This guy wrote that frats should not invite in drunk girls who have pregamed, and that brothers should not allow other brothers to go in rooms alone with drunk girls. His advice mostly focuses on potential liability to fraternities, but his advice also protects those same girls from rape and sexual assault.

The original article got taken down and he was shitcanned within minutes for telling frats to be careful with drunk girls. The most sensible advice I can think of.

Shitlib carnival claims another one.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2683670&forum_id=2...id.#26393359)

"That being said I stand by every word I wrote," Frezza said.

"Most people have no idea what is going on on college campuses these days due to the ill-advised raising of the drinking age from 18 to 21, forcing so much of it to go underground,"

"In our age of sexual equality, why drunk female students are almost never characterized as irresponsible jerks is a question I leave to the feminists."

"But it is precisely those irresponsible women that the brothers must be trained to identify and protect against, because all it takes is one to bring an entire fraternity system down."

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2683670&forum_id=2...id.#26393361)

http://denmark.dk/en/green-living/sustainable-projects/cow-dung-a-source-of-green-energy/

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2683670&forum_id=2...id.#26397699)

The Rancorous Politics of Meat in India

‘Protection of Cows is the single-most important principle,’ tweeted one official.

A cow shelter in Rajasthan.

A cow shelter in Rajasthan. PHOTO: CHANDAN KHANNA/AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE/GETTY IMAGES

By Sadanand Dhume

Updated April 23, 2017 5:21 p.m. ET

37 COMMENTS

Is it acceptable for vigilantes to beat a man to death for transporting cattle? In most countries, the question would be ludicrous. In India it has sparked a fresh round of debate on a charged issue: how governments should regulate beef in a land where most people regard the cow as sacred.

Earlier this month, on a busy highway in the northern state of Rajasthan, self-appointed cow protectors stopped two pickup trucks carrying livestock bought at a local market. The mob assaulted Pehlu Khan, a 55-year-old Muslim dairy farmer, and four other men. Khan later died in the hospital of injuries suffered during the beating.

India’s ruling Bharatiya Janata Party, or BJP, has tightened restrictions on beef in several states that it controls. Proponents of these laws see protecting cows as an essential symbol of a humane Hindu civilization that values life. According to the conservative columnist Swapan Dasgupta, restricting beef in India is a matter of “bowing to common decencies.”

–– ADVERTISEMENT ––

Many BJP supporters also view the issue through a historical prism. They argue that for centuries, first under Muslim rulers and then under the British, Hindus lacked the political power to end a practice that they found hurtful and humiliating. It’s only natural, then, for independent India to honor the religious sentiments of the wide majority of its people. Some 4 in 5 Indians are Hindus, most of whom revere the cow.

Beef-ban opponents tend to couch their arguments in the language of modernity and minority rights. In this view, penalties for the sale or consumption of beef are out of step with both modern times and the rest of the world. In a constitutionally secular republic, what gives pious Hindus the right to police the plates of those who don’t share the same taboos?

They also argue that, with thuggish vigilante groups linked to the BJP mushrooming in states such as Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh, the alleged piety of cow protectors is often little more than a license to harass Muslims who work in the meat industry.

In a democracy, it’s hardly unusual for politicians to respond to public sentiment. For example, Taiwan banned the consumption of dog meat earlier this month.

Nonetheless, India’s rush to protect cows suggests a deeper malaise: Under Prime Minister Narendra Modi and BJP President Amit Shah, personal liberties are shrinking.

Activists linked to the ruling party are often at the vanguard of efforts to slap police cases on authors, justify violence against artists, stop interfaith romances and shut down late-night dance venues. The result: an India that is reducing the choices its people enjoy on matters of food, drink and entertainment.

Beef is emblematic of the BJP’s impulse to ban what it doesn’t like. Last month the western state of Gujarat raised the maximum penalty for cow slaughter to life in prison from seven years. “Protection of Cows is the single-most important principle towards saving the whole world from both moral and spiritual degradation,” tweeted Chief Minister Vijay Rupani.

Not to be outdone, the chief minister of another BJP-ruled state, Chhattisgarh in central India, told a reporter that not a single cow had been killed there in 15 years—and that if anyone killed one he would be hanged. In Uttar Pradesh, which the BJP won last month in a landslide, new Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath has placed a drive to shutter allegedly illegal abattoirs at the top of his agenda.

In 2015 BJP-ruled Maharashtra and Haryana put in place stringent regulations against killing cows or selling beef. In Haryana you can be jailed for five years and fined 50,000 rupees (about $780) for having a steak in your fridge. Rajasthan’s BJP government has set up an entire ministry for cow protection.

Evidently all this is not enough. Last week the head of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, the Hindu nationalist group that provides the BJP with much of its organizational muscle, demanded a nationwide ban on cow slaughter. Never mind that all but a handful of India’s 29 states already place some kind of restrictions on the practice, most dating to the early decades after independence in 1947.

With national elections approaching in 2019, Messrs. Modi and Shah likely reckon that beef bans will improve their prospects. Anyone who opposes them risks being labeled “anti-Hindu” by the party.

In a larger sense, however, an India that constricts rather than expands the choices its citizens can make is going backward. In most of the democratic world, dealing with diversity involves accommodating an expanding range of dietary preferences: think halal meat shops in London or vegetarian Indian restaurants in suburban Virginia. It’s too bad that India appears to be traveling in the opposite direction.

Mr. Dhume is a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/indias-backward-politics-of-food-1492453270

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2683670&forum_id=2...id.#33154833)

"And while a rape charge under these circumstances is unlikely to hold up in a court of law, it doesn't take much for a campus kangaroo court to get you expelled, ruining your life while saddling your fraternity with a reputation for harboring rapists,"

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2683670&forum_id=2...id.#26393366)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2683670&forum_id=2...id.#26393472)

Sadly, frats are done.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2683670&forum_id=2...id.#26393515)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2683670&forum_id=2...id.#26393533)

It's like drunk girls have diplomatic immunity and can do whatever the fuck they want with no consequences. Are we going to stop prosecuting female drunk drivers?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2683670&forum_id=2...id.#26393659)

i assume that's what this choad was

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2683670&forum_id=2...id.#26394261)

http://jezebel.com/frat-alumni-president-blames-drunk-female-guests-for-ru-1638524129/all

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2683670&forum_id=2...id.#26394515)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2683670&forum_id=2...id.#26395161)

Women really just want all ugly men to be murdered or castrated and made into their slaves

Do ANY women see through this bullshit? There is no consistency, no self-awareness whatsoever in modern feminism. How can anyone take it seriously? and we're expected to be "male allies" despite all this? Fuck this gay earth

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2683670&forum_id=2...id.#26395401)

smudge thinks that the more thing change, the more they stay the same

#wisdom

#smudge

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2683670&forum_id=2...id.#26395505)

/Smudge

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2683670&forum_id=2...id.#26395827)

the advice, if followed:

(1) clearly protects women from rape;

(2) clearly protects women from alcohol poisoning;

(3) clearly protects the physical safety of women;

(4) requires men, not women, to take the initiative in not fucking while drunk.

women don't like his tone. he is not an adequate supplicant.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2683670&forum_id=2...id.#26616129)

the goal is empowerment.

if men don't rape women because they choose not to out of self-preservation, they are not empowering women

if men don't get women drunk to the point of alcohol poisoning because of self-preservation, they are not empowering women

if men don't physically hurt women because they are concerned about the consequences to themselves, they are not empowering women

if drunk men don't fuck drunk women because they are concerned about the consequences, women are not empowered.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2683670&forum_id=2...id.#26616972)