This article mentions sexual assault
Given the smaller scale on which American universities signify societal power relations, college campuses often constitute a microcosm in which policy changes can be applied and evaluated. In this way, universities not only echo societal issues but magnify them. Specifically, the issue of sexual assault controversies on campuses displays societal attitudes on the topic thus highlighting the priorities of national, state, and administrative policymakers. To demystify this issue, let’s synthesize the literature on campus sexual assault policy and practice by way of case studies on similar, progressive state legislation (California) and universities (Stanford) to illustrate the resulting political compromises as well as their short and long-term consequences.
Influence of the Media
Policies are not the only factors to be considered when discussing the real-world effects of sexual violence. In the modern-day, media coverage can significantly impact any policies felt by specific populations. Additionally, the media can either highlight or hide certain issues. Highlighting cases of sexual assault often will arouse public outrage for a short amount of time until the news cycle moves on. Further, in the media coverage of a sexual assault case, issues can be blown out of proportion to enhance the ethos draw of the event. This illustrates the fact that there is almost no way for the media to present an unbiased report of such a complex issue, although this was the intention behind free media at the beginning of democracy.
In exploring this, the case of Chanel Miller and Brock Turner displays the effects of social attitudes influencing policy change. Chanel Miller, a 2014 graduate from UC Santa Barbara’s College of Creative Studies, survived an attack from Stanford University star swimmer, Brock Turner, in January 2015. The case went to court and gartered national attention via the media. One of the reasons for this was the public outrage surrounding the perceived under-sentencing of her attacker. This allowed for Miller’s situation and Tuner's accusation to serve as a catalyst for change in state sexual assault policies.
Another reason the case is widely-known is simply due to the sensationalism used by the media in describing the assault. Miller’s emotional victim statement was published and assault survivors around the world felt seen in her words. Although, also important to consider is that Miller’s words were shortened and taken out of context by the media reports, directly impacting how the public understood the situation. Therefore, while the media is a powerful force, it has little responsibility to be grounded in fact when algorithm “clicks” are prioritized. This even pushed Miller to write a book on her experience, taking back her power in utilizing the media to tell her own story.
Since Turner was a student-athlete at a prominent university, both the judge on his case and the media were more inclined to paint him in a good light. Character letters read in court in support of Turner were also presented and research shows that these had a significant impact on the shorter sentencing received and served. While this case is generally seen as a mishandling of the justice system, considering both the accused’s side and the victim’s side in a case is complex and complicated by media attention even in the university setting.
Federal Response
Title IX is a portion of the Education Amendments of 1972 that protects against gender-based discrimination. This includes allowing women to participate in sports and accommodating disabilities to a certain extent. The actual language of the policy only has one sentence that relates to sexual violence in Section 1681(a). Clearly, because this complicated issue is reduced to a single sentence in a federal policy, state policy must be more explicit and comprehensive to cover any “gray area.” Additionally, because sexual assault on college campuses has been proven to be different than sexual violence off college campuses, other policies and resources are needed in this realm.
State Response
In regards to staff and faculty training to comply with federal regulations, a critical and controversial part of state policies is Mandatory Reporters. While data on this issue is generally still in need of collection and aggregation, preliminary findings suggest that there is overwhelming support for the policy. This is in spite of the fact that mandatory reporting can require individuals to contact the police even when the survivor does not desire this intervention, significantly limiting their autonomy.
In getting to this point, reports may be utilized to understand the barriers students face in sexual assault scenarios. Obstacles rated as most important included shame, guilt, embarrassment, not wanting friends and family to know of the incident, reporting confidentiality concerns, and a fear of not being believed. Furthermore, gendered differences in responses indicate specific concerns related to gendered power relations and societal stigma. For example, male sexual assault survivor report being most scared of being perceived as gay, while female sexual assault survivor report being most scared of retaliation from their perpetrator.
California Case Study
Specifically, California’s progressive stance on sexual assault offers improved regulations related to filling the gaps left by Title IX, which could be applied to other states. California AB 636 allowed universities to reveal the identity of an assailant to local law enforcement if that assailant is deemed a serious threat. Another framework for envisioning these policies in multiple states includes California’s “Yes Means Yes” policy. This policy requires both public and private colleges that receive state funding to adopt specific consent standards. While this policy offers a framework that includes the need for an enthusiastic “yes” when engaging in intimate activity, there is no uniform standard of consent established or examples of what this may look like. The federal and state, therefore, outlines for university requirements are only the beginning of what should be addressed to fully handle sexual assault cases across states.
Conclusion
Policy is not made, nor is it successful, in a vacuum; many government actors and entities must collaborate to accomplish equity objectives. While federal regulations dictate and demand certain areas of the issue be addressed, the standardization of these policies falls mainly on the state actors administering them and, occasionally, on the individual private universities. Additionally, many factors influence the realistic workings of these policies in practice including the media and societal attitudes, complicating this already complex issue. Federal policies have only just begun to define, target, and address sexual assault controversies on college campuses. In working towards justice for sexual assault survivors, the “gray area” of Title IX must be dealt with strategically and with a strong social justice hand by ways of state and university supplementary policy.
By Emily Carriere