Why Hasn’t Jackie Coakley Been Punished For Starting The Biggest Rape Hoax Of The Decade?

The Washington Post, to its credit, is reporting that University of Virginia rape hoaxer Jackie Coakley faked a terminal illness and pretended to be a man to try and get her romantic interest to date her. The gang rape lies she produced were also part of that same protracted attempt to enter into a relationship with Ryan Duffin. Although T. Rees Shapiro has sadly only included Jackie’s first name in his article, its publication is a very positive development that will help correct the great damage done to the reputations of various UVA fraternity members.

Despite never having set foot at UVA, let alone attended it, the Jackie Coakley false rape debacle became deeply personal to me. My first ROK article was actually about then Jezebel writer Anna Merlan’s shrieks of sadness that Coakley had not been gratuitously raped. A lot has happened since then, including the unexpected condemnation of Rolling Stone “journalist” Sabrina Rubin Erdely and editor Will Dana in a report by the Columbia University School of Journalism, which had launched an investigation into the frankly horrendous excuse for journalism that the UVA article was.

Some lessons in stalking and psychopathy

Don’t forget Emily Renda, who acted as a conduit for Sabrina Rubin Erdely’s article by introducing her to Jackie Coakley. Renda is committed to destroying college “due process” for male students.

Jackie Coakley’s determination to date Ryan Duffin, irrespective of his repeated turning down of her advances, evinces some clearly unbalanced and psychotic behavior. What’s more is that instead of the usual pattern of punishing the man who spurned her, she took the arguably even more reprehensible act of using uninvolved fraternity members to make false gang rape claims designed to win Duffin’s heart.

Coakley went further, however, and used a fictitious man named Haven Monahan to text Duffin and goad him into returning feelings for her. Police have confirmed that the Monahan character is nothing but an invention. Pictures of him texted to Duffin were of a former classmate of Coakley’s from northern Virginia. Eventually Coakley made her now well-known accusations of gang rape by a group of fraternity brothers, including Monahan.

Duffin rushed to be with her after she told him about the “rape,” as she clearly wanted him to. Coakley’s “hysterical” reactions made her seem believable to him and his fellow comforting friends. He also drew closer to her when she fabricated having a terminal illness, news the character Haven Monahan had relayed to him. Nevertheless, the numbers of male students participating in the rape changed, as did the first name Jackie attributed to Monahan. In fact, she told Duffin she could not tell if his real name was John or Jake or something else. Duffin understandably grew suspicious.

The wider implications

Anna Merlan was devastated that fabulist Jackie Coakley was not raped.

Let’s set aside the holes in Jackie Coakley’s story. Here we have a seemingly well-adjusted and intelligent young man, Ryan Duffin, who was led to trust her, in spite of the gargantuan lies she was telling. Women are, in their own twisted way, capable of delivering performances that superficially match what they are claiming.

This case provides another demonstration of the utter minefield of trusting testimony alone. By false rape standards, Coakley’s reporting to others was sudden. None of the usual delays accompanied her histrionic behavior. Yet the allegations were equally as invented as those of an Emma Sulkowicz or Lena Dunham.

What happens when an accusing woman combines the maximum believability of a Jackie Coakley with a greater level of consistency and the ability to stop herself from overreaching? Gridiron player Brian Banks’ tormentor Wanetta Gibson is one of those individuals, only undone by her own later and unsolicited admissions. The idea of being able to discern deceit based on face-to-face contact and an appraisal of someone’s testimony is purely fanciful.

In broader terms, the Coakley case shows the desperate need for due process and beyond reasonable doubt after rape accusations to approximate the standards expected when other crimes are alleged. A person is extremely unlikely, for example, to be convicted of an armed robbery without CCTV evidence, the recovery of what is stolen, proof of injury, or multiple witness statements of the same individual incident (i.e. not the Bill Cosby witch hunt of disconnected allegations being bundled together as one “truth”). Both courts and non-judicial discussions are engaged in a perpetual cycle of watering down thresholds to secure more convictions and social condemnation.

All this is even more important when we consider the UVA hoax consisted of claims circulating freely without any trial having taken place. Feminists and SJWs seem to think that the absence of a trial, which requires police evidence (or politicized pressures to create it), means mere accusations are allowed to stick as a de facto branding of guilt for accused individuals.

Some much needed rain

UVA President Teresa Sullivan suspended Greek Life after the false gang rape allegations but did nothing to sanction Jackie Coakley when her lies were exposed.

Jackie Coakley is yet to face the comparatively token threat of a university Honor Code trial. UVA was more than happy to suspend Greek Life activities across the whole university, not just for the fraternity at the center of the hoax, but the person conclusively outed as a fabulist escaped unscathed. Some things never change.

In the end, the continued willingness of even CNN and The New York Times, not just the more conservative Post, to air this saga illustrates a marked qualitative change in how many reporters respond to rape hoaxes. Sure, perhaps a majority of journalists, a notoriously left-leaning profession, remain unwilling to tackle such egregious issues. Regardless, T. Rees Shapiro’s piece is an excellent vindication of the truth and should be welcomed by anyone supportive of justice and not mob mentalities.

If you like this article and are concerned about the future of the Western world, check out Roosh’s book Free Speech Isn’t Free. It gives an inside look to how the globalist establishment is attempting to marginalize masculine men with a leftist agenda that promotes censorship, feminism, and sterility. It also shares key knowledge and tools that you can use to defend yourself against social justice attacks. Click here to learn more about the book. Your support will help maintain our operation.

Read More: 9 People In The Media Who Are Upset Jackie Coakley Wasn’t Raped By White Men

185 thoughts on “Why Hasn’t Jackie Coakley Been Punished For Starting The Biggest Rape Hoax Of The Decade?”

  1. False rape accusers should go to jail, period. There needs to be serious repercussions for these psychos or this will keep happening as college campuses get more and more steeped in promoting “rape culture” and denying due process of the law for the accused.

    1. For centuries, the punishment for a false allegation was equal to the punishment for the crime. If you pushed the case that Jack is a murderer, yet this was provably false, you were put on trial for false accusation.
      Bring it back. If you falsely accuse a man of rape, you go on the sex offender’s list and spend years in prison.

      1. It would make people cautious of making false allegations, and very cautious of making serious false allegations.
        Of course, the burden of proof should be ‘beyond reasonable doubt.’ Cases that simply fail for lack of evidence would have to escape prosecution on both sides.
        The problem in the UVA case is that, at first, no complaint was made to police. This would make the false accuser’s case a civil rather than criminal one.
        I heard the frat is suing Rolling Stone but not the girl. Maybe they think she has no money, or is mad.
        Finally, that girl looks quite cute, doesn’t she? And the male friend refused her advances. Perhaps he had an inkling she was a potential bunny boiler. Image if he’d given in and slept with her, then not followed through with a relationship. We all know what would have happened then.
        The moral is obvious for the men wise enough to see it.

        1. And the male friend refused her advances. Perhaps he had an inkling she was a potential bunny boiler.
          Back in my beta days the same thing happened to me. An attractive girl pursued me, but I had an inkling that she was crazy so I ghosted her. She returns a year later and says that she was raped. Of course, I help comfort her, only to discover the whole thing had been fabricated for my attention.
          Geez, come to think of it, The strong and empowered type go to great lengths to get a man’s attention…

        2. Wow, your experience mirrors mine almost to the dot. Except the chick in my case was an ex I haven’t seen in a long time. Basically I ran into her in town, we ended up going for a cup of coffee and then out of the blue she just started talking about how she got raped by this dude that everyone in the town knew he was a creep. I remember being pissed off and wanting to find the guy and beat him to death, glad I didn’t run into the guy back then, because it turned out she withheld a vital information that would’ve change her story quite a bit. While she was hell bent on convincing people that she got lured into his den and raped viciously. the truth was that she was actually in a relationship with the guy, and that she was just a psychotic bitch that wanted to hit 2 birds with one rock by getting sympathy and attention while trash talking her ex for God knows what reason. I’m quite thankful to her to be honest, because her manipulation set me on course, from that day on I grew to be far more distrustful and skeptic to the plights of the “damsels in distress”.

        3. I’m quite thankful to her to be honest, because her manipulation set me
          on course, from that day on I grew to be far more distrustful and
          skeptic to the plights of the “damsels in distress”.

          I’m thankful for my sociopath too. If it weren’t for her, I never would have discovered the red pill and I would have remained a beta.
          Like you, I am also distrustful of “damsels in distress” now and my life has been a great deal more peaceful as a result.
          Also because I started to concentrate on myself and stopped trying to save everyone else, I have a great career, and a couple of side ventures that pay me pretty well.
          My life is great and I wouldn’t have it any other way.
          Maybe I should send her a “thank you” card…
          You helped make me into the man I am today!”

        4. Indeed, I love my enemies more than I do my friends, because the hatred for my enemy drives me further than any supporting friend ever could. It’s ironic really, to think that the worse people we meet usually brought out the best out of us. To think that a lot of us suffering from the human condition didn’t become great despite the trials and enemies that we came across but because of them. I think I might actually drink a glass of whiskey in their name LOL

        5. My martial arts teacher once told me, “The last thing you want to do is break your opponent’s spirit.” This puzzled me for some time, because I always believed that was the first thing you should break. After all, a broken spirit keeps an enemy from attacking.
          I didn’t understand what he meant at first, but now I get at least part of it. To make a long story short, Enemies make you better and stronger. When they stop attacking you is when you grow weak. (ie. [Bane from The Dark Knight Rises]: Peace has cost you your strength. Victory has defeated you.)
          With that being said, I completely agree with everything you said here. In fact, I may drink to my enemies tonight as well. Cheers!

    2. Young men who are bound and determined to attend a college or university after graduating high school need to STAY THE FUCK AWAY from these state co-ed or Ivy League institutions, as well as most small liberal arts colleges, come to think of it. I am going to insist my sons go to an all male institution of higher learning, if there are any left in a dozen years. Most of these schools that are predominately female in terms of the student population have gone off the deep end with this “rape”/anti-male stuff and the women they are producing are largely not only dreadful, but very possibly life-destroying for the young guys they interact with.

      1. I’d want my son to seriously consider a trade-fuck college. You end up with worthless degrees, loads of debt and feminist indoctrination. Learn how to build something, fix cars, etc…

        1. Unless he wants to study STEM or business, give him a library card and a down payment on a house rather than flushing $50k and 4 years of his life down a toilet.

      2. I can honestly see a “need” for schools (private – no funding from the government) for schools for men only. We need to get back to the times when the main focus for men was education (actual higher learning…not this other bullshit they try to sell us today).
        The false rape claims and the BLM movements should push that need to the front of the line. Anyone who wants to invest should see that business model as an up and coming need (be it a college or trade school, either one).

      3. University of Phoenix is completely private. I wonder what the environment is like there?
        Then there is always Trinity Western University, which SJWs love to hate because it is a private Christian university in Canada. They have code of conduct that forbids premarital sex as well as gay sex. Various law societies around the country are trying to ban their law school graduates from practicing in those provinces because of the gay sex ban. Similarly, the BC College of Teachers tried to deny their graduates accreditation to become public school teachers.

        1. Yes, of course, because your fitness for both professions depends entirely on your support of a man who shoves his dick up another man’s ass.

      4. If they could deal with the religious stuff, Christian schools could be a good option. Since many of these schools don’t tolerate premarital sex & often heavily restrict students being in settings with the opposite sex, there’s a lot less opportunity for sexual encounters, so less opportunity for false accusations. Christian universities are also more likely to have higher numbers of people who are more respectful, intelligent, and hardworking individuals instead of annoying sjws complaining about nothing. Some will even admit you even if you are not a part of the church. Honestly, I am not religious but seeing the state of most modern universities I almost would rather my kids become religious or wait a while to have sex rather than be irresponsible or a son being at risk of being falsely accused (which many universities in the US sadly enable)

    3. You’d think, huh.
      If a report crosses the barrier to law enforcement, then it should be a slam dunk false police report charge, prosecution and conviction by the State.
      If the charge is simply a trial balloon thrown in the the rarefied air of our nation’s institutions of higher education, then it’s unfortunately up to MEN to be do their due diligence and stay the hell away from these black holes of fem-fascism where any charge by a female loon is treated as prima facia evidence of a crime. But then real men who know that there’s really no value to a college degree anymore should avoid these places alltogether.

    4. Mind you, if there are serious repercussions then the liars will just stick to their story and never recant.
      There has to be a high standard. It is really hard to prosecute someone for perjury. Still, a completely fabricated (not just unproven or even unfounded) accusation amounts to public mischief. From the Criminal Code of Canada:
      Public mischief
      140. (1) Every one commits public mischief who, with intent to mislead, causes a peace officer to enter on or continue an investigation by
      (a) making a false statement that accuses some other person of having committed an offence;
      (b) doing anything intended to cause some other person to be suspected of having committed an offence that the other person has not committed, or to divert suspicion from himself;
      (c) reporting that an offence has been committed when it has not been committed; or
      (d) reporting or in any other way making it known or causing it to be made known that he or some other person has died when he or that other person has not died.

  2. As readers very aware of the false rape hysteria, what do you feel are the solutions?
    What should the punishments be for hoaxers?
    What processes should be undertaken to investigate false rape accusations so they’re exposed properly and the perpetrators/liars sanctioned?
    You never know, I or another ROK writer may use some of your suggestions in a later article, especially one designed to advise men.

    1. I’m thinking that we are at the starting point of reinstating the due process of law. Take for instance the popularity in the Netflix series “Making a Murderer.” A man was falsely convicted of rape and incarcerated for years due to a witch hunt like setup by the justice system. We are starting to get a feeling of sympathy for the injustice placed upon a man…for once.
      I think we need more stories in the media about false accusations perpetuated by women and men. Then we can get laws passed for severe punishment for conjuring up false crimes to hurt someone.

      1. And you also have woefully inadequate compensation packages, something like $100 per day in many states for wrongful incarceration.

        1. Yup. Just last Sunday on “60 Minutes”, there was a guy in Alabama who was falsely accused of a heinous crime, later exonerated and received no compensation from the state. I’m starting to see more and more of these cases in the media even though the accuser is not a woman.

        2. Interesting you say that because the issue is really ALL about the standard of proof for convictions. There are plenty of false accuser cases but also a great deal of mistaken identity situations.
          In many incidents, young girls who have been raped have incorrectly, albeit non-maliciously, identified the wrong suspect. I forget the name but there was a Texan man imprisoned for something like 20-25 years because he was pointed out in a line-up by a 13-14-year-old girl.

        3. Maybe this is just the beginning, to set the stage sort of speak, to maintain due process in rape cases before it gets out of control as we have seen in 2015.

        4. The weird thing is that any non-male-on-woman sex crime has seen “reasonable doubt” get all but ridiculous. You need eye witnesses, CCTV, DNA, a “smoking gun” and loot in hand to convict a robber these days. However, simply the word of one women is enough to send a guy away on rape charges.
          If I recall, the Criminal Code of Canada was specifically amended to say that the testimony of the alleged victim alone is enough to convict; the lack of any other evidence does not create “reasonable doubt”. I characterized this as a “reverse onus provision” and was shot down by my feminist professor.

        5. Unless you have multiple witnesses who have not kibitzed. It is rare that three people who witnessed the same event will give you the same story, but if they do then that is a rather good bet.
          The process is that we don’t see everything and we will fill in the blanks with what seems to make sense to us. There is nothing evil about this, it is just the way the human mind works. But using that to convict a man for life is retarded.

    2. IMO, death penalty would be more than justified. Rape accusations literally RUIN men’s lives, therefore there must be serious consequences for the accuser.

      1. I think equal consequences for men and women who either rape / or falsely allege rape would be more proportionate and a better approximation of justice

      2. I would say at the very least these women should be listed on a national register (similar to sex offenders). These people (women) should be seen as dangerous to a community, like a sex offender, because these women can ruin someone’s life with a false accusation.
        Who knows how many times one woman has falsely accused many men of rape?

    3. Hoaxers like rapists or pedophiles should be listed on a National register that’s accessible to all members of the public. In Universities their names should be listed on the central college notice board and website, so, that men or indeed other women know the identity of these hoaxers and liars who are clearly a danger to the general good of the local community.

      1. This could be done privately. I am no techie so I don’t know the details but it should not be too hard to create a registry of fucked-up crazy chicks that all other men should avoid. At first it will be useless but give it a year and thousands of guys logging on to warn other guys about their BPD ex and then we have something.

    4. Read my comment above about “public mischief”. But the thing is, cops and prosecutors simply don’t care if women lie about this shit.

  3. Having started a second degree and being back in the academic system for a few months I’m shocked that the leftist agenda has only gotten more and more in students’ faces. At practically every opportunity lefty ideas are shoved down your throat, but never in a debate format, always in a correctional format.
    Recently someone mentioned the game Pac-Man in class and the professor corrected them and said “or Pac-Girl”. Another example (and keep in mind that the program is a digital technology program) is that the professors keep emphasizing that digital technology is currently a male-dominated industry and how that needs to change. What they always fail to mention however is that both the market and the producers of digital tech are often male (e.g., the gaming industry, data-analytics, new tech research, etc.).
    Probably the most libellous statement this one professor made was after class yesterday when I stuck around to discuss the professors’ research interests and academic experience. She got on the topic of women in the gaming industry and she said (paraphrasing here) that what used to be a more diverse industry has become dominated by white men.
    I managed to hold a straight face but was shocked that a university professor could say something so blatantly stereotypical to a young white male student. I wanted to challenge her on this idea that the gaming industry used to be more “diverse” and the idea that “white men” are responsible for taking over the triple-A gaming industry but after previous hostile experiences asking questions in academia I decided to let it go and just continue focusing on my own goals.
    I don’t have any problem being corrected, and I don’t have any problem asking questions, but academia has become an absurdly authoritarian environment.

    1. they seek to control everything invented by men because they themselves can’t innovate shit.
      Men can stay in their own corners and groups – jocks, gamers, nerds, etc… and be happy with their own. Women look at what men are doing and want to take it.

      1. Either take it or be included in it.
        It’s just like the bratty sister that wants to be in the treehouse built by her brother and his male friends.

      2. They don’t really want it. They just want to create drama. It’s like a small child that cries and screams for a particular toy. If the parent caves in and gives them the toy they soon lose interest in it. And the child then knows it can get what it wants by repeating the same behaviour.

        1. I agree. It’s why you only need to look at women as big children. Once you see women in this light then it all starts to make sense.
          It’s a grown adult acting like a preteen for attention.

    2. you were right not to challenge her directly. Your future career depends on it, and if you don’t nod at the required frequency when she farts feminism in your face she will mark down your work or worse. Interesting point though. She has to believe that white men are the aggressors here, and that the patriarchy is alive and kicking. She believes what she needs to believe in order to service her idea that women in tech are oppressed and locked out of the profession. BTW you might have got away with pointing out that pac-girl as an equivalent to pac-man is horribly sexist.

      1. So does his future grades. Even after I got off university which was laden with leftists, the workplaces, especially the ones in the city and government, still bear the same leftist mentality. Some things remain.

        1. It’s creeping into all industries where there’s no personal risk involved.
          What really shocks and disgusts me about it is all the manginas that actually agree when a professor says something about the evils of white men, or capitalism, or whatever the fuck else. These guys just agree without a second thought or need for explanation.
          Capitalism is evil, yet we’re sitting here writing code on computers that are the result of capitalism. White men are so evil, yet everyone is trying to get into western-countries. I can’t wrap my head around their thought process. Are they really just that pussified?

        2. The leftist thinking is like Big ole Marx threw a bad proletariat cheese at society and the fucking smell lingers on.
          Talk to any teenager today and they will straight up tell you that gender is different from your sexual orientation and god forbid if you ever challenge some aspects of Global warming?cooling?change?progress?regress?whatever the fuck it happens to be nowadays.

        3. It’s easier for these (weak) men to go along with it rather than stand up. If you stand up, then you put yourself at risk.
          Many of these betas aren’t going to ruffle too many feathers (and remember many of them have been raised by single mothers – brow beating them at every turn).

        4. I figure my GPA in law school took a hit from a B+ to a B- because I actually called out their bullshit.

        5. I am living and working in China and there is none of that bullshit here. I dread returning to Canada and having to get a “real job” in the future if that is what the corporate environment is like now. Hopefully I can rely on some form of entrepreneurship rather than working 9-5

        6. Your typical teenager has had 8 to 12 years of indoctrination at the hands of public school teachers.
          In Canada they have Student Vote where they get students (under 18) to cast ballots as if they were participating in the election. The Greens got 3 times the popular vote compared to the real election while the Conservatives were 5 points lower. Actually, other than that the 2015 Student Vote was not too far afield of the actual election results. But sometimes you see the NDP forming a government or the Conservatives getting 10% of the popular vote, which is completely whacked. The teachers obviously have some sort of influence over the kids.

        7. Talk to anyone who understands English and they will straight up tell you that gender is different from sexual orientation.

      2. Is there really a Pac-Girl? Isn’t that misogynistic? It should be Pac-Woman, right? 😆😆😆

    3. While I admire your courage for going back into the lion’s den, are you really surprised?

        1. Get used to it, Clark. You’ll find the same out in the working world as well. The best you can do is simply disagree (don’t get into a debate) and then express that it’s your right (freedom of speech) to disagree. That’s how adults used to do things “back when”. You might disagree but it didn’t ruin your day…you just went on with life.
          Not today.

        2. Keep me informed. I am already over-educated as it is but I have musings about pursuing a PhD just for the fuck of it. I did law school just to get the piece of paper. Then again, I climbed Mt. Doom just for the fuck of it.
          I think I have only one or two “for the fuck of it”s left as I am getting myself in a family way this year,

    4. My question would be, “Well, what was it before white men took it over? Was it crawling with men/women from all different races/backgrounds/creeds in the 80’s and 90’s and then suddenly snatched by white dudes?”
      The last I checked it’s even more diverse now than it ever has been.

      1. Of course it is. Video games were developed initially by nerds. It’s only now in 2015 that it is considered a legitimate pass-time. Back in the day being a gamer meant you were a loser… Now having a PS3 kicking around is pretty much the norm. Same old story… Once gaming became mainstream women wanted a piece of the pie. It went from being a place for losers to a “male dominated space”.

        1. Women don’t know what they want, they just want what’s hip and up to fashion.
          Girls trying to pose as games on dating websites=attracts attention from nerds. Dude poses as gamer=less than 0 attention and dates.

    5. “what used to be a more diverse industry has become dominated by white men.”
      No shit. The tech industry has become so complex lately that women simply can’t cut it. We’ll actually see less women in it as time goes by.

      1. I think you are getting something wrong here. Sure, technology IS dominated by men but it has also always been dominated by men. Out of good reasons. There is no increase in that.
        What she practically said was that a multicultural, etc bunch of people created this industry which is just plain false.

        1. Right. If we look back the tech industry creation had nothing to do with the blue hair multicultural mob. It came out of the U.S. Government (thick eye glasses, suit wearing white men), and the IBMs of the time. Then the nerds took it over.

        2. Well, aren’t you bitchy. But yes, guess what? That mob has never created shit.
          All they can do is leech and act as though they have created it.
          What really makes you even think that?
          When we actually look back we see that all the early games, technology and the entire industry was pioneered by the opposite of some multicultural mob. Being a nerd does not mean being multicultural. Only nowadays it does.
          Sure, I am also not saying that all of it has been created by white men but the Japanese cannot be considered “multicultural” either.

        3. Apparently I have to apologize as I have mistaken you for something you are not. Good that the RoK community and comment section is actually different from the rest of the whiny bitches off the internet.

      2. A good point. We are seeing so many of these women failing when left to their own devices (to be free to create their own games). They now have been given the opportunity (read: empowered) to create games at the same level as men but we’re seeing them fail on a regular basis.

        1. I am not a big gamer and don’t follow the industry much but I have seen that crypto-SJW female game designers make these mushy POS games that get lauded in the press. They reap huge rewards on the MSM press they get.
          Meanwhile, my hard core wargame gets released and to the astonishment of all concerned (me, the developer and the publisher) it barely sells a thousand units.

    6. Remember whatever “Law of Power” is the one that goes: “STFU when you’re in a ‘RightThink’ situation. Save the ‘FUCK YOUs’ for when you have ‘Fuck You’ money”

    7. You’ll find this mindset out in the working world as well, Clark. Many women in management are, also, this delusional. They will always and only want to talk about equality when it fits their narrative but never in a general discussion. It’s called selective equality. I will often laugh at them, say ‘no’ or I’ll disagree with them. I don’t get into too much or a debate with them because it’s a waste of time.
      The fact (which women hate) is that it’s men who have taken us this far in society.

    8. Quite the moron: has he never heard of Ms. Pac-Man?
      I learned the hard way in law school that you can’t afford to question the professors’ (absurd) worldview.
      White males make up roughly a third of the population. I couldn’t find a citation to back it up but yes, it seems that AAA gamers are disproportionately white males. One exception is “social gamers” (like Candy Crush and other shit you play on Facebook) are mostly women, but not by much.

    9. “, but never in a debate format, always in a correctional format.”

      they cant have you thinking you have any choice in the matter.

  4. So apparently women can get crucified (well sorta) at the altar of political correctness as well. I’m not a fan of this girl Nicole Arbour or anything but here’s a video of her getting questioned on the view for making fun of feminists and fat people on her YouTube Channel.
    There’s a bit of difference though between this chick and Roosh getting attacked on Dr. Oz. At the end of the video The View makes nice and says thanks for coming to Nicole Arbour. In the Dr. Oz video however Roosh is clearly painted to be the bad guy, and subjected to the 4 minutes of hate from the audience.

    1. The difference between the two is we are talking all women (even the guest) on The View (god damn, that show is awful). It’s why they all played nice in the end because it’s all about girl power (have to keep that narrative going strong).
      Dr. Oz is a beta playing up to women so that is why Roosh (the only man on that show) got it from the audience.
      More women attacking the obvious problems in our society should help because it’s no longer only “the evil white man” doing it. When more women start speaking the truth, then others have to listen – or their narrative starts to fall apart.

      1. Roosh is an excellent writer but he needs to polish his public speaking skills. I say this as a former executive member of my university debating society and as a former trial court lawyer; I was also a TA at the UBC Business school teaching business communications (verbal).
        He admitted at one point that he “shut down”. You can’t do that when the spot light is on you.
        I attended his Toronto event and have watched various interviews. He makes his points but he does not make them with flair, wit or bravado. For a bunch of motivated lads in a basement in Mississauga, logic, observation and experience conveyed in a folksy, matter of fact way will carry the crowd, but you cant do that shit with a hostile crowd.

    2. I have not seen Arbour’s videos but she strikes me as an attention whore who will just say shit to get noticed and then back off about what she really meant by the comments.

      1. She doesn’t seem like anyone to take too seriously.
        I was wanting to ask you btw if you’ve noticed any changes lately kuz of the unstable markets? S&P500 sunk this week and grocery prices have skyrotted back here at home. People say it’s because oil is so oversatured and Canada’s economy is dependent on oil.
        Just wondering if you’ve seen anything that reflects these events out East. 3 peppers right now costs $7.

        1. I haven’t been following the markets. That might change after the summer when I get all this “relationship spending” out of the way.

  5. In Jackie’s defense, the person she was accusing of rape didn’t exist. There was no chance of Haven Monahan going away for a crime he didn’t commit because there was no Haven Monahan. What she did is not nearly as egregious as what countless women do when they falsely accuse men who actually exist.

    1. Yeah. Her behavior carries its own special flavor of psychosis. I keep thinking of Norma Desmond in Sunset Boulevard.

    2. How many of the guys in that fraternity were harassed as a result of this? What about the damage to their lives?

  6. Damn, Jackie Coakley is hot. Beaufiful ! A girl that hot would have had to be extremely psycho for me not to want her. I don’t get it. Why couldn’t she have any man of her choosing ?
    Why did she have to do all that to get a man. A girl looking like that would have been my pride and joy in my 20’s. A girl to brag about.
    (I put up with a psycho bitch for 5 years in my early 20’s not nearly as beautiful as her. Lived with her and was totally abused and emasculated.) If JC is that foxy lady right under the headlines, I just don’t get it. Knock-out gorgeous.

    1. On the other hand, I find it hard to believe the other girls would be raped. I would be inclined to believe the accused.

    2. Cute, not beautiful. She desired high status guys who could do better, and recognized the concept of abundance. Hell hath no fury like a chick who uses her looks and then realizes it’s not enough.

      1. In an attempt to get the attention of an alpha male, she was willing to destroy beta males she didn’t know across campus.

      1. it just occurred to me, this is just the kind of article the real Jackie Coakley might decide she wanted to comment on

    3. Women like things they can’t have that other women have. They are in total bliss knowing that other women envy them.

    4. That’s what is wrong with american culture today. Any white female with normal BMI is “hot” and “beautiful” and “knock-out gorgeous”. In a previous generation a Jackie would have been plain jane, maybe a cutie on a good night if she had personality. That’s fucked up that betas need to tolerate psycho behavior for a chance to hit that.

        1. Jackie stays home alone and fantasizes about Ryan Duffin shooting his hot load down her throat. That pretty much determines all her behavior.

  7. Yes, do remember Emily Renda. She should be punished. But look at her. That’s a child. The real villains are the people in power who enabled her and used her as a tool for this whole atrocity.

    1. Emily was on the payroll of the university, and after this incident I think she quit and went to law school on the west coast. Running away from the problem she created big fucking surprise.

  8. Basically women who make up false rape claims are encouraged and rewarded for their behavior. They are not punished most of the time. This sends a message to young women that it is an acceptable way to act.

    1. there are no consequences for women whatsoever until they tear down society and muslims are roaming the streets. that’s literally the only consequence they would ever face. white societies won’t keep them in line

  9. The reason Jackie Coakley hasn’t been locked up for her elaborate rape fantasy is that then to be consistent they’d have to lock up every feminist on the planet, and that would be one episode of orange is the new black too far.
    Seriously though I’m glad we’re not letting this case slide. Personally I don’t think this is the worst case of a false rape allegation – arguably the ‘journalist’ involved – Erdeley – is almost as culpable because she refused to let Coakley withdraw the allegation (which is outright fraud on her part) but it does shine a spotlight upon the fantasist dynamics of the institutionation of the feminist rape narrative in the west. Firstly you have the attention seeking ‘victim’, then you have the attention-dramatising feminist journalist, then even above that level you have the feminist political dramatist setting up the scene on the national stage (Emily Renda) thereby effectively advertising for cast members, production assistants and stage hands (Coakley Erdeley, the University administrators, and all the left / feminist ‘journalists’ who were piling on to spread the good news until they realised they were drinking bella donna from a cup).
    But just look at this quote from the WP article:
    “Jackie had told Duffin that a date with Haven Monahan on Sept. 28, 2012,
    had gone terribly wrong, claiming that the upperclassman had forced her
    to perform oral sex on five other men. That fall night, Duffin was
    among a group of friends who rushed to be by Jackie’s side as she cried”
    Contained in that one sentence is the entire psychology of the fantasist / feminist mindset: the dramatisation of abuse, reflecting equal parts of fear and fantasy in anticipation of both sympathetic treatment and sexualised attention. This beyond the sheer evil realpolitik of the feminist powergrab is what drives the narrative.
    With real rape you don’t get any of that. With feminist-fantasy rape, that is all you have. Middle class feminist women everywhere are all equally partaking of this corruption of their inner life, and those inner dynamics need to be fully exposed

  10. these are the same type of women currently destroying Europe.
    No logic, no law, no procedures, no objectivity. Pure emotions in every decision.
    Teresa and Emily were both on the university payroll…’empowered’ into authority decision making.
    Rolling Stone now has to pay for a couple lawsuits and layed off a couple employees last year.
    this is what happens when you empower women.

  11. Let this be a lesson in dating – keep her on a tight leash. she gives you any kind of shit you drop her immediately. Their bullshit is not worth putting up with. They subtly and gradually test your limits until they control you.
    If you’re frustrated just buy a fucking hooker, but don’t destroy your life taking these crazy American broads seriously.

    1. I suppose a hooker is cheaper in the long run. Plus in a relationship one always pays for sex anyways, unless you’re a pimp, which either you rock, or you’re a lying sack of shit.

      1. Serial monogamy is far more efficient. Somewhere between daily and weekly you get fucked and when it runs its course you move on. Yes, you end up paying something but a month or so into it and the sex is virtually free.
        I have never gone in for the PUA shit or “hookers are cheaper in the long run” nonsense. I had one girl offer me pay for play and I refused, then charmed her, then fucked her, then tossed her to the curb because she was otherwise useless.
        Trying to fuck a different skank each night or weekend doesn’t seem worth the effort.
        My final chapter isn’t written so there is a chance that a few years from now I will be prowling Pattaya with my wallet open while looking for LBFMs.

        1. You have valid points. Yet, I’ve never paid directly for sex, but after reading your last paragraph, I might be thinking the same thing, except it’s Brazil for me. Plus, with materialism and social media on the rise, the competition for a mate is already pretty fierce as it is and it will get worse.

        2. As a victim of circumstance I have never had a Brazilian girlfriend, but the few that I have met seemed top notch. A good friend of mine made a “marriage of convenience” with a beautiful Brazilian woman and they are still going strong some 15+ years later.
          All that being said I still try to stick to the adage that I adopted a decade ago: make your next girlfriend your last girlfriend. Don’t put you dick into anything that isn’t wife/mother material. Don’t waste your time with skanks. Of course, don’t commit blindly; odds are that, even with that mindset you will go through a number of women before you hit gold
          And my comment about prowling Pattaya is me at my most pessimistic. I think I have bagged my Chinese unicorn so check back with me in September.
          If that falls through I have a . . . back up girlfriend. Not a ‘plate’ because I don’t do that shit but a woman who I sidelined and yet she still wants to play house.
          The prospect of returning to Canada is terrifying, If I end up back in Toronto and single I think I have two options.
          One is to get back into the BDSM community. Submissive chicks have a whole lot of issues but divorce rape is low on their totem pole, and while the relationship is healthy they WILL fix you a ham sandwich and blow you while you watch the Superbowl.
          The other strategy is “fresh meat”. Here in China I train students in English to study at university in Canada. I keep in contact with them so I have a network of teenage or early 20’s Chinese girls who may or may not be up for some romance.
          The more creepy option relates to my niece. I walked her to school one day and she introduced me to her classmates. I don’t know what they are putting in the water these days but these 13 year old girls stood 5’8″ and were otherwise a whole lot of jailbait. That was years ago and when I return to Canada she and her little friends will be legal. My (now ex) brother in law commented on how I would play that part: roll up to the school on my Harley to pick up the girls.
          Just farts in the wind because, as I said, I think I have found my unicorn. But what could have been / might have been still makes for a good story.

  12. Jackie fits the feminist narrative. And the feminist narrative is more important than the facts in today’s culture. So she receives sympathy for being disturbed even when she lies.

  13. “Why Hasn’t Jackie Coakley Been Punished For Starting The Biggest Rape Hoax Of The Decade?”
    To sum it up: because we live in a feminist age. Simple as that.

    1. Let this sucker suck it up! I will have a good laugh when she destroys him emotionally.

      1. She’s going to accuse him of spousal abuse and call Ryan to come save her. Feminists will make her a celebrity cause.

      1. Of course. She locked a beta bucks down so she doesn’t need to take care of herself anymore. Most women at least have enough decency to wait until after the wedding to get fat!

    2. The guy’s picture should be placed in the dictionary under the word FOOL.
      See Image
      noun: fool; plural noun: fools
      a person who acts unwisely or imprudently; a silly person.”what a fool I was to do this”synonyms:idiot, ass, blockhead, dunce, dolt, ignoramus, imbecile, cretin, dullard, simpleton, moron, clod;
      Use “fool” in a sentence.
      The motherfucker who married Jackie Coakley is a fool.

    3. That guy is AWESOME. He is totally taking one for the team! Just think, she won’t be out making up lies about fraternities. With any luck he is gaslighting the hell out of her!

      1. I’m not so sure about that. She just married some schlep just to be “married” so people won’t think she’s socially inept and can’t get a guy.
        She’ll still do stupid shit. I highly doubt this guy has any say in the relationship. Any non-beta guy would not marry that crazy bitch.

        1. I teach ESL in China, and you are correct. The Brits are the masters of sarcasm as far as I can tell. Maybe the French or Germans can too, but you would have to explain it to me.

    4. What a loser. Look at his suit. He got married in that earth tone “men’s warehouse” atrocity?? I give them 6 yrs before a divorce….

    5. someone should put in a thought bubble coming out of her brain-less head that says ” i cant wait to divorcerape this chump in 10 years!” eatprayslut

  14. Women should work in the mines, sweep the streets, drive the trucks, build the houses and do the plumbing & toilets.
    Until they can build their own shit and maintain it, I ain’t listening to another god damned stupid thing that comes out of any modern women’s mouth, total low iq barbarians, unethical, immoral, sleazy, selfish, irrational, lazy, ungrateful and just plain annoying and useless.
    Every aspect of life they have been given access to they have totally destroyed, literature, art, journalism, teaching, universities, schools, government, business, every thing they touch they destroy cause deep down they are stupid, they no it, hence all the powder puff projecting and shit tests.
    The women and men involved in this atrocity should all be working cleaning up all the plastic in the ocean till the day they die..

    1. Christian universities have way fewer SJW’s mostly because their Honor Code and general atmosphere discourages sexual promiscuity, protesting over stupid stuff, and victimhood. I’m not even religious but those I know from these schools tend to be friendlier, ambitious, caring, charitable, and well adjusted individuals

  15. that jackie broad is fuckin nuts….. and that duffin guy is a fuckin idiot for falling for that shit

  16. As much as I believe false rape accusers need to be punished as harshly as rapists, would putting that law in place not actually prevent a woman from coming clean after a false rape accusation? It’s easy for her to jump off the train now because there is no repercussion. Would changing that be the best move?
    Also wouldn’t it deter woman who have actually been raped but have no confidence in the strength of their evidence. That happens too.

    1. “As much as I believe false rape accusers need to be punished as harshly as rapists, would putting that law in place not actually prevent a woman from coming clean after a false rape accusation?”
      Probably not. Courts usually allow women to recant their accusations or drop charges without an explanation required. Also, a strict policy against false accusations would do no harm to real victims of rape. As with other crimes, there would have to be genuine evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that the woman was lying for her to be punished. It would most certainly not mean that a woman will be locked up every time she accuses a man of rape and fails to produce solid enough evidence.

    2. I would suggest false rape accusers should be more harshly punished than rapist. The rape is probably 5-30 minutes or torture (+ emotional torment). A prison sentence is 10-15 years of torture (+ emotional torment). I think if the sentence for false accusing were higher, you’d see far less of them in the first place.

  17. Mr. Garrett, I would straight out kick any of these unsavory characters out of college. Then I would deny them any financial assistance for college. Assuming a respectable college wants to risk accepting them, they would either pay out of pocket (very unlikely), ask for a private loan, or get themselves, in case of the women, a sugar daddy. That, of course, assuming said sugar daddy wants to risk having a psycho for a lover. And, why not, a nice little civil suit for defamation and slander, and maybe even criminal charges for deception, obstruction of justice, etc. My knowledge of criminal law is rudimentary at best so anyone else could help in that regard. At least, whatever the outcome, these hoaxers would still have it easy, compared to being accused of rape, even falsely. We all know how rapists, even those falsely accused, fare in jail. Even if they make it, sex offender registry, perhaps for life. And even for those whose innocence gets acknowledged, like the Central Park 5, the 20 plus years of agony they go through are never returned to them.

  18. I have a very elegant solution: exile to the middle east. If they want to be raped so bad, let them be raped.

    1. They would love the middle east. They can wallow in real patriarchy and real rape culture.

  19. False accusers get whatever the punishment would have been for the accused. If he would have gotten 20 years in prison then she gets 20 years, as others have suggested. Simple really.

  20. False rape accusers should have “LAB” branded on their foreheads for “Lyin’ Ass Bitch”. Other than that, they should be free to go.
    Unless the guy they accused served any prison time, in which case they should serve day-for-day.

  21. News flash: society indulges young women, often too much! Payback time is when they hit the Wall.

  22. “the comparatively token threat of a university Honor Code trial”
    As a UVA alum, this is the one thing I’d take serious objection to. At least when I went there, the Honor Code was single-sanction. If you were found guilty, the only punishment was expulsion. I don’t believe it’s changed since

    1. I would say the Honor Code (any school) is only brought up (or out) depending on who was being charged for violating it.

  23. The truth of the matter is the media is accepting everything, very obviously mentally damaged women are saying, not even doing the minimum vetting. Women would never lie about rape? Read a little about borderline personality or psycopathy, and tell me that.

  24. It never fails to amaze me (or does it?) how INNOCENT men are banned just on an alleged claim, whereas a women is NOT when she is GUILTY of something. WHY are we punishing innocent people and to add insult to injury, NOT punishing people that are? This is outrageous!!!! No WONDER women feel they have everything to gain and nothing to lose; whereas men have everything to lose, but nothing to gain.
    So women either rise victorious, or just stay on the same level; whereas a man can only stay on the same level or fall! They call this equality? FFS!

  25. Minimum 5,000 dollar fine with a possible max of 20,000 dollars paid to the falsely accused. Minimum one year in jail, public apology, never comes off their record, and if this “occurred” in a college campus, they should be immediately expelled when evidence is presented of their lies. See, even as men, we are willing to undergo the provision of concrete evidence before throwing these false accusers into jail. Falesly accusing someone is not to be trifled with, and the only way to make that clear is to harshly punish those who see it as a tool to get their way.

  26. I graduated from UVa in the early 90s.
    The University and students take (or used to take) the honor code seriously there. It’s the reason you can take an exam wherever you want as long as you sign the honor pledge that you have not cheated.
    It seems clear that Jackie’s lies were a violation of the honor code. From the UVa webpage about the honor code :
    “Lying” shall mean the misrepresentation of one or more facts in order to gain a benefit or harm another person, where the actor knows or should know that the misrepresentation will be relied upon by another person.

    An Act of Lying, Cheating, and Stealing must have occurred with knowledge that it was an Honor Offense, and it must be considered a Significant breach of the Community of Trust, in order for it to be considered an Honor Offense. If you have questions or believe that an Honor Offense may have occurred, we encourage you to speak with a confidential advisor.
    Yet as far as I know she’s still enrolled (graduated?).
    The UVa honor code is a joke.
    Men – in my mid-40s now. I’ve learned that the “principles” and “honor” are usually smokescreens. The only thing that matters is power. Hell, look at the Clintons. They should be in jail by now.

  27. UVA’s President Teresa Sullivan is a fat feminist cow that used the brief period when the Rolling Stone story had credibility in the mainstream media in order to demolish what little was left of fair treatment of men in that university. Thomas Jefferson must be rolling in his grave.
    Sullivan should be fired. Will not happen with the current governor, who is a lacky of Hillary Clinton. But one can only hope that when Trump is POTUS, he will clear out this Title IX anti-male student bull shit and help create the environment in which fat feminist cows like Teresa Sullivan will get raked over the coals.

    1. It’s all about fairness, equality and Honor Code…unless the accused is a woman.
      Then, they’ll have to think about it for awhile.

  28. Your neighbors’s mate can get fucked for all I care, get the fuck out of here with this shit!

  29. Making false accusations for attention would be cluster b personality disorder behaviour, not psychopathy.

  30. I need a score card to keep track of the players. So this was all about getting a guy’s attention?

  31. She belongs in jail for lying about the “crimes” she committed – just like Hillary.

  32. Why hasn’t jackie been punished?
    It almost never happens.
    That chick who carries that mattress around is a goddamned liar as well. She’s never been punished. Anyone remember the duke lacrosse case? That chick never was punished for that although i hear she’s in prison now for murder.
    Emily renda? She came up with a story of her own which i don’t buy for a moment and turned it into a solid career.
    The accusers rarely if ever face the consequences of the false accusations.

  33. >Why?
    Because Jews? When is that not the answer to these questions?
    Those who control the major media channels control thought itself. They control what topics get discussed, what gets ignored, and what targets are picked out to be destroyed for the entertainment of the masses.
    Because Jews.

  34. I despise a woman who cries rape. It is a disrespect to real rape victims and they should be charged for false accusations. My one issue with this is how difficult it can be to prove rape for real victims when they are too ashamed/afraid to come forward directly after the incident, so it may deter them more if such a charge for false accusations on rape existed. But if they can prove that someone cried rape, charge their asses and throw them in prison for a bit. Then they might actually get raped and know what they were crying about. I have no mercy for liars, but especially the ones that play with pity.

  35. Sure, she lied… But at least she started a conversation. That’s way more important, y’all.

    1. It would have been better had she not done this in the first place, dude! That’s ‘way more important, y’all’!

  36. I haven’t play video games for a long time. Are macho posturing and misogyny necessary to play video games these days? The comments I read here seem to indicate that they are.

  37. I feel sorry for the poor beta schnook who actually married a head case rape fantasy false accuser and legally tied his future to her insane whims.
    Good luck buddy.

  38. As much as I would hate to be falsely accused, it would be even worse if
    the accuser had a change of heart but was too afraid of the
    consequences to retract his or her accusation. Some false allegations are made out of error or confusion, not intentional deception or malice. The threat of punishment won’t stop the deceivers; they will still falsely accuse when it suits them. Punishment will make it harder for people to retract and recant, though, if they come to realize they were wrong. For that reason alone, I don’t think it’s wise to enact any specific penalty for false accusations, but rather it should be dealt with on a case-by-case basis (as it is already, pretty much).

    1. So using your logic, we shouldn’t punish anyone, ANY criminals, as it WON’T stop crime happening (WTF!?). What exactly do you see punishment for, other than punishment, and not necessarily to rehabilitate too? Who gives a monkeys about if it makes it harder to retract. The same goes for punishment of other crimes; but if you remove ANY accountability then crime will proliferate even more! So yes those nasty, irresponsible women who falsely accuse may be put off retracting, but balance that against many more falsely accusing, knowing they’ll get off! Are you really that dumb? You went through quite a bit of mental gymnastics and ‘faux’ reasoning to justify women getting off scot free, didn’t you? This is precisely why we have a problem as big as we do, because of libtards like you!
      Please tell me you were joking?And if you weren’t then I hope you can sleep at night with a conscience as warped as that! It makes you a false accuser apologist! Now get out of here!

Comments are closed.