Harvard suspends men's soccer team over sexual ranking of women's recruits

[SirFozzie]

I want to start a honest and forthright discussion here.

I saw the story about Harvard suspending their men's soccer team's season (they were about to win the Ivy League and enter the NCAA Men's Tournament) due to them continuing to "rank" incoming female soccer recruits on their hotness.

The initial group did this in 2012, and the suspension happened when it was found out that they continued to do so up until the present day.. and the suspension was both for the continued sexual ranking (which including giving each ranking a sexual "position", and not becoming forthcoming when asked about it.

I think this exposes some of the hypocrisies of college sport. Let's be honest, if 1/100th of the stories about having pretty girls squire top college prospects around their visits (not to mention the Louisville-type rumors of paid prostitutes for visits).. then it's a royal cesspool that needs to be cleaned up.

One can say that these things are horrible and need to stop, but also think ending a team's season because of something that sounds more like "I think she's hot.." "I dunno.. I think this other girl's prettier.." is a bit much.

But on the other hand, we're talking about teenagers here. Teenagers have been speculating about the "hotness" of females forever and a day, and probably will forever and a day more. Hell, look at FOFC with "Hot or Not"...

I'm going to give a not-so-hypothetical example, and I'll give you the details in a moment: One public figure mentioned a story in his autobiography that when he attended Arizona State University, he and his friends ranked the fifteen women in his journalism class. He even called it "His own goofball version of the NFL draft". He told this story because the consensus #4 pick of the guys was voted Miss America the following September.

(The public figure is Hall of Fame Announcer Al Michaels, and the Miss America was Vinda Kay Van Dyke, Miss America 1965)

Looking for civil discussion

[JPhillips]

If they were told to stop and they kept on doing it, they deserve a harsher punishment.

As to sex being used to recruit, that absolutely should be policed more strongly. I don't care with whom consenting students have sex, but adults using students as lures and paying for prostitution shouldn't be as accepted as it is.

[SirFozzie]

Harvard soccer team is suspended for season after 'scouting report' on women - CBSSports.com

[JonInMiddleGA]

Political correctness knows no bounds. And it's one-sided as hell, adding to the utter absurdity.

This is parody caliber foolishness, you couldn't put this in a Mad Magazine parody of p.c. because it's so absurd that it would appear to be going overboard.

That's as civil as I can manage, it's so utterly asinine to me that I'd be hard-pressed to "discuss" much more. The university's action is batshit foolishness on the scale of, well, camping comes to mind. (My benchmark for things I know exist but for the life of me cannot understand why anyone does them)

[jbergey22]

Id wonder how many additional warnings they had to stop this sort of behavior. Probably more to this story...

[SirFozzie]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Political correctness knows no bounds. And it's one-sided as hell, adding to the utter absurdity.

This is parody caliber foolishness, you couldn't put this in a Mad Magazine parody of p.c. because it's so absurd that it would appear to be going overboard.

That's as civil as I can manage, it's so utterly asinine to me that I'd be hard-pressed to "discuss" much more. The university's action is batshit foolishness on the scale of, well, camping comes to mind. (My benchmark for things I know exist but for the life of me cannot understand why anyone does them)

Y'see Jon, even *I* am looking at this askance, but where do we draw the line here, for example, the pretty girl thing squiring college recruits around.. is there a line to be drawn where sexual contact is expected as part of the visit for example?)..

And I agree, if God wanted us to enjoy camping, he wouldn't have allowed mankind to invent Satellite TV, portable generators, and RV's

[TCY Junkie]

If it weren't for Trump comparing his comments to locker room talk they never would have came up with this.

[ISiddiqui]

Good for Harvard. They were told to stop it in 2012 when doing a numerical ranking and then suggesting which sexual position for each female recruit and had it on a publicly available Google Document. But instead of knocking it off, they continued doing it until 2016. Canceling the season is probably the only thing they would have listened to.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by SirFozzie

Y'see Jon, even *I* am looking at this askance, but where do we draw the line here, for example, the pretty girl thing squiring college recruits around.. is there a line to be drawn where sexual contact is expected as part of the visit for example?)..

And I agree, if God wanted us to enjoy camping, he wouldn't have allowed mankind to invent Satellite TV, portable generators, and RV's

Just to make sure ... am I missing something in terms of the Harvard soccer thing vs the recruiting "dollies"? My read of the Harvard thing, which I saw briefly before it popped up here, is that the players did a ranking of the upcoming women's recruits but not that there was any sort of recruiting perks connection in some way. Right? They're unrelated, aside from involving the topic of sex & college athletes, right? (Just making sure I'm not missing a point somewhere).


I mean, the recruiting thing gets a little foggy. Probably best practice at this point is to just make sure that nobody of a different gender within 50 years of the recruit's age gets within 100 feet of them during an official visit. On the one hand it's been nothing short of pimp behavior for many programs for many years and pimpin' is illegal as hell most places. On the other hand, recruits don't lack for amorous attention the minute they have free social time, even if the school has zero hand in it.

Hard to entirely regulate the behavior of consenting (largely) adults. Schools could keep their hands out of it entirely & still end up with similar "fringe benefit"arrangements in a lot of cases.

[SirFozzie]

Nah, I'm just comparing this (which is the players themselves) to the school sanctioned practice of things like the Tennessee Hostess Program:

Tennessee's "Hostess" Program Catches Recruits' (And NCAA's) Eyes (Updated)

and of course Louisville.

Rick Pitino should be held accountable for Louisville scandal. Period.


I'm just comparing what to me seems like an over-reaction to something that while is certainly not endearing, isn't one one thousandth of the sleaziness of the behavior that gets relatively pooh-poohed in other sports.

[Logan]

Originally Posted by SirFozzie

Nah, I'm just comparing to the school sanctioned practice of things like the Tennessee Hostess Program:

Tennessee's "Hostess" Program Catches Recruits' (And NCAA's) Eyes (Updated)

and of course Louisville.

Rick Pitino should be held accountable for Louisville scandal. Period.


I'm just comparing what to me seems like an over-reaction to something that while is certainly not endearing, isn't one one thousandth of the sleaziness of the behavior that gets relatively pooh-poohed in other sports.

I admittedly don't know all the details, but isn't there a pretty big difference between girls who have chosen to partake in a certain activity that might turn sexual, and they may very well want to and that's perfectly fine because it's 2016 and shouldn't be considered whores because they want to have sex...and girls who just happen to be female soccer players/recruits at the school and have been entered into this "ranking system" without choosing to do so on their own?

edit: Why do you seem to be considering this "school sanctioned" by Harvard? For having women's sports? I don't think you're actually saying that, which is why I'm confused.

[SirFozzie]

Originally Posted by Logan

I admittedly don't know all the details, but isn't there a pretty big difference between girls who have chosen to partake in a certain activity that might turn sexual, and they may very well want to and that's perfectly fine because it's 2016 and shouldn't be considered whores because they want to have sex...and girls who just happen to be female soccer players/recruits at the school and have been entered into this "ranking system" without choosing to do so on their own?

edit: Why do you seem to be considering this "school sanctioned" by Harvard? For having women's sports? I don't think you're actually saying that, which is why I'm confused.

missed the word THIS, was comparing it to Tennessee and Louisville (Louisville was set up by a coach, and Tennessee was an official school program)

[Logan]

Originally Posted by SirFozzie

missed the word THIS, was comparing it to Tennessee and Louisville (Louisville was set up by a coach, and Tennessee was an official school program)

Yeah I don't think it's anywhere in the same realm.

If Harvard Men's Soccer threw a party and held a "hottest/most sexual women's soccer player" contest which 20 of the girls entered and it included wet t-shirts, pole dancing, twerking, etc (yes, I know you're saying go on...) and they scored every entrant and crowned a top 3...yeah I'm sure some overly-PC types would have a problem with it but no one would be taking their season away.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Logan

this "ranking system" without choosing to do so on their own?

Kinda like none of our HorN contestants asked us to register an opinion?

Or like how I don't think Sam Elliott asked to have his pic posted on social media with lewd comments on a daily basis?

[bulletsponge]

this thread is worthless without pics. how can we tell if the scouting reports were accurate?

[molson]

Originally Posted by SirFozzie

I think this exposes some of the hypocrisies of college sport. Let's be honest, if 1/100th of the stories about having pretty girls squire top college prospects around their visits (not to mention the Louisville-type rumors of paid prostitutes for visits).. then it's a royal cesspool that needs to be cleaned up.

I don't understand this part, why is it hypocritical for Harvard to take this issue more seriously than Tennessee, Louisville, or Arizona? I would hope that Harvard does LOTS of things differently when it comes to student athletics than any big-time athletic program. Even if these things were all comparable, so what? Doesn't Harvard have the right to at least try to run a different kind of school and program?

Edit: Harvard has had some high-profile sexual assault cases, and lawsuits. Other colleges in town have had big problems with some of their athletes (like BU Hockey). They have to act decisively on this stuff. If there's a sexual assault case involving the soccer teams, everything they do now will be looked at under a microscope.

[SirFozzie]

I'm not necessarily saying it's hypocritical for Harvard to take this response. I'm saying that if Harvard takes this response, then it IS hypocritical for Tennessee, Louisville and the like to pooh-pooh the much much more worse allegations against their programs.

[Toddzilla]

I have to believe that this was a little more egregious than the team saying "I think this girl is the hottest and that girl is less hot than the other girl," but whether it is or it isn't, I see this as being more of following the rules.

Because, while objectifying, they were told to knock that shit off - and told *why* - yet they did it anyway, and lied about it.

If the "ranking" was so terrible on it's own, they would have cancelled the season in 2012 when the found out about it. I think if you look at it from the perspective of the coach:

• finds out in 2012 about something the team does that can get them in real trouble and look poorly upon Harvard
• follows up over the course of 4 years, is told by the team they're abiding
• finds out in 2106 that not only are they still doing it, they've been lying about it for 4 years

Yeah, I'd go ballistic, too.

[Toddzilla]

Dola, the comparison between what the Harvard soccer team did to some schools that have hostesses to escort recruits about campus, is a completely ridiculous comparison.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by molson

Edit: Harvard has had some high-profile sexual assault cases, and lawsuits. Other colleges in town have had big problems with some of their athletes (like BU Hockey). They have to act decisively on this stuff. If there's a sexual assault case involving the soccer teams, everything they do now will be looked at under a microscope.

This. They can't fuck around with Title IX and Cleary Act stuff.

[molson]

And imagine being a parent of a female recruit, and you got wind of this stuff, and confronted the coaching staff about it. "Well you know, boys will be boys". That's not going to fly in 2016.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Good for Harvard. They were told to stop it in 2012 when doing a numerical ranking and then suggesting which sexual position for each female recruit and had it on a publicly available Google Document. But instead of knocking it off, they continued doing it until 2016. Canceling the season is probably the only thing they would have listened to.

Wait, did I miss a step? I thought the 2012 report was the first that came to light (reported by the Crimson), then when the AD followed up he found they were still doing it in 2016. I don't think the administration ever knew or talked to them 4 years ago or I'd have much bigger questions.

As it stands, they weren't suspended for ranking girls by sexiness, they were suspended for leaving it in a publicly accessible listserv, and thus I have no problem with them being punished. Princeton kids would password protect rhat shit!

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

Wait, did I miss a step? I thought the 2012 report was the first that came to light (reported by the Crimson), then when the AD followed up he found they were still doing it in 2016. I don't think the administration ever knew or talked to them 4 years ago or I'd have much bigger questions.

As it stands, they weren't suspended for ranking girls by sexiness, they were suspended for leaving it in a publicly accessible listserv, and thus I have no problem with them being punished. Princeton kids would password protect rhat shit!

The original articles were unclear, but if it was publicly accessible, how didn't anyone find it in the last 4 years?

[ISiddiqui]

Ah, I did a search - it was something that apparently no one found until recently and then they thought it was an isolated one year thing, but then the President found out it was a "tradition".

Harvard Men's Soccer Team Sidelined For Rest Of Season Over Sexist Emails : The Two-Way : NPR

The document — which appeared to be part of an annual tradition — described the female players in graphic, frequently degrading terms. It ranked their attractiveness with numerical values, assigned them sexual positions, theorized about their sexual behavior and described their physical attributes in terms that were variously crude and insulting.

After that story, Harvard ordered a review of the team's behavior. The review found that the "scouting report" was, indeed, a tradition.

"I understand that this practice appears to be more widespread across the team and has continued beyond 2012, including in 2016, and that current students who participated were not immediately forthcoming about their involvement," Athletics Director Bob Scalise wrote in an email to the student body on Thursday.

Apparently there appears to be lying about the list as well (the current students not being forthcoming comment).

[mckerney]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

The original articles were unclear, but if it was publicly accessible, how didn't anyone find it in the last 4 years?

Probably on Google Drive using a shareable link. Public in that you don't need to grant people specific permission to view it if they're given the link, but not something that you can just stumble across.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by mckerney

Probably on Google Drive using a shareable link. Public in that you don't need to grant people specific permission to view it if they're given the link, but not something that you can just stumble across.

I get that, but it seems to be one of those things that someone would share with a buddy and it'd end up in the wrong hands far sooner than 4 years after the fact.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by molson

Edit: Harvard has had some high-profile sexual assault cases, and lawsuits. Other colleges in town have had big problems with some of their athletes (like BU Hockey). They have to act decisively on this stuff. If there's a sexual assault case involving the soccer teams, everything they do now will be looked at under a microscope.

I'm confused here. Is there more to the story? I don't see anything about this team and sexual assault anywhere. Ranking the attractiveness of women is not a crime yet.

If they were doing this in some official capacity that's a different story. For instance putting the Harvard logo or soccer team logo on any document passed around. Or posting these in a locker room on campus and stating it was sponsored by the soccer team. But I don't see any information about that anywhere.

If these were college kids talking about the attractiveness of women and what they'd like to do to them in private among themselves, that's pretty normal.

I do hope Harvard disassociates itself from Zuckerberg after this. Facesmash was created on their campus after all.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

As it stands, they weren't suspended for ranking girls by sexiness, they were suspended for leaving it in a publicly accessible listserv, and thus I have no problem with them being punished.

Big difference in whether this list was being promoted by the team and whether it was just a list for some guys on the team and someone found it and reported it.

Originally Posted by molson

And imagine being a parent of a female recruit, and you got wind of this stuff, and confronted the coaching staff about it. "Well you know, boys will be boys". That's not going to fly in 2016.

But it's true. Is the coach supposed to tell the parents that 20 year old men are not going to comment on the attractiveness of other 20 year old women? I understand as a parent you want to not think about that stuff, but 20 year old guys are going to act like 20 year old guys.

[molson]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Ranking the attractiveness of women is not a crime yet.

They're not being charged with a crime, they're facing university discipline. Title IX and university conduct codes go WAY beyond what would be criminal.

[molson]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

But it's true. Is the coach supposed to tell the parents that 20 year old men are not going to comment on the attractiveness of other 20 year old women? I understand as a parent you want to not think about that stuff, but 20 year old guys are going to act like 20 year old guys.

No, the coach should tell them that the school doesn't approve of male team's "tradition" of sexually objectifying the female recruits, assigning each one a sexual position, ranking them by how much they'd like to fuck them, and then passing that document around, including through the internet. The coach should also tell the parent that they're aware of their Title IX obligations to do what they can to prevent a sexually hostile environment at the school and in the athletic programs. I'm pretty sure there's violations of Harvard's student conduct code too.

If the school instead chooses just minimize this as "commenting on attractiveness," then that will be used against in all future litigation regarding sexual assaults on campus (and there have been lots of those, and there will be more).

This is the environment at universities now. They can't ignore this stuff.

[NobodyHere]

A couple of women at my workplace were discussing the attractiveness of some men.

It made me uncomfortable (They weren't saying any positive things about me. Actually I wasn't mentioned at all and that hurt my self-esteem).

Should I get them fired? Or do they have to write it all down first.

[molson]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

A couple of women at my workplace were discussing the attractiveness of some men.

It made me uncomfortable (They weren't saying any positive things about me. Actually I wasn't mentioned at all and that hurt my self-esteem).

Should I get them fired? Or do they have to write it all down first.

If the women are passing around a document using sexually vulgar terms to rank all of the men, or if any of the men complain about being the subject of sexually explicit "compliments," I think HR would have a problem with that.

Geez, am I the only one here who doesn't work in a 1950's advertising agency? I didn't realize Idaho was so progressive. I'd be fired immediately if I talked about how much I wanted to fuck my co-workers. And even 20 years ago in college, a sexually explicit "ranking" of other students would have brought discipline, if it got out, and if any women on this list found out about it and complained. Even in 1996 I sat through orientation videos about that kind of thing, about how sexual harassment is bad and can take many forms.

Edit: And maybe I didn't hang with the cool crowd, and I didn't play any sports in college, but I saw and heard very little vulgar/hateful objectifying of women. (I can actually buy that Syracuse was progressive in that sense, at least the social circles I ended up in.)

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by molson

Geez, am I the only one here who doesn't work in a 1950's advertising agency? I didn't realize Idaho was so progressive. I'd be fired immediately if I talked about how much I wanted to fuck my co-workers. And even 20 years ago in college, a sexually explicit "ranking" of other students would have brought discipline, if it got out, and if any women on this list found out about it and complained. Even in 1996 I sat through orientation videos about that kind of thing, about how sexual harassment is bad and can take many forms.

Same.

And people are really missing the boat if you're arguing that this was equivalent to guys talking about who is or isn't hot. I know as a father I'm going to be pissed if a school doesn't do anything after I find out my daughter has been described as, she looks like she's dominant and like she wants to be dominated.

[miami_fan]

I feel like whenever these types of discussion come up, there is never a scenario where men would feel (or admit to feeling) uncomfortable when put in the same situation unless of course the women involved are unattractive.

[larrymcg421]

Damn. I didn't get in before the reverse discrimination hot taek.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by molson

If the women are passing around a document using sexually vulgar terms to rank all of the men, or if any of the men complain about being the subject of sexually explicit "compliments," I think HR would have a problem with that.

Geez, am I the only one here who doesn't work in a 1950's advertising agency? I didn't realize Idaho was so progressive. I'd be fired immediately if I talked about how much I wanted to fuck my co-workers. And even 20 years ago in college, a sexually explicit "ranking" of other students would have brought discipline, if it got out, and if any women on this list found out about it and complained. Even in 1996 I sat through orientation videos about that kind of thing, about how sexual harassment is bad and can take many forms.

Edit: And maybe I didn't hang with the cool crowd, and I didn't play any sports in college, but I saw and heard very little vulgar/hateful objectifying of women. (I can actually buy that Syracuse was progressive in that sense, at least the social circles I ended up in.)

Yup. I was in a fraternity in college (late '80's/early '90's). There would be discussions about the attractiveness of women, sometimes going further to wonder about their performance in the sack and just how open they were to casual sex. Sometimes - because we were young, immature, drunk and horny - the speculation was even more crude. But it was never in an organized manner with lists documented and shared for distribution, and that's a subtle but important difference.

You're never going to stop people from commenting in privacy about the attractiveness of other people - that's just human nature to A) find some people more physically attractive than others and B) want to discuss their preferences with friends as validation or a point of debate. Anybody that thinks otherwise is fighting against nature.

But most people have the self-awareness and empathy to keep those conversations private, and most organizations are smart enough to not allow these kinds of discussions to have any hint of official approval.

It's not just that these players were commenting on which female soccer recruits were "hot" - they went well beyond that into much cruder territory, and they did so in an organized way that suggested it was a group endeavor by the men's team rather than private individuals having a private conversation.

[cuervo72]

Originally Posted by miami_fan

I feel like whenever these types of discussion come up, there is never a scenario where men would feel (or admit to feeling) uncomfortable when put in the same situation unless of course the women involved are unattractive.

I was a cheerleader for part of the basketball season as a senior (couple football line buddies did it, we were there for lifts, throws, etc). On one of the bus trips back I was slunked down in one of the seats, and I assume the girls forgot I was there (or didn't care, or thought I was asleep). They were talking about specific guys in very graphic terms, and holy shit did I feel small -- and that's w/o being mentioned (or maybe made worse because I wasn't, either way). It was very uncomfortable.

[Julio Riddols]

These guys needed to be more discreet. Maybe make the list look like an actual scouting report that pertains to their soccer skills.

Jane Randomgirl is "aggressive around the net" and "plays with high energy", she is clearly "one of the top players on the team", etc.

Or they could have just kept that shit among themselves like gentlemen.

[Suicane75]

"Let's too many balls in the net".

[Julio Riddols]

Originally Posted by Suicane75

"Let's too many balls in the net".

Always on point, Suicane.

[CrescentMoonie]

Great in the back, not much going forward.

[digamma]

There's a lot of backdrop to this with the Harvard administration, going back to the sexual assault on campus study a year or so ago and several things that have happened on campus. The dean of students is really sensitive to gender issues, in some cases rightly so and in some cases not. I don't know enough about the facts to know which one he is here.

[Suicane75]

Originally Posted by Julio Riddols

Always on point, Suicane.

My ability to be succinct is one of my finer attributes, going all the way back to when I was just a kid. I remember my grandmother asking my cousins and I what the perils of smoking were. Well my first cousin, she just rambled on and on about the various health issues that could occur, I mean, she went on forever, like nearly half an hour just talking and talking about emphysema, cancer, eye issues, heart issues, on and on. I nearly fell asleep listening to her, I mean really, all she had to say was the smoking kills. Which is exactly what I said when I was finally given the floor. At this point our lunch was already cold, I think it was hot dogs or something. I remember it was off the grill, Grandma always liked to cook on the grill in the Summer, she just liked being outside as much as possible. Anyway, I learned that very day that succinct is the way to go, nobody wants to listen to someone ramble on and on when a few words will suffice.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by molson

And imagine being a parent of a female recruit, and you got wind of this stuff, and confronted the coaching staff about it. "Well you know, boys will be boys". That's not going to fly in 2016.

Then there's some really out of touch parents out there.

Including some that might be shocked to hear the conversations their precious little snowflakes have.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by molson

If the women are passing around a document using sexually vulgar terms to rank all of the men, or if any of the men complain about being the subject of sexually explicit "compliments," I think HR would have a problem with that.

Geez, am I the only one here who doesn't work in a 1950's advertising agency? I didn't realize Idaho was so progressive. I'd be fired immediately if I talked about how much I wanted to fuck my co-workers. And even 20 years ago in college, a sexually explicit "ranking" of other students would have brought discipline, if it got out, and if any women on this list found out about it and complained. Even in 1996 I sat through orientation videos about that kind of thing, about how sexual harassment is bad and can take many forms.

Edit: And maybe I didn't hang with the cool crowd, and I didn't play any sports in college, but I saw and heard very little vulgar/hateful objectifying of women. (I can actually buy that Syracuse was progressive in that sense, at least the social circles I ended up in.)

They are students who pay to attend a school. They are not employees no matter how bad the NCAA wants to have it both ways.

It's a private school and they can make the code of conduct how they want for their students. But it should be consistent from here on out. I think it's weird that if someone posts something on their personal Facebook wall about how attractive someone is in their class, they'll have to be disciplined for it.

[stevew]

And here I thought that creating a systematic ranking system for harvard coeds was a good path to becoming a multi billionaire

[RedKingGold]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

They are students who pay to attend a school. They are not employees no matter how bad the NCAA wants to have it both ways.

It's a private school and they can make the code of conduct how they want for their students. But it should be consistent from here on out. I think it's weird that if someone posts something on their personal Facebook wall about how attractive someone is in their class, they'll have to be disciplined for it.

As molson suggested, that's just not how Title IX works. It uses the same sexual harassment standard and burden-shifting legal analysis as a Title VII hostile work environment case. Schools can be subject to loss of funding and civil lawsuits under a hostile enviornment theory. If it would be a Title VII case in employment (which this scenario would be) then it would be a Title IX case against the school.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by RedKingGold

As molson suggested, that's just not how Title IX works. It uses the same sexual harassment standard and burden-shifting legal analysis as a Title VII hostile work environment case. Schools can be subject to loss of funding and civil lawsuits under a hostile enviornment theory. If it would be a Title VII case in employment (which this scenario would be) then it would be a Title IX case against the school.

I just think it's a really slippery slope when private e-mail correspondence by 20 year olds is subjected to these standards. Where students can't discuss the sexual attractiveness of their fellow students or their sexual activities in private texts, e-mails, etc. I completely understand if these students were posting flyers up in the commons with this information. Or badgering the women's soccer team with the information. But this seemed to be private correspondence that was not intended to be seen by anyone but themselves.

What I'm saying is if you went through the private correspondence of your average college student, I think you'd find a whole lot of distasteful stuff. Maybe we should be cutting some slack.

[RainMaker]

And as I mentioned before, the other thing that irks me is the hypocrisy by some. Zuckerberg created Facemash, a site that literally had students at Harvard rate the hotness of each other to culminate in an overall ranking. This wasn't private either, but something that was passed around the campus. He is welcomed on to the campus to this day with open arms.

Karen Owen who created the "Duke Fuck List" was praised in many progressive circles as a feminist who empowered women. The same circles that are trashing the Harvard soccer team. There was no talk of a Title IX investigation from what I can find. Heck, some of these media outlets gleefully posted the unredacted thesis.

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by molson

Geez, am I the only one here who doesn't work in a 1950's advertising agency? I didn't realize Idaho was so progressive. I'd be fired immediately if I talked about how much I wanted to fuck my co-workers.

Having a) recently completed my compliance training and b) being someone who manages people in a corporate setting, I can confirm that actions like those of this team, if they happened in a corporate setting today, would likely lead to reprimands, if not termination. These guys are learning a valuable lesson with significantly less damaging ramifications.