Problems Persist Even Though Colleges Claim to Be Sensitized to the Issues

Sexual assaults on college campuses persist and create problems that has been dealt with in varying degrees of success. It seems the problem is two-fold: (1) an environment on campus that does not treat sexual assessment and rape as the important problem that it is and (2) failing to enforce the ‘no means no’ standard that has become a sign that the abused party, mostly women, do not consent to what then becomes rape.

Sexual Assault Statistics

I recently read some statistics from the Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network (RAINN). Not surprisingly, RAINN found that sexual violence on campus is pervasive. Here is a summery.

• 13% of all students experience rape or sexual assault through physical force, violence, or incapacitation (among all graduate and undergraduate students).
• Among graduate and professional students, 9.7% of females and 2.5% of males experience rape or sexual assault through physical force, violence, or incapacitation.
• Among undergraduate students, 26.4% of females and 6.8% of males experience rape or sexual assault through physical force, violence, or incapacitation.
• 8% of students have experienced stalking since entering college.²

It’s hard to believe that over one-quarter of female students experience rape or #sexual assault in 2022. The reasons are varied and described below.

Reporting Sexual Assault and Rape

I am also troubled by the fact that many of these assaults go unreported. RAINN provides the following results that clearly demonstrates the need for colleges to take the matter of sexual assault more seriously and provide a supportive environment for those who become victims of rape and sexual assault.

Over 50% of the results show that students are reluctant to report because they didn't believe it would do any good to report; no action would be taken; or they feared reprisals. The latter illustrates the 'kill the messenger' syndrome, which means the one who reports the sexual assault of rape suffers the consequences of doing so because the college or university does not take it seriously enough to send the message that such behavior will not be tolerated and violators will be dealt with appropriately.

Is 'Yes Means Yes' a Good Standard for Enforcement?

I have taught in the California State University System (CSUS) for over 30 years and have been shocked by the degree of sexual assault and rape, much of which does not get reported for fear of being ostracized for doing so. I was, however. pleasantly surprise when in 2014, the CSUS instituted a new approach to reporting campus rapes and, most important, the way in which it should be dealt with. It is a serious attempt to stem the rising tide of campus rapes as illustrated by the fact that the state Senate passed legislation to support victims.

To overcome objections to the '#No means no' standard. in 2014, the state senate unanimously approved the new law after a 52-16 vote in the assembly. SB967 requires California with the passage of a so-called #Yes means yes law. The senate vote in the assembly on SB967 requires colleges and universities to evaluate disciplinary charges of sexual assault under an “affirmative consent” standard as a condition of qualifying for state funds. The bill’s supporters praise it as an important step in preventing sexual violence on campus. However, not everyone thinks it is likely to deter predators or protect victims. Writing for Time Magazine, Cathy Young says "its effect will be to codify vague and capricious rules governing student conduct, to shift the burden of proof to (usually male) students accused of sexual offenses, and to create a disturbing precedent for government regulation of consensual sex."

Those who support the law point out that while sexual consent is widely defined as the absence of a “no” (except in cases of incapacitation), anti-rape activists and many feminists have long argued that this definition needs to shift toward an active “yes.” Or, as the California bill puts it: “Affirmative consent” means affirmative, conscious, and voluntary agreement to engage in sexual activity. … Lack of protest or resistance does not mean consent, nor does silence mean consent."

Furthermore, the law’s defenders, such as feminist writer Amanda Hess, "dismiss as hyperbole claims that it would turn people into unwitting rapists every time they have sex without obtaining an explicit 'yes' (or, better yet, a notarized signature) from their partner. Hess points out that consent can include nonverbal cues such as body language. One of the bill’s co-authors, Democratic Assemblywoman Bonnie Lowenthal, told the San Gabriel Valley Tribune that the affirmative consent standard means a person must say ‘yes.’ ”

Those who oppose the new law point out that nonverbal cues indicating consent are almost certainly present in most consensual sexual encounters. But as a legal standard, nonverbal affirmative consent leaves campus tribunals in the position of trying to answer murky and confusing questions — for instance, whether a passionate response to a kiss was just a kiss, or an expression of “voluntary agreement” to have sexual intercourse. Faced with such ambiguities, administrators are likely to err on the side of caution and treat only explicit verbal agreement as sufficient proof of consent.

What's Happening on College Campuses

Many affirmative-consent-based student codes of sexual conduct today either discourage reliance on nonverbal communication as leaving too much room for mistakes (among them California’s Occidental College and North Carolina’s Duke University) or explicitly require asking for and obtaining verbal consent (the University of Houston) At Pennsylvania’s Swarthmore College, nonverbal communication is allowed but a verbal request for consent absolutely requires a verbal response: If you ask, “Do you want this?”, you may not infer consent from the mere fact that your partner pulls you down on the bed and moves to take off your clothes.

The issue of sexual assault on campus is much more complicate than I can address in this blog. However, I have to close with a troubling report out of San Diego State University (SDSU) that irks me to no end.

Five members of SDSU's football team were reported last fall to campus officials for an alleged rape that took place at a house party off campus, according to a report from the Los Angeles Times.

The alleged incident took place on Oct. 16, 2021, when the five players allegedly raped an unconscious girl and left her “bloodied and bruised.” Two athletes sent messages through the anonymous reporting system, which was reviewed by SDSU’s executive associate athletic director and deputy Title IX coordinator, per The Times.  The Times reports that “99% of the football players are aware of the 5-person rape so the rest of the student-athletes are left wondering why nothing is being done,” one student said, according to records obtained by The Times. They added, “Every person in authority here at SDSU needs to be aware of this, including [San Diego State President] Adela de la Torre.”