Student accused of sexual assault is suing university for “anti-male bias” because sure, that’s a thing

A student at the University of Chicago is currently in the process of suing the university for “anti-male bias” after being investigated twice for sexual assault. The student in question has kept his name concealed, referred to only as “John Doe” in the lawsuit where he is asking for $175,000 in grievances. According to Buzzfeed, his filed complaint claims the school violated Title IX gender equality requirements by “creating a gender biased, hostile environment against males, like John Doe, based in part on UC’s pattern and practice of investigating and disciplining male students who accept physical contact initiated by female students, retaliating against male students, and providing female students preferential treatment under its Title IX policies.”

Sadly, Doe isn’t the first male student to file a Title IX lawsuit as a wedge against sexual assault charges. A lawsuit originally filed against Columbia University in 2013 by a male student who claimed sexual assault accusations were backed by anti-male bias was revived in August. In these cases, “anti-male bias” merely involves potentially investigating rape, whereas “equality” would dictated an environment where male students are free to roam unquestioned.

Given the National Sexual Violence Resource Center’s (NSVRC) statistics that 1 in 5 women in college are sexually assaulted and 1 in 16 men are sexually assaulted, with as many as 63 percent of these cases going unreported, accusations of “anti-male bias” based on accusations of sexual assault feels like fighting fact with fiction.

Also, why aren’t any of these men filing lawsuits about preferential female treatment filing lawsuits addressing the real, often brushed over issue of sexual assault against males if they’re so worried about protecting men?

According a report in The Chicago Maroon, the lawsuit against the University of Chicago claims Doe’s accuser from 2014 (referred to as Jane Roe) has been hurling sexual harassment accusations and retaliation against Doe him ever since the hearings, where he was found innocent.

So to clarify, he wasn’t even prosecuted over his sexual assault investigation, he just allegedly feels uncomfortable in the aftermath. The fact that the most recent documented cases alleging “anti-male bias” are largely defending men accused of sexual assault, and not defending vulnerable male populations such as gay men, trans men, male survivors of sexual assault, or men experiencing racist harassment speaks volumes about male entitlement and what supposed proponents of “men’s rights” are really getting at.

This isn’t about protecting men from violence or harassment (which men can obviously experience); this is about protecting men from facing legal and social responsibilities for their actions and silencing women.