What should we do with a student newspaper whose article we disapprove of? In Columbia, some are proposing that the Columbia Sundial cease publication. In question, a column published in its pages and contesting the reactions considered hasty on the subject of the Cornell rape affair. Published on October 13, it is signed by Nikos Mohammadi and Christina Ma, third-year students at this prestigious New York university. He is deputy editor-in-chief of the newspaper, she collaborates there. Both denounce premature conclusions in the “Cornell Seven” affair.
This affair dates back to the night of October 19 to 20, 2024 and took place on the campus of this other renowned university located in Ithaca, New York. A 20-year-old student was attending a party at Chi Phi, a “fraternity”, a men’s association with a house where she organizes parties. Some time later, the student accused seven participants of the evening of having abused her while she was semi-conscious under the influence of drugs and alcohol. The men accused have disputed and still dispute the accusations.
Reopening of the investigation
The young woman reported the facts to the university police in November 2024. According to a transcript of her hearing consulted by CBS News, she then claimed to be “100% certain” of having been raped. But this sentence does not appear in the written statement sent to the prosecutor. He decides not to initiate criminal proceedings: according to him, the document describes drug consumption and consensual sex. The plaintiff's lawyer disputes this interpretation and criticizes the prosecution for not having directly questioned his client. The case took on a national dimension on September 16, 2026 when the young woman initiated civil proceedings, under the pseudonym “Jane Doe”, in particular against Cornell and the seven men. Demonstrations and campaigns on social networks are increasing. The prosecution announced on September 28 the reopening of the investigation.
It is to the reactions to this untried case that Mohammadi and Ma devote their forum. “We wrote this essay because we observed the reaction of our comrades, who published tirelessly on Instagram,” explains Nikos Mohammadi to Le Figaro. The authors denounce a “collective frenzy” which neglects elements contrary to the dominant narrative. “We thought it was possible to have different opinions on this matter,” he continues, deeming this debate still “taboo at Columbia and on other campuses.”
The two students also invite us to distinguish consent and regret. An experience, they argue, may have been consented to and then experienced as degrading or traumatic. To defend this distinction, they cite the American feminist essayist Camille Paglia, who denounces a tendency to present women as incapable of deciding for themselves. Asked by Le Figaro about this reference, Nikos Mohammadi specifies that the essayist’s ideas seemed useful to them “from a cultural point of view”. The student adds that he has received favorable feedback from several feminists, “even if they are certainly not woke feminists on campus.”
Right of reply, right to appear
As of October 14, the Columbia Political Review, another student journal, which presents itself as open to several political sensibilities, condemns the publication. She accuses the perpetrators of neglecting essential elements of consent and shifting responsibility for the violence onto the victims. She particularly criticizes a statement by Paglia cited in the column: agreeing to follow a man into a room, the magazine emphasizes, does not mean consenting to the relationships that could follow.
Questioned by Le Figaro on the ability to consent under the influence of alcohol or drugs, Mohammadi believes that their text takes this question into account. He recalls that he and Christina Ma recognize in their text the physical vulnerability of women and the need to carefully examine relationships involving several men and a woman.
