1) "The first half seemed utterly naive (apparently nobody was sexually assaulted in the golden age of the 60s?)" - But should she be subjected to an investiga

1) "The first half seemed utterly naive (apparently nobody was sexually assaulted in the golden age of the 60s?)" - But should she be subjected to an investigation for writing a "naive" article? I think not, as surely the freedom of thought includes the freedom to have "wrong" opinions? (2) "then took a very unwise turn with the recounting of the ongoing court cases." -Disagree. These cases are in the public record. Why shouldn't she mention them? It's not as if she has sworn confidentiality or she had inside information. (3) "What particularly struck me was the refusal to believe professors had any power over students" - I don't think this is an accurate summary at all. You don't have to agree with her opinion, her point was that the new attitudes she's complaining about greatly exaggerate the power of professors over students. A professor has the power to give a student a bad grade or write them a bad recommendation. A student has the power to complain about the professor to the dean/chair and give him/her a bad evaluation. If a student alleges sexual harassment or assault the professor's career could be destroyed even if the charges are not proven. Basically a professor has some power, but not some kind of unlimited power over individual students, which seems to be what is being alleged. (4) "if students aren't exposed to harassment at university then they won't be prepared for real life." -Nope. I would phrase it as "If students are overly coddled and swaddled they will not develop psychological coping skills to deal with a real world which is not going to exquisitely cater to their sensitivities".