Author: saveadmin

PR: SAVE Files Amicus Brief Against 18 Attorneys’ General, In Support of New Title IX Regulation

Post author By saveadmin
Post date July 10, 2020

PRESS RELEASE

Contact: Rebecca Stewart

Telephone: 513-479-3335

Email: info@saveservices.org

SAVE Files Amicus Brief Against 18 Attorneys’ General, In Support of New Title IX Regulation

WASHINGTON / July 10, 2020 – SAVE filed an Amicus Brief yesterday in support of the recently released Title IX regulation, which seeks to restore fairness and due process in campus sexual harassment cases. The Amicus Brief highlights the legal inadequacies of the attorneys’ general Complaint, and urges that the Court dismiss their request for a preliminary injunction.

In 2011 the Department of Education issued a “Dear Colleague Letter” that imposed a range of new campus adjudication procedures for sexual assault cases. These changes removed a number of due process protections, such as the right of parties to be represented by counsel. As a result, hundreds of lawsuits were filed against colleges (1). Amidst intense public pressure, the Department of Education revoked its notorious Dear Colleague Letter in 2017, and later issued a new regulation on May 6, 2020. (2)

One month later, the attorneys’ general from 18 states filed a lawsuit seeking to block the long-awaited regulation. The lawsuit claimed the new regulation will “reverse decades of effort to end the corrosive effects of sexual harassment on equal access to education.” (3)

In response, the SAVE Brief highlights that Title IX “is not limited to the protection of one sex or gender; it protects all.” (page 9) This contrasts with the assertion by the California Women’s Law Center Amicus that states Title IX only serves to protect “women and girls.” (page 8).

The SAVE Brief enumerates the types of sex-based discrimination against male students: Biased educational materials; inconsistent enforcement of policies for male and female students; and a double-standard for intoxication policies. (pages 10-16).

The Brief also provides examples of universities that refused to investigate allegations by male students claiming to be victims of female-perpetrated sexual assault. According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control, each year 1.7 million men are sexually “made to penetrate,” compared to 1.5 million women who are raped (4).

Noting the hundreds of lawsuits filed against colleges, the SAVE Brief reaches a resounding conclusion:

“This demonstrates a simple truth: male students constitute the overwhelming majority of victims of proceedings on campus that are unlawful and constitute discrimination on the basis of sex, in violation of Title IX. Plaintiffs totally ignore this truth in their Complaint and subsequent Motion for Preliminary Injunction. This is especially astounding given that the deprivation of students’ rights in the disciplinary process,…was a substantial predicate for the issuance of the Regulation.” (pages 9-10)

The SAVE Amicus Brief is available online (5).

Links:

Sexual Assault

Men’s Lives Matter: Male Victims of Sexual Abuse

Post author By saveadmin
Post date July 9, 2020

When a woman sexually abuses a man, the pain inflicted is dismissed by those whose political paradigm does not include men as victims. Unfortunately, these voices dominate the research, media, and legislation that surrounds the issue of sexual victimization.

Their narrative: “Women are victims, men are perpetrators.” This rigid approach even ignores the glaring male-on-male sexual violence in prisons because it does not fit the mold; in fact, if prisoners were counted, then men might well show a greater rate of rape than women. The blindness to male victimization inflicts a second injustice on every male survivor who is either viewed as a liar or as unimportant. Female survivors of rape in the ‘50s were treated in much the same way by law enforcement and the court system.

The situation with the sexual abuse of men is slowly changing. A few years ago, the CDC added a category of sexual abuse called “made to penetrate,” which is an important but almost entirely overlooked form of sexual abuse, perhaps because it applies only to males. A report entitled “The Sexual Victimization of Men in America: New Data Challenge Old Assumptions” was published in a 2014 issue of the American Journal of Public Health. There, UCLA researchers Lara Stemple and Ilan Meyer explain, “By introducing the term, ‘made to penetrate,’ the CDC has added new detail to help understand what happens when men are sexually victimized…Therefore, to the extent that males experience nonconsensual sex differently (i.e., being made to penetrate), male victimization will remain vastly undercounted in federal data collection on violent crime.” Stemple and Meyer conclude, “we first argue that it is time to move past the male perpetrator and female victim paradigm [of rape]. Overreliance on it stigmatizes men who are victimized.”

Including the category ‘made to penetrate’ could shift the entire paradigm of sexual violence. The CDC, National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey: 2010-2012 State Report, released in 2017, indicates (Tables 3.1 and 3.5):

Males:

Made to penetrate: 1.7 million
Rape: Numbers too small to report a reliable estimate
Sexual coercion: 1.6 million
Unwanted sexual contact: 1.9 million

Females:

Rape: 1.5 million
Made to penetrate: Numbers too small to report a reliable estimate
Sexual coercion: 2.4 million
Unwanted sexual contact: 2.5 million

With this shift of paradigm, female-on-male violence may start to receive attention. The problem is enormous. BOJ statistics for 2018 show the imprisonment rate in America as 431 sentenced per 100,000 residents. Extrapolating from the figures for federal prison, well over 90% of prisoners are male. In its report “No Escape: Male Rape in U.S. Prisons,” Human Rights Watch indicate s that approximately 20% of male prisoners are sexually victimized. Most sexual violence professionals, however, seem indifferent to the situation.

The rate of male sexual victims is likely understated because men notoriously underreport their abuse. The National Domestic Violence Abuse Hotline offers several reasons why. They are socialized against appearing “weak”; their abuse becomes the brunt of jokes; they believe there is no support out there for them…and with reason. The Maryland nonprofit Stop Abusive and Violence Environments summarized the situation. “On the one hand, about 25% of men who sought help from DV hotlines were connected with resources that were helpful. On the other hand, nearly 67%…reported that these DV agencies and hotline were not at all helpful. Many reported being turned away.” Their research tells “a story of male helpseekers who are often doubted, ridiculed, and given false information. This…impacts men’s physical and mental health.”

How can this happen in a society preoccupied with sexual abuse? The dominant narrative of sexual violence is identity politics. This claims that a person’s identity is not defined by a common humanity and the choices he or she makes as an individual. It is defined by the specific subcategories of humanity into which a person fits; gender and race are examples. Instead of humanity having common interests, such as freedom of religion, the subcategories have interests that clash. Men benefit at the expense of women. They do so by sexually oppressing women…or so the story goes.

The preceding statement reflects some historical truth. In the ‘50s, men as a class did receive preferential treatment in the workplace, academia, and from the general culture. Women who experienced sexual and domestic violence were blamed for their own victimization. But society has changed at a dizzying pace. We live in a healthier society that contains a fatal flaw: identity politics. If people are defined by biological subcategories that are in conflict, then society is at war—a forever war. Fairness or equality to one class means pulling down another. If men perpetrate sexual violence, then raising up women means policing and punishing males. When facts contradict the narrative, they may be given a cursory nod, then the narrators return to the script.

In the ‘60s, the unjust treatment of female rape victims sparked a sexual revolution that ripped open the culture. But no revolution defends male victims. Instead, the ‘60s revolution has been institutionalized within academia, bureaucracy, and law. It has calcified. The established sexual order now depends on ignoring male victims or dismissing them as inconvenient. It must ignore the fact that violence has no gender. Violence only has individuals who abuse and individuals who are abused. Excluding women or men from either category shows a willful blindness to reality. It expresses political self-interest, not justice.

Source: https://libertarianinstitute.org/articles/mens-lives-matter-male-victims-of-sexual-abuse/

Uncategorized

Black students four times as likely to allege rights violations in Title IX proceedings

Post author By saveadmin
Post date July 7, 2020

Jonathan Taylor, Founder

Title IX for all

Among plaintiffs whose races are known and when adjusted for student population, black students are four times as likely as white students to file lawsuits alleging their rights were violated in higher ed Title IX disciplinary proceedings. This data, sourced from lawsuits in our Title IX Legal Database, is based on Title IX For All’s recent research analyzing plaintiff demographic data from the ~650 lawsuits filed against higher-ed institutions since 2011.

This data confirms what many have long suspected: that students of color are significantly more likely to be impacted by higher ed Title IX proceedings. While a sizable portion of plaintiffs are of unknown race, we see no reason to suspect this would disconfirm the basic issue of proportionality.

Please see this attachment for a PDF of the race/sex breakdown of plaintiffs in lawsuits by accused students based on our analysis. The data reveals that when the race of the plaintiff is known, white and black students file lawsuits in fairly even numbers overall. According to the National Center for Education Statistics, however, white students outnumber black students four to one. If they file lawsuits in even numbers, this means that black students are four times as likely as white students to file a lawsuit when adjusted for student population.

These findings come at a time when public officials who have long regarded themselves as champions of civil rights for minorities suspected or accused of crimes advocate a heightened awareness of their rights while simultaneously working to undermine their rights in higher ed settings.

As always, Title IX For All advocates that the rights to due process and freedom from discrimination are fundamental rights for all people and do not stop at the campus property line. Public officials should be consistent with their values and acknowledge that these rights are not in conflict with one another; on the contrary, they are part of the same mission of equal rights for all.

Uncategorized

University of Minnesota considers policy changes to comply with new Title IX regulations

Post author By saveadmin
Post date July 3, 2020

https://twin-cities.umn.edu/news-events/university-minnesota-considers-policy-changes-comply-new-title-ix-regulation

What and when: University of Minnesota Board of Regents Meeting and Retreat (Wednesday, July 8 and Thursday, July 9, beginning at 9 a.m. both days)
Where: Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, these meetings will be conducted virtually with a livestream publicly available at youtube.com/UMNRegents

As public higher education institutions throughout the country consider necessary adjustments to sexual misconduct policies to comply with new federal Title IX regulations, the University of Minnesota Board of Regents will consider proposed amendments to the University’s policies and processes during its July meeting.

Released by the U.S. Department of Education (DOE) last month, these regulations narrow the scope of sexual misconduct (including sexual harassment, sexual assault, stalking, and relationship violence) that educational institutions are required to prohibit. They also set requirements for how institutions must conduct grievance processes related to Title IX concerns. The University’s policies and procedures must comply with the federal regulations by Aug. 14.

In many places, the DOE regulations set minimum standards and allow individual institutions to make policy choices appropriate for their unique needs. Since the DOE publicly announced these changes, University leaders have reiterated that the discretion built into this guidance will allow the University to continue providing effective and fair response to all types of sexual misconduct that harms University community members, whether that misconduct occurs on- or off-campus.

The Board will discuss the following primary considerations related to these changes:

A uniform standard of evidence for all Title IX cases, whether these matters involve students, faculty or staff;
Adjustments to how live hearings are conducted, as well as the process for appealing University Title IX decisions;
The size and composition of Title IX hearing panels;
The scope of advisor roles for those assisting parties involved in these matters, and;
The level of systemwide centralization the University will employ as it moves forward with updates to its processes.

Since the initial DOE announcement, the University’s Office of Equal Opportunity and Affirmative Action, in collaboration with other University offices, has consulted broadly with students, faculty and staff systemwide to determine how the University can best meet these federal mandates on all five of its campuses. Though University administrators are continuing to gather feedback from governance groups and beyond, consultation in recent months is reflected in materials coming before the Board for consideration in July.

As part of its July meetings, the Board is also expected to:

Act on a recommendation for a one-time employee retirement incentive option.
Hear the annual report from the University of Minnesota Alumni Association, which represents nearly 500,000 alums from the University’s Twin Cities and Rochester campuses.
Act on the purchase of 501 Oak Street SE in Minneapolis and the sale of 1.66 acres at UMore Park in Rosemount.

For more information, including future meeting times, visit regents.umn.edu.

Uncategorized

In college I was falsely accused of sexual harassment. Men like me deserve due process.

Post author By saveadmin
Post date July 2, 2020

Uncategorized

University of Denver Chancellor Memo Regarding Title IX Compliance

Post author By saveadmin
Post date June 24, 2020

OFFICE OF THE CHANCELLOR

June 10, 2020

Dear DU Community,

As you may be aware, the U.S. Department of Education has issued final regulations that put into place new legally binding requirements that will impact the way DU and all universities that receive federal funding manage and report cases of sexual assault. I am writing to assure you that these changes will in no way compromise our commitment to creating an environment in which all members of the DU community feel safe reporting their experiences and remain confident that their cases will be heard thoroughly, fairly, and with respect.

Through the wecanDUbetter campaign, we heard painful stories about how survivors feel that DU has let them down in the past. Those stories united our campus, and I made a public commitment that DU would respond swiftly and proactively to all future incidents of gender-based violence and sexual assault.

As promised, I am writing today to provide an update to the statement and detailed action plan to combat sexual harassment and assault that I shared on March 5. You can find an update to that action plan here.

Because the new rules are complex, and require DU to implement some new processes by August 14, we want to keep the community fully informed. Toward that end, I hope you will join me and a panel of experts and interested parties on June 16 at 3:30 pm MT for Ask the Experts about Title IX: A Dedicated Town Hall. The Zoom link is here. Our panelists will be:

Jeremy Enlow, interim executive director of equal opportunity and Title IX coordinator, Office of Equal Opportunity & Title IX;
Molly Hooker, interim deputy Title IX coordinator, Office of Equal Opportunity & Title IX;
Michael J. LaFarr, interim associate vice chancellor and executive director of the Health and Counseling Center, Campus Life and Inclusive Excellence;
Kristine McCaslin, director, student rights and responsibilities, Campus Life & Inclusive Excellence;
Josh Richards, vice chair, of the Higher Education Practice at Saul Ewing Arnstein & Lehr LLP;
Beth Robischon, associate general counsel, Office of General Counsel;
Kayla Rodriguez, coordinator, CAPE Advocacy Services, Health and Counseling Services;
Jack Thomas, doctoral student in the Graduate School of Professional Psychology and member of the Healthy Masculinity Working Group; and
Grace Wankelman, undergraduate student, Undergraduate Student Government senator, and co-founder of the wecanDUbetter campaign.

You can find important resources on DU’s Title IX website, including links to the Title IX Final Rule Overview, the Title IX Final Rule as published in the Federal Register on May 19 and anonymously share concerns, questions or ideas for the new Title IX process at DU. We plan to address your questions and concerns on June 16 and at other future programs. Also, we are seeking volunteers to be part of a Title IX policy/procedure advisory committee to provide feedback as we develop our new processes. Nominations can be emailed to titleix@du.edu. We welcome feedback and invite participants to help us make our process as effective and supportive as possible.

Our progress in this important area must continue and I am dedicated to ensuring it does. Please join us on June 16 to share your questions, suggestions or responses to the new federal regulations. Our unequivocal goal remains to make DU a place where all members of our community feel safe, welcome, and supported.

Sincerely,

Jeremy Haefner
Chancellor

Campus Free Speech Sexual Assault Sexual Harassment Title IX Title IX Equity Project

PR: Universities and Colleges Take Steps to Implement New Title IX Regulation

Post author By saveadmin
Post date June 24, 2020

PRESS RELEASE

Contact: Rebecca Stewart

Telephone: 513-479-3335

Email: info@saveservices.org

Universities and Colleges Take Steps to Implement New Title IX Regulation

WASHINGTON / June 25, 2020 – Following lengthy public debate, the U.S. Department of Education issued a new Title IX regulation on May 6, 2020, which carries the force and effect of law. [1]

The new regulation takes effect on August 14, 2020. This means school administrators and Title IX Coordinators have only about 50 days to enact policies and revise training procedures to ensure fairness and equality for all students.

Within this time frame, schools must restore fairness on campuses by upholding students’ rights to written notice of allegations, the right to an advisor, as well as the right to submit, cross-examine, and challenge evidence at a live hearing. One of the key provisions will require colleges to post their Title IX training materials on the websites for public review.[2]

To date, the regulation has been endorsed by editorial boards of the following newspapers: Detroit News, The Oklahoman, New York Daily News, Wall Street Journal, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, and Philadelphia Enquirer. [3] The Independent Women’s Forum has highlighted how the new regulation will help restore due process on campus and bring an end to the so-called “Kangaroo Courts.” [4]

SAVE has identified numerous ways that the new rule will support sexual assault complainants. [5] Most importantly, the regulation establishes a legally enforceable duty of universities to respond to such cases in a timely manner.

Schools have varied in their initial responses to the new standard.

In a letter to the University of Wisconsin System (UWS), Governor Tony Evers stated, “UWS is required to implement these changes through administrative rule making.” Evers mandated his Board of Regents to do so by submitting a scope statement to him, but rejected the first one on the grounds it was too vague. [6]

The South Dakota Board of Regents was scheduled to vote this week to implement the procedures: “Using a hearing examiner and affording full due process at the onset enhances the probability of getting to the correct outcome sooner, rather than a later, an issue that has haunted Title IX nationally in a litany of high profile court appeals in recent years.” [7]

Anecdotal reports indicate other leading universities have initiated the process of implementing the new regulation.

In contrast, a memo from University of Denver Chancellor Jeremy Haefner indicates the University is focusing on ensuring the changes in the final rule support survivors: “I am writing to ensure you that these changes will in no way compromise our commitment to creating an environment in which all members of the DU community feel safe reporting their experiences and remain confident that their cases will be heard thoroughly, fairly, and with respect.” [8] Unlike other schools, the memo does not mention fair and equitable procedures for all parties.

In October 2019, SAVE launched its Title IX Equity Project to assure compliance with Title IX requirements. As a result, the Office of Civil Rights has opened over 100 investigations to date regarding university scholarship policies that discriminate against male or female students. [9] The Title IX Equity Project has enjoyed extensive media coverage, as well. [10]

Citations:

[1] https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/newsroom.html

[2] https://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/secretary-devos-takes-historic-action-strengthen-title-ix-protections-all-students

[3] http://www.saveservices.org/title-ix-regulation/

[4] https://www.iwf.org/2020/05/06/new-title-ix-regulations-restore-due-process-on-campus/

[5] http://www.saveservices.org/2020/05/analysis-new-title-ix-regulation-will-support-and-assist-complainants-in-multiple-ways/

[6]https://content.govdelivery.com/attachments/WIGOV/2020/06/15/file_attachments/1474234/Evers_2020_06_15_UWS%20Ch%2017.pdf

[7] https://www.sdbor.edu/the-board/agendaitems/2014AgendaItems/2020%20Agenda%20Items/June24_20/5_B_BOR0620.pdf

[8] http://www.saveservices.org/2020/06/university-of-denver-chancellor-memo-regarding-title-ix-compliance/

[9] http://www.saveservices.org/equity/ocr-investigations/

[10] http://www.saveservices.org/equity/

Title IX

Title IX Group Resists Title IX Regulations

Post author By saveadmin
Post date June 18, 2020

Title IX Group Resists Title IX Regulations

Title IX Group Resists Title IX Regulations

Posted to Education June 18, 2020 by Wendy McElroy

Campuses are the frontlines of a take-no-prisoners war over Title IX, enacted in 1972 to prohibit sex discrimination in federally funded schools.

In a January 15 op-ed for Inside Higher Education, Brett Sokolow — president of the Association of Title IX Administrators (ATIXA) — advised: “About 20 to 25 percent of the (new Title IX) regulations are potentially very detrimental to the cause of sex and gender equity in education, and we will need… to work within those requirements, challenge them in court or find clever work-arounds.”

What is the conflict?

In 2011, the Department of Education changed Title IX to assert gender equity. “Sexual harassment” was redefined to “unwelcome conduct of a sexual nature” — those accused were denied due process. Sexual discussion and conduct on campus were regulated at the expense of free speech and justice.

On May 6, 2020, new rules from the Education Department’s Office of Civil Rights moved Title IX closer to its original intent. The definition of “sexual harassment” narrowed, and due process returned.

But hostile administrations may not allow the policies to function. ATIXA exemplifies the resistance. It is the main source of national training and legal interpretation for Title IX, with the mission of “gender equity in education.”

ATIXA collides with one specific rule: Campuses must post “all materials used to train… any person who facilitates an informal resolution process.” Transparency may seem to be common sense, but many accused students have had to sue to access their colleges’ guidelines and material on their own hearings.

The College Fix reported on ATIXA’s reaction to the transparency requirement. On May 11, at a webinar, Sokolow told more than 4,200 participants to publish only the title — not the content — of training materials. Why? “Materials from ATIXA … are proprietary and copyrighted.”

“Those materials cannot be posted… because it will violate our copyright. People … are not permitted to have a copy,” he observed, which can be reviewed only in an administrator’s office. Objections were to be sent to ATIXA, which would make “the materials available” under “comfortable” circumstances.

Colleges that comply with the DOE, he stated, would “get a letter from us kindly asking to make sure” the materials “are removed.” The College Fix observed, “The implication is clear: ATIXA will sue colleges for following a legally binding regulation.”

The Education Department swiftly responded. The College Fix related, “OCR wrote a blog post … reiterating that Title IX training materials, among other ‘important information,’ must be posted on schools’ websites — no exceptions.”

The OCR declared that its regulations do “not permit a school to choose whether to post the training materials or offer a public inspection option. … If a school’s current training materials are copyrighted or otherwise protected as proprietary business information (for example, by an outside consultant), the school still must comply with the Title IX Rule.”

ATIXA has since granted permission to use its materials. But if Solokow’s webinar session had not been publicized, would ATIXA’s obstruction have been addressed so quickly, or at all?

There is deep-state resistance to the new Title IX. “Deep State” refers to largely unseen but influential bureaucrats who work behind the scenes to thwart policies they dislike; it includes quasi-private organizations, like ATIXA, that facilitate the bureaucracies. The stakes for the Title IX-industrial complex are high. Its power, status and wealth depend on the regulations created by the Education Department in 2011.

ATIXA is not alone in campus resistance. In January, the National Women’s Law Center sued the DOE over Title IX changes. ATIXA co-signed a March 25, 2020 letter in which the NWLC called to suspend the then-preliminary regulations. In May, the NWLC brought suit…again.

The war for free speech and due process on campus is a war against established bureaucracies. By comparison, Title IX clashes in Congress will seem like a clean fight because it was out in the open. Obstruction on campus will largely consist of clever work-arounds and plausible excuses for why implementation is not possible, whether or not it is

About the Author

Wendy McElroy is an author for The Future of Freedom Foundation. She wrote this for InsideSources.com.

Domestic Violence Uncategorized Violence Against Women Act

Coronavirus-Abuse Hoax Unravels Across the Globe

Post author By saveadmin
Post date June 17, 2020

PRESS RELEASE

Contact: Rebecca Stewart

Telephone: 513-479-3335

Email: info@EndToDV.org

Coronavirus-Abuse Hoax Unravels Across the Globe

WASHINGTON / June 11, 2020 – The Coalition to End Domestic Violence today reports that the oft-repeated claim that coronavirus stay-at-home policies are causing a global “surge” or “spike” in domestic violence has been refuted by police reports gathered from countries around the world.

On April 5, United Nations chief Antonio Guterres issued a Tweet declaring, “Many women under lockdown for #COVID19 face violence where they should be safest: in their own homes….I urge all governments to put women’s safety first as they respond to the pandemic.” (1) The following day, UN Women director Phumzile Mlambo-Ngcuka issued a statement warning, “We see a shadow pandemic growing, of violence against women.” (2)

But police reports received from 10 countries across the globe, listed below in alphabetical order, reach a different conclusion:

Albania: In March 2020, the number of domestic violence reports decreased by 141, as compared to the same month in the previous year (3). Likewise, Judge Durim Hasa reported a decrease in domestic violence cases in his district (4).
Australia: In New South Wales, domestic violence assaults decreased from 2,434 in April, 2019 to 2,145 in April, 2020, representing a 12% drop. Bureau executive director Jackie Fitzgerald said there was no evidence that social isolation measures have led to an increase in domestic violence (5). In Queensland, “Reports of domestic violence breaches dropped 5.6% between March 6 and 27, while court applications related to such matters fell 20% in that time.” (6)
Austria: The incidence of domestic violence has not risen, and many places have seen a reduction, according to reports from dozens of police departments across the country (7).
Canada: The Ottawa Police Service reported that calls requesting an officer’s intervention in domestic disputes were down more than 23% from March 16 to April 30, compared to the same period in 2019. (8) In Toronto, police report a “small drop” in domestic violence numbers since social distancing measures went into effect (9). Police in Vancouver have not seen any increase in domestic violence statistics (10).
India: Earlier this week, Smriti Irani, Minister for Women and Child Development, was asked whether the lockdown has increased domestic violence against women. Her response, “It is false.” (11)
Netherlands: A March newspaper account reported the National Police noted a 12% domestic violence decline, compared to the same week in 2019. (12)
Russia: The number of domestic violence crimes fell by 13% during the lockdown, compared to the same month in 2019. (13)
Spain: During the first two weeks of April, “there has been a sharp drop in complaints being made to the police.” (14)
Tasmania: According to police Acting Commander Stuart Wilkinson, “we’re not seeing an increase at all.” (15)
United States: Among reports gathered from 33 police departments across the country, 11 noted a decline and 19 saw steady numbers of domestic violence cases. Only three offices indicated an increase of 10% or more in domestic violence cases (16).

Many countries have reported increases in calls to domestic violence hotlines. But commentator Wendy McElroy explains why police reports are more accurate than hotlines in tracking trends: “People access [domestic violence] hotlines and services for help on many non-DV issues, including housing, immigration, and medical problems, but they report crime to the police. The same person may phone a hotline many times, but a police report is almost always ‘one person, one case’. The funding of a DV service often depends on its volume, which encourages overstatement. Police accounts also ground DV in reality, with real names and verifiable details rather than anonymous reports.” (17)

While it is possible that domestic violence has increased in some areas, the United Nations’ startling prediction of a new “pandemic” of violence against women around the world has been shown to be false. And extensive global research shows men and women engage in domestic violence at equal rates (18).

In India, Smriti Irani expressed dismay over the domestic violence “scaremongering” at the hands of certain non-governmental organizations (11). In Austria, one group charged feminist-oriented domestic violence groups with using the coronavirus issue to make “untrue statements,” thereby ignoring male victims of violence (7). In Australia, Corrine Barraclough noted, “The myth that domestic violence is surging in lockdown will become one of the biggest lies the gendered narrative leans on for additional funding.” (19)

Links:

Title IX

Evers blocks UW from complying with Trump sex assault rules

Post author By saveadmin
Post date June 16, 2020

https://www.startribune.com/evers-blocks-uw-from-complying-with-trump-sex-assault-rules/571273442/

Evers blocks UW from complying with Trump sex assault rules

By TODD RICHMOND Associated Press

JUNE 15, 2020 — 4:45PM

MADISON, Wis. — Gov. Tony Evers blocked University of Wisconsin System officials Monday from taking the first steps toward complying with new federal rules that bolster the rights of sexual misconduct defendants and narrow the range of cases colleges are required to investigate.

Evers wrote in a letter to UW System President Ray Cross that he was rejecting the system’s outline for a rule complying with changes the Trump administration made last month to Title IX regulations. Evers said the outline doesn’t clearly state whether the system will weaken or strengthen the definition of sexual harassment. The outline also doesn’t recognize the economic impact of providing more mental health services to victims frozen out of the complaint process, the governor said.

“Education and civil rights leaders across the nation have voiced strong concerns about the new federal regulations and the chilling effect they will have on survivors of sexual harassment and sexual assault,” Evers wrote.

UW System spokesman Mark Pitsch had no immediate comment.

Education Secretary Betsy DeVos issued new rules last month tweaking Title IX, a 1972 law barring discrimination based on sex in education. The changes narrow the definition of sexual harassment and require colleges to investigate claims only if the misconduct is so severe and offensive that it effectively denies a person equal access to education.

Obama administration guidelines, by contrast, defined sexual harassment as an unwelcome sexual advance. The final policy was quickly condemned by opponents who say it weakens protections for victims and will discourage many from reporting misconduct.

DeVos’ revisions also state schools can be held accountable for mishandling complaints only if they acted with deliberate indifference and allow student to question one another through representatives during live hearings.

The changes take effect Aug. 14. Evers earlier this month authorized Attorney General Josh Kaul to join a 17-state lawsuit alleging DeVos’ changes undercut Title IX’s mandate to eradicate sexual discrimination in federally funded education programs.

UW System President Ray Cross submitted a scope statement to Evers on May 21 regardless, noting in the statement that refusing to comply could lead to federal enforcement action and lawsuits.

By TODD RICHMOND Associated Press

JUNE 15, 2020 — 4:45PM

UW System spokesman Mark Pitsch had no immediate comment.

UW System President Ray Cross submitted a scope statement to Evers on May 21 regardless, noting in the statement that refusing to comply could lead to federal enforcement action and lawsuits.