The DavidScully Post


Putting It All Together

David Scully Is Sorry For Two Lighthearted References To Rape

In His Historic 1982 Newsletter 36 years Ago!

Peter Thiel made two statements in the book "The Diversity Myth": 1) "The purpose of the rape crisis movement seems as much about vilifying men as about raising 'awareness'" and 2) "But since a multicultural rape charge may indicate nothing more than belated regret, a woman might 'realize' that she had been 'raped' the next day or even many days later." In 2016 he stated: "More than two decades ago, I co-wrote a book with several insensitive, crudely argued statements. As I've said before, I wish I'd never written those things. I'm sorry for it. Rape in all forms is a crime. I regret writing passages that have been taken to suggest otherwise. ******* I, David Scully, humbly state that more than three decades ago, I wrote a series of Newsletters with two lighthearted references to rape which, if misunderstood, or if intentionally misinterpreted or misprepresented, could lead some to believe that I approved of, or took lightly, rape. The background is that, as I have stated in the first pages here, I suffered a period of months of abuse and harassment and mockery based on sex, race and gender from a cabal in the computer science department at sac state, mostly from julie gwynn, the wife of the department chair, john gwynn. julie gwynn was my COBOL computer language instructor. Her behavior was consistent with the behavior of many feminists on campus, extremely rude, aggressive, insulting and irrational, among other things. No one on campus, or ANYWHERE, as far as I could determine, was responding to this very common and offensive behavior. Otherwise, I would have reached out to her/him. So, I very rationally and responsibly established a student organization and published a Newsletter describing the behavior and encouraging a University dialogue regarding the situation. I was then mocked, ridiculed and harassed and threatened and the university president, who was in the running for chancellor, put blatant, heavy-handed pressure on me and my required faculty advisor, who immediately resigned as the organization's faculty advisor. Fearful and outraged, I responded to the continued threats and mockery with further publications and a double dose of mockery and savage satire back on them. Earlier, I had had a meeting for the purpose of creating the organization, and two faculty members from an education department (there were many education departments), came to it, bill harris and cotton johnson. We had a short discussion. In that discussion, I remember making the point that it was pretty clear that the white feminists of the United States had riddden piggyback on the civil rights movement of African Americans, co-opting the movement and taking it over, saying untrue and offensive things such as that the experience of being a white woman was much more difficult and full of suffering than the experience of being an African American slave in America. In agreement, one of them chimed in with the opinion that they used rape as the issue to accomplish the coup. This comment put the topic of rape in my head because it wasn't there before, because I never thought of rape in any way at all, ever, and, during the extremely stressful task of writing and publishing all alone, everyone else fearful or hostile, I offhandedly made a light, silly comment about rape (perhaps for lack of something better coming to mind at the time), and I can't even remember what the comment was, but I do remember that I made such a comment. I think it was something silly and adolescent to lighten up the tone, because it was becoming such a hostile experience with so much hate coming from them. It was probably something stupid and adolescent like, "Maybe we'd all get along better if there was MORE rape," (as in, ha ha ha, to an adolescent mind, rape means having sex. The satirical, mocking, and humorous tone of the Newsletters made it clear from context that this was not to be taken as a serious statement or serious call to take such action. But some either pretended that they couldn't see the satire, or were extremely stupid and so couldn't see it. I think the former is much, much more likely in almost every case. For example, when the sac state president had the dean of students, timmy comstock, call my faculty advisor and me to the president's anti-chamber for a good brow-beating, timmy, a lawyer, not a scholar or an educator, waved a copy of my Newsletter around dramatically in the air, shouting, "Satire!? Satire!? There's no satire in this! This is evil!" Under pressure, the faculty advisor resigned as faculty advisor, while I advised timmy not to try to browbeat me, and I kept on writing and publishing and distributing. But, to respond to his clearly insincere, disingenuous tirade, I addressed the issue in my next Newsletter, but in a light and humorous tone so I wouldn't be alienating my readers. I spoke of the example of Jonathan Swift's satire wherein he suggested, that to deal with the growth of the Irish population, that we should eat Irish babies. Later on I wrote (clearly on the defensive) that deep down I really favored a world ruled by women, but with one caveat, one catch. "The women who rule must be kind, intelligent, beautiful, thoughtful, reasonable, caring and wise." "The rest of the women," I continue "will be eaten." Now, do you really think that I needed to put a consumer warning there stating that "the above statement was satire, and not intended to represent the actual thoughts and beliefs of the writer"? for shitheads like timmy comstock, the highly overpaid university lawyer? Or for useful idiot fbi/law enforcement mental health creeps who would take it literally from sheer simple stupidity, maliciousness, or for career purposes? RHETORIC. Basically, what the entire Newsletter was about was about pissing and shitting back into the faces of the hypocritical, bratty liberals on campus, male and female, the piss and shit that they were dealing out. That's all. And they couldn't take it. Of course, they tried to make my rhetoric-mirror, into a very, very serious matter, like someone was going to start killing cops and robbing banks and blowing up buildings, like the liberal brats (who were at that moment teaching and administering the colleges and universities) did in the sixties and seventies. I also remember another comment. To defuse their predictable shallow knee-jerk criticism (that I had to be a stupid animal not to agree with them) I mockingly embraced their criticism and characterization of me, in self-deprecating humor calling myself a Hun, "a smelly blah blah blah whatever Hun, belching and farting, raping and pillaging..." We all know that's what Huns do, right? They rape and pillage. If it was on "The Match Game" it would be the number one answer. Q. What do Huns do? A. They rape and pillage. It just so happened that I had married a Filipina while in the Navy and I "exploited" that fact (a little sarcastic humor there, embracing and mocking the notion that all that white men ever did was exploit, exploit, exploit) and set her up as a "natural resource," so that I was "raping and pillaging" the natural resource, another certain Match Game winner. Well, at the time, I thought it was a mild mocking-them-with-their-own-condescending-sarcasm-sword chuckle. In the sixties and seventies almost every word from the brats was a mocking sarcasm, or an attempt at one. Seriously, I never raped, I never fantasize about rape, I am not for rape. I don't think rape would have ever crossed my mind if it had not been mentioned by one of the faculty advisor applicants as the white American woman's pry to co-opt the civil rights movement, in his opinion. I have never bothered to make this statement before because I always thought that it was pretty f***ing obvious that it was meant in satire or jest, no matter how inartful or, as Peter Thiel says, "insensitive, crudely argued statments." And, in agreement with Peter Thiel, I also say I wish I'd never written those things. I'm sorry for it. Rape in all forms is a crime. I regret writing passages that have been taken (however maliciously and disingenuously) to suggest otherwise.

The DavidScully Post (Page 12) CONTENTS

David Scully
915 228-8032