Meme - Governor Kathy Hochul @GovKathyHochul: "Choosing to have a drink is not consent, and it’s never a license for sexual assault. New York law should reflect that. I support closing the voluntary intoxication loophole and will work with the Legislature to get it done."
Readers added context they thought people might want to know: "There is no law in New York saying choosing to drink means consenting to sex. Current New York law says voluntary intoxication does not invalidate an individual's ability to give consent, as it does not meet the state's standard of "mentally incapacitated"."
Covfefe Anon on X - "The actual governor of NY State is retarded
"choosing to have a drink is not consent"
Yes - her consenting was consent
The excuse is "she couldn't consent because she was intoxicated" *which isn't even legally true* (as the community note points out)
I assume she'll be "working with the legislature" to fully implement the "all sex is rape" law so we can finally have a legal regime that reflects liberal emotions"
Random HVAC Guy 🇺🇸 on X - "“I never lie” This is why i believe that Jane Doe is lying. She claimed she was 10 shots in and too drunk to consent to anything and yet she’s 100% sure that her recollection is the truth because she “never lies”. Anyone who says they never lie, is lying."
Mario Nawfal on X - "🇺🇸 The Cornell “Jane Doe” story just got another pretty significant twist. Moonies Bar, which Jane Doe is suing for allegedly serving her alcohol while visibly intoxicated, says it didn't serve her alcohol at all. She was 20 at the time. That also lines up with fraternity member Matthew Ingalls' account that she told him she was sober before arriving at the fraternity house, something she disputed in a recorded call. Every new detail in this case seems to raise more questions about the original story. So what actually happened?
Source: TMZ / Writer: Lynn"
Curtis Houck on X - "INSANE: 'CBS Mornings' touts Instagram and TikTok videos of parents talking to their preschoolers and elementary schoolers about the #Cornell7 and how they need to teach little boys at that age not to assault and rape women, and little girls to reject unwanted advances. DERANGED!"
Stephen L. Miller on X - "It's their new hands up don't shoot and has everything to do with engineering midterm outcomes."
Marine’s family reports threats after ‘Cornell 7’ lawsuit mix-up - "A Marine Corps sergeant’s family said they have been subjected to abuse after the service member was served with a lawsuit meant for one of the accused in a Cornell University sexual assault case — all because the two share the same name. Sgt. Matthew Ingalls, 23, is a New York native, and he has never attended the Ivy League university. He was also already serving on active duty in the Marine Corps at the time of an alleged October 2024 assault that has put Cornell in the national spotlight. But when his family answered a knock at the door of their New York home the evening of Sept. 26, his mother, Victoria Ingalls, was handed a 101-page civil lawsuit intended for someone with the same name as her son, The Free Press first reported Thursday. The intended recipient was among the seven members of the Chi Phi fraternity accused of sexually assaulting a female student. “My family’s been terrorized, threatened, and harassed,” Victoria Ingalls told The Free Press. The family had begun receiving unusual messages just before the lawsuit arrived, Ingalls told Stars and Stripes in an interview Saturday. “[Matthew] started getting a lot of messages asking him if he ever went to Cornell, calling him a rapist, all kinds of crazy aggressive messages,” Victoria said. “Then my daughter was getting messages as well, and she didn’t know what was going on.”... She said telling people they had contacted the wrong family did not always stop the messages. “The people that are posting his address, that are saying, ‘I will find you. I will end you. I will kill you,’ types of things are the scariest,” Ingalls said. Victoria Ingalls said the family has received a slew of threatening texts after the family’s phone numbers were leaked. Several to her 26-year-old daughter additionally portrayed threats of death and assault."
Rapists need to be held accountable!!!
Harassment, much less of unquestionably innocent people, is good when it pushes the left wing agenda
Michael Shermer on X - "Cornell reports "35% of surveyed undergraduate women experienced nonconsensual sexual contact involving physical force, threats, or incapacitation while enrolled at the university." This is a shocking figure. Is Cornell closing? Has the National Guard been invoked? Why are women still attending? Why are parents still paying for their daughters to attend? There's something off here."
Kangmin Lee | 이강민 on X - "Women kept sending death threats and hate mail to the wrong Winston Lee so he emailed their employers with copies of their messages lol. What a stud"
Bridget Ayers on X - "Cornell Hearing Panel Decision - New Details, Conflicting Accounts & Physical Evidence
So far, I’ve worked through Jane Doe's civil complaint, the DA's summary of her six-page sworn statement, reported portions of her two-day police interview, excerpts from Cornell's Title IX investigation and now a heavily redacted, 99-page Cornell Hearing Panel Decision. This report filled in some gaps, but was also difficult to navigate with all the redactions. Cornell's investigation was extensive, more than 50 interviews involving 32 witnesses, followed by a multi-day hearing in May 2025. The panel applied a preponderance of the evidence, or “more likely than not,” standard, not the criminal standard of beyond a reasonable doubt.
Invitations, Body Flexes & a Negative Drug Test:
- Doe described having strong romantic and sexual feelings for Ingalls and later described that attraction as having a “chokehold” on her, saying she would have done “anything to please [him].”
- The panel considered the first threesome consensual. The decision also says Doe and one of the two men were already friends and had engaged in sexual activity together previously. Based on the chronology, I believe that person is Newell, although the name is redacted.
- Whether Doe took ketamine around the time of that first threesome was disputed.
- Doe acknowledged she had no independent memory of taking it the first time. Her belief that she did, came from taking ketamine later and remembering thinking, essentially, I've already done this once tonight.
- The men gave conflicting accounts. At one point, one said Doe declined ketamine and they didn't push her. Later, he testified that they offered it and “she chose to take it.” The panel ultimately found it more likely than not that she did take ketamine during that earlier period.
The panel found Doe's inability to remember taking it consistent with the effects of ketamine and viewed that as supporting her credibility, while inconsistencies in the men's accounts reduced theirs.
This report brings more clarity to the timeline:
~1:00 a.m., Lopes enters.
Just after 2:00 a.m., another man enters and consumes ketamine off Doe's body.
~2:15 a.m., another enters, kisses Doe and consumes ketamine off her body.
~2:30 a.m., additional respondents enter.
~5:00 a.m., Doe, Ingalls and Lee leaving the alumni room for the fourth-floor “Pentz” and then the smaller “foffice”. After the final sexual encounter, Doe slept in one man's bed before returning to her residence.
The report also provides more context for the Snapchat message. “Free pussy in alum pu”. The panel concluded that “alum” meant the alumni room and “pu” meant “pull up” - in other words, an invitation to come to the room.
The panel didn't necessarily find every man who entered the room sexually assaulted Doe. For at least one respondent, the panel concluded that simply going to the room because of the Snapchat message constituted attempted sexual exploitation. Its reasoning was that he understood a woman was likely nude or engaged in sexual activity and entered intending to observe it without her knowledge or consent.
Ketamine off her body
This section gets especially messy because the accounts conflict. Doe said she agreed when one man asked to take ketamine off her body. She described lying down and covering her face while multiple people subsequently took drugs off her body. Because her face was covered, however, she couldn't actually identify everything everyone did. She later described two of the men as essentially “voyeurs”, except that she believed they had also done drugs off her body. One man's account was very different. He said two men entered, introduced themselves and Doe invited them in. He said they heard about others doing ketamine off her chest, asked Doe whether they could do the same, “She said yeah, so they did.” That same account contains another detail I haven't seen discussed much:
Doe reportedly got out of the bed and began doing a “bodybuilder pose.” Another account describes her “flexing her muscles to everybody in the room.”
These accounts of what Doe was doing and communicating during portions of a period are described very differently in her civil complaint. The complaint alleges that when additional men entered, Doe hid her naked body under the sheets and “felt as if there was no way for her to escape this room full of predatory, fraternity men.” It later alleges that she became “completely incapacitated.” Her attorney has similarly described her as “intoxicated to the point of incapacity.”
And then there's the drug test. One respondent consistently denied taking ketamine in the room. He submitted an Omega Laboratories hair-follicle test, with the sample collected November 26, 2024. It came back negative for ketamine. He testified that laboratory personnel told him ketamine could remain detectable in hair for three to six months. Another person testified that a different testing company told him hair testing could detect ketamine for up to 90 days. The panel considered that negative test along with the conflicting witness accounts and concluded there was insufficient evidence to establish that this respondent had consumed ketamine off Doe's body. That's significant because Doe said he had. It doesn't mean Doe was lying. Her own account explains why identification would be difficult; she said her face was covered while multiple people were around her. But it is an example of an allegation being tested against other evidence and the evidence not supporting it sufficiently even under Cornell's lower more-likely-than-not standard.
In some places, the panel believed Doe over the respondents. In others, it found the evidence insufficient to substantiate what she believed happened. In still others, it found misconduct that wasn't sexual assault, including attempted sexual exploitation based on why someone entered the room. And that's probably the most useful thing about reading the actual decision. There are consensual sexual encounters. There are disputed sexual encounters. There are admitted drugs. Disputed drugs. Memory gaps. Contradictory statements. Snapchat messages. People entering and leaving. Witnesses describing Doe talking, laughing, and interacting. Doe describing periods of dissociation and missing memory. And at least one piece of objective evidence, a negative drug test, that caused the panel to reject part of an allegation. And it's exactly why I keep reading the documents instead of picking a side from the headlines."
Even with the reduced standard they didn't think there was rape. But of course the lynch mob doesn't care
‘Cornell 7’ frat bro claimed accuser ‘sodomized’ him, school didn’t care he was sex-assault ‘survivor’ - "“You received information that I was sodomized by her while I was incapacitated back in November, and you never once thought to alert me of my rights under these procedures as a survivor of this assault?” Ingalls said in the February 2025 missive to Cornell’s Title IX office and obtained by ABC. “The very fact that I had to bring this to your attention now in February confirms my worst fears: that this process is rolled [sic] with gender discrimination”... Ingalls was also drinking and drugging heavily that night — with a 2024 statement from Doe describing how he kept falling asleep during the encounter before waking up to rejoin the alleged assault."
Left wingers are sexist hypocrites so they just apply double standards to this. Victims are only to be believed when they push the left wing agenda
Thread by @ASFleischman on Thread Reader App – Thread Reader App - "So let's talk about the degrees of rape in New York, what is required for each, and why Jane Doe's statements to police make this an unappealing prosecution. And to get ahead of this: things can be both hard to prosecute under existing law and morally wrong.
New York has three degrees of rape:
First degree: Requires forcible compulsion or being "physically helpless." Physically helpless means unconscious or unable to communicate consent. She was conscious. She said "what happened to just you and me." Not helpless under NY law.
Second degree rape requires being mentally incapacitated or disabled. But New York law excludes consensual intoxication. So if you snort ketamine, get drunk, and have sex, you are not disabled. Someone has to slip it to you. No second degree.
Third degree rape requires sex with who does not consent. Victim must CLEARLY state lack of consent. Here, by victim's own account, she does not seem to clearly state lack of consent.
Ok, so this is not a case of prosecutors refusing to bring a case because they're just assholes who hate women. New York law requires that a woman be either physically helpless OR drugged against her will OR clearly deny consent. Hard to say any of those apply here BRD. That's not to say it's completely hopeless. You could bring a first degree charge here and say that at some point late in the night, probably during that last threesome, she become physically incapable of consent. But much easier if you can say she was drugged, not a user. And by far the worst fact is that it seems whenever Jane Doe indicated a lack of consent, the sex stopped. That fucks prosecutors on both first degree (she can say no) and third (she chose not to).
I think that if charges are brought against these men, they will probably reach a favorable plea bargain or be acquitted. Maybe there's some federal angle I'm not considering. But this does seem to be a very defensible case that prosecutors were right to spurn.
To anyone out there who strongly disagrees with me, just let me know which degree of rape you would charge for which sex act, so we can compare it with the victim's statement. If it can't clear THAT hurtle, imagine how hard it is once the defendants present their evidence. And, to close out, you definitely shouldn't have sex with a girl along with your six of your buddies after she had a bunch of drinks and some ketamine. You should get her back home, or to a private room, and guard the door. This was disgraceful."
Cornell’s Jane Doe is ‘terrified’ after death threats and a swatting incident, her lawyer says
When people talk about Jane Doe being Lucy Craig, we get told that that's fake news, that no one knows who she is, that it's been proven Lucy Craig is not her, that the person who exposed her admitted he was wrong (even if two people independently did so) etc. Yet there have been no stories about someone being wrongly exposed, and the real Jane Doe is getting threats despite no one else being identified as her. So we can conclude that that's really her
Keith Woods on X - "The picture emerging of this girl is a quirk chungus, derpy hicklib who, based on her morphology, has a rather masculine disposition. It's probably because of said disposition that she misread female social dynamics and expected there would be no "slut shaming" from the sisterhood if she did something sexually adventurous like an orgy. The fact that she thought the men involved were gay/bi was added lib status, which as a pride "ally" she must have assumed would especially protect her from social shame – when she first noticed people were speaking negatively of the act, she text a friend words to the effect that this was part of the sexual liberation movement and "is going to become more common" The timeline then seems clear: she was disinvited from a Halloween party because of the reputation she earned as a slut, which she then realised was a view not confined to bigoted men. When she read a comment of someone saying she was raped, she must have immediately clocked this as a possible out to absolve her of accountability and regain her social status. In her own account, she had never conceived of it in this way until she read it from someone else. At that point, members of the sisterhood encouraged her suggestions that she was not actually responsible for anything. "Slut shaming" still exists among sexuall liberated women, but it is at odds with their professed beliefs about sexuality. Women are expected to pick up on this nuance and push for as much female power as possible while also enforcing shaming to discourage any individual lowering female sexual market value through extreme promiscuity. But, the sisterhood has also built an out, and now any woman can just withdraw consent reotrospectively, undo the wrong, and receive an even greater status as a victim."
ಎर on X - "She was disinvited the next time because she is not a looker. Hence low status for the men….so one off….she wrongly assumed that this one act would give her the opening/status that genetics has deprived her….it is what it is…"
Gamerealist on X - "Women’s PR has just been on a downward spiral this whole year. It’s been on a downward spiral since the internet, but I feel like someone just pressed the accelerate button. Women just CAN’T take responsibility and should be relieved of any authority. The Cornell 7 girl is even suing her sorority for not stopping her."
I LIKE COLD BEVERAGES on X - "Women need chaperones to protect them from their own choices"
Gamerealist on X - "There’s a reason father’s helped choose their daughter’s mates in the past."
Thread by @memeticsisyphus on Thread Reader App – Thread Reader App - "The Cornell case is funny because they had verbal consent with witnesses and written consent after the fact through text messages and that’s probably more proof of consent than any sexual encounter anyone has ever had yet half the country still thinks they’re rapists. If the woman in question saying nothing was illegal and enjoyed herself the following day isn’t enough to convince you literally nothing could."
A common cope is that trauma affects memory. Weird how that means her later memory of being raped is accurate but her earlier memory that it was consensual is not. If trauma really affects memory to that extent, that means alleged victim testimony should all be thrown out because it's unreliable. But of course the version of memory that pushes the left wing agenda must be reliable and if you don't believe that, you are a rape apologist and indeed a rapist yourself. Logic is a red flag for feminists
True Discipline on X - "Another funny thing I have noticed is the way women are saying the men can't be the victims because they did this or that. If these same people were discussing a female rape accuser, any illogical behavior would be swept away with saying it was trauma response."
Kazuo Furintoyama on X - "It's almost as if they don't really believe in anything except whatever is convenient for them in the moment."
Michael Tracey on X - "Hey @TMZ this idea of "repressed memory" Harvey keeps invoking is total bunk. She described a consensual "gang bang" in the immediate aftermath, but then later unearthed memories that it was actually "gang rape"? That makes zero sense. "Trauma" = not a "get out of jail free" card"
Michael Tracey on X - "Whenever anyone tries to claim that alleged "victims" can be so "traumatized" that they "repress" their memories of the alleged victimizing incident, only to "recover" those lost memories weeks/months/years later, send them this quote from Harvard professor Richard McNally (2005)"
"The notion that traumatic events can be repressed and later recovered is the most
pernicious bit of folklore ever to infect psychology and psychiatry. It has provided the
theoretical basis for "recovered memory therapy" -- the worst catastrophe to befall the
mental health field since the lobotomy era."
Mr Gus on X - "For ideological women, shitty disrespectful sex is "rape". That's where we get one in three woman are rape "survivors ". More "rape" than in the Rape of Nanjing, ISIS controlled Syria, or African tribal wars."
Dark Pascual on X - "From what I've read about the case (admittedly, not as much), I just find everybody involved stupid and disgusting. But criminal? Not really. What baffles me is that advising "do not drink so much that your judgement is impaired and practice some restraint" is now misogyny."
Hux on X - "Because feminists want consent to be an ethereal tingling feeling that women possess only in their minds and which can, at any moment, be redefined, reinterpreted, removed, under any circumstance, and that this special feeling should, without fail, be taken seriously by the law."
When left wingers proclaim that consent can be revoked at any time, they mean after the fact, too (the cope is that trauma affects memory and actions and you can't find a "perfect victim", which amounts to the same thing). This case is also proof that jokes about getting explicit consent, even in writing, before you do the deed kinda fall flat, since even that can't save you from a false accusation
Jane Doe texted with Cornell frat bro to find 'jealous' rat gossiping about them - "The Cornell student accusing seven frat brothers of gang raping her had worked with one of them to try to find the “rat” talking about them having sex at a party — claiming they needed to “grow up” and be more open-minded about what went on, according to a fresh batch of text messages. Just four days after the Chi Phi fraternity party where the student now claims she was drugged and raped, Jane Doe texted student Matthew Ingalls in a panic claiming “everybody knows” about them having sex , leavin her “incredibly stressed out,” messages obtained by TMZ show. Ingalls sympathized after the accuser complained about some “random bitch” telling her friends. “Dude I have no f—king idea, this sh-t is incredibly frustrating and I know how fast nonsense spreads at this school,” responded Ingalls, who later claimed he was the one assaulted while too drunk to consent. “It’s fan behavior from everyone talking about it. Boring people who have nothing to do with their time,” texted Ingalls, who Doe later said instigated the alleged 2024 gang rape. Doe said the rumors were “f—king RUINING my life” and that she wanted to sniff out “the rats.” “My reputation is destroyed and i’m utterly ashamed. i’m f—king pissed because this many people shouldn’t know and i feel like i know who some of the rats in the room were,” she texted him. She added that the rumors were not only spreading like wildfire but were growing “crazier every f—king day.” “Stupid bitches like to yap, and the fact they’re doing it shows that they’re jealous of you for any number of reasons,” Ingalls shot back. “The only shameful thing is how this spread and how much people won’t shut up about it — which just reflects poorly on them tbh,” he added. Doe agreed that the gossips are “jealous” and threatened to beat up anyone who gives them “sh-t” about what happened while also opening up how she’s “open-minded” about sexuality. “…but also like everyone needs to grow up cause sexuality and sex and sh-t is changing and stuff like this is going to become more common,” she said, while adding that she is “also really open minded tho.”... More than a week later on November 7, Ingalls tells Doe that his ex-girlfriend told him he’s now been labeled a sexual abuser on campus — and asked if Doe had made those allegations against him. Doe said she’s stayed mum but added “people are changing the narrative because like in any sexual scenario w one woman and many men the woman was probably victim.” “I know there are rumors I was gang banged,” she said. That same day, Doe requested a rape kit at an emergency room and reported the alleged rape to campus police the following day, according to her lawsui10"
What an ignorant. What woman would want to be raped?! They need to retract this clearly false report! The messages are clearly fake!
New York Post on X - "NYS lawmaker pitches bill to give sex assault victims tuition reimbursement in wake of Cornell 7 case"
Riley Gaines on X - "Financially incentivizing rape allegations....what could possibly go wrong?"
Erich Hartmann on X - "The Cornell incident happened:
• under Biden
• in a Democrat-controlled state
• in a deep, deep blue city
• at a leftist university
• by progressives
Every. Single. Person. Involved. Is. A. Democrat."
There is a war on male-only spaces : r/TrueUnpopularOpinion - "In light of the Cornell case, many people have been calling for a ban on fraternities. They argue fraternities are a cesspit of sexual assault, alcoholism, hazing, violence etc. Mainstream publications have started to chime in as well, with New York Magazine and Vogue Magazine both putting out pieces in support of a ban. However, I think there is a more sinister reason for the ban, which has nothing to do with protecting women or curbing alcoholism. Fraternities are one of the last, if not the last, true male-only space we have. A space where men can gather, share jokes, mentor eachother and just be themselves without constant female henpecking and browbeating. It seems society is intent on destroying the roughness, edginess and aggressiveness of men (toxic masculinity) and turning them into HR-approved, deferential, wholesome kiddies. We have seen this many times over. The military, the police, the fire brigade, the church groups, the Boy Scouts, the YMCA, the Elks and other private clubs, the gaming groups etc etc Society just won't let men exist in a space that isn't monitored by a nagging girlboss ready to call out any 'microaggressions' or whatever. Men and women are different. We have different physiology, psychology and ways of socializing. We don't need therapy or spa days, we prefer competition, insults or sometimes just sitting in silence in the company of other men. Leave our spaces alone."
