Posted on 09/07/2019 6:20:40 AM PDT by Liz
MIT is a good place to recruit technically skilled intelligence agents.
Remember this?
Names, sex, newspapers. They don't mix.Written by a much younger Jonathan Alter, and published by The Harvard CrimsonTwo MIT women have learned that lesson in recent weeks, as fellow engineers continue to react to the women's article, published in an MIT newspaper, evaluating the sexual performance of three dozen identified male partners.
Roxanne Ritchie's and Susan Gilbert's Consumer Guide to MIT Men appeared in the April 28 issue of "thursday," an alternative MIT weekly, has touched off a controversy downriver, including dark hints of disciplinary action by the university against either the authors, the paper, or both.
"thursday" fears it may lose the office space the university provides.
The article put "star" ratings and obscene comments on the quality, longevity and versatility of the effort next to the names of 36 MIT students. Together, the two women claim to have sampled all 36 men.
"Like sleeping with a small Texas longhorn. Yes, he takes his boots off first," the description of one "two star" performance-denoting "Mediocre but maybe worth trying"--read
'"I did it,' he said. 'Did what?' I asked," was of one of the less complimentary comments.
The student named in that evaluation said yesterday he was "pissed off about my name being used." But, he added, "MIT is out to get 'thursday'--something it's wanted to do for a long time."
Other students named in the article said last week they found it "amusing" but had heard rumors of a possible law suit and complaints to administrators.
Ritchie, who said she resented "the immaturity of the response of the MIT community" to the article, claims to have been continually harassed by other students since the story appeared.
Bet a few media students are scared right now especially if they have duplicate porn tapes of Epstein’s “friends”.
Only creeps do.
Ronan Farrow for The New Yorker
The ruthless little fairy is just biased against heterosexuals. Probably supports Lizziewatha (MIT vs Harvard). /s Thanks Liz.
I remember reading about it, and then reading it ... although it was somewhat after my time there.
Some of the reviews were embarrassing, some were hilarious, and I seem to remember that one, in particular, was highly complimentary. Don’t remember the details, though. And, since it was after my time, I didn’t know any of the principal actors.
Odd how the MSM has so little interest in this story... where is the Washington Post? The New York Times?
Have they donated the money to a charity? Or have they kept it?
MIT could stand for “Money Is Tops”.
MIT, home of Professor Gruber of ObamaCare fame.
MIT, where Iranians went to learn nuclear engineering in the 70s for tuition of 25k.
Worth reading the whole New Yorker article.
Something just doesn’t add up.
For example, Epstein gets Gates to donate a large sum to the lab, and lets the lab directors know he solicited/directed the donation but then they record it in a manner that disguises Epstein’s involvement.
But if Epstein just loved the lab and wanted Gates to donate to it, it would have been much simpler to just ask Gates to donate and not mention to the lab directors that he was the instigator. It would have saved them all the fuss.
SO obviously Epstein wanted to get “credit” for the donation.
But what does “credit” mean in this context?? There’s something he was getting that’s not being addressed.
The article ably demonstrates the lengths universities will go to to get donations, but it never questions the lengths Epstein was going to to make the donations, and what he thought he was getting in return.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.