A Statement On Conflict Of Interest

Written by

To the members of the Columbia community: Bwog does not condone rape culture. We are firmly committed to fostering a safe community. Over the last six months, we have made coverage of sexual assault on this campus a priority in our reporting. As a news publication, we consider it our responsibility to further transparency around this issue and have been dedicated to increasing its visibility and facilitating discussions on and offline.

On May 7, allegations that a member of our staff had violated Columbia University’s Gender Based Misconduct policy were brought to our attention by an anonymous tip. As a reiteration of our continued work against rape culture, we have taken steps to ensure that the makeup of Bwog’s staff, without question, reflects this. Accordingly, we asked this staffer to permanently and immediately resign from their position, and they agreed. Our decision does not reflect a position on the innocence or guilt of this former staff member, nor does it comment on, take a position on, support, implicitly or explicitly, any allegations of fact or law made against such person. To have allowed this staff member to remain a part of Bwog would have, in the opinion of the editorial staff, been a conflict of interest, hampering our ability to accurately report on campus activism. More importantly, in the opinion of the editorial staff, we felt that allowing this staffer to continue his affiliation with Bwog would have tacitly endorsed a rape culture we so firmly stand against.

We delayed publishing the photos until they went viral online—but delayed publishing only because we were in conversation with Bwog’s legal counsel and university administrators, who insinuated that posting the list, in any capacity, might have violated Title IX, FERPA and/or made us vulnerable to libel or defamation lawsuits. We felt it necessary to discuss the legal landscape surrounding 1) posting photos of the lists that have appeared in campus bathrooms and 2) removing the accused staff member. We are encouraged to see the amount of productive dialogue being held about an issue that each member of our staff cares deeply about.

This decision was not made lightly and is meant to reflect our zero-tolerance policy toward rape culture and sexual assault. We would like to reiterate once more that until proven true in a court of law, any and all allegations made are merely that, allegations. In accordance with our comment policy, any attempts to identify the individual involved in the comment section will be removed. Any concerns or inquiries should be sent to


Sarah Faith Thompson, Editor-in-Chief

Claire Friedman, Managing Editor

Alexander Pines, Features Editor

Maud Rozee, Internal Editor

Jake Hershman, Publisher

Tags: ,


  1. Onya Bwog  

    Thank you for doing what the university doesn't

    • Anonymous  

      No... why thank them?

      I would feel more apt to do so when they are consistent with the application of their statement, "We are firmly committed to fostering a safe community." If they truly were committed, they would not be so permissive with allowing such hateful, homophobic, racist, classist, and mean-spirited ANONYMOUS comments.

      Bwog staff, you can't just champion safety on one issue and in only one way you try to implement any ethical practice. Please take accountability for the real hurt and damage that Bwog -- if not in posts' content, in the complicity when you are silent -- that perpetuates in our community here.

      • Svokos, rolling her eyes  

        You write the comments, not Bwog.

      • Anonymous  

        Doesn't it feel like we're always being told how horrible Bwog comments are, while in reality they tend to be pretty decent? Sure, in any anonymous forum, you get bad comments, but after years of reading comments here, I've seen a lot more comments decrying Bwog comments than I've seen decry-able Bwog comments.

        • sad Alum

          the comments have gotten a lot nicer over the years too. Observe, for instance, how there are almost no mean comments under anyone's senior wisdom anymore. this might be the result of obamanard or the conversations surrounding mental health on campus.

          whatever it is, i find myself more interested in the comment section conversations than the posts themselves (sometimes, not always). the comments there are usually extremely witty and/or intelligent.

          it's bothered me for years that people complained the level of intelligence in bwog comments is subpar when I've always looked to them to get different angles on difficult issues... and to try to get my comment favorited....

    • Anonymous

      Columbia has Rape Tourette's

  2. So wait  

    Who was the guy who got sacked?

  3. Soo

    1) Aside from receiving an anonymous tip, how was bwog able to find out that this person had indeed been accused of being in violation of the Misconduct Policy?

    2) If it is indeed merely an allegation, what's the reasoning behind asking this person to leave rather than having them work on assignments unrelated to sexual misconduct?

    • MK Ultra  

      1) They mention in the article that the person was confronted—he/she likely confirmed the story, and wasn't just asked to leave out of the blue.

      2) I think it's just a matter of affiliation. I know that other campus publications have similar policies: Spec doesn't allow you to hold certain positions if you're a member of CCSC, for example, even if you don't cover CCSC events. Even if you're not directly affiliated with certain coverage, there's still the potential that your feelings will influence said coverage.
      For example, say I was on the scriptwriting team for Orgo Night, but also a member of the Spectator. While I may not have written a joke about Spec, my position might still have hypothetically caused some hesitation amongst other members when writing that particular joke.

      • Mark Neil

        "1) They mention in the article that the person was confronted—he/she likely confirmed the story, and wasn't just asked to leave out of the blue. "

        No, they don't. Quite the opposite, in fact. they told this staffer to resign, permanantly, and they didn't fight it. They openly acknowledge they don't know his guilt or not, they're firing of this person doesn't reflect on they guilt or not, and they don't care. The mere association is sufficient enough for them to oust him. Here:

        "Accordingly, we asked this staffer to permanently and immediately resign from their position, and they agreed. Our decision does not reflect a position on the innocence or guilt of this former staff member, nor does it comment on, take a position on, support, implicitly or explicitly, any allegations of fact or law made against such person."


        "We would like to reiterate once more that until proven true in a court of law, any and all allegations made are merely that, allegations."

  4. Hodor  

    Hodor? Hodor. Hodor! Hodor hodor hodor hodor hodor hodor hodor hodor hodor hodor hodor hodor hodor hodor hodor hodor hodor hodor hodor hodor hodor hodor hodor.

  5. Also...  

    ...this is really hard to masturbate to.

  6. Jake Davidson  

    Regardless of what you think of the editor's removal, acknowledging the conflict of interest shows a huge amount of integrity on Bwog's part. Extremely impressive.

  7. Sherry J. Wolf  

    Bwog needs to be taken down once and for all. Shameful "journalism." Read The Lion.

  8. anon  

    Well you guys did rape Theta's reputation so....

  9. Anonymous  

    "Our decision does not reflect a position on the innocence or guilt of this former staff member, nor does it comment on, take a position on, support, implicitly or explicitly, any allegations of fact or law made against such person."

    Your lawyer obviously added that!

    But of course, by going on to say "allowing this staffer to continue his affiliation with Bwog would have tacitly endorsed a rape culture," you are implying that he is guilty.

  10. Yooo....  

    Can you unblur the names? I want to make sure I'm not on that list....

    • This  

      Is too fucking real

    • Anon  

      Uhm, maybe make sure that you don't sexually assault anyone?

      • Anonymous  

        you are fundamentally not understanding why 99.9% of guys are scared by this

        • anon

          wow must suck to be scared all the time… imagine how 100% of the women on this campus feel

          • Ok  

            Just because you are scared 100% of the time does not mean that 100% of the people are scared.

            "75% of the time, it works... Every. Time."

          • Anonymous  

            Yeah, and ideally no one should have to be scared, whether you're scared of being sexually assaulted or scared of being wrongly labeled a rapist. I don't know what point you're making.

          • Jarl Borg

            Yes, why not?

            Keep employing the Fallacy of Relative Privation in an attempt to rationalize why men do not deserve due process.

            If someone were to scribble names of women on a bathroom stall and stated that those names represent known rapists, what would happen?

        • A guy

          I'm not scared at all by the lists, "fundamentally" or otherwise. If you had respect for women then you would not be at all scared that you did something bad when you're drunk, or maybe that a "move" you made would be misinterpreted. Also it helps being gay but I guess that's beyond your control.

          • Anonymous  

            It seems you've never heard of something called due process. If you have no problem with the lists in any way then you're saying you don't have a problem with vigilante justice, mob mentality, lynchings. etc etc. Oh and by the way, why men would be scared has nothing to do with respect for women in case you still haven't figured it out. When it comes to accusations of sexual misconduct, it is a fact that those that come from women are taken more seriously. And also how does being gay mean you can't be accused of sexual misconduct? Please, get over yourself.

          • Anonymous  

            The fear I have has nothing to do with respect for women. The fear comes from the simple fact that there are bad people in the world. I mentioned this in a comment on another article, but I'll say it again here: I don't get why some people assume a human would be monstrous enough to rape someone but not monstrous enough to write someone's name on a bathroom wall. If a girl wants to hurt a guy (or any other permutation of genders, I suppose), accusing them of being a rapist is a great way to get all of society to universally shun them.

          • PLEASE  

            @3:35 AM It's a long way from lists of alleged rapists written on bathroom stalls and fucking LYNCHINGS wow you need to stop.

            Also not sure how this fits into vigilante justice or "mob mentality"... I think if either of those were present in regards to this issue students who violated another would be, I don't know, actually expelled??? Maybe their friends wouldn't be caping for them in the comments of Bwog and the New York Times?

            tl;dr - a girl deciding not to talk to you because she heard you were a rapist is not an example of systematic persecution, regardless of whether or not said rumor is true.

          • girl

            Every single guy I've known who said he was "falsely accused" of sexual assault (I've known a few) treated women in such a deplorable way that I wouldn't have been surprised if those "false accusations" were not, in fact, false. Also, why a woman (or anyone) would falsely accuse someone, to me, is puzzling--being raped, particularly if you are naming someone within your own community, has so much stigma and trauma attached to it that no one in their right mind would do that.

            So if you're fundamentally scared of being on that list, then you should probably reassess the way you treat women/sex.

        • Rosebud

          The label "sexual assault" has lost all meaning. It used to mean forced and/or non-consensual sex. Now it means any sex that a woman later decides she didn't really like and/or regrets.

          It's the essence of the "enthusiastic" consent movement. Sure I agreed to sleep with him (consented), but on reflection I wasn't super duper enthusiastic at the time. Therefore, he raped me. The "enthusiastic consent" movement would be more accurately described as the "we reserve the right to call anything rape" movement. Where even an explicit "yes" from a sober individual is insufficient to qualify as consent.

          • SEAS '15  

            If you are able to give consent, and then you explicitly do so, it is not sexual assault.

            However, if a boss makes a move on an employee, does the employee really have the freedom to choose? Saying no could potentially hurt their career, depending on how unstable the boss is. So although the employee may say "yes" without a gun being pointed to their head, they were not in a position to give consent.

            Regretting sex later is not sexual assault. Making a bad decision is not sexual assault. But if someone is put in a situation where they cannot fully consent, whether it be by physical force or a situation like the one described above, then it is sexual assault.

            I hope that maybe clears things up a bit.

    • Captain Jean-Luc Picard

      The road from legitimate suspicion to rampant paranoia is very much short than we think.

    • anon

      can we unblur the names so us ladies know who to avoid for a really really bad time?

  11. Anonymous  

    good on Bwog. wish this had happened before the pics were released, would have prevented this mini-shitstorm from distracting from the real issues at hand

    • Anonymous  

      the bwog post about the pics, I mean.

    • cc '15  

      I totally agree. I think this is a powerful show of what it looks like to make a tough call in order to stand up for a safer community and challenge rape, culture, and I'm impressed. Wish it could have been done before to avoid all the distraction from the real issues at hand (how to effectively prevent and respond to sexual violence when the systems meant to protect us fail).... but I do get it about having to check with legal counsel.

  12. anon  

    So if you want to get someone kicked off of bwog all you have to do is accuse them of something. That seems a pretty low bar to set even for bwog.

    • Anonymous  

      nice try. they were found responsible and owned up to it according to the list and this post.

      • anon  

        Actually if you read the article it says they asked him if he had been accused and he said he had, so they requested his resignation. It doesn't say he admitted guilt, which would explain the disclaimer saying his resignation should not be seen as reflecting guilt or innocence. Nice try on your part to warping the story to reflect only what you want it to be.

        • Johnny

          actually if you read the article it says " As a reiteration of our continued work against rape culture, we have taken steps to ensure that the makeup of Bwog’s staff, without question, reflects this. Accordingly, we asked this staffer to permanently and immediately resign from their position, and they agreed"

          They asked him to leave, not if he was accused. So, can I accuse the woman editor and have her removed?

  13. Frustrated  

    Are you guys going to remove / ask your members to downvote everything that puts you guys in a bad light?

    Not only did my comment get removed, but after one comment, I got a "you've posted too many comments - slow down."

    Alleged list aside, someone resigned today and if I remember correctly Bwog has 0 problem defaming students who resign from their position and consequently damage their reputations via a simple google search.

    If it were a blanket policy to protect students who could suffer as a result of a published article, then I would have no problem at all, but that is not the case.

  14. Menstruated  

    Do you have any examples of defamed students?

  15. anon  

    Since when has bwog cared about conflicts of interest? You have had staff members report on issues in which they've had huge personal conflicts throughout the year. (being a member of SJP and reporting on the Barnard's banner ban etc.). I guess its ok to have conflicts of interest so as long as its not something as controversial as sexual assault? bwog needs to stop pretending they have journalistic (or really any kind of) ethics...

  16. Chaos is a ladder

    When I got into this school, I heard the acceptance rate was 7-8% or so. After reading the comments, how half of you made it in is beyond me. The half that doesn't surprise me include the following: Hodor, Fake Hodor, Theon, and Varys.

  17. Frustrated  

    Let's go back to last year when a certain person was accused of a hate crime. Neither innocent or guilty at the time (with the case being later dismissed), bwog had no problem whatsoever identifying him by name and posting his picture for all media outlets to pick up the article and make it a national news story. "We would like to reiterate once more that until proven true in a court of law, any and all allegations made are merely that, allegations."

    Outside the scope of the atrocities that have occurred on this campus, I sincerely hope that this circumstance forces your staff as well as other university publications to take a step back and rethink the ramifications of defaming students without considering the internet trail it leaves.

    In a recent circumstance, it was incredibly irresponsible to characterize Theta's president as an insensitive racist. While considered offensive to some, that instance doesn't even come fucking close to the one we are faced with today. You didn't have to post her name despite Spec's article. The double standard kills me. In the end, I side with your decision to protect the identity of the member that has resigned, but it really fucking sucks to know that Theta's president had to suffer public shame, as well as ridicule from an organization that partook in the same actions, while the entire staff of bwog takes a bold stance to protect an alleged rapist.

    • Calm  

      Chad Washington's hate crime was first picked up by NBC (check the link) because the victim reported it to the NYPD. As some commenters on other posts have noted, if the victims of sexual assault crimes had reported it to the NYPD, those records would be publicly available. However, those students chose to go through the University in order to maintain confidentiality. Ousting an alleged rapist would only increase the chance of the victim's identity being revealed, which is obviously not what he or she would want.

      Washington was officially charged with a felony when Bwog reported it, and whether you like it or not that is news that should be reported. Bwog did not defame Washington, the posted the facts, and that is exactly what they have done in their reporting on sexual assault at our school, and more so than any other publication. Their statements in the earlier post today were misguided, but that reflects the tumultuousness of the situation they found themselves in with one of their staffers, but this response is admirable and appropriate.


    I don't think Bwog needs to push gossip to be a relevant/entertaining news source. Do you?

    How about a simple ban/removal on ad hominem attacks?

    Recall, students here are well... students; we are here to learn and grow.
    Accusations magnified by the forever savable/searchable internet deter the learning/growing environment at Columbia and in doing so damage the community as a whole.

    If you insist on doing so in order to gain traffic to your site, don't ignore the gravitas that your misrepresentations (knowingly or not) may have.

    Next time you drop a nuclear bomb on someones reputation for a few more page views... keep in mind that what you write and the comments you allow could conceivable be searchable for centuries. Not a good legacy.

    Are a few more page views really worth it? You're better than that, Bwog.

    • hello are you dumb or  

      did you really miss that the whole point of this article is to provide transparency WITHOUT RELEASING ACTUAL NAMES thereby eliminating the possibility of ruining the alleged perpetrator's reputation on the "forever savable/searchable internet"

      • There's a 1st for everything  

        Oh, they didn't release names for JUST THIS ARTICLE - wow what an accomplishment, it only took one of their staff to be one of the accused for them to pause and think.

    • Anonymous

      #veryrarecomment #fuckjakeover #whotaughtyouthewordadhominem?

  19. Blackstone  

    Let me be perfectly clear: "allowing this staffer to continue his affiliation with Bwog would [NOT] have tacitly endorsed a rape culture we so firmly stand against."

    Got it?

    You aren't endorsing anything but common sense and simple justice when you allow someone to go about their business with a minimum of obstruction until they have been accused of a serious crime on the basis of something more substantive than an "anonymous tip."

    The conflict of interest is a separate subject entirely. Of course it can be difficult to write objectively about an ongoing story when the focus of the story is one of your staff. But this sentence crossed a line.

    • not exactly  

      It seems pretty likely that this person was indeed found responsible of the charges by the University, as the list alleges. Which is claim the attitude of this post and Bwog's action (as well as the individual's agreement to resign) supports.

  20. A guy

    I'm not scared at all by the lists, "fundamentally" or otherwise. If you had respect for women then you would not be at all scared that you did something bad when you're drunk, or maybe that a "move" you made would be misinterpreted. Also it helps being gay but I guess that's beyond your control.

  21. Anonymous

    guilty until proven innocent! Can't wait to release my list of all the known female rapists at Columbia/Barnard. I will plaster their names across every inch of the campus. Then, I will take my message to the web where their shame will be immortalized.

  22. Anonymous  

    *tips fedora*

  23. And thus  

    the witch hunt continues.

  24. Since no one has said this

    Just wanted to note that while false accusations of rape do occur, at a rate that is extremely difficult to measure, it is generally believed to be quite low--usually somewhere in the single digits. On the other hand, the rate at which women and men do not report sexual assaults they experienced is very high (the American Association ofUniversity Women estimate that 95% of assaults go unreported). I don't support the lists--and it's probably more likely that people will make a false accusation in that medium than in public or through disciplinary hearings, honestly. However, I'm of the opinion that we should worry more about the men or women who are not reported who go on to assault others than falsely initiated OJA proceedings. Everyone knows the statistic that 20% of college women are assaulted there--but remember also that 6% of college men have assaulted someone.

    Then again, that's probably a false choice. Both of there are problems and have serious consequences for those involved--it's just that one is far more prevalent.

  25. AliceP

    I really, truly, sincerely would appreciate the same editorial board listed above addressing in writing what to me seems to be the first and most obvious question raised by this bizarre decision;

    Aren't you saying that I or anyone else can immediately have any staffer removed from their position with BWOG simply by leveling an anonymous accusation of wrongdoing against that staff member, and by then anonymously making your team aware of that accusation?

    Just some of the more prominent additional questions begged by the action would include: Does this apply only to accusations involving sexual assault by a male upon a female? Does the same policy apply to an allegation of theft, or of an assault that is a "conventional" fight or thuggery? If not, why not? Does it apply to any or all drug crimes? If I anonymously allege that I smoked dope with an editor, is that editor immediately fired? If not, why not?

    Does the policy apply to allegations that are not necessarily criminal in nature, for example cheating on a test or plagiarizing a paper? If not, why not?

    If I am offended, or angry or simply embarrassed by a report or opinion appearing in BWOG, haven't you now established a policy assuring I can have the responsible person terminated simply by leveling an anonymous accusation of wrongdoing, and then anonymously notifying you of that accusation? After all, if I'm the sort of person who might warrant being the subject of an article reporting on some wrongdoing, why wouldn't I also be the sort of person to level false accusations to punish the person responsible for exposing me? And since my accusation and tip to you are anonymous, there would be no legitimate means for you to dismiss the charges as false, and the product of animosity.

    What if I charge that a Bwog staffer has made a false accusation of sexual assault? As long as the staffer confirms the accusation was made - even if they assert there was no claim of an assault, doesn't it still that mean the staffer is terminated?

    I'd also very much appreciate the panel explaining how the principles of the First Amendment can be held in such esteem, while the Fifth and the Fourteenth - which guarantee the right of "due process" - can be dismissed as optional principles, apparently dependent on the issue involved.

    I do not for an instant question your motives or intentions, but I believe your rationale and thought processes in this decision are enormously flawed.

    Not incidentally, additional questions I'd like to ask include whether it's now Bwog's policy that no false accusation of sexual assault has ever been leveled, or if you'd be comfortable appending your names to a declaration that such instances are statistically so rare that it warrants further impugning the very tiny number who may be victimized by false charges in order to give nothing less than full-throated, unequivocal support to every accuser so that not one genuine victim has to risk the specter of being doubted, tested or even questioned as to their version of events?

    As wrong as this policy decision is, the tragedy is compounded by your involvement in the practice of journalism, a mission that carries with it the obligation to respect the rights of all, to the exclusion of none.

  26. Bill Clinton  

    If a boss asking a worker for sex is rape, is Bill Clinton, the darling of the Democratic Party and feminists all across the globe, a rapist? Please answer quickly, feminists. Or is it only bad if the boss isn't a liberal.

    • a feminist  

      It's not rape, but it is a gross abuse of power––and, since it's in a sexual sense, one with horrific ramifications.

      If you know you're in an arena where there's no way someone can make a COMPLETELY free, COMPLETELY personal decision about having sex with you...don't propose having sex with them? It's not that hard? E.g., you may not want to propose sex if you are the President of the United States and the other individual is a recent college graduate and a (probably desperate to please) intern

      Ignoring that imbalance is gross and more harmful than most people think

      • Hmm  

        Oh, you don't have to worry about that. I'm a very careful person; I wouldn't ever do anything that could get me in trouble. I'm also very realistic and I know just how much women like me. I also read the entire relevant text of Title IX before I came to college. So I know that if I ask someone on a date and she says no and then I thank her and leave, I can be expelled for making an unwanted sexual advance (interesting since I can't actually know if the advance was unwanted unless I ask . . . so it's a great catch-22). Since I'm pretty ugly, I know that all of my date requests are unwanted. So I'm patiently waiting for college to end before I start asking.

  27. Rosebud

    Because all women are perfect angels who never do anything unethical, right? Nevermind the fact that we have campus feminists trying to convince every woman who's ever had a bad hookup that she's really a rape victim.

    This sort of thing can spin out of control quickly.

  28. marymebwog  

    ily bwog <3 <3 <3 <3

  29. John Public

    So you sacked some poor guy cause his name was scribbled on a bathroom wall? Holy fuck you guys are idiots.

    • anon  

      Actually, the flyers said that the people had been found responsible by the University -- there might be evidence. Besides, according to the article, he voluntarily stepped down... why would you step down if it was false?

    • J.  

      No; they addressed the issue with their staff previously - before this incident, as clearly stated in their Statement.

  30. Elias Assefa

    How can your actions not reflect a stance on the individual's guilt? You wouldn't do this to someone you believed to be falsely accused and innocent. Not only does this action imply guilt, it sends a cold chill through university campus's that an anonymous accusation is cause enough to be terminated from a professional position, let alone the fear of being automatically guilty in the court of public opinion. If the individual had chose to fight the allegation, the first thing people would have heard was that he must have been guilty, he was fired for a reason.

    Congratulations for jumping on the "rape-culture" bandwagon without any attempt to clarify an emotionally charged buzz word. University campus's have enough problems to do with sexual assault, blind support of vaguely defined concepts that only serve to incite peoples passions instead of contemplative solutions won't help anything.

  31. BwogKing  

    There is a way war in our society being waged against beta men. Beta men are being assaulted by the three "HOLY" groups: Alpha Pluses, Alpha Minuses, and women. All three groups make noises at each other and then steal from Betas and deprive them of their rights, life, and property. Betas, you MUST abscond. LEAVE. Do not buy into materialism. Do not give people attention, respect, and your efforts unless they earn it (being attractive does not merit anything from them-in fact, maybe it should be a disqualifying feature). The betas in Japan made the herbivore movement and absconded and the Alpha politicians are begging them to please become nice slaves again. But they won't. Their economy feels tremors and people who had power and attention because they were "attractive" have lost it entirely. Abscond and they can no longer attack you. They will all rip at each other's throats because their mutual targets disappear and they cannot help but fight. You have NO obligations to them: in the words of all of those people every time you want something, "The world doesn't owe them a thing".

    • stop putting the pussy on the pedestal

      this is actually a really fucking intelligent comment. There are others who aren't mindless sheep! very comforting to know. It's just that men need to learn how to have more respect for themselves - don't be so desperate for puss, then this whole problem is solved

      • little-known fact  

        "the pussy" is accompanied by human brains with thoughts, emotions, and personal agency that have nothing to do with your dick

        • Jack

          Those aspects of the person are paid lipservice to, but not actually the determining factor, as many many men (with dignity, agency, etc.) are aware. The presence of female genitals determine to a great extent the sympathy and concern you'll receive, the interpretations strangers will take of you at a glance, etc.

          There are more to women than their vaginas, but gender studies and their dogmatic adherents don't treat them that way.

    • "Alpha/Beta" stuff is pseudoscience  

      If you're upset about your lack of confidence and romantic failures, don't blame everyone else and put yourself into a victimized category that doesn't exist in any meaningful sense. Work out, shower once in a while, get more confident. Pursue goals like anyone else. Self-pity, misogyny, and envy like this is a poison

      • KingBwog  

        You only want us to worship you. But it isn't going to happen. I do have a goal-I will earn as much wealth as I can and I will transfer all of it to the Cayman Islands. At the end of my life, I will take all of it, buy whatever rare, valuable treasures that I can with it, and burn them. Why? Because it's mine. I earned it and I can do whatever I want with it. And I won't allow anybody to take it from me. If nobody owes me a thing, I don't owe anybody a thing, least of all my worship. The only person worthy of your worship is yourself. Nobody deserves it just because they have a pretty face.

        And I shower every day, thanks. Saying ridiculous nonsense doesn't make it true. And how dare you tell me to work out; that's misandry. If I said the same thing to a girl, you would call it misogyny.

      • Crickets  

        You know, that's a pretty disgusting thing to assume. Do you really think that if a guy has trouble finding a girl, it's because he's a fat loser with no ambition who doesn't ever shower? Do you even realize that the majority of men at the school got in precisely because they had ambition and worked their tails off to get in? You're absolutely disgusting and misandrist. Maybe it's that easy for girls to find someone since guys are culturally conditioned to take whatever they can get and pine for any form of acceptance at all, but that's not how it works for guys.

  32. defend the wrongly accused

    arrest and expel the vandals. disgusting sub-human filth. hope they never taste an ounce of happiness in their pathetic, miserable lives.

  33. Anon  

    Except he was guilty and pleaded guilty. This guy was a friend of a friend. Check the CNN story Bwog just posted.

  34. Anonymous

    "Our decision does not reflect a position on the innocence or guilt of this former staff member, nor does it comment on, take a position on, support, implicitly or explicitly, any allegations of fact or law made against such person."

    Yes, Yes it does.

    "Accordingly, we asked this staffer to permanently and immediately resign from their position"

    I would like to "anonymously accuse" the following of participating in the rape culture and ask they be "requested" to "permanently and immediately resign from their positions"..

    Sarah Faith Thompson
    Claire Friedman
    Alexander Pines
    Maud Rozee
    Jake Hershman

    Whether or not the accusation is true...

  35. Jack

    This is really uncool. You booted someone for an anonymous tip? You know that's discrimination, even if you say "we do this without taking any stance on anything". Witch-hunts like this are immature, prejudiced, and really taking us back in time.

  36. BC' 12

    How do we know you even did this? I'm not asking how we know the accusations had any validity --- I'm asking how we know the basic facts that you assert. The usual Bwogkreig of publishing as soon as physically possible and iterating is wrong the first time around so damn much that I don't think you have any credibility to tell us what happened if there's no one else to check. How are your readers going to do your work for you now? How are you going to print print your little "UPDATE: We got every fact wrong" at the bottom of the article, or write your Part 2 article that doesn't matter because CNN links to part 1?

    But let's accept the facts you state are true, because they probably are, and I don't have the platform you do to pry info out of people by just publishing garbage and making people correct you in self defense. (Watch for this pattern, Bwog does it a lot.)

    1) Fuck you, no pat on the back. And you of all people should know that administrators insinuating legal consequences is how they say hello.

    2) What was the position? I'm suspicious. Do you cut ties with some rando contributor in such a public way? Were they abusing their position in regards to this? Did people at Bwog know? If that's true --- and it's hard not to be, you think if they'd raped someone, they never made someone on your staff very uncomfortable? --- then I also bet it's much more complicated than that, and that maybe you could have done something and maybe you couldn't have.

    Of course, since you're the journalists, the conversation is very different ---
    all "take steps" and "reiterate our commitment" and no "release the hounds."

  37. Uneducatedfreak

    I don't know how these people or BWOG wtf that is can sit there and proudly say that "we asked this person accused of alleged rape to resign" because blah blah blah, but then go on to say "Our decision does not reflect a position on the innocence or guilt of this former staff member, nor does it comment on, take a position on, support, implicitly or explicitly, any allegations of fact or law made against such person."
    You, as well as your staff, do realize, as an editor in chief that people can read, right? The hypocrisy here is appalling. Innocent UNTIL proven guilty. I have a good mind to anonymously accuse all of your staff of rape and shut you guys down.

  38. David Ryan

    This is a disgusting action. I am stunned that you do not understand the importance of due process and equal protection under the law. My sincere hope is that all of you are anonymously accused in the same fashion. In fact, I encourage it.

    • John

      It is most likely that the people accused did commit rape. I do not think it was a vendetta against certain individuals. Taking it to court would be great. Why doesn't the University promote that idea? Why don't you promote that idea? Why don't you demand that the University comply with Title IX requirements, instead of blowing it off saying they are one of 55 other loser Universities in the US?

      If you care so much about the anon lists, make a stand so they are not necessary? Be part of a solution instead of saying it is unfair. Change the situation so that list like this are not needed to draw attention to the lack of a just process for the victims.

      • david ryan

        And exactly how do you know that they probably did? You should search Google News for 'false rape allegations' sometime. It is eye-opening. On campuses, there has been a rash of activists making accusations or even 'threatening' themselves on social media to gain attention and sympathy. Do some research. You don't know that. . . that is why we have courts.

  39. John

    How can there be a court of law, when women and men are discouraged from reporting the assault to the police. Columbia University is doing all victims of sexual violence a great disservice by not reporting the crimes, and they are major crimes, to the authorities. By keeping everything under the control of the University leadership, the University administration has repeatedly shown that it cares more about money than real justice. Having a person involved in three rape complaints and never removing that person from the university says more about the Dean than any words can do justice.

    One other comment, from another article about the lack of protection that Columbia gives victims. What kind of training does the University give the members of its appeals board? A University professor asking about lubricant before anal rape! What kind of a person is he? One with rape fantasies of his own? I suggest he spend a weekend at Rikers. He will never need to ask that question again. But more importantly it shows the utter lack of training and insensitivity within the University Administration toward victims. The professor who asked such a sick question should have their name published. I would not want to attend their class or after hours function.

    People wake up! Someone who rapes you is not your friend. They RAPED you. Report them to the police and have them arrested. the more cases where college students go to trial for rape and assault, the more this will be noticed and the schools in this nation will be forced to deal with it. Raping someone and being convicted is the proper thing to do. By keeping silent or using the University's joke that it calls crisis intervention, you are assuring that somwone else will be raped by the same person.

  40. Anon  

    If a man is intoxicated and forcibly has sex with a woman without her consent, he has raped her. The intoxication is no excuse for his actions, just as it would be no excuse in the case of murder, a DUI or a theft.
    But, the issue is a good deal more complicated than that. What if the woman is somewhat intoxicated, but outwardly lucid and makes claims of not being that drunk when she consents? Is the man then raping her if she enthusiastically consents? Obviously, there is a certain level of intoxication that is apparent to everyone, but there is definitely a grey zone between having one or two drinks and being passed out on the floor and clearly incapable of giving consent. If a woman is in that grey zone, is she still accountable for consenting to that sex, just as she would be if she drove a car or tried to shoplift?
    Furthermore, how are men to deal with this grey area? Are they to carry breathalyzers? What if the man is too drunk to consent and the woman has sex with him, even if he enthusiastically consents at the time? Is that also rape?

  41. Anonymous

    There is no such thing as rape culture.

    Anonymous accusations are evidence of nothing.

    Feminism is a hate movement.

  42. the irony

    The irony that you folks removed my comment claiming the five of you had "bad touched" me while acting as you say on an anonymous comment to fire someone is overwhelming.

  43. Solutions  

    to this problem are few and far between because of the nature of the crime; rape is a crime of consent like no other, and in nonviolent cases, it's extraordinarily difficult to prove. Add that to the fact that Universities have no business adjudicating criminal matters, and you realize how bad the situation really is.

    The solution isn't to try to force Universities to enact stricter punishments. I understand making it easier for victims by moving perpetrators found responsible using the University's evidence standard to different dorms or off campus, but that simply isn't enough to expell someone if its a he said-she said case. I think forcing the University to deal with this is like going to them if a student murders someone else instead of going straight to the NYPD. My example of course, isn't considering cases in which the perpetrator confesses though. I believe that's a different situation.

    I think the solution is to really encourage reporting to the police, and having a support system at the school. We also need a huge change in the police's culture of dealing with these problems. They mean in general when you go to file complaints. Yes, the justice system WILL drag your name through the mud, but that is the nature of the justice system. Let's make the police become an institution that's supportive of people filing these reports, and have the school act as a supplement, by providing support. While the trial is going on as well as before it, the school should do its best to ensure you never see your alleged assaulter. At the same time, until a trial is completed, no one should presume guilt.

    These are just my 2 cents.

© 2006-2015 Blue and White Publishing Inc.