Monday, November 20, 2006

Like Teacher, Like Student: Duke Student. Shadee Malaklou Offers Her View.

Reading the coverage of the Hoax last week, one couldn’t help but wonder what absurdity could possibly follow an earth sciences professor at Duke writing a full length guest column to the Herald-Sun, complaining about citizens without legal credentials expressing their opinions about the Duke Lacrosse Case. To support his criticism, now infamous professor Thomas Crowley offered incorrect facts and, of course, legal opinions about the conduct of the defense attorneys. When asked by Professor KC Johnson about the allegations of ethical violations Professor Crowley made against the defense attorneys, Crowley responded:

I DON’T HAVE POINT BY POINT DOCUMENTATION ON THIS. ALL I KNOW IS THAT, EVEN THOUGH I DON’T FOLLOW THE LOCAL NEWS VERY CLOSELY I HAVE BEEN SURPRISED HOW OFTEN I HAVE SEEN ONE OF THE LAWYERS (A BEARDED ONE) MAKING SOME STATEMENT. ONE OF THEM EVEN HAD AN OPINION PIECE IN THE HERALD SUN YESTERDAY.

Lucky for us, someone stepped up so we would not be disappointed this week. Apparently emboldened by the precedent that one needs neither to follow the news closely, nor have a basic understanding of the facts, Duke Senior Shadee Malaklou drafted her own full-length guest column for the Herald Sun, which Snooze Room editor Bob Ashley happily printed on Sunday under the headline “Lacrosse Players Far From Innocent.” Shadee starts well, identifying the “bearded one” as Joseph B. Cheshire in the first sentence. She then offers the following:

“For every smug remark by a smug, white attorney representing a smug, white lacrosse player, there is a woman cringing. Not only was Cheshire’s guest column unprofessional, but it was completely insensitive to the multitudes of women who have been victim, in one way or another, to the lacrosse players’ actions…Much of this emphasis on ‘innocence’ has ignored the gender and racial prejudice of the March 13 party. If nothing else, Nifong is holding the lacrosse players accountable for that; and as a woman at Duke who knows just how much these men get away with, I’m thankful….A rape may not have occurred on March 13, but as a woman on Duke’s campus, as a Woman’s Studies major, and as activist for survivors of sexual assault, I assure Mr. Cheshire that these men are not innocent, nor are they upstanding citizens of Duke or Durham law….Nifong might not be in the right legally, but that doesn’t mean he's not doing the right thing.”

One hopes that after penning an article with the word “innocence” in quotes, and apparently encouraging the prosecution of citizens for symbolic reasons, Shadee is not anticipating applying to law school. If she is, perhaps after law school she can explain how a District Attorney can not be in the right legally, but still be doing the right thing. As if President Brodhead describing a trial as a place for the lacrosse players to be “proved innocent” wasn’t a bad enough distortion of the criminal justice system, Shadee offers the view that she is thankful for these charges because they will hold the lacrosse players accountable for “gender and racial prejudice.” Never mind that according to the second dancer, Kim Roberts, none of the three accused players uttered racial slurs. Such details are not important to those like Professor Crowley and Shadee Malaklou.
The “gender prejudice” charge is even more curious. How exactly were the lacrosse players prejudiced against women? Because they hired female strippers? Should they instead have hired male strippers? Is heterosexuality a form of prejudice? The charge from Shadee appears to be that the lacrosse players were disrespectful towards women because they did not follow traditional standards of sexual propriety. This charge may have a slight hint of merit, but it is rendered absurd by the course that Shadee herself teaches at Duke.
"In her columns last year and this fall, sophomore Shadee Malaklou encouraged her peers to embrace their sexuality and have as much fun as the guys. Malaklou taught a student-led, half-credit house course last spring titled "Dating and Mating: The Hook-Up Culture at Duke" and is teaching it for the second time this spring. She also notes that most Duke students are so driven, with career paths charted through postgraduate schooling and beyond, that no one expects to meet his or her future spouse as an undergraduate." Duke Magazine
The "hookup" course description is as follows:
Dating and Mating: Hookup Culture at Duke.
Course Syllabus:
Section 1: Classes 1-3. "Framing the Conversation"--What do we mean by "hookup culture"? What are the overarching issues to be addressed by this class? We are trying to define 'the big picture' here.
Section 2: Classes 4-5. "Situations Conducive to 'Hooking up" -- What kind of environment fosters and is conducive to a "hookup," looking at college campuses specifically.
Section 3: classes 6-8. "The Before and After"--What are the expectations before a hookup, what happens afterwards?
Section 4: Classes 9-11. "Identity"--How are one's sexual encounters shaped by that person's upbringing and social identity?
Section 5: Class 12. "What Now?"--Where do we go from here to create constructive sexual encounters between college students (at Duke especially)?
After reading the ignorant screeds of Duke faculty members Grant Fareed and Thomas Crowley, and comparing them to the intelligent commentary of Duke Student Kristin Butler, it is tempting to suggest that perhaps Duke students should just teach themselves. Shadee does her best to offer evidence otherwise. Can you really get credit at Duke for a course in “hooking up” and creating “constructive sexual encounters”?

Perhaps the appropriate question instead should be whether such a course is more or less valuable than the teachings of Karla Holloway, Grant Fareed, or Alex Rosenberg. Regardless, if one wants to worry about the plight of women at Duke, one need only look to the heroic women’s lacrosse team members, their courageous coach Kirsten Kimel, the female leaders of Duke Students for an Ethical Durham, and the brilliant Kristin Butler to understand that women at Duke are doing just fine. These heroes offer powerful examples to counter Shadee’s assertion that,

“Unfortunately, in spite of all our education and opportunities, Duke women are not so strong…or smart.”

In fact, Duke women have stood up and courageously defended the principles of truth and justice, and brought honor to themselves and the University. Outside of Duke, the Durham citizen who stood up and challenged Mike Nifong was Beth Brewer. One might think that a women’s studies major like Shadee would appreciate this courageous behavior. That Shadee doesn’t, and instead spends the time to pen a column in the Herald-Sun applauding the charges, and denying the relevance of actual innocence speaks volumes.

Truth be told, multitudes of women could be the victims of this Hoax. Jurors that hear testimony of a sexual assault might doubt such testimony based on the travesty that is occurring in this case. That a District Attorney believes a victim might lose much of its meaning. After all, Nifong claims he believed the accuser in the Duke Hoax. The support of false charges for symbolic reasons by people like Shadee is a tragedy not just for Duke, but for women everywhere. That she wrote such an article as a Duke student, and had it published in the Herald-Sun is a disgrace to both the University and the Herald-Sun. On the other hand, at least it gives Professor Crowley a break for a little while.

82 comments:

c.p. said...

More of Ashley's guest columnist's writings here:

10/27/04

The shady, the sexy and the squirrel-y
Shadee Malaklou

In the past I have used my column to write about sex and to also write about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and I have received criticism for doing so.

Is it so impossible for the Duke community to believe that a woman who is sexually active can be politically active as well? I would like to preempt this column by imploring that my articles on the big “S” word—SEX—should not discredit those I write addressing Middle Eastern politics and civil rights at Duke. Instead, the column below should.

It has been brought to my attention in recent weeks that I am a joke on this campus. In lieu of this somewhat disturbing revelation, I have decided that writing about politics and SEX are what make me a joke. This column, I hope, will restore my dignity, pride and legitimacy as a crime-fighting, completely objective, reporter of all truths.

There is something disturbing happening on our campus right now. It is more important than the Palestine Solidarity Movement conference, Students Against Terror, Philip Kurian’s column and the controversial wall separating Palestine Durham from Israel Duke.

I have decided to prove myself to the students of Duke by writing about yet another “S” word. I dedicate this column to a group on campus that is perhaps more hated than I am.

I’m a little brown.

They’re a little furry.

I like to shake my ass on tables in hopes of balls.

They like to shake the trees in hopes of nuts.

They are hounded by the cats.

I am hounded by the sorostitute felines.

Just in from the Squirrel Homeland Security Department, Duke’s somewhat underground and above-the-canopy publication, The Nuticle, has reported that Duke’s infamous squirrels are planning a conspiracy against us, the students.

The squirrels have such poignant grievances as the barricading of their homeland, which we have co-opted as our quad. As part of their conspiracy, the squirrels have demanded the following: Space in the sorostitute’s Longchamps bag for some quality R&R, Joe-Fraternity’s nuts as rations for the harsh winter ahead, and the eradication of campus kitties who want to “Pussy Control” them.

The campus squirrels are also erred by the bias in faculty hiring at Duke, as displayed by the Duke Conservative Union’s ad in The Nuticle last year. The ad not only displayed a lack of Republican faculty but also starkly demonstrated the absence of Squirrelicans.

For a group that outnumbers any other organization on campus, the squirrels feel politically disempowered and sexually frustrated. According to the infamous Nuticle, the dating rituals of squirrels are comparable to that of Joe-Fraternity’s rendition of the “White Man’s Overbite” at Parizade, explaining why both groups have had to resort to their nuts in the past months of sexual frustration.

The squirrels have listed a series of actions to be taken in the event that the above-mentioned demands are not met:

Divestment from Duke; increase in the use of cruise nussiles (also known as Smart Nuts) to be launched from trees down on to unsuspecting civilians; a breach of the 1951 Squirrel-Duke Accords encompassing the bilateral matrix requirements; As well as a strategic military coup against the DUPD.

You see, the squirrels have had long-standing qualms with the DUPD. Their concerns involve campus security. Joe-Fraternity has been passing out on their lawn and polluting it with beer; and no one seems to care. Also, the sorostitute has caused considerable damage since the introduction of the fashionable stiletto, popularized by an inane article published in The Nuticle’s counterpart, The Chronicle. It is important to note that no squirrels died when the sorostitute wore pearls.

The recent holdups of squirrels around Nuts Diner have also been the subject of recent squirrel debate. These holdups have caused considerable mental and economic harm to the squirrel community. The DUPD’s lacking response to these holdups has also further enraged these normally-all-too-compliant furry friends of Duke. They too only wish to exist in peace.

To address these topics and other pertinent issues squirrels face nationwide at college campuses, the much-controversial Squirrel Solidarity Movement (SSM) has chosen Duke has the host of its next conference. The SSM hopes to draw attention to the plight of the squirrels by addressing the apartheid between college students, squirrels and cats. The conference is still under consideration by Duke President Dick Brodhead.



Shadee Malaklou is a Trinity sophomore.

Anonymous said...

It's astonishing to me how many Duke professors and students seem to be willing, even eager, to expose to the public their ignorance and stupidity.

Anonymous said...

Here is Shadee Malaklou's email address:

shadee.malaklou@duke.edu.

Anonymous said...

Oh there are women "cringing" .... mothers,like myself, who have sons, who now have to worry about psycho strippers who can point a finger at a person to accuse him of a terrible crime and a DA out of control with political aspirations and no common sense.. that is what makes us cringe!! I am "cringing" at the thought of a young person who has absolutely NO IDEA what the legal system is for....."Nifong might not be in the right legally, but that doesn’t mean he's not doing the right thing.”
AAUUUUGGGHHHHHHHH.......

Anonymous said...

Shadee Malaklou has certainly accomplished one thing, bring the word freak to a whole new level.

What a way to start my Monday.

Ugh.

Anonymous said...

Well, I finally believe that the majority of this generation of college students have no critical thinking skills! It is obvious that if one wants to espouse illogical positions, one should become a women and gender studies major (a spurious major, at best) or an African-American studies major.

I'll bet this young woman DOES go to law school. Quick, someone tell Harvard, Stanford and Boalt Hall to read her "work." Actually, she'd probably prefer Yale- they don't give grades there (so that no one will have their self-esteem suffer!). Egad, are these the people who will be in charge when I am in my old age? I may reserve my place on an ice floe now!

Anonymous said...

Does anyone actually know what in the world "Women's Studies" is and what one does with it upon graduation? It certainly does not seem to be educating anyone in the art of clear thinking and intelligent discourse.

Anonymous said...

Based on this girl's writings, I assume she is promiscuous. That's bad enough. To publicly proclaim it shows she is also stupid. For Duke to incorporate it into its class offerings is irresponsible. How can Broadhead proclaim that the Duke players did something terrible by hiring strippers and allow one student to teach other students about hookups, which are generally understood to refer to sexual encounters without emotional attachment? Parents are paying top dollar to have their children enrolled in this class. Unconscienable.

Anonymous said...

Ms. Malaklou "shakes her ass on tables in search of balls." That could have been an $800 savings for the Lacrosse team...

The hypocrisy in this case is stunning!

Anonymous said...

Ms. Malaklou is the perfect example of the failure and effects of programs like affirmative action. Does anybody think that a person with the critical thinking and logic and understanding of the legal system that Ms. Malaklou has, belongs in an institution such as Duke. Whose spot did she take? Furthermore I suppose the young black men who were lynched in the south in the 1930's may not have "done it " either, but the sheriff at that time may have been doing the "right thing" for the community he served.

Anonymous said...

Though the only real consequence of the Hoax that I want to see is for the Duke3 to be vindicated and for them to have their good names restored, it is possible that there will be some universal good that will result. Is it possible that sham education that is available at "elite" institutions will be exposed? Although many individual parents are paying approximately $42,000 for their children to receive an education at Duke and similar institutions, there are also numerous students who are subsidized by federal grants and loans. Thus, all taxpayers are contributing to the support of the sort of psychobabble and bafflegab that we have seen from Ms. Malaklou, Professor Crowley, etc.

I am disgusted by the dumbing-down of higher education. It is long past time that the idiocy of some college "courses" is exposed.
Texas Mom

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

As the busses slowly roll through Durham taking this case to court, those with agendas keep hopping on for the ride.

Unfortunately, the short bus is becoming so overloaded that it may not complete the trip.

Anonymous said...

Ms. Malaklou's column:

Reason 2,000,002 not to send your student to Duke. Awarding credit for a course on "hook-ups" taught by an undergrad! Did Duke pay her to teach this course?

Scarier yet, this woman is graduating...

Anonymous said...

Shadee will have to attend law school or graduate school because no employer with a squirrel nut for a brain would employ someone who had penned this nonsense. Why would I risk being sued personally or having my employer sued by someone coming into a work environment with a chip on their shoulder?

kbp said...

Thanks Liestoppers!

Her article helps the defendants more than it hurts them. It appears she struggled to find something unsavory to write about them, their teammates and the case.

It wasn't real clear to me where she was heading with this article, but she is on for the ride!

Anonymous said...

Well, Shadee is prominently featured in today's article
http://media.www.dukechronicle.com/media/storage/paper884/news/2006/11/20/News/Sex-Workshop.Challenges.Taboos-2470168.shtml?sourcedomain=www.dukechronicle.com&MIIHost=media.collegepublisher.com

No wonder why I'm confused about the "position" of the members of the Women's and Gender Studies department! Do you suppose the "Tupperware" party was the source for Precious' vibrator? Be afraid, be very afraid!!!
Texas Mom

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
bill anderson said...

One thing to keep in mind is that the Evil Gang of 88 in part justified its "statement" as a "protest" against the "hook-up" culture at Duke. Now we see that Women's Studies actually PROMOTES the hook-up culture.

For the four millionth time, we see the rank hypocrisy of the Duke feminists in action. Yet, these are people who are beyond embarrassment and beyond any sort of shame. They are PROUD to make false accusations, and if anyone points out to them that their accusations are false, well, that simply is "proof" that anyone who disagrees is racist and misogynist.

As long as this nonsense stays in the halls of academe, it does not do that much social damage. However, once it finds a place in the "halls of justice," we can see just what a danger it is.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

Wow, what a retarded article. Sadly, as a Duke alumnus, I can assure you that this kind of "thinking" is not really out of place at Duke (or any other "top" university) for that matter. This is the price we pay for "diversity"... Do you know which ethnic group is hurt most by affirmative action-type "diversity" admissions? Asian Americans. So, it is likely that Shadee took some Asian kid's spot. Diversity admissions actually hurt other minorities more than they hurt white kids! Dear lord. For what? So we can have Shadee and her braindead and morally reprehensible dribble on our campus?

Btw, Duke doesn't actually give credit for courses taught by undergrads. Duke has what are called "house courses" (for which you don't actually receive real credit), which are designed to help you learn a little about something that might interest you (like basketweaving, Japanese animation, or whatever). I assume that Shadee's course was a house course.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

It appears Shadee encourages promiscuity (based on her hookup course).
Yet she is happy that lacrosse players are prosecuted because they “party hard.” How does she reconcile the two? On one hand, hooking up and exploring sexuality is encouraged. On the other hand, partying is bad. Is it only bad when lacrosse players do it?

TombZ said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
gc said...

Bill Anderson,
You beat me to that post. Here the students are criticized in the Rolling Stones article, while courses taught by the likes of this woman, Shandee, are encouraged on campus no less.

My spouse gets upset with me when I say that before PC, we used to hire "strippers" at work or stippers to sing happy birthday to the boss. We would all go in the conference room and have a boig laugh. And this was for a fortune 100 company.

What exactly is the difference between hiring a stripper for a party which the Lax team did and having a "sex toy" party. I really don't see the difference.

Anonymous said...

"Loved givimg Crowley a break for awhile." Whats with the squirrels?Her effort to be not thought of as a "JOKE" backfired. Writes like Karla H and like a bad book. this article broke down quickly. At the least, she should write on her mirror "Dont lie to ME."
stupid, stupid, stupid

Anonymous said...

Here is a snippet of what this young woman does when she is not ignoring the constitution or helping others "hook up". {Article on a conference held at Duke by the Palestinian Solidarity Movement)

"Further controversy ensued in September after Shadee Malaklou, a sophomore at Duke University's Trinity College, wrote a column for The Chronicel, Duke's daily newspaper, defending the conference. Her column was critical of Israel and included references to "Jewish influence" and Jewish "power." In her article, she asked the Duke students: "How many Jewish and Zionist (because in the United States, yes, to be Jewish and to be Zionist is one in the same) students do we have at Duke? How much power do they exude? How many speakers from Israel (or even just pro-Israeli speakers) did we have last year alone?"

I guess we should be trying to find out if International Relations is her minor......

Anonymous said...

And her profile from the "Women's Center":

Shadee Malaklou - Gender Issues Team Leader
I am proud to admit that I am both a feminist and a radical, that I don't neccessarily believe in working within the system to change things, and that I often stick out on campus more than I want to.? This is my second year working at the Women's Center. Last year I worked as Promotions Team Leader and this year I am working to develop and implement programming initiatives as a Gender Issues Team Leader. You'll usually find me recommending and/or leading oddly flamboyant and empowering programs for women... and for their libidos. My pride-and-joy program last year was the Vagina Workshop (that's right: VAGINA). I encourage you to look forward to similar programs this year by either myself or the other fabulous members of the Women's Center staff. And remember: the Women's Center gets paid to offer programs that interest the gender-conscious Duke student body, so do yourself a favor and come in with program suggestions.

Anonymous said...

Dear Shadee,
You get your vagina (that's right vagina) home and I'll teach you a few things about being a woman. Frist, you can start by taking over running the house and working a full-time job that pays for the ptitiful excuse of a major you selected. Second, you can do some volunteer work at the local AIDS clinic and see how that helps your libido. Third, you can take a couse about SOMETHING at the local community college so you can get an education that will enable you to get a job.
I didn't raise you to go off an embarass your family by being flamboyant about your sexuality. Here's a radical idea for you. Button your pants and zip your mouth.
Love,
MOM
(This is satire, but a letter I would have written my daughter who is the same age. She teaches a 1 credit course at another college and I am so proud of the thought and care she puts into planning the course. She uses the time to discuss how to stay safe, find a part-time job, and the best places to study. Thank God this is not my girl.)

Anonymous said...

Shadee is a hypocrite. She's fine with women hooking up and having fun like men do but when the lacrosse players allegedly engage in the same behavior it suddenly becomes terrible.

So let me see if I have this - when women do it, it's "empowering" but when men do it everyone should condemn it. Right.

Anonymous said...

Ummm after seeing pictures/videos of Laura Poole on youtube.com, it is quite obvious why she relies on toys so much.

Anonymous said...

http://wc.studentaffairs.duke.edu//wc/about_us/staff/profiles/shadee_malaklou.html

http://wc.studentaffairs.duke.edu//wc/index.html

Shaddee pictures.

huesofblue said...

3:14,

I really laughed at your letter from "mom." It rang so true - and had more than its share of wisdom.

But in defense of women's studies and similar majors, everyone should take a deep breath and calm down. The peole who major in these subjects will be fine. They'll get jobs at battered women's shelters, end up working as social workers, or go to grad school and become lawyers, writers, non-profit directors, ect. They won't go hungry. And when they have a job, student loan bills, a family and 100 other worries that come with real life, their politics will mellow.

Despite being totally in the wrong on this case, the author seems fairly driven. I'm sure she'll make an impact on the world in ways just as profound as a jr-analyst at some I-bank.

And I'm not knocking I-bankers. I work in finance. It's intense and pays very well (with 135k in loans, I can't imagine doing anything else). But if every smart kid who got into Duke went to work on wall st. the world would probably be worse off. Homecoming would be full of stressed-out, overworked, and unhappy divorcees.

I don't know where I'm going with this, other than to say don't knock your kid for majoring in something they're interested in. If they're smart and ambitous, they're going to be fine at the end of the day.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Joe T. said...

What an unbelievable clown that girl is! Four words for her: D N A evidence.

bill anderson said...

Except that people with this mentality who become social workers are likely to take children from homes for no reason, except that they have the power to do so. A couple weeks ago, I posted on one blog an email I received from an attorney who deals with families who are put through hell by feminist social workers.

People like Shaddee absolutely hate normal families, and I suspect that she and other Duke feminists are overjoyed at the stress that the families of the lacrosse players are experiencing. I am not exaggerating here. I suspect if one could eavesdrop on their conversations, one would hear people expressing thoughts like "I hope they are convicted and to to prison" and things like that. That is not because they believe the Duke 3 actually raped anyone, but because the Duke academic programs have encouraged them to hate others and to spread as much anger and hatred as possible.

The race/class/gender studies programs at places like Duke are nihilistic in their orientation. They are based upon absolute hatred of other people, and they turn out students who are dedicated to destroying relationships and the lives of others -- all to satisfy some abstract politicized view of "society" and "social justice."

The rank hypocrisy of the Evil Gang of 88's statement is exceeded only by the cynicism that prevails in this case. There are some very evil forces that are united here, and it will take a very good effort (and a miracle or two) for the Duke 3 to come out without being convicted.

I am not trying to be pessimistic; I just know the character of the people who are pushing for convictions, and across the board, they are simply evil. Shaddee is only one piece of that puzzle, but as the readers can see, understand Shaddee and you will understand the stinking hypocrisy and cynicism that unlies this prosecution.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Joe T. said...

Mr. Anderson: Again, I agree with you that "evil" is not too strong a word to describe these people. As Judge Judy was quoted on a message board I saw: "Only the psychotic enjoy seeing innocent people suffer."

bill anderson said...

There is another important point regarding these race/class/gender studies, and that is they constantly are harping on everyone else for "hating," yet one of the main foundations for these "studies" is hatred. Shaddee and the Evil Gang of 88 give us hate-filled words about people, accusing them of horrible crimes, using over-the-top language, and then getting on everyone else.

Think of all the "stop the hate" rallies that they put on, complete with hateful signs and hateful chants and the like. Look how they completely took over the debate when the AV first made her charges, not permitting anyone else to say anything, intimidating faculty members and administration, and generally monopolizing the whole scene.

Then, when the defense began to present its case, the lawyers and lacrosse team and the supporters were then accused of being "racist" and "misogynyst." So, I leave the question to the readers: Who are the REAL haters?

huesofblue said...

Joe and Bill,

I think evil is too strong of a word. She's 20 and 20 year olds do stupid stuff, whether its flirting with radical politics or throwing parties with strippers. Neither makes you evil or the epitomy of all that's wrong with colleges. I don't agree with her by any means, but I'm not going to drag her or the LAX players over the coals for doing ordinary poor-judgment stuff that kids do.

Anonymous said...

Hues, I can agree that 20 year olds do stupid stuff. HOWEVER, this young woman appears to take great pride in spewing venom towards a variety of groups- and she does it loudly and in print. Read John in Caarolina's blog entry regarding Shadee. He dissects her comments far better than I could do.
Texas Mom

bill anderson said...

I think trying to ramrod a wrongful conviction is evil. I do understand the point you are making, but what she is doing is wrong.

People need to understand that the purpose of the race/class/gender studies programs is not to help ensure "fairness" for minorities and women. What these people want to do is to bring down the whole house. They want the destruction of every social institution that now holds us together, and to replace those institutions with the raw power of the state.

That was what the Russian Revolution ultimately was about. We tended to fixate on the economic aspects of communism, but forget that it was a revolution in toto. Now, we know that many of the institutions -- and especially the churches -- outlived the revolution, but the social damage done in those 70+ years was and is horrendous.

I know this sounds like over-the-top language, but think of what people like Shaddee are demanding. They want instant sexual gratification, and they want it all without human relationships, or an atomistic society in which the state provides everything.

Furthermore, they are not satisfied in just wanting such a life for themselves. No, they want the rest of us to be forced into that way of life, too. No "live and let live" here.

Ultimately, we see how this is spelled out: false charges and the threat of imprisonment for innocent people.

Anonymous said...

I e-mailed Shadee nad did not get a response. Was it because I said her article was the most ridiculous thing I ever read? Or, was it because I tried to use her logic of thinking and said she must be a pedofile since I am sure she is guilty of looking at a picture of a naked baby. (being a LAX player watching a stripper makes you a rapist, so looking at a naked baby must make you a pedafile). Perfect logic, correct?
I am sure if she had the opportunity she would love to hook up wit ha LAX player, athlete, good-looking male, etc. Instead, they leave her dog food outside her dorm door.
Some people are just wacko!

huesofblue said...

I just can't get too worked up about radical feminism. Sure there are plenty of professors preaching that all hetro-sex is rape or similar craziness, but it's not like radical feminism is taking over the nation. Most women have a man or two in their life that they legitimaty love and aren't drnking the kool-aid that all men are fundamentally evil rapists at heart. That said, feminism has accomplished plenty of good over the years and I don't think universities are really hurt by a 6 professor department dedicated to examining history, political science, ect. from an untraditional point of view.

The most radical may have ridiculous utopian ideas about a society free from the corrupting influence of men, but they're so far out in left field that I can't even get that upset over it.

Anonymous said...

Bill

For Christ's sake....How can you ask the question about who the real haters are? Have you really read the posts here? Just in case you don't know...I'll tell you...The duke 3 supporters. Are you ignoring that? And you also! What kind of example is that for your boys? Children do have a habit of copying their parents.
And thing more: Stop referring to your boys as my adopted black kids. They are supposed to be YOUR kids. Seems like to me you want people to know that they didn't come from your loins. Just stop that!

If they call you Dad, then that's what you are. Think about it. You talk about the victim supporters are racist and hate filled and say nothing about the duke supporters hating on others. That's hypocritical...don't you think. Or is that you're showboating???

Anonymous said...

What should be done for all the young men that Shadee has victimized during her time at Duke? And she encouraged other women at Duke to do the same!

Anonymous said...

Perhaps when you are 20 you see things differently. You think that your opinion is yours to voice without retribution. You think that whatever you are concerned about THAT INSTANT is the most important thing in the world. You don't understand why people can't see the TRUTH that you know.

I remember it. I've got a kid who is living it - although, thank the Lord, not out loud.

As a woman of a certain age, I will say this - we didn't fight for the this young lady to be able to say whatever she wants. We fought for the Duke women's lacrosse team to have a right to play D1 sports and for both them and their coach to have voice. This young woman is NOT a feminist. She is a young woman, fuelled by the fact that no one has ever told her, "NO - you're going too far" and looking for her 15 minutes of fame.

Perhaps some day, in a quiet moment, she will understand that there are things bigger than her agenda. That biggotry exists in forms other than the color of a person's skin. That some times, right and wrong actually is not at all gray, but black and white.

Or maybe she will just go on through her life, not realizing that there is any other existence than what is going on in her head.

The biggest problem is that her vaunted school has evidently ratified her perception of her place in the world, rather than encouraging her to look outside herself.

Anonymous said...

Ive yet to see any evidence against the accused. Its all race and gender rambling, but no actual proof.

Anonymous said...

duke is a private institution, right? who's fostering the affirmative-action agenda at duke? i didn't go there--does anyone know how doofuses like holloway get employment at duke?

how far into this century will duke alumni and parents be feeding the parasites?

Anonymous said...

8:53

YES THERE IS PROOF!
Mike Nifong has it and it's the reason the duke 3 have been charged. (Duh)

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

9:02
Did you????

Anonymous said...

8:58.... I know this is beating a dead horse... but exactly what evidence do you think Nifong has?? NC is an open discovery state, if he had it, it would have been "leaked" by now. He has nothing. This whole situation is so very sad, and people like you are so blinded by hatred for a whole group of people that you believe have "wronged" you or your ancestors in the past or present that you make no sense at all.

Anonymous said...

To 8:58-
What is the evidence Nifong has? I missed it.
I do know NC law has an open discovery policy.By law (but then again, Nifong makes up his own laws)Nifong had to make all is discovery public.
I missed the evidence against the Duke Three. PLEASE refresh my memory.
TY

bill anderson said...

I think the post by 8:23 PM should be answered, and I'll start on what he is telling me.

I refer to my three youngest children as my adopted children because if I said I have black (and one Hispanic) children, people would say, "But you are not black," since my picture accompanies my Lew Rockwell writings. Thus, I refer to them as being adopted because it lessens the confusion.

However, 8:23 PM is absolutely correct in that I regard them as MY children. Since I have a daughter from a previous marriage, I can say honestly that I do not have any difference in how I feel and act toward my children. Sasha was a baby when we got her in Guatemala, so bonding was not difficult.

The boys, on the other hand, were 5 and 6 when we got them, and that has made for a more difficult process, especially since both have suffered from attachment disorders. It has taken my life savings to deal with everything, but I have no regrets. I hope the Lord grants me a long enough life to be able to see them to adulthood.

As for the aspects of hate, I would remind 8:23 PM that these young men found an entire campus calling them rapists, a DA calling them hooligans, and people holding signs condemning them, a "wanted" poster in the N&O, and constant demonization from Duke and the black community.

What I find most interesting, however, is that the people who KNOW the Duke 3 have very high personal opinions of them. On the other hand, people who really know the accuser have low opinions of her.

You have accused me of being a "hater," whatever that is. Let us remember that ALL of the hate was demonstrated by the Duke faculty, some students, and the New Black Panthers.

Are the blacks who post here ready to say that if Reade Seligmann's alibi holds up, and that if he is found "not guilty," that they will simply complain about his being white and "getting off"? What about the others?

You don't like the Klan, and well you should not. I don't like the Klan, either. However, did you support the NBPs when they arrived, screaming "rapist" at Seligmann? Do any of you know him? Have you read what others who are his friends and who have dealt with him say about him? The man is NOT a rapist, and I think all of you know it.

However, I sense that within the Black community, people simply want a conviction because they believe they are entitled to revenge against whites in general. To you, it is a form of reparations.

Yet, if you continue to go down this road, you are guaranteeing that more black men in the future will be wrongfully convicted because our legal system runs on precedent. The precendents being set here ultimately will be used against innocent black males. Is that what you want?

I will defend anyone, black or white, when they are wrongfully accused. I must say that I am very disappointed at what I see from the blacks in Durham. They want a conviction not because there was a rape, but because it will make them feel they put something over on the whites.

Whenever I hear the black ministers speak of "reconciliation," I will know it is a lie. To demand convictions of innocent people and to pursue lies tells me that the black ministers use "reconciliation" only as rhetoric, not as something that has meaning to them.

If the Duke 3 are tried and convicted in Durham, and if it is clear at the trial that the jury simply ignored exculpatory evidence, do not expect there to be "healing." No, whites will not riot, or go about screaming, "No justice, no peace," but the bitterness will be there, and will never go away.

Call me a racist if you want, but I will tell you that my words are true. Every one of them.

Anonymous said...

9:27

What has my opinion got to do with racism and hatred?It's my d*mn opinion and I have a right to one. You must be a hater of blacks b/c you're supporting the duke 3. Don't you dare pass judgment on me? I happen to believe that Mike Nifong has the evidence to convict all 3. Keep on thinking that he has nothing. You're going to be so ashamed and rightly so. I honestly feel that the duke 3 are trying to buy their d*mn way out of this mess that they've created. BUT NOT TODAY!!! You are only one of their little pawns. I bet the duke 3 are laughing their @$$ off at you. If you like being played...go for it.

bill anderson said...

Let me ask you this: Other than the accuser's statement (and we have to pick and choose, since she gave a bunch of them, all contradictory), what is the evidence? The medical reports do not back it up, and Precious' co-workers (who are black, so they must hate blacks, too, since they are not backing up Precious) are giving a different story.

It is interesting that you set the bar of "racism" as my saying I do not believe that the Duke 3 raped the AV. There are a lot of false rape charges out there, but if I read you right, I have to believe all of them, or I am a racist.

This truly is pathetic, and tells me once again that a Durham jury simply would not be capable of passing any kind of clear judgment. My guess is that the poster is typical of Durham, so his words speak for themselves.

You can call me what you wish, my friend, but at least you cannot call me a liar. And, yes, I dare pass judgment on you, just as you have passed judgment on the Duke 3. You may happen to believe what you believe, but remember that black males have been acquitted of rape or had their convictions overturned when there was MORE evidence than what Nifong now has. (North Carolina is a discovery state, and Nifong is forced to give his evidence and make it public.)

So, you are now saying that those men listed on the web page of the Innocence Project should not have had their convictions overturned. That is interesting.

Anonymous said...

Hold up Bill

Tell me, how can you think so little of black people but YET raise black children. Your own words condemn you. You think blacks are incapable of being fair on a jury. Well ain't that a *****. You are wrong and God Almighty know it's true.

It's time that you learn about blacks b/c surely you know NOT what you speak. The blacks in Durham want a trial to determine guilt or innocence. You Bill, have a very low opinion about blacks and YET raise little black children. I tell you, I have to wonder about that. What's your motive here. You see one way and d*mn the other.

Truth be known Bill....you're insecure! You need to work on that. As I see, your own words condemn you.

Anonymous said...

10:27 sounds like a white guy trying to pretend to be black

borrring!

bill anderson said...

The blacks in Durham already have publicly pronounced the three guilty. How, then, can they serve on a jury? One cannot go into a jury with preconceived notions.

Blacks serve on juries all the time, but when blacks -- or whites, for that matter -- decide beforehand that the defendant is guilty, then they should not serve. Only people who are willing to view the evidence and make a rational decision should be on juries.

The black leadership in Durham, not to mention the blacks who have posted here, to a person have said that ANY exculpatory evidence, from the negative DNA to the photographs of Reade Seligmann at the bank teller, are the result of white conspiracies. The photo is faked, the DNA was tampered with, and so on. I suspect that you believe that the DNA was tampered with, and if you were on a jury, you would ignore all of the testimony and vote them guilty because it would make you feel powerful.

By the way, why don't you ask my black students and black friends and neighbors if I look down on them? Why don't you travel to where I live and tell my children that YOU KNOW that I really hate them?

You think I am insulting you, but I am not. You already have declared the Duke 3 guilty, you have dismissed ALL of the exculpatory evidence as being part of a conspiracy, and then you say you should be able to sit on a jury.

Let me ask you this: If you were on trial, would you want your potential jurors all to have to declared you guilty even before the trial? That is what is happening right now. If you were wearing those shoes, you would NOT want those people on a jury. That is all I am saying.

If there is to be a trial, let it be outside of Durham. Why are you so afraid to have a change of venue? Is it because you know that the Durham jury pool already has pronounced them guilty?

But, by all means, you need to come up here and tell my children what you know about me. By the way, have you ever met me? Have you ever spoken to me? Have you ever been one of my students? Yet, you claim to know everything about me.

AMac said...

Prof. Anderson,

I am not a big fan of talking about "Blacks" and "Whites" and what "they" think and how "they" act. There are bloggers who know more about the genetics and anthropology of "race" than you and me put together (to say nothing of your anonymous correspondent). Their posts are complex, and spawn arcane discussions. Check, for instance, Razib's thinking at the group blog Gene Expression.

That said, the mistreatment of blacks by whites is the single most terrible fact of our nation's history. It calls for truth-telling, compassion, and individual acts of kindness and justice. All around. Perhaps by creating your family across racial lines, you will bring a small measure of healing to our greater community. In any case, the adoptive decisions that you and your spouse made are admirable and honorable. They require no explanation or defense, least of all to an off-topic troll on a thread about the Duke Lacrosse Hoax.

Anonymous said...

Bill

Now Now...don't get testy!
I don't claim anything. I'm reading your words and it's jumping out at me. I am pretty d*mn good at reading people. NO JOKE. I see through all the duke 3's garbage. Tell me, why can't you? I'm certainly not the one to harp on you for raising black children. More power to you for that. Bill, you don't know anything about the victim in this case, only what you've gotten from the media. The people in Durham is not down on her. Where did you hear that the blacks think low of her? Was it from duke supporters or Duke University? Because I know it wasn't from the AA community. Let me tell you Bill, most likely blacks WILL sit on that jury. To deny them that is a racist act. That ain't gonna happen!

You talked earlier about the NBPP. I don't agree with the group and all that hate but they have a right to freedom of speech (according to the constitution) just like anyone else. You or no one else can take that right from them. This is America baby.

You talk about how the duke 3 were slandered. What about the victim being slandered. There is NO difference here. She is a woman, mother, student and someone's daughter. Her parents happen to LOVE her too. They don't want their daughter raped and abused by no one. Just like you don't want anyone to hurt your child. It's the same d*mn difference. You need to look over the bias and racism in your own heart. Hate is an ugly thing and it only eat away like a cancer and that can't be good.

Anonymous said...

Me oh my, the sopbox had been stood upon, and the lunatic fringe is screaming at the World. The piece you cite is deranged.

Have you ever noticed that with the Femi-freaks, the only "smart" women are those women who, unshockingly, agree with their positions? They must a live a very lonely life being so much smarter than the "average" woman I suppose. Far be it from me to suggest that this attitude is "arrogant" to an extreme, or that it smacks of "prejudice," but, well, it does.

Just thought I would share.

-BCM-
-From D. Evans's community in Maryland-
-If he's a rapist, I'm also a Chinese Jet Pilot-

Anonymous said...

From 11:23:
"Her parents happen to LOVE her too. They don't want their daughter raped and abused by no one."

Um, sure--but, there was NO rape here. Their daughter needs help for many other problems.

Anonymous said...

11:39
According to the victim's own statement, the medical report, and Mike Nifong....A rape happened!

Anonymous said...

"Have some Kool-aid...."

Seriously, no one in their right mind thinks these guys actually committed rape. Even the article tried to justify the prosecution (dangerously) on the grounds that they are white male lacrosse players, and are thus guilty of being white male lacrosse players.

Love in this case has nothing to do with it. This is about justice, and how a justice system can be abused to fit a political agenda.

-BCM-

Anonymous said...

Medical report showed she had diffuse edema. Not that a "rape happened." Diffuse edema that could have been caused by her sexual activities before the party, including admitted use of a vibrator.

Anonymous said...

[QUOTE]According to the victim's own statement, the medical report, and Mike Nifong....A rape happened! [/QUOTE]

Which statement? The medical report? It shows a condition that is not confined to rape.

Mike Nifong? Are you serious? Wasn;t that when he was itching to get reelected?

-BCM-

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

Mike Nifong knows a rape happened?
How? He claims he never even talked to the accuser about the case.
How do you think he knows "a rape happened?".

Anonymous said...

P.J., is that you?

Anonymous said...

The HATE in this came has come from the angry Mob and the prosecution. The Players are and were HATED, and they were treated as one unit with 46 interchangable parts. Why was it assumed that they were all the same?

In reality, they are 46 individuals with different views, opinions, likes, and dislikes. Every one of them should be -- must be -- granted the presumption of innocence.

That presumption of innocence was noticably absent in this case, the same cannot be said of HATE though.

.

loki on the run said...

I don't believe that Shadee Malaklou wrote that The shady, the sexy and the squirrely nonsense.

That's about a tenth-grade writing level.

Anonymous said...

as opposed to her highly sophisticated other writings? yeah right... check out her 'note' on FB. seriously disturbing.

shadee--get over yourself

Anonymous said...

11:45 No DNA=No Rape by Duke 3.

Maybe the BF raped her? Isn't he in jail now?

bill anderson said...

The earlier poster misunderstands me. It is not that I believe that NO blacks should sit on the jury, but rather that if the trial were to be held in Durham, the blacks there would be under tremendous pressure from the community to ignore all of the exculpatory evidence.

Can you imagine what would happen to a black person on the jury who would vote to acquit? He or she would be ostracized and face a lot of personal abuse. This is what happened to whites who voted to acquit when blacks were tried during the Jim Crow era.

The judge in the Scottsboro Boys case in the 1930s realized the trial was a sham and overturned the convictions. He was voted out of office and ostracized in his community.

That is why if there is a trial, I would hope that there would be a change of venue. The atmosphere in Durham right now is not conducive to picking a jury that would be willing to adhere to a "guilty beyond a reasonable doubt" standard. This is what happens when politics drives a criminal case. Things get ugly, and the law is discarded.

I make no apology for saying that the evidence I have seen so far leads me to believe that this case is a sham. You can call me a racist for believing that evidence matters, but then I also think that the Scottsboro Boys were innocent, as well as the faces we see on the web page of the Innocence Project.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

thank you for your continuing efforts to out the agenda driven that have attached themselves to this horrid miscarriage of justice.

Anonymous said...

11:45 p.m.
I suggest you review KC Johnson's Durham-in-Wonderland site for the SANE I-V posters. They are very informative about the medical evidence, which because of Mr. Nifong's disingenuous comments, led many of us to believe a rape happened initially. You are in for some very interesting reading based on the analysis of a forensic nurse. You are likely to feel very differently about the value of the medical evidence when you finish.

Kelly said...

Just an FYI. An above comment stated "the mistreatment of blacks by whites is the single most terrible fact of our nation's history." Uh, being a native american member of the Osage Nation I have a different view. I think that the blacks had it a bit easier than us. They had value as slaves and were treated as such, as abomidable as that treatment was. We had no value at all, and most editorials of the time demanded our annihalation. Slavery vs genocide...blacks do not have a monopoly on misery in history.

Anonymous said...

there are no "laurapoole" toy videos on youtube. if this blog is so interested in the truth, you might want to delete that reference as it is wrong.
thanks. -a friend.

Anonymous said...

stop judging shadee. the lady who pretended to be shadee's mom, shame on you. you dont know her mother, but it happens that i do.