Not the Headlines - Sex at Cornell

SPEAKER_00 0:00

The Listening Tube presents not the headlines.

SPEAKER_02 0:09

I'm Bob Woodley from The Listening Tube. One of the stories getting a lot of attention right now is the alleged rape of a woman referred to as Jane Doe at Cornell University in New York. I'm not sure why the media is paying so much attention to this case of rape, where there are probably hundreds of other rape cases they could cover any day of the week. But this one seems to be getting the lion's share of attention. While all rapes are despicable acts of cowardice mixed with opportunity, the press rarely covers the subject unless they can somehow sensationalize it, which seems to be the case here. Is rape an issue that deserves more attention? Yes, it is. And there are certain places where rape seems to rear its ugly head more than average. Those places include college campuses and certain military situations. It might also be prevalent in prisons, too, but those would be homosexual encounters for the most part, or guards taking advantage of inmates. We don't hear much about those cases, but this one at Cornell seems to be the current darling of the media. For those of you not intimately familiar with what allegedly happened, Jane Doe claims she was gang raped in 2024 at Cornell University in a frat house called Cai Phi. Something like that would never happen at Sigma Phi Epsilon. Anyway, all we really know at this point is that she had sex with a number of men that night. Was she raped? Maybe. I'm not here to adjudicate the charges. I'm here to examine how the media reported on it. Some of the reporting is as questionable as the opposing versions of what happened that night. I don't think the press gives a damn about what happened that night. I think the press is just happy that they found a story they can use to show how much they support women. Plus, Kai Fi is basically a white men's fraternity, and white men are an easy target. It's not hard to imagine that if Kai Fi was a black fraternity, there wouldn't be a whisper of this story in any of the legacy media, especially if the alleged victim was a white woman. If that were the case, the trial would have already happened and there'd be seven guys in jail and the press wouldn't have let the story go beyond the local newspaper. That is, assuming there was a rape at all. We still don't know that. But if you only see the headlines from the legacy media, you might believe that a gang rape did happen, despite there originally being no charges filed. ABC in New York had a headline that said, Cornell Frat Brother apologized to Jane Doe after alleged rape texts show. Did I mention that there's an electronic paper trail of some of the events of that night? Well, there is. And the legacy media has been selective about which texts to share and which texts to ignore. Granted, there are texts that are not relevant, regardless of the accusations, but some texts have been revealed later rather than sooner. One of the early texts revealed by the press included the exchange between two frat members in a group chat was shop still open? And the response, yeah. If that's all you heard about the story, you could reasonably assume a woman was being raped. Unless the woman was a willing participant. I'm not saying that's the case here, but the media, in this case, The Guardian, wrote a story that takes what they knew at that point and makes a case in support of Jane Doe. The text referred to in the headline was one of the Frat brothers who wrote, I just wanted to apologize for how things went down the other night. If you only read the headline, you might think, Well, okay, if he apologized, then he must be guilty. But this text is actually very vague and could indicate that, although he regrets how things went down, he's not admitting any guilt. He didn't say, I'm sorry I raped you. He didn't say, I'm sorry you got raped. If texting were available when I was a young man in the dating scene, I could have sent that exact same text to half of the women I went out with after our first date. Sorry, didn't mean to disappoint you. Not because there was a rape, but because I wasn't very good at dating. Honestly. On my first date with my current wife, I took her to my family reunion. She married me anyway.

SPEAKER_01 5:24

You can text the listening tube from the homepage. If he says something stupid.

SPEAKER_02 5:59

So at the very least, this guy is off the hook. As she said, she really liked being with him. But should everybody else get off the hook because she said that none of the sexual stuff was illegal? That'll be settled in court, I guess. None of this would even be in the news if the alleged victim hadn't filed a civil lawsuit against the Seven Men and Cornell University, as well as both the frat house where the event happened, and the sorority to which she belonged. Delta Delta Delta! Tridell. And we still might have never heard about it if the governor of New York hadn't taken the situation under her wing as a cause celeb to make it look like the left is somehow in support of women all of a sudden. It's like the New York governor is trying to create another Me Too movement, and this is the chance she was looking for. And ever since that happened, the media changed its tune on the event.

SPEAKER_00 7:05

Send email to thelisteningtube at Outlook.com.

SPEAKER_02 7:10

The woman at the center of the incident filed the lawsuit on September 16th of this year, nearly two years after the incident, which happened on the night of October 19th or the morning of October 20th. The woman had several text messages with one of the men she's now accusing of rape. We've already heard some of it, but there's more. One of her texts to the man said everyone needs to grow up because sexuality and sex and stuff is changing and stuff like this is going to become more common. I'm also really open minded, though. I love you, king. But then, according to a timeline of events published by ABC News, ten days after the incident in question, she lamented that she was uninvited to a party at the same frat house. I knew this was going to happen. The woman will always get the short end of the stick, she texted to one of her lovers. Then on November 8th, she goes to the campus police to file a complaint. A couple weeks later, the frat is suspended based on what happened that night. It was eventually permanently closed. The frat had already kicked out the accused members within days of the incident. Then in January of 2025, Cornell opens an investigation under Title IX. You know Title IX, the one that's meant to protect women but doesn't when it comes to transgender athletes competing against them? The investigation would conduct twelve hearings and interviews with thirty-two witnesses. Some of them interviewed more than once. The case was also referred to the county district attorney who didn't press any charges. But why? Well, news reports that came out very early after the lawsuit was filed told the whole story. The DA was quoted in an ABC news story from September 29th as saying she never says that she was drugged without her knowledge. She admits to taking drugs and alcohol voluntarily and with knowledge. She does not allege that she was forced to engage in any acts. She does not say that she was physically helpless or unconscious or incapacitated at any point during the time at the fraternity house. Her lawyer claims she wasn't asked the right questions or wasn't asked them in the correct way. That sounds like a lawyer who would face constant objections in a trial for leading the witness. But I'm not a judge. And neither is New York Governor Kathy Hokel. Yet she found it to be her responsibility to not only poke her nose into this case, but also thought it necessary to replace the current DA with the state attorney general Leticia James. The governor purposely raised the bar of this case by making it bigger than it was and bigger than it should be. That's not to say that rape isn't a serious allegation, but this particular case is not a state level case and has already been thoroughly investigated and conclusions have already been drawn. You can open the case again and look at the evidence again, but it's still going to be the same evidence. Meanwhile, Cornell has put a stop to all fraternity events as a knee jerk reaction to the attention brought upon the institution by the publicity. It's merely virtue signaling and will prevent nothing nor accomplish anything. The investigation, be it led by AG James or someone else, will inevitably lead to the same conclusions as the original investigation, and the only things that will change is seven men will continue to regret what happened in college, and a woman might get a monetary windfall that will benefit her lawyer more than her. She'll be known by most of us as Jane Doe, but for those who know her, she'll be the gangbang woman from Cornell who couldn't get over the fact that she got uninvited to a party at the same frat house where she thought she was welcome. Should she have been invited back? Yeah, that would have been the cool thing to do. But word had already got around about what happened, and it was probably best for everyone to not get together again only ten days later. Let the rumors fade a little before you throw more fuel onto the fire. If she had been invited to go back to the frat house again just ten days later, that could have been interpreted in many different ways, but most of them would have been bad. On the other hand, if she was invited back and nothing happened and all was cool between everyone, none of this would be happening now. And the men who allegedly raped this woman had already been expelled from the frat house in question. If any conclusion other than what has already been decided should come about because of this lawsuit, it will only have succeeded because of the governor sticking her nose into it. That provides pressure to create a different outcome. The sad part is that the governor of New York really doesn't give a damn about Jane Doe. She only wants to take advantage of an opportunity to show support for a woman as a counterpoint to all the other ways Democrats and others on the left have abandoned women by letting men compete against them in sports under the guise of acceptance, allowing illegal alien criminals to stalk and kill them, calling for the FBI to investigate moms who question school boards, relegating their titles to demeaning terms like birthing persons and being unable to even define what a woman is. Suddenly, they find a woman who made some very poor decisions in college and turned her regret into a lawsuit. I don't know why they feel sorry for this woman, as opposed to a woman whose health insurance they took away by putting an end date on Obamacare subsidies. I don't know why they choose to champion this Jane Doe instead of the tens of thousands of women who died of fentanyl poisoning during the Biden administration. But oddly enough, the longer this rape story plays out, the more the Democrats and the media change how they talk about it and what it seems to mean. They've gotten the student body in a frenzy, calling for resignations and accusations that students aren't protected on the campus of Cornell. What's not being reported is that Cornell did everything right. They took statements, they did an investigation, they turned over the case to the district attorney. They did an investigation, they didn't press charges. This woman has a right to file a lawsuit. Let the courts decide what happens next. There's no reason for the governor of New York or Letitia James to get involved. And the news media has changed their tune as the tide of perceived public opinion has changed. But I don't think public opinion has changed at all. Only the way the media and the New York politicians seem to care about the case has changed. Follow the listening tube at thelisteningtube.com, where you'll also find This Week in History and interviews with interesting people. Thank you for putting your ear to the listening tube. Like and subscribe at thelisteningtube.com. I'm your host, Bob Woodley, for Thou ad Infinitum.