[BostonCard]

Yeah, I suppose this is probably a reaction to the Brock Turner case, though it doesn't appear to be a particularly helpful or logical reaction. Of course this would be far from the first time that "doing something" won out over doing something useful.

You suppose?  I think the whole point of this thread is calling Stanford out for "doing something" over doing something useful.

That being said, I think it would be more constructive if people suggested what "something useful" would be, instead of criticizing the University for doing something.  I agree with whoever suggested that the University could start with enforcing the laws against underage drinking that already exist.

I would add that it is important to remember that the Brock Turner case was a rape case, not an alcohol case, and the university is treading dangerous waters by implicitly endorsing Turner's defense that the alcohol was the problem, and not his raping a woman.  Alcohol was a contributing factor, yes, but plenty of people manage to get horribly drunk without raping women.

At the time, I think I wrote that it was critically important that the university foster an atmosphere of respect for onseself and respect and support for others.  That means taking responsibility for making sure that people are safe, whether they have been drinking or not.  The reason that I think the new policy is not only "not helpful" but actually counterproductive is that it places the university and its agents (RA's, etc.) in an adversarial position, when they should be placed in a supportive position.  If students look at RA's and the University as people out to ensure they have no fun, they are less likely to seek help for problems like binge drinking, depression, or to help resolve issues like harassment and the sort of "creepy" behavior that, if I recall correctly, the women swimmers at Stanford endured without telling anyone.  I wonder, for example, if someone had been aware of the behavior, if they could have talked to Turner (especially if it was some of the more senior members of his team) and let him know that his behavior, whether intended or not, was not welcome and that there are more appropriate ways to interact with his female classmates.  I am not so naive as to think it would have averted the rape, but I think if you have a culture of respect and support that indicates that the sort of lower level harassment and "creepiness" that he had been engaging in was not acceptable that it sends a much more powerful message to people than "don't drink heavy alcohol".

Likewise, with drinking, the problem is not with what people are drinking, or even the age at which they drink (though I think that is a contributing factor), but with a culture that encourages drinking to excess instead of drinking responsibly, and that finds people who have had too much to drink as a source of amusement, and not as a responsibility (to make sure they are safe, to make sure that they don't do anything stupid, and, later, to make sure they drink more responsibly in the future).

BC

[BostonCard]

Yeah, I suppose this is probably a reaction to the Brock Turner case, though it doesn't appear to be a particularly helpful or logical reaction. Of course this would be far from the first time that "doing something" won out over doing something useful.

You suppose?  I think the whole point of this thread is calling Stanford out for "doing something" over doing something useful.

That being said, I think it would be more constructive if people suggested what "something useful" would be, instead of criticizing the University for doing something.  I agree with whoever suggested that the University could start with enforcing the laws against underage drinking that already exist.

I would add that it is important to remember that the Brock Turner case was a rape case, not an alcohol case, and the university is treading dangerous waters by implicitly endorsing Turner's defense that the alcohol was the problem, and not his raping a woman.  Alcohol was a contributing factor, yes, but plenty of people manage to get horribly drunk without raping women.

At the time, I think I wrote that it was critically important that the university foster an atmosphere of respect for onseself and respect and support for others.  That means taking responsibility for making sure that people are safe, whether they have been drinking or not.  The reason that I think the new policy is not only "not helpful" but actually counterproductive is that it places the university and its agents (RA's, etc.) in an adversarial position, when they should be placed in a supportive position.  If students look at RA's and the University as people out to ensure they have no fun, they are less likely to seek help for problems like binge drinking, depression, or to help resolve issues like harassment and the sort of "creepy" behavior that, if I recall correctly, the women swimmers at Stanford endured without telling anyone.  I wonder, for example, if someone had been aware of the behavior, if they could have talked to Turner (especially if it was some of the more senior members of his team) and let him know that his behavior, whether intended or not, was not welcome and that there are more appropriate ways to interact with his female classmates.  I am not so naive as to think it would have averted the rape, but I think if you have a culture of respect and support that indicates that the sort of lower level harassment and "creepiness" that he had been engaging in was not acceptable that it sends a much more powerful message to people than "don't drink heavy alcohol".

Likewise, with drinking, the problem is not with what people are drinking, or even the age at which they drink (though I think that is a contributing factor), but with a culture that encourages drinking to excess instead of drinking responsibly, and that finds people who have had too much to drink as a source of amusement, and not as a responsibility (to make sure they are safe, to make sure that they don't do anything stupid, and, later, to make sure they drink more responsibly in the future).

BC