Megyn Kelly Called a Cornell Rape Accuser Beefy. Then Came the Backlash

Welcome back to the C WEB podcast. Megyn Kelly called a Cornell rape accuser beefy. Then came the backlash. The case was an allegation of sexual assault. Kelly made part of it about a woman's body. This episode looks at the word she used, the file behind it, and why the reply was so sharp.

A woman identified in court papers as Jane Doe alleges that on the night of 19 October 2024, at Cornell's Chi Phi fraternity house, she was given alcohol and drugs, including ketamine, and sexually assaulted while unable to consent. She also alleges that Cornell failed to protect her after she reported it. These remain allegations. The men named in the civil suit have denied wrongdoing. Some say any sexual contact was consensual. Others say they were not present.

After a Title IX investigation and hearings in May 2025, Cornell expelled two of the men, suspended two, and gave the other three lighter penalties. The Chi Phi chapter was closed and remains barred from campus. None of the men has been criminally charged. The Tompkins County district attorney declined to take the case to a grand jury in 2024. The criminal inquiry has since been reopened. Doe reported the matter to campus police in early November 2024, about three weeks later.

On 5 October 2026, on her SiriusXM programme, Megyn Kelly said no one would consider the possibility that the woman made a decision to get it on with four men, not seven, and enjoyed it, because, in her words, she is not the most attractive gal. Then came the line in the title. She said Doe is extremely beefy in her arms and her legs. Kelly also referred to a video in which Doe talked about her cankles. She said Doe was probably thrilled to be admired because she clearly did not grow up the incredibly beautiful one, and that this is how women make these mistakes. She added that Doe, in an inebriated state, counted the attention as a win and that this is why she kept saying yes. Kelly said she was not trying to be insulting, and that she was offering a narrative that, in her opinion, was likely.

Beefy was not a slip beside the argument. It was the argument. A dispute over consent, numbers, and intoxication can be examined without a verdict on a woman's arms and legs. That is opinion. It is not a finding.

Doe's lawyer, Thomas P. Giuffra, told the Daily Beast the remarks were mean-spirited, and that Kelly was using her platform to be abusive to women. He said that when people with a following attack, it gives others permission to attack, and that Jane Doe has been through enough. Kelly had criticised Doe for waiting before going to police. Giuffra asked why it took Kelly more than a decade to report unwanted sexual advances from her boss, Roger Ailes, then chairman of Fox News. Kelly has written that she consulted a lawyer at the time and stayed quiet because she believed a stink would likely end her career. The comparison is not that the two events are the same. It is that delay is part of the record Kelly herself has described.

A university panel did not find every accused man responsible. Punishments ranged from expulsion to much lighter sanctions. Defence lawyers have said on Kelly's programme that the sex was consensual. Those points are the argument over evidence. They are not an argument about whether a woman is attractive enough to have been harmed.

Olivia Rodrigo posted that she stood with Jane Doe. Kelly's reply, as reported, was to tell her to be quiet and leave it to the adults. Jane Doe is a pseudonym in a live case. The men have denied the allegations. A court, not a monologue, is where those denials are proved or rejected.

Check out a deal from Paris Jewelry. Visit ParisJewelry.com and take 20 per cent off any jewellery with the code SAVE20 at checkout.

You have been listening to C WEB. Subscribe on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, Amazon Music, YouTube, iHeartRadio, or SiriusXM for more.