Title IX Complaint

Supporting Arguments
Overview

It is hereby alleged that Blue Bench (A Non-Profit Corporation organized in the state of Colorado), and Cherry
Creek School District staff (Mr. Bradley Weinhold and Ms. Lisa Roberts) engaged in gender harassment and
gender discrimination against men and boys while providing sexual violence education during school hours
and on school property from August 2018 to the present.

These allegations comprise of the following categories:

1. Lack of male representation in Blue Bench and the pilot participants.

2. Providing untrue, biased and unsubstantiated statistics about the prevalence and gendered nature of
rape and sexual assault (gender harassment and discrimination).

3. Providing a questionnaire to children that unnecessarily mentioned gender, that was not counter-
balanced by opposite gender questions (gender discrimination).

4. Providing gendered examples of sexual assault, without providing counter-balanced examples of the
opposite gender (gender discrimination).

5. Supporting political movements that support Misandry (gender harassment).

6. Not providing details of the abusive nature and criminality of false accusations (gender
discrimination).

7. Advocating for gender-specific sexual assault and enablement programs (gender discrimination).

1
Lack of male representation

Blue Bench lack male representation and male perspectives and the pilot participants were 80% female.

This lack of male participation should have been addressed before the program was allowed to continue to
roll-out phase.

It appears that the participants in the pilot were from the school leadership program, and if the leadership
program is gender balanced, this begs the question of why so few boys applied to participate in the pilot.

If the leadership program is not gender balanced, this also begs other questions about the role of boys at the
school.

Among the CORA documents provided by the district, there is reference to what appears to be a female
student who has been specially trained in being some sort of mentor or advocate. There are also references
by Bradley Weinhold to only female staff being invited to a meeting.

2
If in fact there is a student (or a teacher as this is not completely clear) who has been specially trained to deal
with issues of sexual assault, one must ask why this resource is female, and why attempts were not made to
ensure both a male and female candidate, if not resource.

It seems ironic that Brad Weinhold would be so intent on making it clear that he will invite a female staff
member to a meeting, while being completely blind to the fact that the whole presentation lacked any
significant male involvement (apart from the actual female focus of the presentation itself).

3
It is inconceivable that a group of Men’s Rights Activists would be allowed to present a seminar on sexual
violence to a pilot of 4 boys for every one girl, so why would anybody think the opposite would be
acceptable?

Conclusion

Lack of male participation in Blue Bench and the pilot should have been addressed before roll-out and the
failure to do this resulted in a program full of gender discrimination and harassment.

4
Untrue, biased and unsubstantiated statistics

Blue Bench provided the following statistics to the students according to the Vice Principal at Grandview.

Statistics 1, 2 and 4 are gendered, false and unsubstantiated.

Statistic 1.

There is no source given to substantiate the claim that 1-in-4 women and 1-in-17 men experience an
attempted or completed sexual assault in their lifetime.

Lifetime statistics are problematic because they are an aggregate of reporting over time. Where possible it is
better to use point-in-time statistics where available as this avoids waiting 20-40 years for problems to
appear in the lifetime statistics.

Currently, the NIH reports that there is near parity in male and female levels of sexual assault (source
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4062022).

5
“For example, in 2011 the CDC reported results from the National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey
(NISVS), one of the most comprehensive surveys of sexual victimization conducted in the United States to
date. The survey found that men and women had a similar prevalence of nonconsensual sex in the previous 12
months (1.270 million women and 1.267 million men).5 This remarkable finding challenges stereotypical
assumptions about the gender of victims of sexual violence. However unintentionally, the CDC’s publications
and the media coverage that followed instead highlighted female sexual victimization, reinforcing public
perceptions that sexual victimization is primarily a women’s issue”.

Conclusion.

There is no need at all to present this statistic, but if such a statistic is presented, a source must be cited, and
it must be accurate.

There is no evidence to suggest that women are 4+ times more likely to experience sexual assault, and to
present this false statistic to children is both gender discrimination and gender harassment.

Presenting this false statistic not only results in bias against men who are assumed to be perpetrators, but it
also makes men believe they are less likely to be victims of sexual assault; which is not true.

6
Statistic 2.

Rape is defined as the penetration of a mouth, anus or vagina with a penis.

The equivalent female perpetrated crime is Made to Penetrate and is reported at equivalent rates.

A male can perpetrate Rape and Made to Penetrate, but a woman can only perpetrate Made to Penetrate.

Men can be victims of both Rape and Made to Penetrate, but females can only be victims of Rape.

To talk only about Rape, and not Made to Penetrate omits the crime of Made to Penetrate which women
perpetrate, and only men experience.

Further, the 2-8% false claim statistic is based on selective anecdotal evidence and represents allegations that
are provably false; that is, would result in a successful Perjury conviction.

Just because 2-8% of people making allegations can be convicted of Perjury does not mean the remaining 92-
98% of allegations are true.

Excluded anecdotal claims by the Baltimore Police department list provably false allegations as high as 35%.

Without looking at anecdotal evidence, one can either look at actual research or conviction rates.

According to RAINN (who I am not agreeing with), 6 in 1,000 allegations result in convictions.

7
This graphic is biased because it should say “Out of 1,000 Rape Allegations”, but RAINN is a feminist
organization who evidently have no belief in the presumption of innocence.

https://www.rainn.org/statistics/criminal-justice-system

To claim that most Rape allegations are true, is to repudiate our justice system, which one is free to do, but
should not be part of any official government policy.

Alternatively, the US Navy did actual research that showed that 29-60% of rape allegations were provably
false (29% of accusers admitted their allegations were false).

Conclusion

There is no way of knowing what percentage of Rape allegations are true, and to claim that 92-98% of
allegations are true is not only a misrepresentation of the anecdotal statistics, it ignores the fact that as a
society all accused are presumed to be innocent until proven guilty.

The provision of this statistic is academically dishonest, overlooks the female crime of Made to Penetrate,
and is therefore both gender harassment and gender discrimination.

Allowing children to believe this falsehood will compromise our legal system, result in falsely accused boys
not being given the presumption of innocence, and most importantly could be used by sexual perpetrators to
coerce a boy into unwanted sexual activity.

8
Statistic 4.

When one says, “Most men don’t Rape, but the few that do, commit multiple rapes as well as other assault”,
it overlooks the fact that women equally commit sexual assault, and that Rape relates to penetration, and
that Made to Penetrate is also equally reported.

Conclusion

When women make men penetrate them, are they serial offenders too? If girls need to know the pattern of
behavior of male perpetrators, boys also need to know the pattern of behavior of female perpetrators.

To only discuss the patterns of male-perpetrated crime is gender harassment and gender discrimination.

9
Providing a gendered questionnaire to the students

The questionnaire provided to students by Blue Bench (which I note parents were not told about, and did not
consent to) included gendered questions which only discussed female victims.

Not only was this unnecessary, but to the extent that it could be argued that it is necessary, it is critical that
questions are also given that include male victims.

Why does someone only need to speak up when a joke is told about a female or gay/lesbian body?

Blue Bench have omitted being Made to Penetrate in their definitions of sexual abuse and focused only on
penetration itself. This is concerning given the equal prevalence of Made to Penetrate.

10
Conclusion

Both men and women are raped (if prison rape is included way more men are raped than women in the
United States), and men are also subjected to the crime of Made to Penetrate.

Only including a question about rape, with a female victim, and not adding the counter-balance of a male
victim constitutes gender discrimination.

Body shaming is not only an issue for women and homosexuals; it beggar’s belief that anybody would think
that a gay male would be more a victim of body shaming than a heterosexual male.

Omitting examples of heterosexual male body shaming constitutes gender and sexuality discrimination.

11
Providing unbalanced Gendered Examples

Blue Bench provided the following two examples of assault considerations:

12
You will note that in scenario 1, a female teacher is being protected from being put in a position of being
falsely accused of sexual assault.

In scenario 2, a female student is alleged to have been groped (I say alleged, even though the scenario just
assumes the boy is guilty).

I am told that a third scenario was also given to the students, in which a boy and girl are both drinking, and
the girl is Raped because she does not consent.

No mention was made of the boy consenting, or him being less intoxicated than the girl.

This resulted in a male teacher categorizing the example as “nonsense” and I am told “bullshit”.

It remains unclear if the teacher was calling Colorado Law nonsense, the Blue Bench description of Colorado
Law nonsense, or what my son heard, which is that the claim that only women need to consent when drunk
is nonsense.

Either way, it seems like a pretty epic fail on the part of the school, especially given the school Principal
appeared to not understand the Law when my wife and I met with her.

13
Conclusion

To the extent that gendered examples are required to be part of the presentation at all, it is critical that if
gendered examples are given these examples are gender balanced from both a perpetrator and victim
perspective.

The gender bias of Blue Bench is clear in the examples they provide. Both relate to the protection of women.

In scenario 1, no consideration was given to the fact that the boy might be molested by the female teacher or
that he needed a ride home. Consideration was only given to the risk the female teacher faced of being
falsely accused.

Scenario 2 presumes the accused male perpetrator is guilty, and that the female accuser is telling the truth.

The failure to provide balanced gender scenarios is both gender harassment and discrimination and is
particularly alarming given the prevalence of female teachers being convicted of sexually assaulting male
students, especially the sporty ones.

14
Supporting political movements involved in Misandry

Blue Bench is clearly an organization run by feminists.

There is next to no gender diversity in their organization and they support the #MeToo movement which
seeks to bypass natural justice for men accused of sexual assault.

Further, the organization supports advocacy against the Title IX reforms progressed by the Trump
administration that are aimed at restoring natural justice (and Constitutional compliance) to the education
sector.

At the conclusion of one of the Blue Bench presentations, one of the presenter’s cars had a Trump magnet
attached to it (source CORA data). This may very well be an indication of the level of anger male students
face when being forced to endure misandry and presentations based upon misandry.

Conclusion

Inviting feminist organizations into the school who advocate against men’s equality and attempts by the
government to make processes fair for men, discriminate and harass men and who push the feminist
conspiracy theories of “Rape Culture” and “Patriarchy Theory” is inherently just a recursive form of gender
discrimination and harassment.

Further, #MeToo as a movement, and as a process of shaming men is a form of real and cyberbullying which
is in direct contravention of the school districts anti-bullying programs.

15
Not providing detail on the abusive nature of false
accusations

False accusations are a form of extreme bullying behavior, and closely associated with the feminine
manifestation of aggressive behavior “gossip, innuendo and reputation-destruction” that is extensively
documented in peer-reviewed science.

Further, female in-group bias (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15491274) results in girls often

ganging up on boys when they are falsely accused.

False accusations of Rape and Sexual Assault are life-changing for those who are subjected to this form of
abuse, with many developing depression and taking their lives.

False accusations are a form of sexual abuse, and usually result in the same lifetime damage as sexual assault
itself.

Conclusion

When considered in the context of the false statistics of 92-98% of allegations being true, the fact that the
statistic only related to Rape (and not Made to Penetrate) and the fact that only male patterns of
perpetration were discussed in statistic 4, the absence of discussion about the abuse of false allegations
constitutes both gender harassment and gender discrimination against boys.

Further, given the long American history of lynching black men falsely accused of rape by white women, and
the presence of To Kill a Mockingbird on the school reading list, the absence of education on the
consequences of false allegations arguably constitutes racial discrimination too (a further violation of Title
IX).

16
Advocating for gender-specific programs

According to the CORA response, Blue Bench is currently advocating for gender-specific programs to be
implemented in Cherry Creek District schools (“Safety and Empowerment Skills for Women and Girls”).

Conclusion

Discussion of gender-specific programs aimed at empowering women and girls, in the absence of any
evidence that girls are less empowered or less skilled constitutes gender discrimination.

Given the lack of male participation in the pilot, which appears to have been attended by leadership
students, there would appear to be evidence that boys are more in need of “empowerment training”,
especially given the gynocentric focus of the Blue Bench presentation which it appears nobody was able to
see, even after my initial complaints.

17
While it is noted that there is no record that the school has adopted this program, according to the email
from Blue Bench, it appears the district has already shown an interest in implementing this program.

Any move towards this would be a violation of Title IX Law.

18