So, OK, professors attacking the female students. Well, attacking perhaps not so much – attempting to bonk say – but let us for the sake of the argument agree:
It found that sexual violence is “endemic” at universities, with one in 10 staff assaulted at work but only half reporting incidents over the past five years. It also found that 12 per cent of women and 5 per cent of men had directly experienced workplace sexual violence.
Note, the claim is sexual assault. It’s not nasty remarks, it’s willy waving and staining outfits etc up to rape.
while workers who are trans and non-binary were at higher risk of directly experiencing sexual violence (1.3 times as likely).
Now, I can imagine that if we use a modern definition – mispronouning say – then we can reach this result. But if we’re sticking with the usual and colloquial definition of sexual violence – white and powerful men forcing their willies upon people – in what damn world are the trans and non-binary going to get more of this than the tits and pussy crowd?
We’re trying to make the allegation that the trans and non-binary are more attractive to the average power crazed and lust driven white male? Rilly?
The study also discovered that staff with disabilities were twice as likely to experience direct sexual violence years as non-disabled staff, and workers with a sexual orientation other than heterosexual were almost twice as likely to directly experience sexual violence than their heterosexual peers.
No, we’re not using that normal definition of sexual assault, are we?
The one legged lesbian propforwardinadress gets raped more often than that Sophia Loren lookalike in the Italian department? Have these people ever met any humans?