Meet the College Women Who Are Starting a Revolution Against Campus Sexual Assault

Vanessa Grigoriadis

“Want to meet at my dorm? Less carrying for me.”

Emma Sulkowicz, a.k.a. the international sensation “mattress girl,” is emailing from her phone in her Columbia University dorm high up over Morningside Heights, where she lives in a single room within a six-person suite. “My friends and I got the first place in the housing lottery for seniors last year,” she says non­chalantly, leading the way through a concrete-block hallway, in purple flip-flops the same color as her painted toes, as well as a light-blue cropped tee featuring a moose with sunglasses over the words FEARLESS LEADER, commemorating a river-rafting trip for freshmen. As you may already know, given how viral Sulkowicz’s image has gone in the past few weeks, that’s the outdoor-­orientation program that preceded Sulkowicz’s alleged rape by another orientation leader, which was followed by a Columbia-adjudicated hearing during which the university found her assailant not guilty—a verdict she began protesting, this September, by carry­ing a mattress around campus until Columbia expels her assailant.

A few years ago, an Ivy League student going public about her rape, telling the world her real name—let alone trying to attract attention by lugging around a mattress—would have been a rare bird. In America, after all, we still assume rape survivors want, and need, their identities protected by the press. But shattering silence, in 2014, means not just coming out with an atrocity tale about your assault but offering what Danielle Dirks, a sociologist at Occidental, calls “an atrocity tale about how poorly you were treated by the people you pay $62,500 a year to protect you.” By owning those accusations, and pointing a finger not only at assailants but also the American university, the ivory tower of privilege, these survivors have built the most effective, organized anti-rape movement since the late ’70s. Rape activists now don’t talk much about women’s self-care and protection like they did in the ’90s with Take Back the Night marches, self-defense classes, and cans of Mace. Today, the militant cry is aimed at the university: Kick the bastards out.

Taking a seat in a wood-and-wool chair of the blend shared by dorms and doctors’ waiting rooms, Sulkowicz starts to tell her tale. At 21, in barely detectable Invisalign braces, she’s the type of hipster-nerd who rules the world these days, with the mellow demeanor and direct way of speaking of an Apple genius-bar clerk, except she giggles nervously when worried she’s said the wrong thing. The Japanese-Chinese-Jewish daughter of Manhattan psychiatrists, she was a club fencer and an A student at Dalton on the Upper East Side. At Columbia, Sulkowicz thought she’d focus on mechanical physics—she liked the way you could draw a diagram to solve a problem, see the answer—but wound up drawn to visual arts instead. She also joined Alpha Delta Phi, Columbia’s co-ed “hipster frat.” As she puts it dryly, “Only the most hipster of the hipster kids can get in.” That’s where she met Paul, a film fanatic and rower. “He was a nice person,” she says matter-of-factly, “a cool person who was secretly really crazy.”

Toward the end of freshman year, the two students signed up to help lead the next year’s outdoor-orientation program, taking a training trip down the Delaware River. There were an odd number of students on the trip, so everyone sat two to a canoe except Paul, who was in a kayak. “He would paddle way out ahead of everyone so that he didn’t have to talk to anyone,” she says. They had sex twice. He went to Europe for the summer.

When he returned, at the beginning of sophomore year, Sulkowicz was a committee head for orientation. “Paul was really needy,” she says. “He asked me to help carry his bags, and I was like, ‘I’m organizing food for 400 freshmen.’ ” One night there was a party for the orientation leaders. In the ivy-covered courtyard outside Wien Hall, Paul kissed Sulkowicz, who says that she was sober except for a sip of gin-and-Sprite. He was buzzed and carrying a handle of vodka. While they were having consensual sex in her dorm room, she alleges that he suddenly pushed her legs against her chest, choked her, slapped her, and anally penetrated her as she struggled and clearly repeated “No.”

Sulkowicz didn’t report the incident at first. But when two classmates told her that Paul had been abusive to them too—one who had been in a long-term relationship with him, the other alleging he groped her—she pressed charges with the administration. Students tend to be uncomfortable going to the cops, who, despite what plots of Law & Order suggest, aren’t always great with rape. The preference suits the universities, too, which prefer to handle issues quietly in-house. Under Title IX, a gender-parity law from 1972, universities are required to adjudicate sexual-assault claims to ensure gender equality on campus as a civil right. The Obama White House, taking a strong position on combating campus assault, has reinforced a “preponderance of the evidence” standard in these cases, meaning campus courts need only find it’s 51 percent likely the assault occurred to punish the accused. To students like Sulkowicz—who are, after all, putting their good word on the line as well as risking stigma, humiliation, possible retribution from the guy’s friends, and diminishment of respect from their own friends—that lower standard can feel like a relief.

Related Stories
The Columbia Student Carrying a Mattress Everywhere Says Reporters Are Triggering Rape Memories
I Was Raped, and I Stayed Silent About My ‘Coveted Status’
Why, Exactly, Are Colleges So Bad at Dealing With Rape?
Sulkowicz, though, claims that Columbia administrators made errors and acted, frankly, idiotically during the hearing process. One took incomplete notes of her story, writing that she was tipsy that night. Adjudicators “kept asking me to explain the position I was in,” she says. “At one point, I was like, ‘Should I just draw you a picture?’ So I drew a stick drawing.” She says one of the three judges even asked whether Paul used lubricant, commenting, “I don’t know how it’s possible to have anal sex without lubrication first.”

Paul denied the charges. If Sulkowicz is a fencer, she alleges he told the panel, her legs are the strongest part of her body, and he was only a lightweight rower—how could he have pinned her legs down? The anal sex was consensual, he said. He went into detail about how he came on Sulkowicz, and then she grabbed a tissue, wiped the ejaculate off, and “ ‘threw the tissue away,’ ” she says. “None of which is true—he never came that night. He just stopped and ran away.”

Columbia didn’t hear Sulkowicz’s charges for six months, then found in favor of Paul. “There’s three women accusing the same guy here,” she says. “Like, we don’t have any other motivation other than he assaulted us.” When she appealed, a dean refused to overturn the verdict. By Columbia’s bylaws, his decision was final.

Today, Paul is still at Columbia, though he’s lying low, even keeping his email out of the campus Facebook. The mattress protest is a way for Sulkowicz to both refuse him that anonymity and turn the situation on its head. She’ll take the punishment, it says. This is a heavy mattress—an extra-long twin covered with shiny blue bedbug-proof material, bought from a clearinghouse called Tall Paul’s Tall Mall, which stocks the same mattresses Columbia orders for its dorms for growing boys. For now, she’s not using any hooks or belt loops to carry it—only her hands, or other students’ hands (her friends call those “collective carries”). It’s a weight Columbia can lift together. “For the record, the best arrangement is four people carrying the mattress, because they each take a corner,” says Sulkowicz, smiling. “Then it’s really light.”

Sulkowicz’s mattress project is powerful, indelible; as Hillary Clinton said last week, “That image should haunt all of us.” But it is also maybe a little youthful. This is the ethical purview of college students. Strict attention not only to learning and knowledge but also to morality, to right and wrong, when to stand up and when to stay silent, is a large part of why American colleges exist.

“One cannot help but feel terrible about this,” Columbia president Lee Bollinger says about Sulkowicz and her mattress in his first interview on the subject. “This is a person who is one of my students, and I care about all of my students. And when one of them feels that she has been a victim of mistreatment, I am affected by that. This is all very painful.” Bollinger says that he has spent “as much time on this issue”—meaning sexual assault on campus—“as any issue” over the past year, which includes ­Columbia’s largest expansion in nearly a century, a $6.3 billion, 17-acre satellite campus in West Harlem. In August, he created a new sexual-assault policy, taking a much harder line. Students are now required to have “unambiguous communication and mutual agreement”—that’s verbal consent—before sexual acts, or risk ­consequences. Though an improvement, this hasn’t been enough to quell unrest.

Activists of Sulkowicz’s generation have long retired the word victim, preferring survivor. But Sulkowicz calls carrying the mattress “performance art,” and we might as well take her at her word. Her daily thoughts, including how the hell she’s getting the mattress to class, are about the integrity of her art piece; when this magazine asked to photograph her in a studio in Chelsea, she worried about violating the “rules” for the performance by taking the mattress to a location off-campus.

That she has become the poster girl for the anti-rape movement is an accident of a viral world—she doesn’t have a background in activism, and she is not really at the center of this crusade. To find the godmothers, you have to travel to Los Angeles, where Annie Clark, 25, and Andrea Pino, 22, two political-science majors from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, are hard at work in a one-bedroom in Silver Lake, rented off Craigslist, that has become an anti-assault Death Star. Both of them were violently raped as students, and in responding to both cases, UNC seemed to be lax verging on cruel—Clark claims an administrator even said to her, “Rape is like football. If you look back on the game, and you’re the quarterback … is there anything you would have done differently?” Working with a network of activists, they’ve helped survivors learn about their Title IX rights and file complaints about violations across the country. Today, 78 American colleges, including Harvard, Princeton, Dartmouth, Amherst, Swarthmore, Brandeis, Emerson, and a slew of West Coast schools from UC Berkeley to USC to UCLA, are under investigation by the Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights.

Though they’re at the heart of a national movement now, Pino and Clark were on the sidelines when things started to shake out a few years ago. Online—especially on powerful mainstream blogs like Jezebel—young writers were brewing a cauldron of pop-culture ­coverage and feminist theory, resuscitating feminism from its post–Monica Lewinksy, Girls Gone Wild–era doldrums by coaxing horror stories out of dark crannies and crucifying pop-culture villains. Between Woody Allen, Terry Richardson, Chris Brown, Elliot Rodger, the “legitimate rape” dude, Robin Thicke’s “Blurred Lines,” and Ray Rice knocking his fiancée out cold in the elevator, they haven’t needed to look far. Pop culture was “rape culture,” they said, borrowing a term from second-wave feminism as a catchall for America’s stew of degradation, objectification, and male entitlement. “Rape culture is an attitude toward women in particular, but not even just to women—to treating all people as sexual objects, nothing more than an opportunity for sex,” says Anna Bahr, a Columbia graduate and former editor of Blue and White, the school magazine.

Slowly, public discussion of rape among college women began to be normalized, and they started to share. Amherst student Angie Epifano published the first major, non-pseudonymous “atrocity tale” in 2012, writing about how her rape allegations were denied by her college’s sexual-assault counselor; how she became suicidal and was locked up in a psychiatric ward, after which, she alleged, Amherst tried to deny her readmittance; how, when the school agreed to take her back, her dean prevented her from studying abroad (“Africa is quite traumatizing, what with those horrible Third World conditions: disease … huts … lions!”); how they made her feel like a “broken, polluted piece of shit.” She wrote that she did not want to be ashamed anymore. It occurred to her that she had no reason to be ashamed. “Silence has the rusty taste of shame,” she repeated to herself. “I will not be quiet.”

Emma Sulkowicz, a senior, she says she’ll lug her mattress around campus all year in protest.
Pino studied policy-framing at school, and she thought about combining Epifano’s narrative with developments at Yale, where students had filed a complaint alleging that the school was mishandling rape accusations amid a female-unfriendly atmosphere where frat pledges felt okay yelling things like “No means yes, yes means anal” and “My name is Jack, I’m a necrophiliac, I fuck dead women and fill them with my semen.” A mix of the personal and the political, Pino thought, can make a movement. Pino and Clark also had a genius rhetorical idea—they’d take a lesson from the military anti-rape movement, which had beaten a drum about kicking serial, violent rapists out of the armed forces. No one should talk the way activists did in the ’90s—no more date rape. Focus on college men as serial predators, and cite a study that claimed that 6 percent commit three or more undetected rapes and attempted rapes each.

On a staggeringly sunny morning in Los Angeles, Pino and Clark are at their apartment, working away. Best friends, they even dress the same: Today, they’re in purple tops, black eyeliner, a surfeit of teeny-tiny diamond-stud earrings, each with a pendant around her neck, plus Clark has slung on her Phi Beta Kappa key—and small ankle tattoos reading ix. This crusade is exciting but not lucrative. Without money to pay rent, they slept in a tent for a little while. Pino became ill and thought she had mono, though Clark didn’t have mono and they spent all their time together. Maybe it was the old hummus she’d eaten? At the ER, with her laptop to keep plugging away on activist issues, the doctors gave her prednisone, a no-no because she has PTSD from her rape. “It gave me violent hallucinations, which made me suicidal,” she says.

In the end, Pino was diagnosed with a staph infection in her blood, though she looks fine today, doing what she does every day—talking to survivors, advising them on Title IX complaints, and polishing media sound bites about necrophiliacs and the taste of silence and every dirty, repulsive thing. “I got a good one today,” says Pino. “My Rapist Was Only Fined $25.” On a wall, a whiteboard is filled with the names of schools they’re about to target, and a map of the U.S. has tiny colored pins stuck in each state where a college has an investigation. Says Clark, “Like at Penn State, when things aren’t connected, it’s so easy to say, ‘Okay, here are four people doing things wrong. We’ll fire them, and the issue goes away.’ We reframed the debate as, ‘What’s happening at one school is a microcosm of what’s happening everywhere.’ ”

Taking a seat at a cardboard box, which functions as their desk, they whip out a laptop. “I wouldn’t say we control the media, but we have a good grasp of how the media works,” says Pino, shrugging her shoulders.

Drawing bright lines over gray areas is one of the things college students do best—you pay money to learn, among ­like-minded souls, the contours of the world and your place in it. Over the past couple of decades, the college campus has acquired some aspects of a utopia, too, namely, the free-floating myth of itself as a utopia. But different students have different ideas of what this constitutes. It might be a place to go wild, to do the things you won’t get to do as a full-fledged adult; it might be a place to search for a political point of view and dedicate yourself to a cause. It’s also seen, primarily by boys, as a sexual utopia, where all you have to do is open the door of a frat party to have mind-blowing sex that catapults you into the pantheon of manhood—as opposed to what college sex is often really like, which on its best nights (after emoji flirting, hits off a five-foot bong from a top bunk, and elegant overtures like “Um-want-to-watch-a-movie-in-my-room”) still resembles rutting pubescent chimpanzees.

Is there a rampant hook-up culture on campus today? Of course there is. Does the promiscuity that third-wave feminists heralded as empowerment look a little less attractive when practiced by teenagers with little experience and less maturity? You bet. And frustration with hook-up culture is undeniably a part of the anti-rape movement. In some ­activists’ ideal world, there might be no trial, on campus or elsewhere, but instead a simple ­presumption of guilt.

In all of the allegations, I’m sure there are a few women who are crying wolf, who are vengeful and looking to punish ex-­boyfriends—just a few. A ­ercentage may be misunderstandings—confusing signals, something she wanted and then didn’t. Drunken­ness doesn’t clarify these things, even when they should be clear. The way that college girls, for instance, taught from early life to be polite and well behaved, might say “No” during sex with someone they know isn’t the same as with a stranger. It’s “No, it’s not a good idea,” “No, please get off me,” and then, often, a numb acceptance.

Survivor-activists like Pino and Clark don’t accept this worldview—to them, efforts to understand the problem are nearly useless because, they insist, only a small number of college sex offenders can be rehabilitated. “There are people out there who want to say that survivors today are feminism gone wild, railroading men for power,” says Dirks, the Occidental sociologist. “And they can rely on talking about kids and alcohol, saying what happened was just drunk sex—and, you know, we’ve all had great drunk sex!” Research, she says, shows that only a small percentage of college guys truly don’t know where the line is—“and, for them, if you tell them to get verbal consent, they don’t push so hard.” She pauses. “But the rest of them—and I know it’s hard to think of our brothers, our sons, like this—are calculated predators. They seem like nice guys, but they’re not nice guys. In society, we don’t like sex offenders in any other area, but for some reason, if you’re in ­college, we love you and want to protect your rights.”

As compelling as this rallying cry about unrehabilitatable ­offenders is, it’s not an assessment of the problem that everyone shares. In the center of this philosophical, and administrative, debate are the universities, which need to protect students, including innocent boys who may not look innocent, as in the Duke lacrosse case. There are good people here who have dedicated their lives to helping young people, and one of the mysteries of this issue is how they created a system that devastates so many of the students who come to them desperate for help. At some universities, it’s administrative bloat, middle-management laziness, a habit of shoving assault cases under the rug so they don’t become nuisances. At others, too much attention has perhaps been paid to the letter of Title IX and not its spirit, with a sluggishness about giving rape survivors what they want—the accused student out of their dorms, classes, and their lives.

A progressive, politically aware school in Manhattan but also apart from it, Columbia, to my knowledge, isn’t accused of covering up sadistic gang rapes that have been exposed at other schools. Most of the cases that I learned about, though each horrid in its own way, involves a female student, perhaps engaged in a hook-up session, being forced into an act against her will. A freshman was raped by a junior who taught her Consent 101 class. A student’s rapist was moved back into her dorm by mistake. In one case, an assistant athletic coach whom a student confided in about her assault told the head coach, unbidden, and he berated her for three hours. Camila Quarta says she woke up in the middle of the night and the male platonic friend she had invited to sleep over was fingering her. He begged her not to report him, leaving a letter and David Foster Wallace’s This Is Water at her door. “He wanted me to have it because I’d shared so many of my political views on the world with him,” and he said Wallace’s speech was important to his Weltanschauung, says Quarta, a die-hard leftist. “I didn’t read it.” (Citing privacy laws, Bollinger won’t comment on the accuracy of these allegations—it would not only be illegal, he says, but immoral.

Columbia doesn’t have an overt Animal House atmosphere—though excessive drinking, often at city bars, has always been part of its social life. Here, the issue around assault built slowly. In 2013, as national headlines sprang up, the university’s College Democrats thought it was worth inquiring into Columbia’s sexual-assault ­statistics. They asked Bollinger for data beyond what was mandated by federal requirements—they wanted aggregated, anonymous data about punishments meted out when the accused were found guilty. Otherwise, how could they know if the system was working? As “Prezbo,” as Bollinger is called, seemed to ignore their requests, students became suspicious, circulating a petition that gathered over 1,500 names.

Still, this was a relatively quiet collegiate tussle—but Sulkowicz, whose father consulted with a high-profile attorney who knows how to work the press, began to grant interviews. And then Bahr, the magazine editor, published an 8,000-word, two-part article about the three women who had accused Paul of assault. The Columbia campus went nuts—was this what had been going on behind closed doors?

Zoe Ridolfi-Starr, a brunette with a fringe of bangs and a clipped way of speaking that resembles Tracy Flick’s, took up the question. The daughter of the two female co-founders of the Northern California Innocence Project— “My favorite baby picture is at my first pro-choice rally, wearing a hat with a pin on it that says ABORTION WITHOUT APOLOGY”—she was an Obama organizer in Nevada at 15, president of her class in San Jose, and then a congressional page with plans to run for public office one day.

But after her first year at Columbia, Ridolfi-Starr was at a fraternity party with two men, one of whom was a student and one who wasn’t, when they began assaulting her. “It was dirty and confusing and made me feel sick,” she said. Then, at the Democratic National Convention, with the “son of a very important person,” it happened again. “I was pretty violently assaulted,” says Ridolfi-Starr, audibly drawing in a breath. “I was stranded in North Carolina with no one I knew and no way to get home. The scene at the DNC struck me as extremely grimy, extremely exploitative, with people grabbing power sexually, personally, politically—everything. And then the guy lied about what happened and everybody was laughing about it.”

Ridolfi-Starr never brought her assaulters to justice. She studied abroad in Argentina, got away for a while. But now she was back at Columbia. And she was ready to channel her fury over her rapes, along with considerable political expertise, into helping students avoid the same fate. If Pino and Clark are national leaders, Ridolfi-Starr is a star organizer of the Columbia branch of the movement. “Columbia is my home, and I deserve to be safe in my home,” she says. “I moved across the country to come to my dream school, and then the institution betrays us. It’s hideous.”

In general, students were outraged by the unethical ways that the guys and Columbia’s administration had acted. But some of them thought survivor accounts were difficult to believe: “They’re pigeonholing these guys as autistic, predatory rapist dudes who only think about sex,” says a sophomore. And, problematically, no one seemed to understand or agree on what rape means or what qualifies. “I had a friend who was like, ‘I had sex with this guy and I was really uncomfortable—I wish I’d said something,’ ” says Trina Bills, a student who graduated last year. “But she didn’t, and so he didn’t know. When she finally told him, he said, ‘You should’ve told me. It would’ve been fine—we just wouldn’t have done anything.’ The communication aspect of this is real. And everyone communicates differently.”

Sulkowicz and Ridolfi-Starr shared a hall as freshmen, but the hipster fencer-artist and the earnest political organizer weren’t close back then. “I remember Zoe carried around lollipops in her purse, taking them out to suck on like they were accessories,” says Sulkowicz. Ridolfi-Starr laughs. “I always have my little thing,” she says. “This year, I’m really into headbands.”

Now they had a strong bond. At first, they tried to work with Bollinger and the administration. But, Ridolfi-Starr claims, the school refused to put out a place setting for them, choosing instead to work with ­student-government leaders. “They don’t like us. They don’t trust us. They don’t want to work with this. Their attitude isn’t ‘Let us address your needs as students.’ It’s ‘How do we mitigate this situation to protect our reputation?’ ” She sighs. “Going through the experience in your own life is not a qualification they take seriously.”

It was time for direct, nonhierarchical, gyno-friendly, partially anonymous, fuck-Prezbo-up action. Ridolfi-Starr and others founded a radical group called No Red Tape—the mantra is “Red tape won’t cover up rape”—and put tape over their mouths at a student-activity fair when they were told to stand 20 feet away. (“It’s our student center!” says Ridolfi-Starr.) She claims that a dean told another student she was “disruptive” and a “liar”—“Can you imagine, a 50-year-old saying that about a 21-year-old?”—and that on Valentine’s Day this year, the same dean kicked No Red Tape out of his office when the group asked about funding for the rape crisis center. “Emma said, ‘You mean to tell us that as the dean of our school you don’t know how anything is funded?’ ” says Ridolfi-Starr. “We were sharing some of the worst experiences of our lives with him, and he was in a suit, smirking at us. Then he said, “This meeting is over.” She shakes her head. “It was so unacceptable.”

The administration may not have wanted to listen—but Pino and Clark did. At the time, Clark was advising Hobart on a Title IX investigation, and the two of them were coaching a survivor on talking to the Times. It wasn’t a long way to New York. Ridolfi-Starr burned the midnight oil, and soon 28 students signed a federal Title IX complaint against Columbia that runs about 400 pages, they estimate. (Columbia has yet to hear whether it will be investigated, and added to that list of 78 schools.)

Now that the Title IX complaint had been filed, media and high-level politicians were ready to give the students a platform. Could Sulkowicz be on the front page of the Times? Done. And ­Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, stung by disappointment about her military-rape bill, was crafting a strong campus-rape bill, asking for more protection for students and higher penalties for colleges, slated to come to the floor in late 2014 or 2015. For certain violations, she wants fines of up to one percent of the universities’ operating budget, which can run into the billions.

After a press conference at Gillibrand’s office, Ridolfi-Starr talked to her parents. “Right before, I sent them an email like, ‘Heads up, you may see something,’ because they have, um, a Google Alert for my name. How embarrassing.” Her moms were very upset. “You know, they’re smart people, feminists, and yet one of the first things they said was, ‘This happened in Argentina, didn’t it? You’ve always been too adventurous.’ ” A “mom response,” granted, but “so victim-blaming,” she says. “Even if I was assaulted in Argentina, it’s not my fault for going to Argentina. And also, like, ‘No, I was here, doing the same thing I do every weekend—bar, party, apartment; bar, party, dorm.’ ” She laughs a little bitterly. “Mom, you probably walked by him when you moved me in.”

There was still more courage to summon. One day in May, several people crept into the bathrooms of student buildings and wrote the names of the alleged rapists on the wall—not only Paul but prominent guys like a big campus DJ, an athlete training for the Olympics, and a male student who worked at the Blue and White’s news blog. Columbia immediately dispatched janitors to wash the graffiti away. The anonymous offenders did it again, two times, and Columbia finally barricaded the third bathroom.

Other students started to ask questions—what was this? This was not taking the university to task in a responsible way—this was vigilantism. Ridolfi-Starr was upset by the blowback: Students were saying it was possible these guys weren’t even rapists. She couldn’t believe it—she, the daughter of Innocence Project moms, making false accusations? A new flyer appeared from an unknown source, this time explaining which students on the list were found guilty and calling Paul a “serial rapist.” The accused student was forced to resign from the blog.

Though some students thought social ostracism made sense, the survivor-activist group lost a little bit of support over Bathroomgate. You can’t just disappear a student. Some of these guys had been disciplined—who was to say the punishment was too lenient? To Quarta, whose assaulter was only given a semester off, it wasn’t enough. “His family sent him to Europe, and meanwhile I was here working my ass off,” she says.

Over the summer, accused male students around the country began to organize, too. They’re aware of the political brilliance of the anti-rape movement, the way activists have liberated themselves from litigating individual he-said-she-said cases and moved the burden to universities to foster a safe campus environment, to insist they live up to their own ideals as liberal utopias, where nobody ever has to debate semantics.

At Columbia, a suspended varsity rower from Florida is suing the school, and several others are considering suits as well, alleging their own civil rights are being violated: They wouldn’t be coming under fire if they weren’t men. (No accused students agreed to speak with New York, and a message left for Paul was not returned.) Andrew Miltenberg, an attorney for the rower, says there aren’t big settlements in the offing, but the kid’s academic record should be expunged of a sexual offense, so he can go to medical or law school, ­proceed with his life.

On the survivor side, activist lawyer Gloria Allred and others are settling civil cases with ­universities—at the University of Connecticut, awards ranged from $25,000 and $125,000, though one student received $900,000—but no one at Columbia has signed up with an attorney yet, says Ridolfi-Starr. If you take money from the university, you generally sign a confidentiality clause, and that isn’t great for the movement.

Erik Campano, a Columbia student and member of No Red Tape who identifies as a survivor of sexual assault.
On a recent afternoon, I went to see Suzanne Goldberg, Columbia’s new head liaison on sexual assault and a law professor best known as co-counsel on the Supreme Court case reversing Texas’s sodomy law. Her office, which is hung with a LAMBDA poster featuring Lady Liberty, faces Wien Hall, where Paul and Sulkowicz were kissing that night. Columbia’s new policy, says Goldberg, is a good one—“one of the best in the country, with more resources dedicated to supporting survivors and other students affected by gender-based misconduct than most.” She pauses. “It’s hard for most people to navigate sexual relationships and particularly challenging for young adults.” She clicks on a computer to show me a poster hanging in undergraduate dorms, with red, yellow, and green lights. Red means stop: You’re drunk, asleep, or passed out, or one person doesn’t want to have sex. Yellow is pause: mixed signals. Green: A mutual decision has been made about how far to go and “all partners are excited and enthusiastic!” She looks pleased. “A traffic light is useful. It gives people a vocabulary for having what can be an awkward conversation in a congenial way.”

Sitting here, with this distinguished woman in pearls and a black suit, it strikes me how hard it is to talk about sex, rape prevention, any of this, in a way that fixes what’s wrong—this is America, after all, where we’re supposed to think about sex constantly, but never talk about it. Shifting our standard of consent from “No means no” to “Yes means yes”—a change being considered on many campuses and recently passed for colleges in the California state legislature—could happen in ten years, like seat belts and laws around secondhand smoke. Or it may be much harder in practice than ­theory, especially if Pino, Clark, and Dirks are right, that the problem has less to do with communication than with serial ­predators. Memory is fungible, and especially without the guys’ perspective, I can’t say whether the survivors’ accounts are truthful on every point. A woman who doesn’t support other women’s rape accusations is an ugly thing. And I can definitely report that whatever happened to them was deeply traumatizing. When Sulkowicz ran into Paul earlier this fall, she says, “I turned around and went the other way. Then I started to cry.”

Columbia’s new policy still leaves appeals in the hands of undergraduate deans, which No Red Tape finds disagreeable. “My view is the deans are ultimately responsible for the protection and caring of our students, and they should be making the decisions,” says Bollinger. “But I’m open to talking about that, just like any other question.” In mid-September, at a rally on the steps of Low Memorial Library, where President Bollinger’s office is located, as they covered Alma Mater’s mouth with red tape and dragged dozens of mattresses onto the steps, this issue was front and center, with students holding signs reading FUCK THE DEANS—plus FUCK RAPE CULTURE, FUCK YOUR COMMITTEE, and FUCK YOUR FAKE CONCERN.

For nearly three hours, survivors—females and males, straight and LGBTQ—talked about their experiences, as observers and a scrum of media bore witness. It started with a Barnard student spitting a poem about howling at the moon, and then calling Columbia out as a place where “future leaders may rape and come back.” There was the student assaulted the first day of her freshman year 22 years ago, and a freshman with a red X over her bellybutton who said she had been assaulted six days ago. There was a beautiful blonde from Barnard who screamed, “Fuck the administration!” and a heavyset student with magenta hair who described campus response to stories of sexual assault as, “When a pretty girl is raped, it’s a tragedy, and when a fat woman is raped, she should be grateful.” She pleaded with the crowd not to forget about her.

There were students from Union Theological Seminary, who led the crowd in a civil-rights-era song and talked about Sulkowicz, praising the “courage of a young lady on this campus who cracked shame not only for herself but cracked shame in all of us.” There was the male former Amherst student-body president, in his salmon polo shirt, khaki shorts, and duck shoes, who talked about his best friend who was expelled for rape last year. When the speaker didn’t defend him, he was ostracized and had to move out of his dorm. “I literally lost all of my friends,” he says. “For something about which we’re right and they’re wrong. Rape culture is what’s wrong.”

It went on and on, and the sun was hot. Ridolfi-Starr tried to cut things short but then dialed her suggestion back when she realized that the crowd was still swelling. Some were thoughtful: Erik Campano, in gold horn-rims, called for a “compassionate campus,” where “my guy friends, who are otherwise men of conscience and intelligence, will not come up to me at a party and ask me who at the party might respond to their advances?” And some were out there: “I had a dream last night,” said a Barnard student in black leggings, “that President Bollinger and the deans were in a conference room with naked women on their laps, watching our protest on a screen and ­laughing at us.”

It was like an old-time teach-in, with the survivors teaching the people who hadn’t been touched in a nasty, formerly unmentionable way by anyone in their lives what it felt like, but at some point everyone realized something had happened to them that they didn’t like, in bed, on a mattress, at least once or twice, and their empathy lifted the survivors’ resolve even more. Soon, there wasn’t a dry eye. The speeches got angrier, and then they got softer, and the crowd pulled in close, as a third-year student at the engineering school began to speak. “I’m not going to give you the list of assaults, and I’m not going to give you the list of rapes, and I’m not going to give you the names. It’s a lot of years.” She scanned the group, looking as many people as she could in the eye. “I know what it feels like to be the person in these crowds who doesn’t know how to hold this bullhorn yet, and I want to say something for those who are not going to come up here. We believe you. I believe you. So stay.” She gripped the bullhorn, demanding their commitment. “Just stay.”

“This article was first published in the NY Magazine.”
*t

*

IMG_2114.JPG

IMG_2113.JPG

FIREWORKS, RANGEGEAR & FAMILY

Independence Day! One of my favorite holidays. Last year we drove out to the lake on the golf cart, where thousands of people gather every year with, blanket, food and kids in hand. Last year though, Maiya was getting ready to turn 3. So I dug in the range bag and took along a few pairs of ear muffs. Well, everyone of course thought it was hilarious, until Maiya was really enjoying the action, and their kids, well… Not so much. I went to research the noise level a few days ago to write something about it. When I did, I ran across one of my favorite writers, Tactical Dad. He pretty much summed it up. So I thought I share his story with you, as well.

Originally posted by Guns And Tactics
JULY 1, 2014 Posted by DOUG MARCOUX in BLOG, TACTICAL PARENT

WITH INDEPENDENCE DAY APPROACHING IT’S TIME TO STOCK UP ON BURGERS, HOT DOGS AND FIREWORKS. IN THIS ARTICLE, DOUG SHARES HIS RECOMMENDATION TO KEEP KIDS SAFE WHILE DETONATING YOUR CELEBRATORY MUNITIONS.

Independence Day is one of my favorite holidays. I love the sense of patriotism and community it brings as friends, family and neighbors come together to observe the day. Like any red-blooded American, I also love to celebrate by blowing things up once the sun sets.

A few years ago, as we were beginning our annual fireworks display, my young son started fussing and made it clear that he was not interested in sticking around for the show. I realized that it was the noise from the explosions that was making him uncomfortable. I went inside to grab my range bag and pulled out a set of range muffs to put over his ears. Almost immediately he stopped being upset and everyone was able to enjoy the fireworks.

The next day I did some research and learned that the explosions from the fireworks are just as loud or even louder than the rounds we fire at the range, often exceeding 150 decibels (db) and even reaching up as far as around 200 db. The limit for sound exposure where immediate nerve damage can occur is only 140 db for adults and 120 db for children, so there is a pretty good case for everyone to consider wearing ear protection during your 4th of July fireworks display… including you! There are several youth-sized ear muffs available. My kids like the pink and blue Peltor Junior muffs made by 3M.

This year, thinking about it from the perspective of range safety, I considered the need for eye protection as well. Simply put, a firearm is far less likely to send something flying into your eye than fireworks – which explode in all directions and have questionable quality-control at best. Thus, since we wear eye protection at the range, it only makes sense to do the same while setting off fireworks as well. As I wrote in another Tactical Parent article, Tiny Ears & Eyes, I have found the SoundVision eye protection to work particularly well for children in terms of both coverage and comfort.

So this year dig out your extra range gear and make sure everyone has appropriate eye and ear protection. Even if your kids aren’t yet old enough to join you at the gun range they will still benefit from having their own gear and, I have to admit, it’s cute to see them wearing it. Adding these key pieces of safety equipment not only allows you to model good habits for your kids but it also dramatically reduces the likelihood of an injury. It will also, hopefully, ensure that even the littlest ones enjoy the show along with everyone else.

Doug Marcoux

Doug has a diverse background, both professionally and privately, in firearms, self-defense, and tactics… but most importantly, he’s a parent. He writes from the unique perspective of someone whose life involves combining concealment clothing, tactics training, and “everyday carry gear,” with car seats, exploding diapers, and questions like “why did you paint the dog with yogurt?” In our Tactical Parent series, Doug shares his perspective on gear, tricks and tips, defensive tactics, and best practices for parents who take an active role in protecting their family.

20140702-100922-36562032.jpg

20140702-101003-36603893.jpg

/strong>The Man Behind The Webs Most Controversial Video Site.

Have you ever wondered who writes all the crazy stuff on the most controversial website out there? I don’t care for it, not my cup a tea. But a lot of others, meaning millions view it everyday, and that’s how he became so famous and wealthy doing it, and I have say, anytime a company or someone becomes an overnight success, its spikes my interest. Jason Parham with Gawker had the opportunity to sit across from him and chat. Let’s hear his side of the story.

We’re 35 floors high above midtown Manhattan and Lee O’Denat occupies the seat across from me. His is a physically-commanding presence—a bull of a man—and I begin to think everything I have read about him up until this point is true. The designer shades. The diamond-encrusted chain. The deceptively knowing smile that spreads across his round face from time to time. He knows something that you don’t.

And here he is, the Hollis, Queens-raised kid turned internet entrepreneur who built a media empire off shock and awe, the man who understands that maybe, deep down, all people really want is to be entertained, and whether that pleasure comes by watching two kids fight or some girl shake her ass—well, that’s your choice, not his. Because it is your choice. Right?

His speech is deliberate and gentle, and not at all what you might expect from a man his size. “I believed in it so much,” he says. “And we’ve grown so organically based on the trueness of the site.” O’Denat is talking about WorldStarHipHop, the video site he created in 2005 as a means to provide for his family. He’ll later tell me of the time he pawned his son’s video games so he could buy food at Wal-mart, struggled to pay rent, but kept at it because he knew he was on to something (he admits WSHH did not turn a profit until 2009). But all of that was almost 10 years ago, and he goes by Q now.

As it stands today, WorldStar has become a household name among a generation of kids raised on Facebook and Lil’ Wayne lyrics. The site, though, is not without controversy. Aside from featuring music videos, both regional and mainstream, it regularly posts videos depicting unimaginable violence (the killing of 16-year-old Chicago student Derrion Albert in 2009, for example) and bare-ass nudity. The easy argument: It’s all just click bait, and isn’t every website doing that these days? But to Q, it’s more than that. WorldStar’s mission, so he believes, is to provide coverage of communities that larger news organizations like CNN or MSNBC might ignore. It can be ugly at times, but so is reality.

Really, it’s all part of Q’s larger plan to provide the masses with the “realness” that made hip-hop such an unstoppable force. “Hip-hop is profanity, it’s violence, it’s all of the above. Watching NWA, 2Live Crew, and Eminem being themselves, being real, and getting criticized—and Tupac with Delores Tucker—this is who we are,” he says of WorldStar. A slight grin gives way before he continues. “If you don’t like it, go fuck yourself.”

Before WorldStar you were in the mixtape game, right?

In 1999 I reached out to a longtime friend of mine, DJ Whoo Kid, who I’ve known for over 25 years. He had a little buzz circling in the streets with his mixtapes. At the same time he met 50 Cent, and I told them, ‘Hey, I can help you guys. I’m learning the internet, I need to make some money, so let me help you get these mixtapes out.’ Back then, no one wanted to buy. It was hard, because I was living in Baltimore for a few years at the time, and a lot of stores didn’t really know who Whoo Kid was. Long story short, I just kept hustling; I got a couple on consignment based on what they sold. Then I noticed, in the internet space, there weren’t many mixtapes being sold online. So I spent eight months reading and studying and learned how to build a mixtape website. It officially launched on September 11, 2001. I got the email at around eight o’clock in the morning that the site was officially open, and then a couple hours later the planes hit. At the time, there were maybe two or three other sites doing it. It was slow in the beginning, because I made it 100 percent Whoo Kid mixtapes. It was NYCFatMixtapes.com; that was my first website. It just took off, and kept growing and growing.

Did you have a background in tech? Or did the hustler in you feel like it was just something you needed to pick up?

It’s the mentality. I grew up fast. My brother left for the Marines when I was 13 and I had to learn on my own. No father in the house. My mom worked a lot so we really didn’t spend much time together. I didn’t know anything about “family day” or “family time.” It was a Haitian home—you learn early that you’re on your own, and that this is life. I learned that I had to work hard for myself, because no one gave me shit. Family, aunts and uncles, nobody gave me anything. I just thought that that’s what life is about. I had to go out, work, hustle, find ways to make my money. I used to shovel snow all over Queens, in the hood. I found my own ways to make money and understood that I was in control of my own life. And that’s what people need to realize, no one owes you anything.

So what eventually led you into video aggregation?

I was booking a lot of after parties for Whoo Kid and G-Unit, and I found myself on the road a lot. So the site blew up based on that, and me hustling on the web side to put a nice site together for the artist, because the label wasn’t. Being on the road all the time, I wasn’t home to ship the CDs and people kept complaining. I was doing everything by myself, and it was hard. I was like, I gotta find a way to make people download this shit, so I don’t have to be home to ship it. Then 2005 came around, and I figured why not just create a site where people can download. So WorldStarHipHop was a download mixtape site in the beginning. But it also had other things: you could watch crazy stuff, read crazy stuff; it had sex tapes. I knew I wanted to be different. Most of these sites were boring, not really showing that realness of hip-hop. You know, hip-hop is profanity, it’s girls, it’s fights. That’s why the culture is loved worldwide—it’s real. And I wanted a site to be real like that.

Do you remember the very first video posted to WorldStar?

It was a lot of that DVD stuff. People didn’t have ways to go into the hood and buy these DVDs. So we would buy it, chop up the best part of the interview with an artist, usually two to three minutes, and people started loving it. Here we are showing these real interviews, not the ones on BET or MTV, not the PG-13 interview; we’re showing them being real, back of the tour bus, with chicks, fights, cursing—it was all crazyiness. We decided to move forward in that direction. I relaunched to make it an official video website in 2008, because in 2007 we got hacked and the site was down for seven months. When we relaunched in January 08 we never looked back.

When did you realize WorldStar had truly made a name for itself?

I guess when news started wrenching us. I remember Bill O’Reilly shouted us out twice. He said the government should pay us a visit. And I’m like, ‘Whoa I’m just the video guy, why aren’t you going after YouTube’s CEO. That’s where I got it from?’ People kept talking about us, telling me we were on Fox News. The media outside of the internet space, when people talk about us, freaks me out. Now it’s part of the norm. I remember the first official music video premiere we had exclusive to the site—Ace Hood’s “Cash Flow” featuring Rick Ross—that DJ Khaled gave us. That was five, six years ago. We had buzz, but we weren’t the top yet. I think AllHipHop.com did better numbers than us. SOHH.com, too. Khaled saw we were growing fast, and we got that first exclusive video, and that kinda made people realize we just didn’t have crazy videos, but we premiered music videos too. Then more people started premiering videos with us, and that started the price charts, the banner sales. I was one of the first guys to come up with the price plan. Labels usually do net 60, net 90, and I was the first to be like, ‘I want my money now, or you get no banner space.’ So I changed the game. I made labels pay the check first, then I’d put the banner up. And I was doing everything myself, handling all the business and advertisers. Being organic, and the way we do business—we’re pretty much flat rate—it made people feel like, ‘Whoa this site is growing and keeping it 100.’

WorldStar has become known as a shock site, and is famous for the fight videos it posts. Was that your intention going in—to sell spectacle?

I wanted the site to have a hip-hop influence. I wanted it to be like the games that I liked growing up, and like Grand Theft Auto—video games where it just shows everything, where it shows what’s going on in the streets, where I’m from. These kinds of videos were popping on YouTube, and they were entertaining. It was something we couldn’t deny. People love to see that stuff. I didn’t think the site would move so much in that one direction, but WorldStar shows the good, the bad, and the ugly. And if it’s going to show something that’s ugly, we’re just providing the medium. We’re just providing the news.

What do you mean by the good, the bad, and the ugly?

We show things that are inspirational, but that are bad, too. But that’s just the way news is. CNN and Fox News do the same thing. This is part of our history, our culture. Culture as a whole. People. Not just black people, but whites, and everybody—every culture has its bad side. People want to watch an ugly side of someone then blame us for showing it, but what about the people actually doing it? Why click on it? It’s like why watch porno on HBO at midnight? You have the choice to watch what you want. The remote control is in your hand. People will click it, watch it, then hate on me for watching the video. Then why did you watch the video? It’s a choice we all have. You can’t point fingers. It’s your guilty pleasure. Point at yourself.

You once referred to WorldStar as the “CNN of the Ghetto.” Do you see the site giving voice to unheard communities?

Yeah, definitely. We do a lot of community work for people that gets unnoticed. I’m not looking for a lot of exposure on that. If it comes, great. But I know, deep down, we give back to charities.

No, I’m talking about the site specifically, the videos that you put up. Do you see them giving voice to communities and people that go unheard?

Yeah, they get heard. These communities—for example, when the WIC in LA was shut down, we were the first to go talk to those people who were in line waiting. CNN didn’t do that. FOX News; they’re not out there. It’s not gonna be a big headline. So we like to give voice to the communities that are hurting, and let people know even though some of these videos may look ugly to people, it’s still our voice, and they need help. But fighting is a part of life. You gotta get over it. People complain to me about the fighting, but people have been fighting before camera phones, before I was born, and this is the way life is. As long as they are not shooting each other, I have no problem with people wanting to squab it out. That’s how this country was built, on fighting. We fight all the time, every election day there’s fights. People need to stop thinking that everyone is going to walk around and sing Kumbaya.

But don’t your good intentions get lost in all the fight videos, sex clips, and twerking montages? Is the message lost in all that noise?

Yeah, I mean—the site’s mission is to just capture what we find real in the world, you know? As a leader of the internet entertainment world we understand that we’re going to be critiqued for everything that we post. You still see shock TV on cable. Ridiculousness, the MTV show, mocks people all the time with their videos, Tosh.0—but no one ever talks about them.

So why do you get all the criticism?

Because I’m black, and from the hood. [Laughs] Tosh does it and he’s great, Rob Dyrdek and all the white people on Ridiculousness hurting their balls, falling down, cracking their heads open—it’s funny. But someone fighting in the back of a Waffle House? Oh, Q’s the devil! I accept that. That’s just being a black man in America. If you make it doing something someone else can easily do, they’re going to blame you. Black people look at me because I’m black and think I’m doing harm to black communities. But I look at this as a positive. It’s all about how you look at things in life. I bring awareness to those that don’t want to be on WorldStar in that way. Somebody might say, ‘I don’t want to get drunk and then start a fight.’ They can, but they’re going to end up on the site looking foolish. People are now thinking two or three times before they want to fight someone, or act ratchet and crazy. People have camera phones, so whatever you do—if you’re acting silly, stupid, belligerent—they’re gonna record it and send it to us. People have to realize and look at it as a positive.

But if somebody non-black comes to the site they are being sold a very specific brand of blackness. Do you see WorldStar as fueling negative stereotypes within the black community?

Stereotypes? I don’t think so. If a white person comes to the site and sees black people fighting or twerking, he likes the culture. We just like to have fun, man. Black people are admired by different cultures because we’re free. We like to be free. Some people live trapped. They don’t want to get wild because they feel like they’re being judged for this. With black people, we’re just ourselves. If we fight, we fight. And we’ve always been shaking our asses. Since the slave ship we’ve been shaking our asses. [Laughs] We love to do these things. And now, people are attached to it. We’re a very influential race all over the world because we keep it 100. We have negative stereotypes, sure—we like chicken, we like to drink, we go the the strip club—but every race has negative stereotypes. We just have to love ourselves, admire ourselves. Know that only God can judge you. Don’t worry about the critics.

Hip Hop Weekly just had the exclusive with Q, CEO Of as well about why he thinks he receives so much hate?

On the recent hate he’s receiving:

“A lotta folks hate on me because of the way the site blew up, and since you’re number one, that’s what happens. Like Obama, he’s got hatin’. That’s the way it is. I’ve accepted it.”

On helping launching careers like Kat Stacks:

“People that have the talent and skill, it speaks for itself now because the video don’t lie, as far as the image, and people like to see video more and more. For the new artists comin’ up, like the Kat Stacks, the 50 Tysons, you can get instant fans real quick because people are drawn to anything that’s interesting to them.”

On the image of World Star:

“I try to portray the good, the bad and the ugly – that’s what I try to portray. It’s not just good, good, good. Hip Hop is a culture – a lifestyle. It’s not just a Black thing or an inner-city thing. It’s for anyone that can feel it in’em. It’s Hip Hop. It’s just swag.”

[Image by Sam Woolley]

20140621-010218-3738171.jpg

Feet on the ground in Bagdad

Authors name is kept anonymous. This came from a very reliable source.

Gents, thought you might want to hear from the front. Just returned from Baghdad day before yesterday checking on my folks. This is as current and objective as I have seen to date.

The current situation in Baghdad is best described as tense. Mass media coverage over the last few days of unfolding events has seen a run on supplies/fuel/at banks by civilians who are preparing in the event the worst does happen. It is not yet to the point of a panic but locals are nervous. The airport is extremely busy and flights elsewhere (especially to the Kurdish Region) are far overbooked. The overall situation in the country can only be described as very serious and with yesterday’s ‘call to arms’ by Ayatollah Sistani, the prospect of a sectarian civil war is the highest it has ever been – and has the potential to even be worse than the 2006/2007 era.

But – before going any further – it is worth putting the overall situation into context, and describing the ISIS ‘advance to Baghdad’ thus far. The portrayal in the media since this situation broke five days ago has been one of a relentless advance by ISIS. According to CNN etc, ISIS began by capturing Mosul, then advanced in a Blitzkrieg movement south, routing the Iraqi Army and capturing vast swathes of terrain as they went. This continuous sensationalization by the mainstream western media is the number one driving factor for the tension in Baghdad rather than a true appreciation of fact.

While the reporting of the folding of the Iraqi Army in Mosul and areas north of Baghdad is accurate (and is the reason why this situation has developed as it has), the rest of it is far less simple than is widely portrayed in the western media, and the true facts need putting into context. Most of this has already been covered in the GW Daily Reports from Jun 10-14 inclusive, and summarized in the GW weekly released last night. It is recommended these documents are reviewed for a balanced understanding of what has transpired so far. But to put some key points down on paper:

The last week in May/first week in June saw a substantial increase in insurgent activity across the country. Bombings and spectacular attacks ranged across the country, from VBIEDs near Karbala and Najaf, an assassination of a senior Sahwa commander in Anbar, an assault on Sammara and finally the attack on Mosul which caused the rout of the Iraqi Army and everything that then subsequently unfolded over the course of the last five days. The key takeaways, however are:

The ‘advance’ from Mosul to the outskirts of Baghdad has been blown out of proportion. What in actuality happened was ISIS were masterful in capitalizing on their success in Mosul and then gaining and achieving momentum. But rather than a straightforward advance to Baghdad, it is more realistic to consider that news of the Mosul success and fleeing Iraqi Army traveled fast throughout the Sunni dominated areas north of Baghdad. ISIS units already in situ in their traditional locations rallied behind their flag and mobilized in their local areas all at once. Similar news spread amongst the Iraqi Army, whose commanders were the first to flee, which caused the mass pullout/desertion/withdrawal. ISIS then moved into the Iraqi Army positions, taking the majority of them without a fight or meeting only mediocre resistance. What is extremely import to note is: ISIS have yet to move outside of areas where they have always been traditionally strong. In addition, ISIS have met no resistance from the predominantly Sunni population in these areas – who have been downtrodden and marginalized to the point where they are at least passively supporting ISIS, maintaining a laissez faire outlook. Some of this support though is no doubt through fear – ISIS will have presented them with a ‘You are either with us or against us’ ultimatum. In the total absence of official law and order, most Sunni locals will have little choice but to along with it – for now. It should also at this point be noted that ‘ISIS’ is not just ISIS. Other militant organizations and local Sunni tribes who are ‘going along with it for now’ are involved. These ultimately are not interested in the level of radicalism that true ISIS demands – so this is a fragile alliance at best, which will no doubt come to the fore once true resistance appears, or when ISIS start summarily executing peop0le for crimes and issuing strict laws on how to live etc (and we are already seeing evidence of this in Mosul and Tikrit).

Back to the ‘Advance on Baghdad’. Understanding the above – it should now be clear that ISIS have not yet set one foot outside areas where they have traditionally been strong. Which is why the ‘advance’ has stalled in the area of Samarra/Balad. In Diyala with its more mixed populace, they have not even ‘advanced’ that far south in parallel – Shia militia groups such as AAH are openly fighting them and the Iraqi Army is maintaining a presence there also. Not to mention in Northern Diyala, the ‘limits of control’ are tested between ISIS/Peshmerga – testing the Peshmerga are currently winning as they consolidate positions and expand their region (they will likely be the ultimate winners in all of this). The minute they step off their traditional turf into areas where they have no popular support (i.e. Shia parts of the country – northern Baghdad for instance….) we will see how well they do trying to fight conventionally….

The massive Shia mobilization that is currently occurring in Baghdad and the south means that the ‘advance’ in a conventional sense, is likely to remain stalled where it is if not beaten back some in the coming days.

So what’s the realistic prognosis of the situation for Taji and Baghdad?

Taji has become the main reception point for falling back troops and the point from where counter offensives will be planned and organized. On current available information, the massing troops there and the size of the facility means that ISIS as yet will have very little chance of attacking it in a conventional sense, so will get back to what they do best – car bombs, suicide attacks etc, along with IDF. The fact that the group has consolidated ground now with a ‘frontline’ behind which they have almost unrestrained freedom of movement means that supply lines will be extended so possibly we will see the frequency of these kind of attacks increasing. Not to mention the masses of military equipment (and cash) they have captured (although it appears much of it has gone to Syria – which is indicative that the campaign there may be of greater or least equal importance to the movement). Same goes for Balad airbase to the north of Taji – as yet the facility has not been directly attacked despite ISIS proximity, and both will be extremely well defended but no denying the facilities will be ISIS priority targets.

It also goes for Baghdad itself. In addition to the northern ‘axis’, we need to consider what is happening Anbar to the west (and the linked Jurf al-Sakhr district of Babil province to the southwest of Baghdad). There has been a noticeable drawing back of Iraqi Army units from Fallujah (presumably so properly battle hardened veterans can redeploy elsewhere). The has led to more freedom of movement for ISIS/anti govt elements – again with the implication of being able to stage closer to Baghdad. But again even from this axis – at this juncture we are talking increased unconventional guerilla attacks in the capital rather than the media ‘Lets all drive right into town’ sketch. I do see increased suicide attacks, car bombings – possibly even IDF on the BIAP and IZ (and maybe even increased conventional clashes in Abu Ghraib and therefore encroaching on the outer BIAP perimeter), but based on current info, not a conventional type assault as the press is talking. Baghdad is absolutely teeming with Iraqi Army troops and now, Shia milita of all kinds, including the now gloves-off Jaish al Mahdi (JAM) and Asaib Ahl al Haq (AAH), and I don’t doubt (as with some other parts of the country) Iranian Quds force too. Iranian involvement is set to increase as this progresses.

So to conclude – for ISIS to just go strolling into Baghdad as they have in a similar fashion in the areas where they’ve always been strong is currently completely unrealistic (again, media to blame for it). However what is likely is an increase in car bombings, suicide bombings, IDF threat to BIAP and IZ. Short notice lockdowns throughout the city are also possible, as is the potential for short notice vehicle movement restrictions and curfews (already one in place from 10pm till 6am). The other major burning issue right now – is the mass Shia mobilization and the fighting that is to follow north of the capital: Once this begins, we are going to hear many reports of atrocities committed against both Sunni and Shia communities as such a mass, fast mobilization means that training will be poor as will discipline. And we already know what the other side is capable of. This has the very real potential to spark bitterness and a renewed civil war period. In Baghdad, this may well translate as mass sectarian killings on either side on the streets in capital in conjunction with attacks on Mosques etc (as happened in 2006/2007) depending as to what transpires over the coming days .

I hope that helps clarify the current situation.

20140615-112852-41332751.jpg

Prespectives

Modular BladeHave you ever done something in your life for a very long time, but still have that nagging feeling that’s there’s more or you’re missing something. Then one day you do or hear something that just clicks in the brain, and suddenly, it all comes together in harmony. Then, you look back and say, how simple? How could I have not seen it from that perspective?

Last week was the world’s largest blade show, an annual event, in which Bram Frank and I do together every year. He always stays at our home, we talk and we train! We talk and we train some more. This year was different. It was as if, a different energy had entered the room. It wasn’t on the training floor that it finally happened; it was during a talk late, the night before he left. We were talking about entry points, and how Sinawali and Redondo came together. What really brought it all together was a discussion on perspective and space. Maybe he explained it differently, maybe I finally heard it, or maybe it took that much time to perceive it. I don’t know. What I do know, is suddenly, everything clicked. It was an epic achievement for me. I just really wanted to say, thank you to Bram. He has been actively studying martial arts, for over 49 years. His talent and passion for the art and his knowledge and persistence in development of his modular system and knives has saved many lives. It is used through-out the world, in law enforcement, federal agencies and military, as well as, civilians. It would take more than a small book, to list all of his accomplishments and credits.

One would think that, after so long of studying and training in the same subject/art, you would know it all. All I know is that, I don’t know. I do know for certain that continuous training and teaching is a must. It has been Bram, always telling me to teach is to learn. The knowledge is always there for the taking. I asked him, “Bram, how do you know what to teach?” You have no curriculum, etc.? He smiled, and softly said, “Teach what you feel like teaching. Teach what you know.”

Self defense, whether for yourself or your family, needs to be a priority in your life, as much as, golf, working out or any other hobby in our lives. After all, isn’t taken care of our family, our children and ourselves our top priority?

It seems as though every time, I post something about self defense and edged tool training, I will always get the occasional email or post about, why do I train so much? Or, why would I train in weapons? Best one, is why do I train at all, because I live in a fairy tale world? 🙂 That’s pretty easy for me to answer. It has happened to me, I’ve been there, done that. What I can tell you is and I’ve said it before, is that, if you train intensively, like your life depends on it, whether shooting, edged tools, self defense, etc., “If you learn intensively, how to be the bad guy, you will understand, how to defeat and defend yourself against the bad guy.”

The best part of Bram Frank’s modular training system is, it is one of the best self defense training classes you can possible receive. Its common sense self defense with a tool. It trains you to survive a close attack by using edged or blunt tools. If you think of the body as a pulley system, like a machine with cables, it will help here. CSSD teaches you to use biomechanical cutting to shut down that pulley system, not maim it: Thus keeping you out of jail. Bram has told me many times, “people say, I’d rather be tried by 12 than carried by 6, but I don’t won’t to be tried in court. I want to come home…to my family.” When you cut and maim a person, a jury is likely not going to see it, as self defense even though it could be. That’s where perspective comes in. How do I train bad guy, good guy drills. Whenever a strike comes at you at any part of your body that is considered a kill zone, that’s a bad guy strike, you counter that with a good guy strike, at the limbs; shutting down the limb that holds the tool. It’s disarming in a literal sense. Once that is done, there are options. There is so much to learn about the human body and how it reacts. This is just a minute, but important part of modular training. Understanding perspective is a critical part of modular. Thank you again Bram and all the CSSD instructors worldwide, for believing in Bram, CSSD and the system, for taking time out of your lives to teach others and sharing the knowledge. Thank you.

 

FIREARM TRAINING IN THE NOW

 

 

SHOOTING IN THE NOW

Lets talk about training in more of a meditative state. Is there such a thing, as firearm drills in the now. Well, we try to live our lives in the now, why not train in the now. And don’t get me wrong, realistic training is my favorite. But, there is always room for improvement and change.

 
My drills this month have been very different and I have to say, quite effective. The progress is really showing, in more ways than one.

 
As most of you that shoot, know and will practice the Par Drill and basic speed draw and of course different reload drills. At the range, you have a lot of loud noisy around you and this helps you not to think about what you are doing and eliminating the stress and tension in the body as you practice. Same as with any practice sport, you will crank up the music and it takes away for thinking about the task at hand.

 
What we don’t realize is that just like golf or anything else, repetition is extremely important, but at the same time, practicing incorrectly can cause really bad habits that are hard to break. A good friend of mine and expert firearms instructor, Ken Nelson, as well as, owner of one of the top firearm schools in the nation, Tactical Performance Center
has preached this many times. As a new shooter even up to advanced levels, we know the importance of the fundamentals. If we are just constantly moving through the motions, are we really achieving excellence? Even breaking down the basic draw into 4 to 6 reference points you don’t fully achieve the awareness of the movements.

 
We need to understand how an exercise or drill like this helps us become more aware. Becoming aware we start to uncover the layers of mis information. We uncover these layers by paying attention to subtleties. So, not only breaking this drill into 4 steps, but holding each step for a few minutes will make us aware of what our bodies are actually doing at that moment in time. At that moment, is the now.

 
I want to really emphasized the importance of how we process stress and, how it effects our body. Understanding stress is the universal law of energy: energy flows along the path of least resistance, as we all know, yet tend to forget, all to often. We know that energy moves toward what is easiest. So why not align ourselves in what we do.

 
Most of us tend to motivate toward what is easiest for achieving the end result. It focuses on the comfort that we will experience when we achieve that end result. It’s focused on fast, to get to the end fast; and loud, to create distractions for the mind so we don’t experience as much stress doing it. But when doing this, you don’t find the minute things that can take you from good to perfection.

 
If you ever watch a video of yourself at a match or any stressful situation. You will notice how our body will tense up and contract. I know I’ve looked back, and can see my shoulders rise and elbows lock.

 
What we need to do Is notice the subtlety of our breath. Is it deep, continuous, and regular? Under stress it will become shallow and irregular. Then we notice subtle tension in our muscles. Are we holding any unneeded tension? We notice our posture. Is it contracting, arms getting stiff, shoulders rising or dropping, elbows locking? Our legs, knees, etc., so we make subtle adjustments to hold the pose correctly.

 
The muscles will contract again when we’re stressed or from just the stress of tension holding the pose. The breath will become more shallow, muscles will tense, and our posture will slowly change. These are layers covering up our awareness. All of our attention is needed to notice subtle contractions so we can redirect our attention to proper breathing, relaxing, and body posture. Once we can achieve this, everything else comes natural and the flow returns.

 
A few of the things I have been doing is first, speed drills broken down into 4 points. Take each four steps and hold that pose for 2 minutes, taking breaks of course between each one. Make sure you set up a video camera. I use Coaches Eye. It allows me to store each video, edit and re-play in slow motion to see every body movement. I want to see what happens to my body as I hold each of these poses. What tenses up first, is my body in the correct position, legs, feet, knees, shoulders, grip, arms, etc. feel your body, in the now. Breath, and really feel the now of each muscle. What do you feel?

 
I have been doing this everyday now for about the last 30 days, filming every session and I am amazed at the improvement not only physically, but mentally.

 
I hope you will give this a try over the next month. I would love to hear your feedback and as always stay safe and carry on. I’ve been doing meditation and yoga for over 20 years, but doing it with SIRT, brought it to a whole new level.

image