Phi Kappa Psi at U of Virginia Voluntarily Suspends Activities

[honorgal]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Both Pike and Sigma Nu shut down their chapters in advance of this. You don't have chapters voluntarily shutting down their Alpha chapters (Pike) and Beta chapters (Sigma Nu) unless they believe there are other options.

I don't believe a competent administrator can see those things happening around them and conclude there is no cause for concern. I know that governing bodies of fraternities around the country are going to really be talking about this issue over the next year. I expect some major initiatives.

I thought those shut downs were over hazing violations?

[Kevin]

They were the kinds of hazing violations which don't usually result in the shutting down of a chapter. In the case of Pi Kappa Alpha's Alpha chapter, pledges were forced to take bites from a raw onion while being showered with various condiments. In Sigma Nu's case, there was some excessive forced physical exercise. I didn't think either case was particularly extreme.

[1964Alum]

ITA with you, TriDeltaSallie. As a starter, UVA needs to stop referring to " Sexual Misconduct" and call is what it is, "Criminal Felony Rape." This is so beyond the pale and so far afield from anything I have ever heard of it's like another universe to me.

[TriDeltaSallie]

Originally Posted by 1964Alum

ITA with you, TriDeltaSallie. As a starter, UVA needs to stop referring to " Sexual Misconduct" and call is what it is, "Criminal Felony Rape."

THIS.

I watched the video of Eramo and wanted to throw something at the screen every time she said sexual misconduct.

IT IS CRIMINAL FELONY RAPE.

In the real world, people rot in prison for years for this.

At UVA when they run into classmate they just raped over the weekend they tell her that they had a great time with her.

SICK. SICK. SICK.

[Low D Flat]

Basically, the law requires coed schools to maintain environments where women have equal access to education. If women are being run off campus, harassed, in fear, etc. due to the prevalence of rape and other kinds of abuse at the hands of their classmates, then they don't have equal access to education at that school. It's no different, from a legal perspective, from a school that requires all the women to take Home Ec and doesn't allow them to major in physics.

This is not just in education law; this is the theory that applies in workplaces, too. If you're being sexually harassed at work, then as far as the institution's responsibility is concerned, it doesn't matter whether it's your co-worker or the CEO that's harassing you. If the bosses know that the environment is toxic and discriminatory, and they don't act to fix it, they're in violation of the law.

[33girl]

Originally Posted by Low D Flat

Basically, the law requires coed schools to maintain environments where women have equal access to education. If women are being run off campus, harassed, in fear, etc. due to the prevalence of rape and other kinds of abuse at the hands of their classmates, then they don't have equal access to education at that school. It's no different, from a legal perspective, from a school that requires all the women to take Home Ec and doesn't allow them to major in physics.

This is not just in education law; this is the theory that applies in workplaces, too. If you're being sexually harassed at work, then as far as the institution's responsibility is concerned, it doesn't matter whether it's your co-worker or the CEO that's harassing you. If the bosses know that the environment is toxic and discriminatory, and they don't act to fix it, they're in violation of the law.

That seems awfully subjective for a statute that is so concerned with sheer numbers. Say a large number of women leave a school, one of them because of a sexual assault, but the remainder because a formerly all male school nearby has finally opened up to women and it has a better academic reputation. Can that one woman attempt to say this is a title IX violation?

This just doesn't make sense to me - it's like piggybacking one thing on top of another and the 2 things really don't mesh.

[33girl]

And also - if UVA really is as full of cavemen as is suggested, I can't imagine it's a very safe or welcoming place for gay men either. What statute can they use? Wouldn't it be better to compel the university to change by using laws that say there has to be a safe environment for everyone, regardless of genitalia?

[pinksequins]

I'm confused, Nanners. I read DBB's comment as meaning that the victim not only has to relive the trauma through testimony but also skepticism by authorities as to the validity of the claim. In sum, it can be another horrific experience. Did I miss something?

[WhiteRose1912]

Originally Posted by pinksequins

I'm confused, Nanners. I read DBB's comment as meaning that the victim not only has to relive the trauma through testimony but also skepticism by authorities as to the validity of the claim. In sum, it can be another horrific experience. Did I miss something?

DBB was telling another woman (cinder) that since she had a different opinion on how rape should be handled, she clearly has no idea what it's like to be a rape victim trying to come forward to police, and dismissed cinder's opinion and experiences based on that assumption. That's the issue. I'm surprised to see this coming from DBB.

[DeltaBetaBaby]

Originally Posted by Nanners52674

I really respect you as a member but I'm incredibly bothered with your message. No one knows if someone has been raped and in a discussion about rape, to suggest to a woman that she has no idea what happens when a rape is reported is so far over the line. You have no idea who you're really saying this to. But if gosh forbid they happened to be a rape survivor you come off sounding like a hard assed bitch.

You're right; I made the unconscious assumption that someone (no matter their gender) advocating that all rapes be reported to the legal system is not someone who has reported a rape to the legal system. Based on my experience with rape survivors, I don't know a single one who would take that stance, but that doesn't mean there aren't some who would. Mea culpa.

[DrPhil]

Some rape survivors (and organizations that address sexual assault and rape) advocate and advise reporting to police and the legal system. Doing so is usually an overall bad experience but it is typically considered necessary. Even if it is often ineffective for some individuals it can be effective in bringing attention to the issue and giving a larger voice.

Examples: https://rainn.org/get-information/le...reporting-rape

There are far more accounts of why people do not report rapes to the police but it isn't the case that all rape victims would advise other rape victims to not report rape to the police.

[DeltaBetaBaby]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

Some rape survivors (and organizations that address sexual assault and rape) advocate and advise reporting to police and the legal system. Doing so is usually an overall bad experience but it is typically considered necessary. Even if it is often ineffective for some individuals it can be effective in bringing attention to the issue and giving a larger voice.

Examples: https://rainn.org/get-information/le...reporting-rape

There are far more accounts of why people do not report rapes to the police but it isn't the case that all rape victims would advise other rape victims to not report rape to the police.

Yes, but that's a little different from mandatory reporting, which is how I had read things upthread. The problem is taking the choice away from the survivor; they should be able to go to the university and say they need support without the university automatically going to LE.

All that said, I overstepped, because someone who reported to the university and had a terrible experience would very likely want the university out of it and LE in. Of course, either entity can totally f*ck it up, as we've seen at UVA, and recently in the city of New Orleans.

I was trying to think about what an ideal system would look like, and I don't really know, except that it needs to be centered around the survivor and what they want.

[Low D Flat]

Ah -- there is no federal statute banning discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation in either education or employment. There are state and local laws in some places. But where those laws don't exist, it's perfectly legal for a school to expel a student or for a boss to fire an employee for being gay.

The Title IX violation doesn't depend on women leaving the school. That's just an extreme example of how a discriminatory environment can interfere with access to education. If men get to walk around feeling safe and women don't, and the school doesn't make any effort to change that, that's potentially a Title IX violation, too. But there has to be pretty powerful evidence before any federal agency will sanction a school. Just a pattern of women enrolling and leaving wouldn't do it.

[33girl]

Originally Posted by Low D Flat

But there has to be pretty powerful evidence before any federal agency will sanction a school. Just a pattern of women enrolling and leaving wouldn't do it.

That's my point. It seems like throwing Title IX around is kind of silly when you pretty much have to have the equivalent of a herd of elephants in the room to get anything to stick.

[DrPhil]

I see what you mean. There is no ideal system.

I think the people who want it to be reported are speaking in terms of whichever method is most fair and less stressful for the accuser and the accused (of course, not everyone is concerned with fairness and stress of the accused). This is so complex and what works for one situation may not work for another situation.