The CardBoard
Larger question re. sexual violence and Brock Turner - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Larger question re. sexual violence and Brock Turner (/thread-12138.html)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Larger question re. sexual violence and Brock Turner - robin - 06-07-2016

Stanford issued a "Brock Turner case" press release yesterday through Lisa Lapin of University Communications.  The release states in pertinent part: "…Stanford University, its students, its police and its staff members did everything they could."  While doing everything apparently includes purging Turner's name from the 2014-2015 Stanford University swim roster, it does not include eliminating what all-too-often provides young male students with the means and opportunity to commit the crime of sexual assault -- fraternities that throw parties at which consumption of alcohol is a major emphasis. 

When I transferred to Stanford in 1974 I was a member of Kappa Kappa Gamma ("KKG"), a national sorority.  Fraternity members who feared the Stanford Housing Office would use Title IX to eliminate campus fraternities asked me (and two transferees who also were KKG members) to start a KKG chapter at Stanford.  (These enterprising boys said they already had requested and obtained a pledge of support from KKG "National" for a Stanford chapter.)  Having attended three different Pac-12 schools where the Greek system was strong, we three women were familiar with the system's culture and none of us thought the culture was one that would benefit Stanford.  Although we refused the opportunity the fraternity boys offered, somehow sororities returned to Stanford after we left and the university's (existing) fraternities were "saved" the impact of Title IX.

While one can debate whether bureaucratic snafu or sexism explains Stanford's failure to investigate and take action in connection with the assault my husband witnessed in a Stanford dorm in 1976 (by a future U. S. Congressman who apparently continued to prey on women after he graduated from Stanford -- see my post in reply to ColoradoTree's original post on "Brock Turner sentenced"), I think we all can agree using America's criminal justice system to prosecute campus-based sexual assaults is not the best way to permanently reduce violence against women.  While I am sympathetic to Michele Dauber's frustration as a woman and lawyer (like Brooksley Born I have been the target of bullies who retaliated when I stated my opinion on an economic matter and like David Wu I went on to earn a law degree after I earned my Stanford biological sciences degree), I do not think using the recall process against judges such as Persky provides the answer.  (Nor do I think criticizing Turner's father for the words he wrote in an effort to support his son is appropriate.)  Only when Stanford bans sororities and fraternities can the university legitimately make the claim it has done everything it can do.

Re: Larger question re. sexual violence and Brock Turner - winflop - 06-07-2016

Robin, with all due respect to your personal experiences, I think that to take the actions of individuals and project that onto an entire group is not appropriate.

My objection to the press release is that Stanford did not do everything it could.  Not even close.

- Has Stanford provided counseling to the woman who was assaulted by its student on its campus outside a party in one of its buildings being run by other students?  No, but Stanford should be paying for this woman's counseling/psychiatric treatment - not because it's legally obligated but because that's the right thing to do.

- Has Stanford mandated training on sexual assault for EVERY student and EVERY member of its faculty and staff?  Because it's not just the young men who need it to reduce the occurrence.  It's the RA's in the women's/coed residences and the faculty & staff who interact with students who need to know what signs to look for.  And sexual assault doesn't just happen to students - it can happen to faculty & staff too.

- Has Stanford done any kind of honest assessment of the frequency of sexual assault on campus so that it can have some reasonably unbiased and non-anecdotal data on what's happening on its property?  No, it hasn't.

I really hope the new President and Provost tackle this issue head-on, and I hope that alums like us encourage the SAA to speak on our behalf that this must be a top priority of the new administration.

Re: Larger question re. sexual violence and Brock Turner - robin - 06-07-2016

I think my personal experience and the experiences of my fellow alumnae properly allow for projection about the Greek system, but I agree offering counseling to the girl Turner victimized may be appropriate (albeit potentially unlikely while the possibility of legal action is a reality).  And perhaps you have a unique vantage re. mandated sexual assault training for Stanford male/female faculty/staff, but from my many years practicing corporate employment law I suspect this training already is a reality and whether a 20-year-old student or a seasoned male lawyer is involved training only goes so far in preventing sexual violence/harassment.  (The men who bullied me after I made a comment about paying women equally for their equal work were well-trained re. applicable civil rights laws.) 

Honest assessment of the frequency of sexual assault certainly is in order, but women often are reluctant to come forward to report such assaults.  (Indeed, based on the reports I have seen even Brock Turner’s victim expects confidentiality.)  Institutional “stepping to the plate” about the deleterious effects of fraternity culture seems in order. 

I will continue to hope the new administration makes the elimination of on-campus sororities and fraternities a priority and that Stanford's male and female alums support the university taking such a position as a step toward ending violence toward women.

Re: Larger question re. sexual violence and Brock Turner - oldalum - 06-07-2016

My son is currently in a fraternity at another university (he did not apply to Stanford, heaven forfend) where the controls over fraternity parties seem stronger than they were at Stanford at the time of the Brock Turner assault. When his fraternity holds a "registered" party (one that is open to all students), the university mandates that they have designated non-drinking party monitors (called the "sober party patrol"), whose job is to control admission to the party (no already intoxicated students may enter) and register any non-university students who want to come in and record who they are a guest of, ensure that no women are taken into non-public areas of the fraternity, that inappropriate behavior is not occurring at the party, and that no one has smuggled hard alcohol into the party. In addition, at his fraternity any intoxicated men or women are personally escorted back to their dorm room when they are ready to leave, if they are not in the company of a non-intoxicated known friend. The fraternity understands that any incident that occurs will result in the dissolution of the fraternity at that campus and thus has a strong incentive to ensure that nothing untoward happens. It would seem that Stanford and other universities could require the same level of attentiveness and protection.

Re: Larger question re. sexual violence and Brock Turner - fullmetal - 06-07-2016

You may imagine the outrage and indignation that would arise if Stanford's party-throwers were asked to be so responsible  :(

Re: Larger question re. sexual violence and Brock Turner - 2006alum - 06-07-2016

IIRC, all "open parties" during my time at Stanford (mid-2000s) had to be registered with OSA and everyone had to have a Stanford ID to enter, and be 21 (with ID to prove it) to get a wristband for beer. Have they changed the requirements? Otherwise, I wonder how the victim, who was not a Stanford student, even got into the party? It's irrelevant to the outcome, of course, but it makes me think enforcement is as much of a problem here as the rules themselves.

Re: Larger question re. sexual violence and Brock Turner - 82lsju - 06-07-2016

(06-07-2016, 11:07 AM)fullmetal link Wrote:You may imagine the outrage and indignation that would arise if Stanford's party-throwers were asked to be so responsible  :(

they have been, see the party registration process and planning guide here

https://stanford.app.box.com/v/stanfordpartyguide

which is pretty similar to the process described above by "oldalum" for his son's college

Re: Larger question re. sexual violence and Brock Turner - CTcard - 06-07-2016

(06-07-2016, 11:24 AM)eric link Wrote:[quote author=fullmetal link=topic=15166.msg164586#msg164586 date=1465322844]
You may imagine the outrage and indignation that would arise if Stanford's party-throwers were asked to be so responsible  :(

they have been, see the party registration process and planning guide here

https://stanford.app.box.com/v/stanfordpartyguide

which is pretty similar to the process described above by "oldalum" for his son's college
[/quote]

I was about to post the same.

There is a lot of posting about how Stanford is negligent with out making it clear what Stanford does and does not do today. That information would make it a lot easier to think about and judge Stanford's positions on these issues.

Re: Larger question re. sexual violence and Brock Turner - fullmetal - 06-07-2016

It was quite likely not an "open" party that the victim attended.  More goes on in such private parties than ever gets told :(

Re: Larger question re. sexual violence and Brock Turner - cratica - 06-07-2016

I don't think Stanford, nor any university can or should control what goes on at open parties, if off campus.  On campus is another thing entirely. 

Re: Larger question re. sexual violence and Brock Turner - BostonCard - 06-07-2016

Whether Stanford was negligent or not, I have a feeling they will be named in a suit alleging as much, so maybe we will find out in court whether Stanford was negligent, though, more likely, I would have to believe Stanford would settle such a suit with a nondisclosure agreement as part of the terms.

With regards to the original poster's points, though I see some merits to an officially sanctioned Greek system, I have a feeling that in response to episodes such as the Turner case, the University will increase restrictions on fraternities, until eventually they are either outlined outright or de facto (FWIW, I was not a fraternity member as a student).

That being said, I think fraternities and sororities are a symptom of a broader challenge that is faced by any organization where a large number of young people are congregated and given freedoms and responsibilities for the first time in their life.  You might try to strip out the Greek system from the university, but by definition, you cannot strip away 7,000 18-22 year olds living away from home for the first time.

In the best case scenario, the Greek system can be co-opted into establishing a culture of responsibility that encourages responsible alcohol consumption and a mutually respectful approach to dating and sex.  By providing mentorship and setting good examples, the Greek system could play a very positive role in preventing these sorts of problems.  The key is getting to there from where we are now.

BC

Re: Larger question re. sexual violence and Brock Turner - TreesAndBirds - 06-07-2016

Re the possibility of suing Stanford.....I think the victim would risk losing her anonymity which it seems she has understandably worked hard to maintain.

Re: Larger question re. sexual violence and Brock Turner - TreeWeird - 06-07-2016

(06-07-2016, 11:54 AM)fullmetal link Wrote:It was quite likely not an "open" party that the victim attended.  More goes on in such private parties than ever gets told :(

Quite right, unfortunately.  I have three children at other universities.  All have their rules, which are widely ignored or circumvented.  One even has a 100% ban on alcohol on campus since most of their upperclassman live off campus..  It's hard to argue with such rules, but by my observation:

- it's easier to conceal a "private party" today because most dorms built in the last several years have been apartment-like suites, usually with semi-private bathrooms.  Contrast these with more traditional dorms where it is harder (if not impossible) to conceal what's going on in a room, and virtually impossible in a communal bathroom.

- there is more emphasis on hard liquor versus beer because liquor is easier to conceal

- there is more emphasis on getting wasted pre-party since an underage student may find it harder to get a drink at a regulated party

- more parties off-campus.  This is perhaps less an issue at Stanford, but most schools don't have virtually all their undergrads living on campus in an area with housing as expensive as Palo Alto

- all of the above tends naturally to be more tempting to younger, less experienced and more vulnerable students





Re: Larger question re. sexual violence and Brock Turner - slide - 06-07-2016

curiosity question:  of the 26 (or 24) rape cases reported at Stanford in the past year, does anyone know the number involving fraternity members or were in conjunction with fraternity parties? 

in reading the linked WaPost piece I was surprised at the numbers of rape cases (and high rates of reports) at schools with no fraternities. 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/grade-point/wp/2016/06/07/these-colleges-have-the-most-reports-of-rape/



Re: Larger question re. sexual violence and Brock Turner - 2006alum - 06-07-2016

Based on the facts given in the police report by the victim, it really doesn't sound like the Stanford Administration had (or could have had) a lot to do with containing this. From the Stanford Daily reporting on the police report:

Quote:According to a statement given to police by the alleged victim the night of Jan. 18, the alleged victim was on campus with a friend. The alleged victim and her friends met at a party at KA.
One of the friends found a handle of vodka that, according of the police report, they believe was sealed at the time. The group of friends passed around the handle, and in the police report the alleged victim reported nothing unusual about its taste.
She reported being at KA for 20 to 30 minutes before leaving the house. Outside, she and her friends conversed with a group of three college-aged males. One of them gave her a beer can that the victim believes she opened herself.
After drinking the beer, the alleged victim reports not remembering anything else until waking up at the hospital.

So to recite: she and a friend went to a party, found an unopened bottle of booze that wasn't theirs, took it, drank it, and then left the party.

What should Stanford do? Eliminate all social events with alcohol? There's not even an allegation that someone at KA served her. She herself said she and her friends took the unopened bottle they found and served themselves.

Re: Larger question re. sexual violence and Brock Turner - 81alum - 06-07-2016

(06-07-2016, 01:07 PM)2006alum link Wrote:What should Stanford do? Eliminate all social events with alcohol?
Some campuses have done exactly that.  When 90% of your undergraduates are underneath the legal drinking age, there should not be unsupervised, open access to alcohol.  However, given the seniors, grad students, and employees who are of age, the better solution might be to have a real bar on campus that cards people in lieu of allowing frats to leave unsupervised liquor around at their parties.

Chico State banned all alcohol a few years ago after a frat related hazing resulted in a death.  Many campuses have banned hard alcohol, Dartmouth, Williams, Amherst, Notre Dame, etc.

http://fusion.net/story/41436/10-other-top-colleges-that-banned-hard-alcohol/

Stanford, apparently, has recently decided to join the hard alcohol ban--or at least has proposed to.  I can't find out whether the policy has been approved or not.  I wonder if the decision has been influenced by the Brock Turner case.

http://www.stanforddaily.com/2016/04/19/stanford-administration-to-discuss-alcohol-policy-with-resident-fellows/

Let's be careful, though, not to blame this incident on alcohol alone.  Most drunk people do not rape unconscious people--Turner's drunkenness--which was not so bad that it prevented him from sprinting away from the scene of the crime--is no excuse.  It is worth pointing out, however, that not only is Turner culpable as a rapist, he was also not of legal age to drink, and anyone who supplied him with alcohol was breaking the law. 

By the way, there is immense Stanford history over alcohol.  The Stanfords banned it and so did Palo Alto.  The ban lasted until 1966, apparently.  In the early days, students had to cross the city line to Mayfield (since annexed--the California Avenue district) to buy booze.  Ernie's is still there, right at what was the city line.

Edit:  just found this:

http://www.stanforddaily.com/2016/04/06/alcohol-referendum-renews-longtime-campus-conversation/

Students rejected the ban 91% to 9%.  Doesn't mean it won't happen.  Apparently the ban was ONLY going to apply to freshman dorms.  Sheeesh.

Re: Larger question re. sexual violence and Brock Turner - fullmetal - 06-07-2016

(06-07-2016, 02:08 PM)81alum link Wrote:Many campuses have banned hard alcohol, Dartmouth, Williams, Amherst, UFDFG, etc.

Dartmouth?  I don't actually believe this.

edit:
What I meant was that I didn't think such a ban would have much effect.

http://thedartmouth.com/2016/03/03/a-look-at-the-alcohol-policy-one-year-out/

Re: Larger question re. sexual violence and Brock Turner - Robbie - 06-07-2016

The increase to a federal 21 drinking age was predicated on its value to reduce drinking and driving. I'm sure there is (unfortunately) some drinking and driving on campus, but predominantly people walk (or bike.)

Most industrialized societies have a drinking age of roughly 18, and it tends to not be so strictly enforced. Do other societies have drunk driving problems? Do other societies have alcohol-related sexual assault problems? I'm sure they do, but they primarily use other levers to control them than the drinking age.

I went from being an exchange student in South America at 17 (where there was no legal drinking age, as far as I could tell) to living in Scotland (where the drinking age was completely unenforced) to going to Stanford back when the only significant alcohol rule was EANAB. The band, in particular, was under the direction of Barnes (who was not going to enforce or even suggest a limit on alcohol intake; he wasn't a hypocrite), and since it wasn't a residential organization the various ResEd rules did not apply.

Frankly, if my children were on campus I'd much rather they were stumbling home from a party on the row than driving home from a party at some rented facility off campus (in order to get around restrictive campus rules.) My daughter went to college in Manhattan - which means that she was either walking there or taking the subway. (Maybe Uber - who knows what she did with money I sent.) At least I did not fear that she was getting in a car where the driver had been drinking.

Let's solve the problems that exist. (They are real, and I don't mean to minimize them.) But no need to use drinking age or campus alcohol rules as the mechanism.

Re: Larger question re. sexual violence and Brock Turner - 2006alum - 06-07-2016

(06-07-2016, 01:07 PM)2006alum link Wrote:What should Stanford do? Eliminate all social events with alcohol?
(06-07-2016, 02:08 PM)81alum link Wrote:Some campuses have done exactly that.  When 90% of your undergraduates are underneath the legal drinking age, there should not be unsupervised, open access to alcohol.  However, given the seniors, grad students, and employees who are of age, the better solution might be to have a real bar on campus that cards people in lieu of allowing frats to leave unsupervised liquor around at their parties.

Where did you get 90%? Most of my friends turned 21 early to mid-way through junior year, so if you assume nearly all seniors can drink and by junior spring close to 75-80% of juniors can drink, that seems more like approximately 65%, not 90%?
(06-07-2016, 02:08 PM)81alum link Wrote:http://www.stanforddaily.com/2016/04/06/alcohol-referendum-renews-longtime-campus-conversation/

Students rejected the ban 91% to 9%.  Doesn't mean it won't happen.  Apparently the ban was ONLY going to apply to freshman dorms.  Sheeesh.
I can only speak for myself, but I am nearly certain I would have enjoyed my undergraduate experience substantially less if alcohol were banned. I didn't drink at all until I was 21, but it nonetheless contributed to a festive environment that generated many of my favorite memories from Stanford.

And let's be realistic - all that would happen is that it would go underground. When I was an RA my attitude was that I would tolerate underaged drinking as long as people kept their doors open. When people close their doors and try to hide the drinking, that's usually when the problems start.


Re: Larger question re. sexual violence and Brock Turner - 82lsju - 06-07-2016

(06-07-2016, 02:08 PM)81alum link Wrote:By the way, there is immense Stanford history over alcohol.  The Stanfords banned it and so did Palo Alto.  The ban lasted until 1966, apparently.  In the early days, students had to cross the city line to Mayfield (since annexed--the California Avenue district) to buy booze.  Ernie's is still there, right at what was the city line.

history of Stanford and alcohol begins about 1/3rd of the way into this article

https://alumni.stanford.edu/get/page/magazine/article/?article_id=38042

From the beginning, two decisions dictated how closely University students and the town would interact. One was a conscious effort to keep students housed, fed and entertained on campus. The other involved access, or the lack of it, to alcohol.