Feminist Professor "Triggered" By Male Student's Paper, Saying She Had Trouble Telling His Paper from Her Rapist

If you have trouble distinguishing a student's paper from a rape, maybe you don't actually understand rape.

Let me note that this screed was written anonymously by the professor. So we don't know who the professor was, and crucially, we don't know what the paper actually says.

She claims the student said he was skeptical that rape still exists. I tend to doubt that. I have a feeling he pointed out, correctly, that there have been a spate of fake rape accusations and that the definition of sexual assault has been reduced to a guy making a pass towards a woman who rejects it.

Add into that her hysterical, crybully damselling, calling for her knights in shining armor to come to her emotional rescue.

So I don't buy her characterizations of the "triggering" paper.

But here's what she shrieked:

A feminist professor said she was so triggered by a male student’s paper that "I began to have trouble distinguishing him from the man that [raped me]."

Writing anonymously in Inside Higher Ed, the professor described a lesson on rape culture she included in her gender class, saying she was frustrated with male students skeptical that it exists.

But one male student’s paper left her "thrown back into a pit of traumatic, fragmented memories," she wrote.

The student cited a men’' rights advocacy group, referenced a case where a woman raped a man, questioned whether feminism was relevant, and said that concerns about gender inequality were overblown.

If the guy "triggered" her post-traumatic reaction to rape, why is she also complaining about such small-ball matters like whether feminism is relevant, or if gender inequality claims are overblown?

Think about this from a position of human sanity: If someone kidnapped and maimed a person, would the victim, in the course of narrating the crime to police, also toss in "I think he voted for Trump" and "I'm skeptical of some of the websites I saw him reading"?

...

"As I went over his paper," she wrote, "I realized that I was reading a paper that sounded word for word like something the man who raped me would say. And not only did this sound like something my rapist would say, this student fit the same demographic profile as him: white, college male, between the ages of 18 and 22."

She said she was so upset that she could no longer grade papers or read.

"Although I knew it was unlikely that this student would literally try to rape me, his words felt so familiar that I began having trouble distinguishing him from the man that did...."

I didn't want to steal the whole thing, but trust me when I say there's some nice crazy kickers at the end.

More: David French excerpts another part of this screed, revealing that the prof seems especially keen on explaining to students that don't know they've been raped that they've been raped, or to students who don't know they're rapists that they're rapists. And she gets upset by the "mansplaining" that then occurs as non-rapists resist her new definitions of rape.

posted by Ace at 11:13 AM

| Access Comments