of the most intelligent, passionate and savvy students at yale.I have no doubt in their ability to make these frat retards' lives a living hell, and rightly so.

January 21, 2008 8:31 PM

IvyLaw says:

Women of Yale, in general, may feel harassed, but they have no legal standing to sue these losers.
The Yale Women's Center might have standing, but it sure as hell seems unlikely. These losers were excercising free speech. Plus, Yale should and will squelch this.
Yale, however, may do whatever it wants to these guys, especially the dude holding the sign. But I'll bet the fraternity makes a big apology, commits to some form of pro-women community service, and the WOmen's Center remains pissed at their inability to do anything.

January 21, 2008 8:31 PM

Y '11 says:

http://www.yale.edu/hronline/forms/shbroch.pdf

this is clearly an example of sexual harassment. yes, what else can we expect of fraternity pledges? But, that doesn't mean that we shouldn't try to CHANGE the way they act. The Women's Center is the ONE place on campus where women should feel safe.

January 21, 2008 8:43 PM

keggy says:

If Yale had their Greek life regulatory shit together, there would be no need for legal action, because the frat would be either suspended, or de-recognized. If this shit happened at Dartmouth, that frat would be gone before you even had a chance to file suit.

January 21, 2008 8:48 PM

Y '11 says:

This is hate speech baby ;-) There are certainly grounds for a suit, especially since every reasonable person--"representative of community standards"-- looks at this picture and is deeply offended. These are fraternity pledges, this is blatant SEXUAL HARASSMENT, lets knock these "boys" off their high horses. I don't like what they say, I certainly won't talk to them, nor sleep with them (for moral and fear of catching some horrible STD). And I can tell you one thing Y '09, plenty of girls are damned pissed about this and things ARE going to change. ;-)

I am proud that I go to a school where the Women's Center is not scared and will not tolerate this type of ridiculous behaviour.

January 21, 2008 8:49 PM

Y '11 says:

This is hate speech baby ;-) There are certainly grounds for a suit, especially since every reasonable person--"representative of community standards"-- looks at this picture and is deeply offended. These are fraternity pledges, this is blatant SEXUAL HARASSMENT, lets knock these "boys" off their high horses. I don't like what they say, I certainly won't talk to them, nor sleep with them (for moral and fear of catching some horrible STD). And I can tell you one thing Y '09, plenty of girls are damned pissed about this and things ARE going to change. ;-)

I am proud that I go to a school where the Women's Center is not scared and will not tolerate this type of ridiculous behaviour.

January 21, 2008 8:54 PM

Y '09 says:

Nope, this isn't hate speech, silly. No one is being "hated" on. I believe "love" is the key word. And when a reasonable person looks at it, they think it's pretty damn funny. Why don't you go pick up a copy of the Rumpus? The entire thing is full of the same stuff. Articles about crazy hipsters, about Yale druggies, about "Toad's sluts", this is along the same lines. I don't understand how you cannot see this as a joke. And in front of the Yale Women's Center? The picture is a freakin riot hahah.

January 21, 2008 8:55 PM

@ YLS '09 says:

if you think that this is a winnable case on sexual harassment, you are a complete idiot. free speech totally covers these lads, at least in this country. hopefully in the next three semesters you will learn some of the fundamentals of your profession.

granted, these kids are a bunch of asshats.

January 21, 2008 9:01 PM

Another Y'09 says:

How is this hate speech? These men are professing their love for Yale sluts. And let's face it, without Yale sluts, Yale would be just like its older bro in Cambridge.

January 21, 2008 9:04 PM

yalesluts says:

GODDAMN YALE SLUTS ARE SO FUCKING WHORISH

January 21, 2008 9:06 PM

Y' 09 says:

Amen to that brotha "Anotha '09". We should be honest with each other, we all need some of the lovely ladies those frat boys are talking about to keep our beds warm at night.

January 21, 2008 9:08 PM

Y '07 says:

Tasteless? Yes. Sexual harassment? No. Legal action? LOL. Cupcakes at the Women's Center need to worry about more important things... like shaving their pits and finding a boy thirsty enough to lay with them.

January 21, 2008 9:18 PM

Another Y says:

By no means should Zeta Psi be viewed as reflective of other Yale fraternities (they are not frats!) However, what they did offensive to the Women's Center and its principles, but come on--THIS IS COLLEGE. Lighten up.

January 21, 2008 9:20 PM

Y '09 says:

Yes, it is absolutely true: any reasonable member of the Yale community who looks at this should be appalled and outraged. Appalled and outraged that some people at their school are so easily offended that they won't allow even a simple act of obvious humor TO BE POSTED ON FACEBOOK without threatening a lawsuit. I can already see the inevitable apologetic open letter from President Levin, the string of forums, rallies, and talks on tolerance they will organize around campus in response to this 'unconscionable' act. Does no special interest group at Yale realize how polarizing and distasteful this inane reflexive objection to humor is? "Unwilling to be enrolled in a school where woman-hating is a subject of pride"? ...Try "unwilling to be enrolled in a school where nothing can be funny anymore"

January 21, 2008 9:36 PM

Y '11 says:

The whole reason that the Women's Center is up in arms about this photograph is because "this is college." The Women's Center isn't against fun, nor does it lack a sense of humor. It's just that behavior like this isn't funny, not when sexism is so ingrained in our culture that shit like this is allowed to happen. Crimes against women, from date rape to wage discrepancies, are the result of society's negative attitudes towards girls. Feminists of the Women's Center know that everything they represent starts with trying to effect change in culture, and frat culture is a great place to begin on a college campus, especially when Zeta Psi just handed them a lawsuit on a silver platter.

January 21, 2008 9:38 PM

Y'10 says:

I don't care if this is college or not. "Boys will be boys" doesn't cut it anymore. These shitholes need to be held accountable for their actions. They are creating a "hostile environment" for women and anyone who respects women on campus. And I find it offensive when people think that we should "lighten up" about this. Did anyone tell the African-American community at Yale to "lighten up" when someone spray-painted the words "nigger school" outside Pierson College?? This is absolutely repugnant and unacceptable. I'm ashamed of my university for not coming down stronger against this. Misogyny is NOT ok and it is NOT funny.

January 21, 2008 9:40 PM

Y '07 says:

Y'10 I have some advice... Sign up for match.com and get laid. I'm willing to bet you're a chill person, just the lack of sex in your life has made you an extremely bitter person.

And as a black male I am highly offended that you compared this stunt, in which frat boys are expressing their love for the sluts of Yale, to the word nigger being tagged on campus. Grow up.

January 21, 2008 9:52 PM

not sure i get it says:

i'm female. i guess i sorta understand what this is all about... the word slut, right?

would it be a big deal for the frat guys to say "we love yale's sexually active women"?

i don't know maybe that's offensive too?

but i wonder if this lawsuit hurts *the cause* more than it helps... wouldn't it be better for the YWC to be above the fray, maybe write an editorial about the history of the use of the word slut and why it's offensive?

i'm not saying they don't have a right to sue. but *should* they?

January 21, 2008 10:20 PM

1st Amendment says:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

I guess the founding fathers ran out of ink before getting to the "Except when its like, totally not what we want to hear."

January 21, 2008 10:51 PM

agoodfriend says:

Just wanted to highlight my good friend, Giovanni Christodoulou, holding the sign. Props, man.

January 21, 2008 10:53 PM

^ says:

to understand the suit you have to understand the philosophy of feminism. Feminists don't like the word slut because it is one of many words they feel reflects a history of objectification. So they want it stricken from common vernacular of polite societies. It is not unlike an african american's objection to the word "nigger" which is offensive not so much for its meaning, but for its connotation. So do you see now why these guys are a bunch of insensitive fucktards? If not, look more closely at the picture and draw the appropriate stereotype from everyone else you know who wears a doorag, smokes black and milds, or throws up "west-side" in photographs.

I don't care if the suit is valid, or not. I just want to see the guy in the doorag in his best suit, hair combed, pleading before a judge, while his mom is carefully planning how she is going to chew him out on the ride home.

January 21, 2008 11:06 PM

^'11 says:

Girls who are pissed about this never get laid and are envious of the slutty Yale girls.

January 21, 2008 11:15 PM

1st Amendment says:

^: I understood there reasoning. Understanding it doesn't make it any less retarded/ groundless.

January 21, 2008 11:18 PM

i hate psets says:

For SURE no legal basis for a law suit--I mean, the KKK is allowed to have peaceful demonstrations and post pictures of them on the internet. But I'm sure ExCom can do whatever they want with these morons since this is on Yale property.

January 21, 2008 11:23 PM

listen says:

I anticipate an letter in the YDN, filled with bravado, bemoaning the situation, making a ridiculous analogy to some of the recent hate crime scenarios at Yale, and threatening further legal action. I am fairly certain that the WC has not actually sought legal counsel yet. Guts and gusto before good research. They may have a case, but they don't know for sure yet. This coming from someone who knows a few members of the Executive Board and has a fairly refined sense of their sensibilities.

January 21, 2008 11:38 PM

y'10 says:

While it seems unlikely that the YWC has a case in this situation, this picture is not at all funny. As a woman who really does not consider herself a feminisit, I still find this very offensive. "Jokes" like this further propogate the double standard in our society, where women who sleep around are "sluts" and are looked down upon, while men who sleep around are praised and encouraged to brag about their exploits. I mean, think about it, if the Pi Phi girls posed with a sign saying "we love to f*ck yale men" or some sh*t like that, it wouldn't be funny at all, they would be looked down upon. To dismiss this with a simple "guys will be guys" is a very narrow and closeminded approach. I'm dissapointed that on a campus dedicated to equal opportunity and embracing differences that more people are not outraged by this appaling display of sexism.

January 22, 2008 12:04 AM

my2cents says:

I think the best punishment is to print these boys' names along with the photo. That way, any future employers, prospective significant others and parents in laws, etc. can easily find it through Google.

January 22, 2008 12:06 AM

agoodfriend says:

Yep that's why I commented with the sign holder's name above. He's the star running back who scored Yale's only touchdown in the Yale-Harvard game. Really great kid...

January 22, 2008 12:12 AM

you are wrong says:

y'10: that is a false analogy. if women possessed a sex drive comparable to a man's it would spell the end of civilization. Evolutionary happenstance has forced the role of discrimination upon the female. It will be this way until the genes controlling the male sex drive have been suppressed. Perhaps this (the suppression of said genes) is the goal of modern feminism, whether explicitly stated or not.

January 22, 2008 12:21 AM

hellzyea says:

"I mean, think about it, if the Pi Phi girls posed with a sign saying "we love to f*ck yale men" or some sh*t like that, it wouldn't be funny at all, they would be looked down upon."

NO IT WOULDNT, THAT WOULD BE AWESOME

January 22, 2008 12:25 AM

Y '10 says:

I mean I think the proper analogy is the Pi Phi girls posing with a sign that says "we love Yale pimps" or something. They wouldn't do that because it would make them look bad, but if they did I'm pretty sure the frats wouldn't get offended and threaten to sue them and if they did, people would probably think the frats were overreacting and being ridiculous.

The situation is analogous - Zeta Psi makes itself look bad with this picture, but the threat to sue is laughably absurd. One of the keys to good advocacy is to respond credibly - an e-mail condemning the picture, an op-ed, or a boycott of Zeta Psi all seem like reasonable responses perhaps, but the threat of a lawsuit is laughably absurd.

January 22, 2008 12:26 AM

hellzyea says:

"I mean, think about it, if the Pi Phi girls posed with a sign saying "we love to f*ck yale men" or some sh*t like that, it wouldn't be funny at all, they would be looked down upon."

NO IT WOULDNT, THAT WOULD BE AWESOME

January 22, 2008 12:29 AM

agoodfriend says:

>> Yep that's why I commented with the sign holder's name above. He's the star running back who scored Yale's only touchdown in the Yale-Harvard game. Really great kid...

Just wanted to emphasize the word only in your comment. Oh and btw, Yale missed the extra point, leaving it at 37-6.

January 22, 2008 12:34 AM

Yale '010 woman says:

I completely understand the arguments against a lawsuit. I don't know the legality of it, but it does seem extreme. However, I am astounded by the presence of "good ol' boys" posting not only excuses, but applause for this hateful display. The issue here is not simply the word "slut" (though that, in itself, is no simple or laughing matter). The larger point is the choice to target a specific group: those women on the Yale campus fighting most for women's rights and equality. And if a group *namely women* finds a word to be offensive and derogatory *namely slut*, then it is. It is derogatory, just as "nigger" or "faggot" are offensive to their respective victims. As for the Pi Phi analogy, I believe the point was that no one would be making excuses for the girls. They would be labeled with the same derogatory language as the frat labeled the women of the Women's Center.

January 22, 2008 12:49 AM

CLS '09 says:

YLS '09 apparently needs a brush-up on constitutional law. Monroe dealt with school officials from a federally-funded school who ignored student-on-student harassment. Title IX only applies to the conduct of recipients of federal funds--i.e. Yale. Not Zeta Psi. Nor its pledges/brothers. There can only be a Title IX action against Yale if Yale doesn't do anything about this. So, these guys at least haven't violated Title IX, themselves. Whether they have violated state anti-discrimination laws is another story, though, and I don't know CT statutory law.

January 22, 2008 1:07 AM

y07 says:

@Yale '010 woman: I'm an avowed (if admittedly male) feminist, and I still think this is hilarious, if only because it is poking fun at the RIDICULOUS, borderline militant behavior of some of the women's center's members. These people aren't good old boys--they just smart enough to realize that you're entirely missing the point. Anybody who construes frat boys saying they like girls who have sex with them as "threatening" needs to chill the fuck out.

Also, I'm not even going to start with the Pi Phi comment...

January 22, 2008 1:11 AM

Yale '09 says:

While I understand the outrage of the Women's Center, I can't help feeling it's a tad misdirected--and because of that, likely to be ineffective. Relatively speaking, this photo is a drop in the bucket. In terms of actual harm done to actual women, every frat party that results in the incapacitation and alcohol-facilitated rape of women is much worse than a bunch of drunken idiots holding up a sign because somebody told them to, in a location that they thought would be funny. Rather than targeting these individuals and ranting about legal action that has dubious grounds at best, the YWC should have been going after the problem at its source long before this. In choosing to go ballistic over this one incident, I fear they're wasting their time and fueling the shrill, trigger-happy stereotype that gives feminists a bad name--and that only does harm to the image of the female sex. Calling Yale "a school where woman-hating is a subject of pride" is making them look as ridiculous as the people in the photo. The best way to combat this particular incident is not to give it more attention than it deserves.

January 22, 2008 1:17 AM

Question says:

So if I go and stand in front of the women's center holding a sign that says I HATE YALE SLUTS, am I gonna get sued too?

I'm a bit confused about what's so offensive. Do sluts at Yale not exist? Do they not deserve attention or love? Are they not welcome at the Women's Center?

January 22, 2008 1:22 AM

Pton '10 says:

It amuses me that the very comments that claim women are being defamed by these frat "retards," fail to see the hate speech they are laying on the mentally handicapped. Are all of those with low IQ's inclined to misogyny?--I think not, in fact, I am sure most are loving and sweet people.

January 22, 2008 1:39 AM

Y '09 says:

Reference to Y'09 above: Maybe if there were a photograph found of the "actual harm" such as incapacitation and alcohol-facilitated rape, the YWC would sue for that. Unfortunately, those photos don't exist because the Canon stays tucked safely in the purse while the painful nonconsensual penetration takes place. Rather, it is not only useful but necessary to fight the seemingly less personal attacks, because those can appeal to the universal victim. It simply comes down to inequality, which bites away at women's sense of self. If women or men think it is okay for the term 'slut' to be thrown around casually, then 12 year-old girls won't think it's all that wrong to lose their virginities to whomever and keep the self-restraint hidden away with the self-respect. 'Boys will be boys' and disrespect those girls who are being girls because that's natural! That's what society has taught us, so OF COURSE there's no need to complain. Why would we try to fight something that has already happened? There's a reason we call it making a difference. Stereotypes should never have developed this way, and the only way we can change them is by pointing out the flaws whenever they appear. And legality is a necessary mechanism to control this behavior, but also to simply set the example of what we should aim to value.

January 22, 2008 1:42 AM

y08 says:

This is sad. Partially because of the overanalysis of a stupid prank, certainly, but also because of a insulting thing done by some stupid freshmen at the behest of stupider upperclassmen. Let's let this whole thing die, people; there's nothing more to be said!

January 22, 2008 1:55 AM

Columbia '08 says:

These guys are total tools both for taking that picture and for looking like they do in it. You go to Yale, you are not thugs. Have some self respect. That said, legal action is laughable.

Also laughable: how no one can figure out IvyGate's comment posting system.

January 22, 2008 2:17 AM

penn11 female says:

i guess i'm in the minority here, but i definitely LOLed. lighten up, seriously.

January 22, 2008 2:21 AM

y10 says:

1st Amendment trumps sexual harassment here. Sexual harassment needs to happen against an individual, not an entire fucking gender. There is no legal action to be taken.

Now, Yale College on the other hand, has every right to shut down Zeta Psi. They shouldn't,IMO, but they could. Freedom of Mother Fucking Speech. You can kill a fetus but you can't use the word "slut"? Where's the logic there?

January 22, 2008 2:32 AM

@hey above says:

Wait, so using words like "slut" encourages 12 year olds to lose their virginities (sic) to whomever? That really doesn't make much sense at all. Seeing as how "slut" is used to insult those who are sexually promiscuous, wouldn't it make them less likely to lose their virginities (sic) to whomever because sexual promiscuity is being criticized?

Furthermore, you criticize inequality and stereotypes, but then go on to equate self-restraint and self-respect. Why can't womyn enjoy sex and have sex frequently and still have self-respect? I know plenty of men who enjoy sex and have sex frequently and still have self-respect, so why can't womyn too? By suggesting that womyn who have sex frequently and thus are not "restrained" lack self-respect, aren't you perpetuating the very stereotypes and inequalities you claim to be criticizing?

January 22, 2008 2:59 AM

Jesus says:

why don't Yale sluts deserve to be loved and accepted?

January 22, 2008 3:03 AM

beth says:

pagliaro on the left

January 22, 2008 3:03 AM

alright says:

enough. the two sides have laid down their claims.

conclusions.

1) a lawsuit wouldn't make sense as it wouldn't hold up in court.

2) while protected legally under free speech, these guys are douche-bags.

4) what will happen is a public apology, blah blah blah some soul searching, repentance, no forgiveness, a demand to accept responsibility, blah, blah blah.

next issue.

there are much bigger problems in the world you stupid fucking americans. like your racist, imperialist government.

January 22, 2008 3:14 AM

Jigga says:

I FUCKING LOVE YALE'S FEMINISTS. THOSE GIRLS HAVE BEEN FUCKING THE WORLD UP FOR THE LAST YEAR AND THEY JUST WON'T BE SHUT DOWN. ROCK ON LIKE THE ROLLING STONES.

January 22, 2008 4:54 AM

counting down says:

Is the insane amount of commenting on this article a product of the fact that Ivies are in the midst of finals (at least, Princeton is), so we're releasing our pent up frustration? Looks that way to me.

January 22, 2008 5:53 AM

Y'10 says:

We're out of finals. Maybe that's the problem...the masses are restless.

January 22, 2008 7:34 AM

y09 says:

i think it's interesting that, because of the mlk holiday, ivygate was able to beat the ydn to the punch on this one.

January 22, 2008 8:30 AM

crimson says:

WHO ARE THEY HARASSING?! You broads need to chill the fuck out.

January 22, 2008 9:02 AM

@crimson says:

they did harass a specific person. read about it in the ydn.

January 22, 2008 9:10 AM

crimson says:

Are you referring to the "Dick!" chant? It sounds like the chant was directed to their pledges who were posing for the photo... Jessica Svendsen ’09 just happened to over hear them and was sooooooo frightened by the word dick (probably because she's never experienced one) that she had to take a detour through the other entrance.
1.) I'm not sure I believe her.
2.) GIVE ME A FUCKING BREAK.
.....and to the person above who said it's cool for men to sleep around. I think sluts can be both men and women, and a lack of respect for your body is disgusting no matter your gender.

January 22, 2008 9:22 AM

Y '10 says:

OF COURSE this is sexual harassment. By standing in front of the women's center the Zeta Psi men were inferring that all women are sluts, especially those who are fighting for equality or use the services of the women's center after being victims of sexual harassment or rape. The men were mocking these women, reducing them sexual objects with the pejorative term "SLUT." If the women's center want to change the sexism so ingrained in our culture, this is the PERFECT place to start.

January 22, 2008 9:35 AM

y '06 says:

The First Amendment probably would not cover this. It only covers valuable "expression" as the Court defines it (read Cohen v. California), and if full-nudity stripping isn't covered under that test, then "We love Yale Sluts" probably isn't either. These guys could definitely be sued under state discrimination law--not sure if they would be liable since the statute focuses on work, but they could be sued. And Yale will have to punish them or they could be subject to a Title IX suit. After all, Yale has fared poorly in recent lawsuits...just ask Adam Davenport, who just won $300,000 from yale on a discrimination claim because they expelled him for abusing the Sudler Grant system.

January 22, 2008 9:40 AM

@Y '10 says:

Inferring that all women are sluts is not sexual harassment.

January 22, 2008 10:17 AM

Marc says:

Yeah - calling women "sluts" in front of the Women's Center doesn't make you look cool - it gets your ass sued. I hope the Women's Center at Yale sues the pants of these guys - judging from their actions, that's the only way they'll be taking off their pants after this incident.

I haven't heard anything from Yale's president. Until I do, I am going to assume that Yale is an institution that promotes misogyny and sexual harrassment.

January 22, 2008 10:32 AM

state school says:

I think people are missing the offensive part, which is that proclaiming a love of sluts in front of a place where women go when they have been sexually violated is mocking what has happened to them, mocking what has happened to them as something they wanted.

That's what is offensive.

January 22, 2008 10:34 AM

h-bomber says:

Where do the men go who get sexually harassed or violated?

January 22, 2008 10:51 AM

Y '10 says:

I mean everyone is making claims about what was going through the minds of the Zeta Psi pledges/ brothers when this occurs without actually having any idea what was in fact going through their minds. If the above comment is true then yes it is very offensive. But, if the women's center was just chosen as an ironic sort of backdrop or as an "in your face"/ response to the YWC's militant ridiculousness then it's a lot less offensive.

January 22, 2008 10:54 AM

Marc says:

Why do anti-feminists always assume that it's about them (re: H-bomber's comment). Until men are constantly harrassed, their bodies put up for judgment and display, and face the threats of rape, then we can start talking about them. Those living with male privilege have no room to bitch.

Stop steering the discussing back to men rights. This discussion is about violations of women's rights. Hmmm. I never knew Yale students could be such losers. I am glad I am at an non-Ivy League school.

January 22, 2008 11:12 AM

e-bomb says:

Can you imagine being a first-year girl sleeping with her boyfriend the first time and having to go through this crowd to get birth control? What about sexually nonactive women who just want some help with a yeast infection? Or the girl going in for help with her eating disorder? Worst, can you imagine getting raped and having to go through this crowd? Imagine it happening to one of your close girl friends.

Oh and usually women's centers are safe spaces for ANYONE who has been sexually violated but it seems the people who did this and the people who are defending them are pretty ignorant about such matters. Not everyone needs a Women's Center, but if anything ever happens to you, you'll be glad this bastion of militancy is around so you or your girlfriend doesn't get knocked up.

January 22, 2008 11:15 AM

Kiuku says:

As a woman, I can say that this picture makes me want to unload about 100 rounds on them and watch them die an agonizing and bloody death. How dare they? Who in their right mind thinks it is ok and a joke to shout "dick dick dick" in front of a rape and woman's counselling center, act menacing, dress like thugs and block the entrance to the door. "Boys will be Boys" if you don't like men go somewhere else? College is not "for men". You people disgust me.

January 22, 2008 11:26 AM

wait a second says:

when did "dick dick dick" happen?

January 22, 2008 11:28 AM

another penn '11 female says:

Fuck political correctness. I'm female and I hate feminists because they do shit like this. These guys were CLEARLY not hurting anyone. If anyone was offended by this then they need to gain a little self-confidence and a sense of humor.

January 22, 2008 11:29 AM

d07 says:

@another penn '11 female: do you swallow?

January 22, 2008 11:41 AM

P'10 says:

From Zeta Psi's national website:

In turn, our members have advanced to become leaders in North America, from influential writers, to state governors and presidential hopefuls, to CEOs of major corporations. By providing support and an environment for social learning at school, we aim to, "...turn out into the world self-respecting, original-thinking, self-controlled, purposeful gentlemen."

Clearly. Does the national organization not care that their name is being smeared?

January 22, 2008 11:42 AM

ODU 08 says:

Another Penn '11 -

Because as a privileged woman, you have know exactly what some of these women are going through, right? You hate feminists, huh? I hope you also hate your right to vote, that you could go to college, and that you aren't getting raped ...just because they're not hurting you doesn't mean they're not hurting other women. For once, put your privilege aside, and think about others for a chance. The world isn't about you.

Gain a little confidence? Goddamn. Women can be confident without having to face sexual harrassment. Standing up to these jackasses is confidence ...standing by while others get sexually harrassed, like you, is cowardly.

January 22, 2008 11:43 AM

Big Red Tiger says:

Women..or womyn (ha!) need to get over playing the woe-is-me card.

January 22, 2008 11:47 AM

y09 says:

way to steal this shit from yale OTR, ivygate.

January 22, 2008 11:51 AM

Graduate says:

"I mean everyone is making claims about what was going through the minds of the Zeta Psi pledges/ brothers when this occurs without actually having any idea what was in fact going through their minds."

Stupidity is not a valid defense and standing up for the integrity of women is not militancy.

Regardless of your sense of humor, it would be racist for a group of white people to stand in front of the cultural center with a sign that read "I love niggers!", would it not? So, how is this any different? A bunch of guys standing in front of the women's center with a sign saying "I love sluts." Why is misogyny acceptable by racism is not?

And for all of you that stress it was only a joke: For fucksake, this stunt offends me on a creative level. The "humor" comes purely from it's offensiveness. I'm sure it took them all of their three collective brain cells to come up with it.

January 22, 2008 11:51 AM

MIT '09 says:

We all make mistakes in our struggle to understand and respect other people. Not even MLK was perfect in this. But these actions go beyond the pale for enlightened Yale students. To treat women (or anyone) with such disrespect is reprehensible. I hope they meant what they wrote in the apology. Still, it'll likely be a long road for them to understand what exactly was so offensive about what they did.

January 22, 2008 11:56 AM

CB says:

e-bomb and state school have it right. If they had taken this picture in front of their frat house or somewhere else on campus, things would have been fine. As it is, they were mocking "sluts" in front of a place where women go to seek help after being raped. I think this is the point where the picture moves from "boys will be boys" to sexual harassment.

January 22, 2008 12:06 PM

xyz says:

According to Connecticut State law, sexual harassment consists of “any unwelcome sexual advances or requests for sexual favors or any conduct of a sexual nature … when such conduct has the purpose or effect of substantially interfering the individual’s work performance or creating an intimidating, hostile or offensive working environment.”

??? Obviously not the case here

January 22, 2008 12:12 PM

Benjamin A'Lee says:

What a bunch of idiots. I hope the Women's Centre does sue them, and I hope it wins; there is just no way this is appropriate. Just because it's "only college" and "boys will be boys" doesn't make it okay; this is at best immature and at worst intentionally offensive and/or threatening (and yes, it is threatening - I certainly wouldn't like to have to get through that crowd, so I doubt many women would either, and certainly not, as e-bomb mentioned, women who are already in a vulnerable position).

"Inferring that all women are sluts is not sexual harassment." No? Maybe not - I don't know exactly what constitutes sexual harassment in the US - but it's certainly misogynistic and certainly unacceptable.

January 22, 2008 12:13 PM

d07 says:

Either way, "free speech" also entails the right to be offended, to find certain speech disgusting, and to criticize it. It doesn't mean that all speech must be respected or heard; you can choose, after all, within your right, not to listen. Furthermore, it's not clear that speech that is meant to silence--such as the clear "put out or shut up" message offered by our Yale friends--should enjoy the same freedom as other kinds of speech.

January 22, 2008 12:14 PM

@xyz says:

xyz, you left out the relevant portions of the law. read a little further, friend.

January 22, 2008 12:15 PM

yale baseball says:

^^ agreed. rape is beyond comprehension in its evil. to intimidate a girl who needs to get into a building that helps rape victims is downright despicable.

January 22, 2008 12:15 PM

H '10 says:

the reason the line "we love yale sluts" is offensive is that the term slut refers to a woman who has no self worth and sleeps around, essentially making her body into something only good for the pleasure of others. (a slut is not just someone who sleeps around. it has a distinct derogatory flavor greater than strict promiscuity.) when a group of guys say they love that, they're saying that they love it when yale women have no self worth and sleep around, only good for the pleasure of others. If you don't understand why that is offensive, then you're a lost cause.
It was really stupid of them to post that on facebook, and if there's any justice in the world (which there isn't) they'll never get married or hired for any kind of respectful position. keep the names coming.

January 22, 2008 12:18 PM

your dad says:

silly cunts, they should shut the fuck up and go make me dinner.

January 22, 2008 12:21 PM

@your dad says:

you just proved their point.

January 22, 2008 12:33 PM

h-bomber says:

just to be clear, I'm not defending the people listed above; I think what they did was juvenile and ill conceived.
Along the same lines, however, how is a judge going to consider this illegal if the right-to-life protesters and picketers can stand in front of a Planned Parenthood clinic and make MUCH more threatening comments to women (and men) going in and out.

January 22, 2008 12:39 PM

xyz says:

According to Connecticut State law, sexual harassment consists of “any unwelcome sexual advances or requests for sexual favors or any conduct of a sexual nature … when such conduct has the purpose or effect of substantially interfering the individual’s work performance or creating an intimidating, hostile or offensive working environment.”

??? Obviously not the case here

January 22, 2008 12:40 PM

YOUR MOTHER says:

that you "your dad" -- it is people like you that make feminists' job a lot easier.

January 22, 2008 12:42 PM

lizriz says:

Can you imagine if you were the parents of one of these guys??? How embarrassing/ horrifying/ disappointing/ disgusting... It's so sad, truly.

January 22, 2008 1:01 PM

Graduate says:

"Along the same lines, however, how is a judge going to consider this illegal if the right-to-life protesters and picketers can stand in front of a Planned Parenthood clinic and make MUCH more threatening comments to women (and men) going in and out."

Your right to free speech ends at private property. The sidewalk outside a Planned Parenthood is public property. Yale's campus, however, is private property. If Yale has a student code of conduct that prohibits sexual harrassment, they are opening themselves up to a lawsuit if they do not actually enforce it. The fraternity opened themselves up to discipline (and a lawsuit) by not following the code of conduct.

According to Connecticut State law, sexual harassment consists of “any unwelcome sexual advances or requests for sexual favors or any conduct of a sexual nature … when such conduct has the purpose or effect of substantially interfering the individual’s work performance or creating an intimidating, hostile or offensive working environment.”

I don't know what's so hard to understand. The Women's Center is a place where women go for a variety of reasons, including rape crisis counseling. A sign that reads "I love sluts" is fundamentally sexual in nature. Judging by the location these boneheads chose to hold it up in, I assume it was meant to imply all women who visit the WC are sluts (hilarious, right?)Now say a student was sexually assulted that night and was going to go into the women's center until she found a group of guys chanting "dick, dick, dick" and holding up a that sign. Isn't that sign being directed at her? How is that not creating a hostile environment? Forget my hypothetical student, these idiots posted the picture on a public forum for everyone to see. Whether or not they're intelligent enought to think their actions through, it's a form of intimidation and should be treated as such.

January 22, 2008 1:11 PM

nyu10 says:

hollaback yale anyone?

January 22, 2008 1:14 PM

y10 says:

"Where do the men go who get sexually harassed or violated?"

This. The YWC is sexist.

January 22, 2008 1:21 PM

WestCoastBrat says:

Okay for one thing free speech does not mean you are allowed to say anything you want to say. It is not legal for me to yell "fire" in a crowded theater.

I thought someone from an Ivy league school would be smart enough to know that.

Second point, they are calling rape victims sluts! How would you feel is they were doing that to your mother and sister?

Third, thank you all for the lovely examples of why I should send my child to a state school.

January 22, 2008 1:24 PM

yale 2012 says:

It's SCARY when the basis of sexual harassment isn't based on any particular act, toward a particular individual, but based on some subjective FEELING of harassment. It's one thing to say you are offended, but being harassed is different.

I'm offended by the women's center suing about this, am I HARASSED? Why the double standard?

Plenty of Yale women say nasty and mean things to guys on campus, can we call this harassment?

It's stuff like this, the failure to pick battles worth fighting-- that makes people hate feminism.

It's too bad because there are real feminists out there who are worth taking seriously.

January 22, 2008 1:29 PM

xyz says:

don't think this was sexual harrassment as defined by the law. assuming that workplace harrassment statutes can be extended to a school environment, there certainly weren't any sexual advances or requests for sexual favors.
Was this an example of "conduct of a sexual nature"? Do any of these actions qualify?:
- posing for pictures
- chanting "dick" with a bunch of frat bros
- displaying a sign proclaiming your love of "sluts"

Even if this was intimidation, i don't think it counts as sexual harassment, as none of the frat bros were directly coming on to anybody.

January 22, 2008 1:30 PM

yale 2012 says:

It's SCARY when the basis of sexual harassment isn't based on any particular act, toward a particular individual, but based on some subjective FEELING of harassment. It's one thing to say you are offended, but being harassed is different.

I'm offended by the women's center suing about this, am I HARASSED? Why the double standard?

Plenty of Yale women say nasty and mean things to guys on campus, can we call this harassment?

It's stuff like this, the failure to pick battles worth fighting-- that makes people hate feminism.

It's too bad because there are real feminists out there who are worth taking seriously.

January 22, 2008 1:31 PM

yallle says:

the YWC is sexist? Any victim of sexual assault can come to the Women's Center -- and they do.

January 22, 2008 1:33 PM

hmm... says:

What are so many non Ivy kids doing here? I don't come here to read about what some middle class kid thinks of Ivy League issues they know nothing about...

Lizriz: Kids do dumb things in college...parents don't find out about most of them. Personally I'd rather see my son posing in a silly picture then have my son/daughter sniffing coke and having unprotected sex every weekend and never knowing about it. Maybe that's just me though...

January 22, 2008 1:36 PM

yale2032 says:

ywc is not exclusively a rape victim recovery/counseling facility. in fact, it is probably not even the "official" university contact for rape victims. i was under the impression that ywc was a student-run organization - wouldn't university health or university police department be the institutional places for a victim to turn to?

shouldn't this statement be construed as against the ywc and not against potential rape victims?

January 22, 2008 1:38 PM

eek says:

gross. these guys were intimidating and harrassing women attempting to go into the building, which clearly qualifies as sexual harrassment. yes they are obviously braindead tools, but they should still own up to consequences. in other news, what the HELL has happened to yale?

January 22, 2008 1:44 PM

seconded says:

seconded - this is repulsive

January 22, 2008 1:47 PM

Brown Brown Brown Brown Brown? says:

hmm... says:

What are so many non Ivy kids doing here? I don't come here to read about what some middle class kid thinks of Ivy League issues they know nothing about...
--------------------------------
If it's wrong, it's wrong, and that goes for middle class people as well as pompous gasbags like yourself. Nice try, though.

January 22, 2008 2:01 PM

boredoftonto says:

To all the guys who posted ignorant, misogynistic comments posted here: Get your act together, and develop some character. Your narrow view of women is pathetic.

January 22, 2008 2:01 PM

Army SGT says:

This is funny. I thought Yale was supposed to be for smart people, looks like they let in any dumb guy who sends in an application.

They most likely CAN sue because it is a school and not public property. Your first amendment whining will do you know good. You PAY to go here, remember? Also the KKK can march in a public street, not on a school campus. Also this is a case where some may not feel comfortable on their own school grounds going to a rape support group becasue of this picture. I hope they sue the living f#&k out of those asshats.

Maybe some of the dopes on here pretending like they know the law should do some research on sexual harrasment. This is why there is so much, you asswipes don't even know what harrasment is.

January 22, 2008 2:05 PM

HuhWhat? says:

"It's SCARY when the basis of sexual harassment isn't based on any particular act, toward a particular individual, but based on some subjective FEELING of harassment."

Oh, those poor pledges. They just were standing in front of some randon building with a sign that someone else gave them. They didn't even know what it said! And when that girl said they were chanting "dick, dick, dick" I'm sure she misheard them. They were really chanting "Nick, Nick, Nick." Then some meanie came along and took their picture and posted it on the internet without their permition. The nerve of some people! These boys are obviously innocent and need to be protected from big, scary feminists.

I judge people by their actions. While these boys may not be intelligent, they do have agency.

January 22, 2008 2:08 PM

vox says:

Back in the day, the Yale feminists used to plaster the campus with such recherche chestnuts as "There are no fathers, only sperm donors."

Frankly bitches, it's long past time to say, "Pot, meet kettle. Kettle, Pot."

January 22, 2008 2:13 PM

??? says:

vox- your post is incoherant and makes no sense. get your act together.

January 22, 2008 2:15 PM

Heidi Hartmann says:

As an alumna of Yale who has a PhD and took courses in law at the law school, I would say the women students, as represented by the women's center or any other campus group, should sue the University for failing to maintain an environment free of hostility toward women. Yale has made progress since 1969 when the first undergraduate women were admitted, but clearly not enough. It usually takes both protest and the law to make change. Both were used to integrate Mory's for example and both were used to increase the numbers of women faculty and so on. So please do sue, the Yale University administration certainly deserves it for fostering an atmosphere that can let this happen.

January 22, 2008 2:18 PM

@ Army SGT says:

It was public property- they were on the sidewalk, not in the women's center.

Sidewalk = public property = free speech

January 22, 2008 2:18 PM

another penn '11 female says:

@ ODU 08
What does that have to do with any of this? You think hookers from the streets of New Haven are the ones going to the YWC? Because I'm fairly sure it's more of the use of Yale students, which would make them the same type of "privileged women" that I am. Maybe I should have clarified what type of feminists I hate. I appreciate everything they've done in the past. I appreciate what they're doing in 2nd and 3rd world countries. But can't they focus their efforts on something like ending female circumcision rather than trying to sue some frat boys who made an un-PC joke? Overwhelmingly, feminists in America today seem to think that women should be above men, not equal to them, and get fired up over little things like this. If this was explicitly a rape victims' center, my feelings about the prank may be different, but it's not. If the women's center is anything like the women's center here, it's usually almost exclusively for birth control and STD testing. It's not like there were rape victims covered in tears and dried semen trying to fight through this crowd of guys.

January 22, 2008 2:24 PM

vox says:

"Retaining the male has not even the dubious purpose of reproduction. The male is a biological accident: the y(male) gene is an incomplete x(female) gene, that is, has an incomplete set of chromosomes. In other words, the male is an incomplete female, a walking abortion, aborted at the gene stage. To be male is to be deficient, emotionally limited; maleness is a deficiency disease and males are emotional cripples."

--somebody who wouldn't make her share of the sandwiches

Ah the memories.

January 22, 2008 2:33 PM

HmmWha? says:

That's a bit simplistic, Army SGT. It depends on who owns the sidewalk. They don't have to be in the Women's Center, just on the privately owned campus of which the sidewalk may be a part. And I am sure that Yale's code of conduct applies whether they were on campus or not,so Yale would still maintain the right to discipline them for breaking that code even if they are on public property.

January 22, 2008 2:36 PM

Englishman says:

Wow, i am truly amazed at the bravery of the free speech activists/men of america, standing outside a rape victim help centre with a little bit of paper saying yale girls are sluts. Kinda shows everything that is wrong with your pathetic, penis envy driven society.

These are your most "intelligent" minds?

no wonder you're still in iraq..............

January 22, 2008 2:37 PM

Captain America says:

Hey Englishman, you only need to hit the submit button once.

no wonder you lost wwII..........

January 22, 2008 2:47 PM

feminist says:

Women were prevented from entering the Women's by this group of frat boys. Feminists do not think that they should be above men. They merely think that they should be able to enter the women's center without being called a slut by a group of their peers.

January 22, 2008 2:54 PM

??? says:

the english lost WW2? That is news to EVERYONE.

January 22, 2008 2:54 PM

y11 says:

@everyone who keeps criticizing yale students:

please don't judge all of yale by the actions of a group of idiot frat boys or the inane comments of some yalies on this board. i swear some of us are decent, intelligent people.

January 22, 2008 2:55 PM

Penisdriven says:

The women's center needs to grow a pair of balls and a sense of humor. This is not sexual harassment, hate speech, or anything of the sort. The guys were standing on a public sidewalk and Yale has not (as of yet) implemented "free speech zones" to abrogate the rights of its students. The location is inconsequential and we oughtn't pretend that the Women's Center is exclusively some sort of safe haven for rape victims. It is the voice of radical feminism at Yale, and believe it or not, there are still some rational people around who are not feminists.

I hope Yale does absolutely nothing and let's the Women's Center waste its breath suing the frat, exposing itself as the hovel of humorless harpies it is.

January 22, 2008 2:58 PM

HuhWha? says:

How exactly does feminism today demand that women be treated as better than men. Really, I want some examples.

@ another penn '11 female: "It's not like there were rape victims covered in tears and dried semen trying to fight through this crowd of guys."

Good to know that you have such a narrow view of who can be victimized by misogyny and sexism. Is it also not really rape if the girl isn't bleeding?

"If the women's center is anything like the women's center here, it's usually almost exclusively for birth control and STD testing." So it's not okay to call rape victims slutty, but it is okay to call women who want access to reproductive health care slutty? Get a clue. Events like these are not happening in a vaccum. They may vary in severity but the message is the same. And we won't be able to stop horrible acts around the world like female genital mutilation if we're not even capable of treating women at home with respect.

January 22, 2008 3:03 PM

RadicalFeminist says:

@ penisdriven:

Because wanting to be treated with respect is so fucking radical.

January 22, 2008 3:13 PM

stupid yale says:

The Women's Center was looooong closed for the day.

No women were impeded from entering the Center.

No women were directly targeted by the group.

The incident occurred outside the Center, not inside it.

No damage to property was done.

Some guys looked dumb- a social gaffe but certainly not harassment.

Keep your political agendas at home on this one folks. It was fully harmless.

January 22, 2008 3:42 PM

C'08 says:

I AGREE with RadicalFeminist. Also, to bring Miss Manners into this, the fact is that this shouldn't be about rights. We could argue all day long (and we have) about whether or not Yale students ought to have the RIGHT to say this. I don't think that there's any question, though, that this is the least classy, most impolite, stupidest thing that a person can do with a camera, and the people in this photo ought to be ashamed.

January 22, 2008 3:45 PM

yale 2012 says:

these guys were intimidating and harrassing women attempting to go into the building, which clearly qualifies as sexual harrassment.

Where is the evidence for this dumb assertion? Nothing in the articles about this indicates anything about blockading the women's center from allowing women to enter.

The ignorant HuhWhat says:
"Oh, those poor pledges. They just were standing in front of some randon building with a sign that someone else gave them. They didn't even know what it said! And when that girl said they were chanting "dick, dick, dick" I'm sure she misheard them. They were really chanting "Nick, Nick, Nick." Then some meanie came along and took their picture and posted it on the internet without their permition. The nerve of some people! These boys are obviously innocent and need to be protected from big, scary feminists.

I judge people by their actions. While these boys may not be intelligent, they do have agency. "

Having agency in this case is not the same thing as harassment, and shame on you for suggesting it. I take harassment seriously, and I don't think it's right to degrade the term by suggesting that just because what hte guys did was tasteless its' harassment. There are real women who suffer rape, pressure in the workplace, pressure at school, and who would rather that you spend your time dealing with these issues directly than to support the use of legal bullying to correct for "tasteless behavior."

Your argument about how the guys "knew what they were doing" is nonresponsive. There's only so many times
women can cry wolf about sexual harassment until people stop taking it seriously when LEGITIMATE claims are made, once based on actual, specific, individualized situations, and not one where women want to censor other people based on their particular tastes re: free speech.

There are women who are being raped, there are women who suffer in the workplace, there are women who radical feminists don't care about (i.e. women of color).
Why don't you stop complaining about something so minimal, and start paying attention to the real, material suffering which so many women face?

Where's the "care ethics" in the cowardly move by the Women's center to sue first and then ask questions later? I'm not saying the frat guys behaved correctly, so don't skirt the issue like you tried to in your post.

My point is, they should have instead tried to increase discourse, to talk to the university--but to sue is just another form of power, or an expression of "patriarchy"
which just ticks off more people into rolling their eyes when substantial claims about patriarchy are made.

As someone who takes feminist issues and theory very seriously, shame shame on you, and shame on the Women's center.

January 22, 2008 3:49 PM

D'10 says:

To everyone who says that this event is harassment because "Women were prevented from entering" the building, please show your proof or stop making baseless inferences.

If you can't figure out how to go around a group of people who are momentarily taking a picture in front of a building YOU SHOULD BE HOME WORKING ON YOUR COLORING BOOKS.

January 22, 2008 3:53 PM

Tiger09.5 says:

@ yale 2012:
While you had some good points, try keeping your comment to a few sentences. I'm not interested in your extensive rant on the nuances of your opinions on agency. You may post again after orientation.

January 22, 2008 4:06 PM

kiuku says:

Yale2012 clearly doesn't know anything about Radical Feminists. Show me one Radical Feminist who doesn't care about people of color. Do you even know where the term "White priveledge" and "Male priveledge" came from? Can you even name a Radical Feminist?

Your ignorance aside, it is a myth that women "cry wolf" when it comes to harassment and rape. The statistics for so-called false rape reports are no higher than any other crime. A lot of the time people mistakenly call false the rape reports that cannot be proven. It is the most underreported crime. A lot of victims are shamed into not reporting harassment and rape by idiots like you.

I believe the woman who had to use the backdoor, not a bunch of "boys will be boys" and harassment apologists on a blog.

It is about rights. Women have a right to not be harassed, believe it or not. It's not "If you don't want to be harassed go somewhere else." Nice try.

January 22, 2008 4:07 PM

@ yale 2012 says:

You don't even go to yale yet. When people start calling YOU a slut for going to the women's center because you've been sexually assaulted, then maybe you can talk about "real, material suffering." In the meantime, get off your high horse and go back to high school.

January 22, 2008 4:08 PM

Someone who went to GMU says:

Wow.. I'd expect this asinine behaviour from people too stupid to get into Yale.. looks like their standards have dropped. You'd think a Yale student could come up with something wittier or amusing, and less sophomoric. Way to go frat-tards (yes, terms were created to describe people such as yourselves)! Way to represent yourselves and your institution!

January 22, 2008 4:15 PM

Steve Holt says:

STEVE HOLT!

January 22, 2008 4:18 PM