Sent by Jon on 02-28-2008:
What a pleasure to hear some sense on this issue, and framed most elegantly within the wider question: "What are our universities for?" This highlights the moral, the intellectual, and the institutional failure, all in one. Why are our universities crowded with extraneous organizations, many of which are engaged in victim-manufacture? Patronage politics: the enemy of honesty and friend of vulgarity.
Cheers to Ms. Mac Donald for this one!
Sent by Wayne Steadham on 02-26-2008:
An excellent article and exposÃ© of thinking that is perhaps more tawdry than the behavior it seeks to understand. It's about time someone called them out. I am sharing this with all of my academic friends. Not that many, unfortunately.
Sent by James on 02-26-2008:
I've worked for three years in a civilian capacity for a college-town police department. One thing for which I was unprepared is the amount of alleged sexual assaults that have arisen from the hookup culture rampant among a certain age group on and off college campuses. I can attest to the resources spent on taking reports from and investigating alcohol-fueled, morning-after, regret-filled sexual encounters. One recent example involved a victim who enjoyed an off-and-on again "friends with benefits" relationship with a fellow student who, on this occasion, prior to their liaison, had made it explicitly clear thru text messages that their visit that night would be solely for sex. She later learned that he allowed at least two friends to watch in the dark, from his closet. No charges of unlawful sexual contact (possible if being "peeped" or if one is subjected to a flasher) could be brought forward, however, because the "victim" is still hoping her friend will come around and that it will evolve into "the real thing."
There are too many other similar instances to note--such as the young woman who only reported her sexual assault after finding that her electronics had been stolen from her apartment by the visiting non-students with whom she and her roommate had engaged in consensual group sex. She intimated to officers that she assumed her crime would get higher police priority if a sexual assault was added, despite having first called 911 for the robbery.
Sent by Jonathan Cohen on 02-26-2008:
Your article on the sexual violence industry is very much needed. At DePaul, we have all of it: take back the night marches, the Vagina Monologues, the clothesline display, the marches against sexual violence that parade through classroom buildings disrupting classes. Last spring, there was a demonstration outside of the Student Center; one of the demonstrators held a poster attacking a column in the student newspaper that suggested that the Duke lacrosse players had been unfairly treated.
I stopped by and got in a conversation with a freshman girl. I asked her if she believed that one-fourth of the women at DePaul had been raped. She assured me that the statistic was correct. I told her that it wasn't credible. There are fewer than 10 sexual assaults a year reported at DePaul. By her reckoning, at a school with some 15,000 female students, that means close to 1,000 rapes a year. Even if she is referring only to the 5,000 female undergrads, it would still mean on average close to 300 rapes a year. It might be true that half the women are too traumatized to report the rapes, but it is unlikely that only one in thirty would report that they were raped. Your article pretty well explained the statistics.
There was a real rape two years ago. A stranger climbed into the dorm and raped a female student. After he was captured and his picture was shown in the papers, the head of Women's Studies wrote a letter to the school newspaper complaining that his picture shouldn't have been shown because it stigmatized blacks.
There was a rape in the building that housed the Math department. It was committed late at night by a homeless person. Our building was connected to the rectory of St. Vincent DePaul Church, where the homeless were provided meals. As a result, there were homeless people on the grounds much of the time, sometimes engaged in arguments. Also, there was often the smell of urine near the vending machines. One of the homeless committed the rape at around 10 pm, when I believe a graduate student was working late at her office.
I have talked with people who have been attacked, and they are quite traumatized by the experience, particularly because their lives are threatened. If what the women's studies faculty is telling their students was true, our students would be on 60 Minutes. (There was a 60 Minutes story recently on women who have been raped in Africa).
What they are saying is disturbing. But what is completely insane is that you can't object to it. They are able to continue to expound the most vile lies about men, and it is considered not only acceptable but laudable.
We are having discussions about our rules governing speech. A task force to consider questions of free speech vs. offensive speech is reporting its guidelines. They will reflect on our current policies, which include anti-harassment policies. Unfortunately, our current policies divide the world into binary categories: the protected and the unprotected. Women are protected, men are not. Blacks are protected, whites are not. Gays are protected, straights are not.
I am on the Faculty Council, and we had a report on the guidelines. There was a discussion in which there was some dispute about the background concerning the task force and also the implications of the guidelines. One person who was not on the task force but is a member of something called the President's Diversity Council, and who is opposed to the guidelines, made a long statement complaining about the guidelines and the composition of the task force and the usual complaints about attacks on people of color. I responded by saying that the task force was not set up to protect victims of offensive speech, but in reaction to differing views about the conflicting aims of protecting free speech and protecting people from being offended. I also offered my own opinion on the subject, including a sharp criticism of our current harassment policies. I said that they allowed people in the protected classes to say anything, no matter how offensive, while any criticism from the unprotected was a potential case of harassment. I added that I found the policy itself very offensive.
When the minutes of the meeting were sent out, my comments were eliminated, the woman from the Diversity Council was portrayed as having an official role in the matter (she didn't), and the entire point of the task force report was obscured. I sent an email to all members of the Faculty Council complaining that the minutes were not an accurate record of what had occurred at the meeting, and I explained in detail what had been left out. I got no support, and when the minutes came up at the next meeting, they were simply accepted with no discussion of any kind.
I think that my story tells the real reason for this insanity. It empowers women and some minorities on campus in all matters. It means that they are not subject to the same standards for promotion and tenure, they get favored in assignment to committees, their status as members of protected classes is a criteria for merit in yearly salary evaluation, that they receive favorable consideration in all hiring decisions, and so on.
People who think that the whole edifice of preference will collapse from its own stupidity are sadly mistaken. The logic of the situation is that it only gets worse, since the more outrageous the demand for favoritism, the more outlandish must be the claims of mistreatment. What can be more legitimizing than lurid tales of 300 rapes a year? Since real rape is an awful crime, as virtually everyone agrees, what could be more effective in silencing male voices than claiming that the rather dull life of faculty is some kind of playground of sexual violence?
Keep up the good work. You are a voice in the wilderness on this one.
Sent by Neal on 02-25-2008:
This was an article that I couldn't stop reading. The unspoken treaty between the sexual revolution and feminist movement for the sake of liberalism is destroying our young people and creating, quite frankly, a disgusting society. Both sides are obviously victims. What is sad is that men are being accused of rape when they give into the seductions, and women are putting themselves into positions of being raped (or in the very least putting on the slut label).
Also unfortunate is that the military is just behind the universities in its idea of rape. The Uniform Code of Military Justice has guidelines for married individuals (married military members who have affairs can be charged under the UCMJ), but there is little regulation for singles. While the military doesn't offer "better sex" courses, it does have condom handouts and rape classes. In the latest Air Force rape video, we are shown a staged scenario where a girl gets really drunk, goes out with a guy, and is then "raped." We are told in our tech schools that if there is anything less than a verbal consent we are to stay away. Still, there aren't big orgy parties.
The low number of rapes within the military is, however, given the same type of excuses. The Air Force is taking measures to assure victims of rape that they will not be humiliated, and that if they feel that they were sexually assaulted or raped in any way that their accusations will not cause reprisals. The Air Force believes that fear of reprisal is the reason that frequency of reported events don't match their pre-supposed numbers.
Sent by Kathy Anderson on 02-25-2008:
I am a woman and, for five years, was a campus investigator (administrative, not law enforcement) for reports of sexual assaults by students against students. I fully agree with your conclusion that rape on campus is exceedingly rare. I also agree that anyone trying to remain a neutral finder of fact can find themselves, as I did, vilified by those who believe that all reports of rape are true and everyone accused of rape is a rapist.
I was shunned by those who despised my practice of referring to women who reported rape as complainants rather than victims. I was accused by a complainant of dereliction of duty after I concluded that rape was not a sustainable charge when she offered her anus to a man and he ended up in her vagina instead--and she admitted he immediately apologized for his mistake.
One complainant demanded I find a way to hold a young man accountable for intended rape because he would have had sex with her if she had not vomited on him and caused him to leave the area in disgust. I had many more complainants such as these and I tried, from my neutral position, to educate them and others on campus about the lifelong impact of false charges against another. Without fail, the complainants who asked me for such findings had been whipped into a frenzy for revenge by the rape industrialists or their acolytes in the student body.
I thank you, Ms. Mac Donald, for the reasoned and researched arguments you make in all your books and articles. I hope some day your honesty and integrity will rub off on all writers. Hey, that might be a great pursuit for the "gangs of 88" on every campus--get back to the classroom and teach truth, ethics, and the paths to finding them both.
Sent by Caitlin Barr on 02-25-2008:
I'm sure that you are getting lots of negative responses and press from this article (I actually discovered it from a link on Feministing.com, which trashed it) so I wanted to say, Thank you! This is an awesome, incredibly accurate article and I'm glad somebody wrote it.
Sent by Cassandra Showell on 02-25-2008:
I went and listened to the William and Mary webpage's audio clips featuring voices saying how sexual assault had affected them. Ms. Mac Donald wrote that she was puzzled that so many of the voices were male, but I think there's really no mystery. The voices are actors, and their words are scripted. I think so for a couple reasons: first, the campus rape resources types probably wouldn't use actual rape victims for that kind of public, even though anonymous, exposure. Second, in college I took a semester-long training course required of anyone who wanted to be a Resident Adviser. We spent an entire 1.5-hour class period listening to, I think, four "rape survivors" tell their stories. At the end, there was a question-and-answer period, and one girl in the class raised her hand just to commend the presenters for being so brave as to share their stories. The moderator looked a little embarrassed and then said "Uh, actually these are actors."
It was a surprise to everyone in the class, but the university had set up this program that recruited students to pretend to be rape victims and tell groups made-up stories. I rather doubt they could have found enough real victims, even if the horror of sharing wouldn't have been a hurdle.
Sent by Sarah Seltzer on 02-25-2008:
I have never in my life encountered an article documenting or lamenting promiscuity among young men.
Instead of publishing screeds chastising young women for their own victimization, the LA Times might consider why there's a movement that seeks to absolve men for raping semi-unconscious women.
We're never going to return to the good old days Ms. Mac Donald so clearly yearns for, thank god. Young people will experiment sexually. The only question is how we can ensure such experimentation happens in a moral and legal way, and to do that, we need to focus on educating young men. It's about time.
Sent by Chris Clardy on 02-24-2008:
I enjoyed your article and agree with your premise about female victimization agenda and organizing it into a campus politics that seriously exaggerates the problem. However, I think you obliquely touched on the real reason feminists want to carry this torch to its utmost extreme and create false hysteria. They want to spread their true, rage-induced, agenda of demonizing all white males, who they believe have caused all of the cultural maladies throughout history.
Its a lonely job, working the phones at a college rape crisis center. Day after day, you wait for the casualties to show up from the alleged campus rape epidemicbut no one calls. Could this mean that the crisis is overblown? No: it means, according to the campus sexual-assault industry, that the abuse of coeds is worse than anyone had ever imagined. It means that consultants and counselors need more funding to persuade student rape victims to break the silence of their suffering.
The campus rape movement highlights the current condition of radical feminism, from its self-indulgent bathos to its embrace of ever more vulnerable female victimhood. But the movement is an even more important barometer of academia itself. In a delicious historical irony, the baby boomers who dismantled the universitys intellectual architecture in favor of unbridled sex and protest have now bureaucratized both. While womens studies professors bang pots and blow whistles at antirape rallies, in the dorm next door, freshman counselors and deans pass out tips for better orgasms and the use of sex toys. The academic bureaucracy is roomy enough to sponsor both the dour antimale feminism of the college rape movement and the promiscuous hookup culture of student life. The only thing that doesnt fit into the universitys new commitments is serious scholarly purpose.
The campus rape industrys central tenet is that one-quarter of all college girls will be raped or be the targets of attempted rape by the end of their college years (completed rapes outnumbering attempted rapes by a ratio of about three to two). The girls assailants are not terrifying strangers grabbing them in dark alleys but the guys sitting next to them in class or at the cafeteria.
This claim, first published in Ms. magazine in 1987, took the universities by storm. By the early 1990s, campus rape centers and 24-hour hotlines were opening across the country, aided by tens of millions of dollars of federal funding. Victimhood rituals sprang up: first the Take Back the Night rallies, in which alleged rape victims reveal their stories to gathered crowds of candle-holding supporters; then the Clothesline Project, in which T-shirts made by self-proclaimed rape survivors are strung on campus, while recorded sounds of gongs and drums mark minute-by-minute casualties of the rape culture. A special rhetoric emerged: victims family and friends were co-survivors; survivors existed in a larger community of survivors.
An army of salesmen took to the road, selling advice to administrators on how to structure sexual-assault procedures, and lecturing freshmen on the undetected rapists in their midst. Rape bureaucrats exchanged notes at such gatherings as the Inter Ivy Sexual Assault Conferences and the New England College Sexual Assault Network. Organizations like One in Four and Men Can Stop Rape tried to persuade college boys to redefine their masculinity away from the rape culture. The college rape infrastructure shows no signs of a slowdown. In 2006, for example, Yale created a new Sexual Harassment and Assault Resources and Education Center, despite numerous resources for rape victims already on campus.
If the one-in-four statistic is correctit is sometimes modified to one-in-five to one-in-fourcampus rape represents a crime wave of unprecedented proportions. No crime, much less one as serious as rape, has a victimization rate remotely approaching 20 or 25 percent, even over many years. The 2006 violent crime rate in Detroit, one of the most violent cities in America, was 2,400 murders, rapes, robberies, and aggravated assaults per 100,000 inhabitantsa rate of 2.4 percent. The one-in-four statistic would mean that every year, millions of young women graduate who have suffered the most terrifying assault, short of murder, that a woman can experience. Such a crime wave would require nothing less than a state of emergencyTake Back the Night rallies and 24-hour hotlines would hardly be adequate to counter this tsunami of sexual violence. Admissions policies letting in tens of thousands of vicious criminals would require a complete revision, perhaps banning boys entirely. The nations nearly 10 million female undergrads would need to take the most stringent safety precautions. Certainly, they would have to alter their sexual behavior radically to avoid falling prey to the rape epidemic.
None of this crisis response occurs, of coursebecause the crisis doesnt exist. During the 1980s, feminist researchers committed to the rape-culture theory had discovered that asking women directly if they had been raped yielded disappointing resultsvery few women said that they had been. So Ms. commissioned University of Arizona public health professor Mary Koss to develop a different way of measuring the prevalence of rape. Rather than asking female students about rape per se, Koss asked them if they had experienced actions that she then classified as rape. Kosss method produced the 25 percent rate, which Ms. then published.
Kosss study had serious flaws. Her survey instrument was highly ambiguous, as University of California at Berkeley social-welfare professor Neil Gilbert has pointed out. But the most powerful refutation of Kosss research came from her own subjects: 73 percent of the women whom she characterized as rape victims said that they hadnt been raped. Furtherthough it is inconceivable that a raped woman would voluntarily have sex again with the fiend who attacked her42 percent of Kosss supposed victims had intercourse again with their alleged assailants.
All subsequent feminist rape studies have resulted in this discrepancy between the researchers conclusions and the subjects own views. A survey of sorority girls at the University of Virginia found that only 23 percent of the subjects whom the survey characterized as rape victims felt that they had been rapeda result that the universitys director of Sexual and Domestic Violence Services calls discouraging. Equally damning was a 2000 campus rape study conducted under the aegis of the Department of Justice. Sixty-five percent of what the feminist researchers called completed rape victims and three-quarters of attempted rape victims said that they did not think that their experiences were serious enough to report. The victims in the study, moreover, generally did not state that their victimization resulted in physical or emotional injuries, report the researchers.
Just as a reality check, consider an actual student-related rape: in 2006, Labrente Robinson and Jacoby Robinson broke into the Philadelphia home of a Temple University student and a Temple graduate, and anally, vaginally, and orally penetrated the women, including with a gun. The chance that the victims would not consider this event serious enough to report, or physically and emotionally injurious, is exactly nil. In short, believing in the campus rape epidemic depends on ignoring womens own interpretations of their experiencessupposedly the most grievous sin in the feminist political code.
None of the obvious weaknesses in the research has had the slightest drag on the campus rape movement, because the movement is political, not empirical. In a rape culture, which condones physical and emotional terrorism against women as a norm, sexual assault will wind up underreported, argued the director of Yales Sexual Harassment and Assault Resources and Education Center in a March 2007 newsletter. You dont need evidence for the rape culture; you simply know that it exists. But if you do need evidence, the underreporting of rape is the best proof there is.
Campus rape researchers may feel that they know better than female students themselves about the students sexual experiences, but the students are voting with their feet and staying away in droves from the massive rape apparatus built up since the Ms. article. Referring to rape hotlines, rape consultant Brett Sokolow laments: The problem is, on so many of our campuses, very few people ever call. And mostly, weve resigned ourselves to the under-utilization of these resources.
Federal law requires colleges to publish reported crimes affecting their students. The numbers of reported sexual assaultsthe law does not require their confirmationusually run under half a dozen a year on private campuses and maybe two to three times that at large public universities. You might think that having so few reports of sexual assault a year would be a point of pride; in fact, its a source of gall for students and administrators alike. Yales associate general counsel and vice president were clearly on the defensive when asked by the Yale alumni magazine in 2004 about Harvards higher numbers of reported assaults; the reporter might as well have been needling them about a Harvard-Yale football rout. Harvard must have double-counted or included incidents not required by federal law, groused the officials. The University of Virginia does not publish the number of its sexual-assault hearings because it is so low. Were reticent to publicize it when we have such a small n number, says Nicole Eramu, Virginias associate dean of students.
Campuses do everything they can to get their numbers of reported and adjudicated sexual assaults upadding new categories of lesser offenses, lowering the burden of proof, and devising hearing procedures that will elicit more assault charges. At Yale, it is the accuser who decides whether the accused may confront hera sacrifice of one of the great Anglo-Saxon truth-finding procedures. You dont want them to not come to the board and report, do you? asks physics professor Peter Parker, convener of the universitys Sexual Harassment Grievance Board.
The scarcity of reported sexual assaults means that the women who do report them must be treated like rare treasures. New York Universitys Wellness Exchange counsels people to believe unconditionally in sexual-assault charges because only 2 percent of reported rapes are false reports (a ubiquitous claim that dates from radical feminist Susan Brownmillers 1975 tract Against Our Will). As Stuart Taylor and K. C. Johnson point out in their book Until Proven Innocent, however, the rate of false reports is at least 9 percent and probably closer to 50 percent. Just how powerful is the believe unconditionally credo? David Lisak, a University of Massachusetts psychology professor who lectures constantly on the antirape college circuit, acknowledged to a hall of Rutgers students this November that the Duke case, in which a black stripper falsely accused three white Duke lacrosse players of rape in 2006, has raised the issue of false allegations. But Lisak didnt want to talk about the Duke case, he said. I dont know what happened at Duke. No one knows. Actually, we do know what happened at Duke: the prosecutor ignored clearly exculpatory evidence and alibis that cleared the defendants, and was later disbarred for his misconduct. But to the campus rape industry, a lying plaintiff remains a victim of the patriarchy, and the accused remain forever under suspicion.
So what reality does lie behind the campus rape industry? A booze-fueled hookup culture of one-night, or sometimes just partial-night, stands. Students in the sixties demanded that college administrators stop setting rules for fraternization. Were adults, the students shouted. We can manage our own lives. If we want to have members of the opposite sex in our rooms at any hour of the day or night, thats our right. The colleges meekly complied and opened a Pandoras box of boorish, sluttish behavior that gets cruder each year. Do the boys, riding the testosterone wave, act thuggishly toward the girls? You bet! Do the girls try to match their insensitivity? Indisputably.
College girls drink themselves into near or actual oblivion before and during parties. That drinking is often goal-oriented, suggests University of Virginia graduate Karin Agness: it frees the drinker from responsibility and provides an excuse for engaging in behavior that she ordinarily wouldnt. A Columbia University security official marvels at the scene at homecomings: The women are shit-faced, saying, Lets get as drunk as we can, while the men are hovering over them. As anticipated, the night can include a meaningless sexual encounter with a guy whom the girl may not even know. This less-than-romantic denouement produces the roll and scream: you roll over the next morning so horrified at what you find next to you that you scream, a Duke coed reports in Laura Sessions Stepps recent book Unhooked. To the extent that theyre remembered at all, these are the couplings that are occasionally transformed into rapethough far less often than the campus rape industry wishes.
The magazine Saturday Night: Untold Stories of Sexual Assault at Harvard, produced by Harvards Office of Sexual Assault Prevention and Response, provides a first-person account of such a coupling:
What can I tell you about being raped? Very little. I remember drinking with some girlfriends and then heading to a party in the house that some seniors were throwing. Im told that I walked in and within 5 minutes was making out with one of the guys who lived there, who Id talked to some in the dining hall but never really hung out with. I may have initiated it. I dont remember arriving at the party; I dimly remember waking up at some point in the early morning in this guys room. I remember him walking me back to my room. I couldnt have made it alone; I still had too much alcohol in my system to even stand up straight. I made myself vulnerable and even now its hard to think that someone here who I have talked and laughed with could be cold-hearted enough to take advantage of that vulnerability. Id rather, sometimes, take half the blame than believe that a profound evil can exist in mankind. But its easy for me to say, that, of the two of us, Im the only one who still has nightmares, found myself panicking and detaching during sex for many months afterwards, and spent more time looking into the abyss than any one person should.
The inequalities of the consequences of the night, the actions taken unintentionally or not, have changed the course of only one of our lives, irrevocably and profoundly.
Now perhaps the male willfully exploited the narrators self-inflicted incapacitation; if so, he deserves censure for taking advantage of a female in distress. But to hold the narrator completely without responsibility requires stripping women of volition and moral agency. Though the Harvard victim does not remember her actions, its highly unlikely that she passed out upon arriving at the party and was dragged away like roadkill while other students looked on. Rather, she probably participated voluntarily in the usual prelude to intercourse, and probably even in intercourse itself, however woozily.
Even if the Harvard victims drunkenness cancels any responsibility that she might share for the interactions finale, is she equally without responsibility for all of her behavior up to that point, including getting so drunk that she cant remember anything? Campus rape ideology holds that inebriation strips women of responsibility for their actions but preserves male responsibility not only for their own actions but for their partners as well. Thus do men again become the guardians of female well-being.
As for the storys maudlin melodrama, perhaps the narrators life really has been irrevocably changed, for which one sympathizes. One cant help observing, however, that the effect of this profound evil on at least her sex life appears to have been minimalshe detached during sex for many months afterwards, but sex she most certainly had. Real rape victims, however, can fear physical intimacy for years, along with suffering a host of other terrors. We dont know if the narrators look into the abyss led her to reconsider getting plastered before parties and initiating sexual contact with casual acquaintances. But if a Harvard student doesnt understand that getting very drunk and becoming physically involved with a boy at a hookup party carries a serious probability of intercourse, shes at the wrong university, if she should be at college at all.
A large number of complicating factors make the Saturday Night story a far more problematic case than the term rape usually implies. Unlike the campus rape industry, most students are well aware of those complicating factors, which is why there are so few rape charges brought for college sex. But if the rape industrialists are so sure that foreseeable and seemingly cooperative drunken sex amounts to rape, there are some obvious steps that they could take to prevent it. Above all, they could persuade girls not to put themselves into situations whose likely outcome is intercourse. Specifically: dont get drunk, dont get into bed with a guy, and dont take off your clothes or allow them to be removed. Once youre in that situation, the rape activists could say, its going to be hard to halt the proceedings, for lots of complex emotional reasons. Were this advice heeded, the campus rape epidemic would be wiped out overnight.
But suggest to a rape bureaucrat that female students should behave with greater sexual restraint as a preventive measure, and you might as well be saying that the girls should enter a convent or don the burka. I am uncomfortable with the idea, e-mailed Hillary Wing-Richards, the associate director of the Office of Sexual Assault Prevention and Womens Resource Center at James Madison University in Virginia. This indicates that if [female students] are raped it could be their faultit is never their faultand how one dresses does not invite rape or violence. . . . I would never allow my staff or myself to send the message it is the victims fault due to their dress or lack of restraint in any way. Putting on a tight tank top doesnt, of course, lead to what the bureaucrats call rape. But taking off that tank top does increase the risk of sexual intercourse that will be later regretted, especially when the tank-topper has been intently mainlining rum and Cokes all evening.
The baby boomers who demanded the dismantling of all campus rules governing the relations between the sexes now sit in deans offices and student-counseling services. They cannot turn around and argue for reregulating sex, even on pragmatic grounds. Instead, they have responded to the fallout of the college sexual revolution with bizarre and anachronistic legalism. Campuses have created a judicial infrastructure for responding to postcoital second thoughts more complex than that required to adjudicate maritime commerce claims in Renaissance Venice.
University of Virginia students, for example, have at least three different procedural channels open to them following carnal knowledge: they may demand a formal adjudication before the Sexual Assault Board; they can request a Structured Meeting with the Office of the Dean of Students by filing a formal complaint; or they can seek voluntary mediation. The Structured Meetings are presided over by the chair of the Sexual Assault Board, with assistance from another board member or senior staff of the Office of the Dean of Students. The Structured Meeting, according to the university, is an opportunity for the complainant to confront the accused and communicate their feelings and perceptions regarding the incident, the impact of the incident and their wishes and expectations regarding protection in the future. Mediation, on the other hand, allows both you and the accused to discuss your respective understandings of the assault with the guidance of a trained professional, says the schools sexual-assault center.
Rarely have primal lust and carousing been more weirdly paired with their opposites. Out in the real world, people who regret a sexual coupling must work it out on their own; no counterpart exists outside academia for this superstructure of hearings, mediations, and negotiated settlements. If youve actually been raped, you go to criminal courtbut the overwhelming majority of campus rape cases that take up administration time and resources would get thrown out of court in a twinkling, which is why theyre almost never prosecuted. Indeed, if the campus rape industry really believes that these hookup encounters are rape, it is unconscionable to leave them to flimsy academic procedures. Universities are equipped to handle plagiarism, not rape, observes University of Pennsylvania history professor Alan Charles Kors. Sexual-assault charges, if true, are so serious as to belong only in the criminal system.
Risk-management consultants travel the country to help colleges craft legal rules for student sexual congress. These rules presume that an activity originating in inchoate desire, whose nuances have taxed the expressive powers of poets, artists, and philosophers for centuries, can be reduced to a species of commercial code. The process of crafting these rules combines a voyeuristic prurience and a seeming cluelessness about sex. It is fun, writes Alan D. Berkowitz, a popular campus rape lecturer and consultant, to ask students how they know if someone is sexually interested in them. (Fun for whom? one must ask.) Continues Berkowitz: Many of the responses rely on guesswork and inference to determine sexual intent. Such signaling mechanisms, dating from the dawn of the human race, are no longer acceptable on the rape-sensitized campus. In fact, explains our consultant, sexual intent can only be determined by clear and unambiguous communication about what is desired. So much for seduction and romance; bring in the MBAs and lawyers.
The campus sex-management industry locks in its livelihood by introducing a specious clarity to what is inherently mysterious and an equally specious complexity to what is straightforward. Both the pseudo-clarity and pseudo-complexity work in a womans favor, of course. If one partner puts a condom on the other, does that signify that they are consenting to intercourse? asks Berkowitz. Short of guiding the thus-sheathed instrumentality to port, its hard to imagine a clearer signal of consent. But perhaps a girl who has just so outfitted her partner will decide after the fact that she has been rapedso better to declare the action, as Berkowitz does, inherently ambiguous. He recommends instead that colleges require clear verbal consent for sex, a policy that the recently disbanded Antioch College introduced in the early 1990s to universal derision.
The university is sneaking back in its in loco parentis oversight of student sexual relations, but it has replaced the moral content of that regulation with supposedly neutral legal procedure. The generation that got rid of parietal rules has re-created a form of bedroom oversight as pervasive as Benthams Panopticon.
But the post-1960s university is nothing if not capacious. It has institutionalized every strand of adolescent-inspired rebellion familiar since student sit-in days. The campus rape industry may decry ubiquitous male predation, but a campus sex industry puts bureaucratic clout behind the message that students should have recreational sex at every opportunity.
In late October, for example, New York Universitys professional sexpert set up her wares in the light-filled atrium of the Kimmel Student Center. Along with the usual baskets of lubricated condoms, female condoms, and dental dams (a lesbian-inspired latex innovation for safe oral sex), Alyssa La Fosse, looking thoroughly professional in a neatly coiffed bun, also provided brightly colored instructional sheets on such important topics as How to Female Ejaculate (First take some time to get aroused. Lube up your fingers and let them do the walking) and Masturbation Tips for Girls (Draw a circle around your clitoris with your index finger). In a heroic effort at inclusiveness, she also provided a pamphlet called Exploring Your Options: Abstinence, but a reader could be forgiven for thinking that he had mistakenly grabbed the menu of activities at a West Village bathhouse. NYUs officially approved abstinence options include outercourse, mutual masturbation, pornography, and sex toys such as vibrators, dildos, and a paddle. Ever the responsible parent-surrogate, NYU recommends that abstinence practitioners cover their sex toys with a condom if they are to be inserted in the mouth, anus, or vagina.
The students passing La Fosses table showed a greater interest in the free Hersheys Kisses than in the latex accessories and informational sheets; very occasionally, someone would grab a condom. No one brought questions about sexuality or sexual health to La Fosse, despite the universitys official invitation to do so. NYU is not about to be daunted in its mission of promoting better sex, however. So it also offers workshops on orgasmshow to achieve that (sometimes elusive) stateand Sex Toys for Safer Sex (an evening with rubber, silicone, and vibrating toys) in residence halls and various student clubs.
Similarly, Brown Universitys Student Services helps students answer the compelling question: How can I bring sex toys into my relationship? Brown categorizes sex toys by function (Some sex toys are meant to be used more gently, while others are used for sexual acts involving dominance and submission . . . such as restraints, blindfolds, and whips) and offers the usual safe-sex caveats (If sharing sex toys, such as dildos, butt plugs, or vibrators, use condoms and dental dams). UCLAs Arthur Ashe Student Health and Wellness Center advises on how a man might increase the amount of time before he ejaculates; Tufts Universitys 2006 Sex Fair featured a Dildo Ring Toss and dental-dam slingshots; and Barnard College suggests that participants in sadomasochistic sex, where no, please dont . . . can be a part of the fun, agree on a safeword that will stop all play immediately. A Princeton student who thinks that a docking sleeve may be some kind of maritime hardware, or a suction device something used for plumbing, had better bone up, so to speak, before playing the schools official Safer Sex Jeopardy game, because these objects are in the grab bag categories of penile toys and nipple toys, respectively. Encyclopedic knowledge is advisable: game developers list six types of vibrators, including the rabbit vibrator, and eight kinds of penile toys, including the pocket pussy.
By now, universities have traveled so far from their original task of immersing students in the greatest intellectual and artistic creations of humanity that criticizing any particular detour seems arbitrary. Still, the question presents itself: Why, exactly, are the schools offering workshops on orgasms and sex toys instead of on Michelangelos Campidoglio or Pushkins Eugene Onegin? Are students already so saturated with knowledge of Renaissance humanism or the evolution of constitutional democracy, say, that colleges can happily reroute resources to matters readily available on porn websites?
Strange Bedfellows at William and Mary
Anyone who still thinks of sorority girls as cashmere-clad innocents, giggling as they wait by the phone for that special someone to call, wont understand much of the campus date rape scene. A few incidents at the College of William and Mary, a pioneer in sexual-assault awareness, may correct lingering misconceptions.
In October 2005, at a Delta Delta Delta formal, drunken sorority girls careened through the hosts house, vomiting, falling, and breaking furnishings. One girl ran naked through a hallway; another was found half-naked with a male on the bed in the master suite. A third had intercourse with her escort in a different bedroom. On the bus back from the formal, she was seen kissing her escort; once she arrived home, she had sex with a different male. Later, she accused her escort of rape. The district attorney declined to prosecute the girls rape charges. William and Mary, however, had already forced the defendant to leave school and, even after the D.A.s decision, wouldnt let him return until his accuser graduated. The defendant sued his accuser for $5.5 million for defamation; the parties settled out of court.
The incident wasnt as unusual as it sounds. A year earlier, a William and Mary student had charged rape after having provided a condom to her partner for intercourse. The boy had cofounded the national antirape organization One in Four; the school suspended him for a year, anyway. In an earlier incident, a drunken sorority girl was filmed giving oral sex to seven men. She cried rape when her boyfriend found out. William and Mary found one of the recipients, who had taped the event, guilty of assault and suspended him.
But in the fall semester of 2005, rape charges spread through William and Mary like witchcraft accusations in a medieval village. In short succession after the Delta Delta Delta bacchanal, three more students accused acquaintances of rape. Only one of these three additional victims pressed charges in court, however, and she quickly dropped the case.
A fifth rape incident around the same time followed a different pattern. In November 2005, a William and Mary student woke up in the middle of the night with a knife at her throat. A 23-year-old stranger with a prior conviction for peeping at her apartment complex had broken into her apartment; he raped her, threatened her roommate at knifepoint, and left with two stolen cell phones and cash. The rapist was caught, convicted, and sentenced to 57 years in prison.
Guess which incident got the most attention at William and Mary? The Delta Delta Delta formal rape. Like many stranger rapists on campus, the knifepoint assailant was black, and thus an unattractive target for politically correct protest. (The 2006 Duke stripper case, by contrast, seemingly provided the ideal and, for the industry, sadly rare configuration: white rapists and a black victim.)
Stranger rapes also provide less opportunity for bureaucratic expansion. After the spate of date rapes, William and Marys vice president for student affairs announced that the school would hire a full-time sexual-assault educator, in addition to its existing sexual-assault services and counseling staff and numerous sexual-assault awareness organizations. Freshmen would now have to attend a gender-specific sexual-assault awareness program. None of this new apparatusfor instance, the Equality Wheel, which explains the dynamics of a healthy relationshiphas the slightest relevance to stranger rapes.
However, the cross-currents of campus political correctness are so intense that they produce some surprising twists. William and Marys sexual-assault resources webpage invites visitors to listen to what people affected by sexual assault are sharing. It then offers ten audio accounts of sexual assaults, exactly half of which are male. My experience came very close to killing me, one man reports. One would need the skills of a Kremlinologist to interpret this gender lineup, and the site doesnt explain who exactly these voices arebut its hard to escape the impression that William and Mary has admitted either a huge gay community or some very beefy women. Diversity politics, gay politics, and the sexual-assault movement produce strange bedfellows.
Columbia Universitys Go Ask Alice website illustrates the dilemma posed by a colleges simultaneous advocacy of healthy sexuality and of the rape is everywhere ideology. Go Ask Alice is run by Columbias Health Services; it answers both nonsexual health queries and such burning questions as: Sex with four friendsMutual? and Will it ever be good for me? (from a virgin). In one post, titled Im sure I was drunk, but Im not sure if I had sex, Alice takes up the classic hookup scenario: a girl who has no recollection of whether she had intercourse during a drunken encounter and now wonders if shes pregnant. Alices initial reaction is pure hip-to-free-love toleration: Depending upon your relationship with your partner, you may want to ask what happened. Understandably, this might feel awkward and embarrassing, but the conversation might . . . help you to understand what happened and what steps you might decide to take. Absent that pesky worry about insemination, there would presumably be no compelling reason to engage in something as awkward and embarrassing as a post-roll-in-the-hay conversation.
But then a shadow passes over the horizon: the date-rape threat. On a darker note, continues Alice, its possible your experience may have been non-consensual, considering that you were drunk and dont remember exactly what happened. Alice recommends a call to Columbias Rape Crisis/Anti-Violence Support Center (officially dedicated to speaking our truths about sexual violence). Alices advice shows the incoherence of the contemporary universitys multiple stances toward college sex. Its hard to speak your truths about sexual violence when your involvement with your potential date-rapist is so tenuous that its awkward to speak to him. And the support center cant know whether the encounter was consensual. But Alice declines to condemn the behavior that both got the girl into her predicament and erased her memory of it.
The only lesson that Alice offers is that the girl mightpurely as an optional matterwant to think about how alcohol affected her. As for rethinking whether she should be getting into bed with someone whom, Alice presumes, she would be reluctant to contact the next day, well, that never comes up. Members of the multifaceted campus sex bureaucracy never seem to consider the possibility that the libertinism that one administrative branch champions, and the sex that another branch portrays as rape, may be inextricably linked.
Modern feminists defined the right to be promiscuous as a cornerstone of female equality. Understandably, they now hesitate to acknowledge that sex is a more complicated force than was foreseen. Rather than recognizing that no-consequences sex may be a contradiction in terms, however, the campus rape industry claims that what it calls campus rape is about not sex but rather politicsthe male desire to subordinate women. The University of Virginia Womens Center intones that rape or sexual assault is not an act of sex or lustits about aggression, power, and humiliation, using sex as the weapon. The rapists goal is domination.
This characterization may or may not describe the psychopathic violence of stranger rape. But it is an absurd description of the barnyard rutting that undergraduate men, happily released from older constraints, seek. The guys who push themselves on women at keggers are after one thing only, and its not a reinstatement of the patriarchy. Each would be perfectly content if his partner for the evening becomes president of the United States one day, so long as she lets him take off her panties tonight.
One group on campus isnt buying the politics of the campus rape movement, however: students. To the despair of rape industrialists everywhere, students have held on to the view that women usually have considerable power to determine whether a campus social event ends with intercourse.
Rutgers University Sexual Assault Services surveyed student athletes about violence against women in the 200102 academic year. The female teams were more direct, the survey reported, in expressing the idea that women who are raped sometimes put themselves in those situations. A female athlete told interviewers: When we go out to parties, and I see girls and the way they dress and the way they act . . . and just the way they are, under the influence and um, then they like accuse them of like, oh yeah, my boyfriend did this to me or whatever, I honestly always think its their fault. Another brainwashed victim of the rape culture.
Equally maddening must be the reaction that sometimes greets performers in Sex Signals, an improvisational show on date rape whose venues include Harvard, Yale, and schools throughout the Midwest. Sometimes we get women who are advocates for men, the shows founders told a Chicago public radio station this October, barely concealing their disbelief. They blame the victim and try to find out what the victim did so they wont do it. Such worrisome self-help efforts could shut down the campus rape industry.
Promiscuity is a word that you will never see in the pages of a campus rape center publication; it is equally repugnant to the sexual liberationist strand of feminism and to the Catherine Mac-Kinnonite all-sex-is-rape strand. But its an idea that wont go away among the student Lumpenproletariat. Students refer to sororistutesthose wild and crazy Greek women so often featured in Girls Gone Wild videos. And they persist in seeing a connection between promiscuity and the alleged campus rape epidemic. A Rutgers University freshman says that he knows women who claim to have been sexually assaulted, but adds: They dont have the best reputation. Sometimes its hard to believe that kind of stuff.
Rape consultant David Lisak faced a similar problem this November: an auditorium of Rutgers students who kept treating women as moral agents. He might have sensed the trouble ahead when in response to a photo array of what Lisak calls undetected rapists, a girl asked: Why are there only white men? Am I blind? It went downhill from there. Lisak did his best to send a tremor of fear through the audience with the news that rape happens with terrifying frequency. Im not talking of someone who comes onto campus but students, Rutgers students, who prowl for victims in bars, parties, wherever alcohol is being consumed. He then played a dramatized interview with a student rapist at a fraternity that had deliberately set aside a room for raping girls during parties, according to Lisak. The students werent buying it. I dont understand why these parties dont become infamous among girls, wondered one. Another asked: Are you saying that the frat brothers decided that this room would be used for committing sexual assault, or was it just: Maybe Ill get lucky, and if I do, Ill go there? And then someone asked the most dangerous question of all: Shouldnt the victim have had a little bit of education beforehand? We all know the dangers of parties. The victim had miscalculations on her part; alcohol can lead to things.
In a column this November in the University of Virginias student newspaper, third-year student Katelyn Kiley gave the real scoop on frat parties: Theyre filled with boys hoping to have sex. She did not call these boys rapists. She did not demonize their sex drive. She merely offered some practical wisdom to the scantily clad freshman girls trooping off to Virginias fraternity row: That frat boy really is just trying to get into your pants. Most disturbingly, she advised the girls to exercise sexual control: So dance with that good-looking guy. If he offers, you can even go up to his room to get a mixed drink. . . . Flirt. But its probably a good idea to keep your clothes on, and at the end of the night, to go home to your own bed. Interestingly enough, thats how you get them to keep asking you back.
You can read thousands of pages of rape crisis center hysteria without coming across such bracing common sense. Amazingly, Kiley hasnt received any of the millions of dollars that feminists in the federal government have showered on campuses to prevent what they call rape.
Some student rebels are going one step further: organizing in favor of sexual restraint. Such newly created campus groups as the Love and Fidelity Network and the True Love Revolution advocate an alternative to the rampant regret sex of the hookup scene: wait until marriage. Their message would do more to return a modicum of manners to campus maleand femalebehavior than endless harangues about the rape culture ever could.
Maybe these young iconoclasts can take up another discredited idea: college is for learning. The adults in charge have gone deaf to the siren call of beauty that for centuries lured people to the classics. But fighting male dominance or catering to the libidinal impulses released in the 1960s are sorry substitutes for the pursuit of knowledge. The campus rape and sex industries are signs of how hollow the university has become.
Heather Mac Donald is a contributing editor of City Journal and the John M. Olin Fellow at the Manhattan Institute. Her most recent book, coauthored with Victor Davis Hanson and Steven Malanga, is The Immigration Solution.