The Cornell 7 — No Means Motherfucking No

Not all men... but somehow, always a man.

The Cornell 7 story has been sitting heavy with me because what the fuck do you mean you can send your child away to COLLEGE — an Ivy League at that — and have to worry about them allegedly being violated in one of the worst ways imaginable?

A civil lawsuit filed by a former Cornell student, identified as Jane Doe, names Matthew Ingalls, Johnathan Newell, Winston Lee, Gillio Lopes, Diego Sarabia, Scott Norris and Scott Kretzschmar as defendants. She alleges that she was drugged and sexually assaulted at Cornell's Chi Phi fraternity house in October 2024. These are allegations, not criminal convictions, and some of the accused have publicly denied wrongdoing. The Tompkins County District Attorney has now reopened the criminal investigation and says the evidence will be presented to a grand jury.

Now, those are the allegations, the documented findings and where the case currently stands. What comes next is my take — not a statement of anyone's guilt or innocence.

And MY take? This entire story has me disturbed, because regardless of what a court or grand jury ultimately decides about these seven men, the conversation it has opened up about consent, entitlement and the way we raise our sons is one we desperately need to have.

No means no. And yes can become no.

I don't care if somebody willingly walked into the room. I don't care if they were drinking beforehand. I don't care if they kissed you. And I don't care if five minutes ago they were completely down for it.

Consent is not permanent. It can be withdrawn at any moment.

You can tell somebody YES at 1:00 and NO at 1:05. And at 1:05? Everything stops. Period.

The lawsuit alleges Jane Doe was intoxicated, consumed ketamine after arriving at the fraternity house, and eventually became incapacitated as multiple sexual encounters occurred. Cornell says its Title IX process resulted in serious sanctions: two students were expelled, two were suspended for at least two semesters, one had already graduated, and two were found not responsible for sexual misconduct.

There are also disputed facts that matter. The district attorney says Jane Doe's original 2024 sworn statement described drug use and sexual activity differently from the allegations in her 2026 lawsuit. Her attorney says she was traumatized, in denial and trying to understand what had happened. Those discrepancies are among the issues the reopened investigation and civil case will have to sort out.

But this story also has me thinking about something bigger: entitlement.

Why are we still raising boys who grow into men believing access to somebody's body is something they are owed?

And for me, there is another uncomfortable conversation here about race, class and proximity to whiteness.

I'm not assigning racial identities to these individual men based on somebody's name, face or last name. But I absolutely believe parents raising Black, Latino, Asian, biracial and other boys of color in predominantly white and affluent spaces need to understand something:

Access does not make your child white.

Your son can attend their schools. Join their fraternities. Live in their neighborhoods. Wear what they wear and move in the same social circles. He still needs to know who HE is.

And to my Black community specifically: putting your child in an all-white neighborhood or predominantly white school is not automatically the flex some of y'all think it is.

Give your babies access. Give them the best education you can. Give them opportunities you never had. But give them culture too. Give them identity. Give them accountability.

And PLEASE teach your sons about consent before college. Don't wait until they're 18.

Teach boys that a drunk woman is not an opportunity. An incapacitated woman cannot meaningfully participate in what is happening to her. A woman coming into your bedroom isn't automatic consent to sex. Consent to one person isn't consent to everybody else. And agreeing to one thing doesn't mean agreeing to everything.

This case is now back in the hands of investigators, and a grand jury will determine what happens on the criminal side. Let the evidence and legal process establish individual responsibility.

But parents don't need to wait for a verdict to teach their children something that should have been understood generations ago.