Something Was Wrong

S25 Ep9: Flipped the Script

February 19, 2026

Key Takeaways Copied to clipboard!

  • The University of Central Oklahoma's Title IX office initially misled survivors by suggesting an informal resolution process, which ultimately resulted in minimal, undisclosed consequences for the accused professor, Kato Buss. 
  • Survivors Miranda and Rihanna experienced significant re-traumatization when their detailed second Title IX report was handled with cold neutrality, leading to a lack of transparency regarding the sanctions imposed on the professor. 
  • The public filing of a lawsuit against Professor Buss and the university, while necessary for accountability, caused further trauma for the complainants due to the loss of privacy and the perceived self-serving advocacy from peers online. 

Segments

Initial Title IX Contact and Advice
Copied to clipboard!
(00:02:32)
  • Key Takeaway: The initial Title IX office interaction involved the accused professor asking the survivor to be a character witness for him, immediately following the initial report.
  • Summary: After being directed to the Title IX office, the survivor reported that the accused professor had confessed everything and denied the allegations were true. The Title IX office initially suggested anonymity for the report, which was later revealed to be false. The survivor reflected on the implications of the Title IX filing during a period away from campus.
Post-Disclosure Academic Retaliation
Copied to clipboard!
(00:04:07)
  • Key Takeaway: Despite the Title IX filing, the professor continued to act as the survivor’s acting teacher, demanding professional contact for graduate school recommendations while engaging in subtle artistic retaliation.
  • Summary: The survivor remained dependent on the professor for training and letters of recommendation, leading to continued, non-sexual contact that included unwanted expressions of missing her. The professor retaliated by ensuring the survivor was cast in a chorus role in a feminist theater piece he directed, despite her being slated for a lead role elsewhere. This play, an offshoot of Trojan Women, ironically featured the chorus members, mostly women of color, portrayed as prisoners.
Professor’s Targeted Attention
Copied to clipboard!
(00:07:30)
  • Key Takeaway: The professor paid ‘special attention’ to women of color under the guise of being an ally, offering them specific opportunities and representation in shows.
  • Summary: Rihanna described how the professor offered her a scholarship to remain enrolled specifically so he could cast her in Trojan Women, despite both knowing she had participated in the prior Title IX case against him. Rihanna found directing her during this play, which focused on sexual assault, to be anxiety-inducing and nightmarish, especially as she was simultaneously processing her own unrelated childhood sexual abuse in therapy. Miranda experienced similar discomfort working with the professor on the same triggering material.
Survivor Burnout and Departure
Copied to clipboard!
(00:11:41)
  • Key Takeaway: Exhaustion from the ongoing situation led the survivor to quit the department mid-semester after the production of Trojan Women concluded, compounded by financial strain.
  • Summary: The survivor stopped attending classes after Trojan Women ended, citing burnout from the previous two years of navigating the situation. The promised scholarship funds from the professor never materialized, contributing to her inability to afford continued enrollment. This marked the end of her direct involvement with the department and the professor while still a student.
Post-Graduation Stalking Attempts
Copied to clipboard!
(00:16:19)
  • Key Takeaway: After graduation, the professor escalated desperate, boundary-pressing contact attempts, including showing up unannounced at a professional performance and sending disturbing messages after the survivor broke her leg.
  • Summary: The survivor ignored the professor’s texts after graduating, finding his continued attempts to press boundaries gross and irritating, especially when he appeared uninvited at her professional theater engagement. Following a severe leg injury, the professor sent manipulative messages, including a photo of his own bloodied head, claiming he only thought of her while injured. The survivor documented this harassment by screenshotting a Snapchat message, hoping to scare him into stopping contact before blocking him everywhere.
Reflection and Second Title IX Filing
Copied to clipboard!
(00:20:34)
  • Key Takeaway: Six months of isolation during injury and the COVID-19 pandemic provided the necessary space for the survivor to fully process the manipulative nature of the abuse and seek therapy, leading to the decision to file a second, more comprehensive Title IX complaint.
  • Summary: The time alone allowed the survivor to realize the extent of the manipulative abuse she experienced, which she processed through intensive therapy that she credits with saving her life. Filing the Title IX complaint required her to disclose the trauma to her support system, including her best friend Olivia. Olivia was immediately supportive and offered to serve as a witness in the new case.
Title IX Guidance and Resolution Choice
Copied to clipboard!
(00:31:13)
  • Key Takeaway: The Title IX official strongly suggested the informal resolution path, citing the need for ‘swift action’ if it were her own child, which the survivors later regretted choosing.
  • Summary: The Title IX official informed Miranda that the case could proceed as either an informal (HR-based) or formal resolution, noting that neither was less serious but the informal route would be quicker. Based on the official’s advice, Miranda chose the informal resolution, a decision she later recognized as incorrect in hindsight. Olivia confirmed the official used highly persuasive language, stating she would want ‘swift action taken’ if it were her child, pushing them toward the informal process.
Inadequate University Sanctions
Copied to clipboard!
(00:34:43)
  • Key Takeaway: The university closed the informal resolution case, imposing undisclosed ‘relative sanctions’ on the professor, which resulted in no discernible change to his status or the survivors’ safety.
  • Summary: The final letter confirmed the university used a combination of interventions and remedies under the informal resolution, considering the matter closed, but refused to specify the sanctions when asked. Through an advocate, the survivors learned the consequences seemed minimal, such as barring the professor from directing certain events or travel. The lack of transparency and minimal outcome was deeply hurtful, as the process failed to provide the closure or protection Miranda sought.
Filing the Lawsuit and Media Fallout
Copied to clipboard!
(00:47:36)
  • Key Takeaway: Frustrated by the university’s inaction, the survivors pursued a lawsuit, which resulted in immediate, unwanted media exposure that retraumatized them by stripping away their control over the narrative.
  • Summary: Encouraged by a professor advocate, the survivors hired an attorney and filed a lawsuit in May 2021, adding multiple complainants to strengthen the case against the statute of limitations issues. The news broke the following day, leading to widespread public commentary, petitions, and social media discussion, which Miranda found as traumatizing as the initial abuse. The survivors felt unable to speak publicly due to the ongoing lawsuit, leaving them without a voice while their private trauma was debated online.
Advice for True Support
Copied to clipboard!
(00:54:02)
  • Key Takeaway: True support for survivors involves directly checking in with them privately rather than publicly posting generalized statements of solidarity online.
  • Summary: The survivor noted the confusing dynamic where peers posted supportive messages online but failed to personally reach out to check on the victims’ well-being. She emphasized that when a survivor is vulnerable and unable to speak for themselves, advocates should ask what the survivor needs instead of making assumptions. Direct, private communication offering to listen is far more impactful than public advocacy that can feel self-serving to the poster.