Just popping in to recommend a fantastic article on campus rape in the Washington Post today. Along with the fact that the article itself is fabulous, it also points to the great new report on campus sexual assault by the Center for Public Integrity, and to recent, extremely important research on college rapists by David Lisak and Stephanie McWhorter.

When SAFER first made the transition from a student group to a national organization, I remember being very concerned about the ginormous, super-rich right-wing infrastructure that was standing ready to try to stop any effort to end sexual violence on college campuses. A very wise lady told me that the situation was very much like a chess game, in which the other side has extremely powerful pieces—queens and rooks and bishops and whatnot—but our side only has pawns. The trick, she said, is that our side has a lot more pieces.

Back then, one conservative organization opposing our efforts was able to create a carefully coordinated month-long media blitz opposing SAFER’s work in pretty much every major news outlet with little more than a few phone calls. Ironically enough, the coverage started with an op-ed in the Washington Post, so I feel a special satisfaction at seeing such great work there, specifically.

Anti-violence activists may not have the money and corporate connections of those who deny the reality of sexual assault on college campuses. We can’t make a call and send our talking points to a bought and paid for “journalist” who will parrot them. We don’t have corporate donors who will fund us to create propaganda trying to convince people that their own experiences are false. But what we do have on our side is the very simple truth: sexual violence is an epidemic on college campuses. More importantly, we also have a lot of people who are pretty tired of that situation. Articles like this make me think the pawns are on the move.

Below is a message from Jerin Alam, a former CUNY student who has been working alongside many other students to establish a system-wide sexual assault policy for all of the CUNY schools (which serve over half a million people). The new policy is set to be discussed and hopefully approved by the CUNY Board of Trustees in April, but it’s missing a couple of important pieces. Check out the following for information about how you can support the new policy. (Cross-posted at NOW NYS Young Feminists blog)

A few weeks ago one of my fellow board members Erin organized an AWESOME event at Re/dress in Brooklyn. The event was titled HOT KNOTS and it was a queer-centric, fat positive bondage workshop, led by Sarah Jenny. While it was not organized by SAFER, we were the beneficiary.

It may seem very random for an organization to benefit from an event that not only centers on tying people up for sexual pleasure, but also made sure to declare itself as centering on queer fat people. After all, SAFER is an anti-violence organization and supports students to organize against violence in their own communities. However, I think there are some elements that arose in the workshop that could be applied to the issues that SAFER’s mission.

Sarah Jenny emphasized that consent and communication is key while participating in bondage, which is something that is also important in all interpersonal relations and are vital to sexual violence prevention – especially on college campuses. The first thing that Sarah brought up was the need for a “safe word” that needs to be established before anything happens. Therefore, whenever  a partner does not feel comfortable and wants to stop immediately whatever that is happening can stop. The requirement of conversation before engaging in sexual acts is great – everyone should feel like they are being respected and are maintaining the right to their body. It should not be required only when participating in sex outside mainstream societal norms.

It was great to be reminded of a message that can be applied to many areas of life wrapped in an “unconventional” BDSM package. It is important to be open with your partners and be willing to express when you’re uncomfortable. Remember also to ask your partners. Many may feel like it’s too awkward to ask questions, but talking about ones needs and desires can be a fun sort of foreplay and a way to establish/strengthen trust.

Last week, the Times-Herald Record reported that “from 1990 to 2009, the percentage of sexual harassment claims filed by men has doubled from 8 percent to 16 percent of all claims, according to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission [EEOC].” In 2000, the percentage was around 12%, showing surprisingly stable increases over the years. For 2009, the numbers work out to 2000 claims out of a total 12,700 claims were filed by men.

Who are men accusing of harassment? Sometimes women—the article states that “cases involving women making unwanted advances toward men may also be rising” and gives examples of female-on-male harassment, but the numbers aren’t clear. The majority of complaints are made against other men, and though a number of those complaints seem to stem from unwanted sexual advances or romantic overtures, many of them seem to come from homophobia or a kind of “sexualized hazing”:

Other times, men are picked on because they are gay, perceived as being gay or not considered masculine enough for the work setting.

In November, for example, the Cheesecake Factory restaurant chain agreed to pay $345,000 to six male employees who claimed they were repeatedly sexually assaulted by a group of male kitchen staffers at a Phoenix-area restaurant.

The EEOC said the abusers would drag some victims kicking and screaming into a walk-in refrigerator, touching and grinding against the victims’ genitals and take turns simulating rape. The company denied the allegations but agreed to make a financial settlement and educate its employees and managers about sexual harassment.

Susan Strauss, a consultant who advises companies about how to avoid sexual harassment in the workplace, said…”If you don’t fit the masculine stereotype or are viewed as effeminate, you get picked on in a sexual way to demean you.”

The Supreme Court ruled in 1998 that same-sex harassment should be included in federal anti-discrimination laws—a ruling that came out of a case similar to the Cheesecake Factory incident above where a man was violently sexually assaulted by his male coworkers.

An attorney from the EEOC says of the increase in claims, “It’s certainly possible that there’s more sexual harassment of men going on, but it could just be that more men are coming forward and complaining about it.” And certainly we know that men rarely report sexual harassment and assault, even less often then women, who already vastly under-report. Men who are sexually harassed or sexually assaulted must face a very different kind of shame. As one complainant said, “I think maybe it’s just harder for males to come out and file a complaint because of how embarrassing it is…When I talk about it I get this nauseous feeling in my stomach.”

Besides the fact that traditional gender norms dictate that men are supposed to be able to muscle through conflict without getting emotional or making these kinds of complaints, there is also the issue of really fucked up behavior between men having become normalized to the point where guys are supposed to just grin and bear it:

In the past, some employers might have shrugged off such antics as “boys will be boys” horseplay or fraternity-type behavior. But the EEOC has been filing more lawsuits involving male victims, saying it wants to send a message that such behavior is unacceptable and unlawful.

Good for the EEOC. I don’t care who thinks they’re “just playing around,” physically assaulting someone (or sexually harassing or demeaning someone) should never be acceptable and men shouldn’t have to just suck it up because they feel socially prescribed to. This is another place where both men and women can step in an be engaged bystanders—if you see your male friends chalking this kind of behavior up to “horseplay,” speak up. And if you’re a woman, remember that you’re not off the hook for harassing/assaulting men—watch your behavior and language like you would expect your male friends to. This kind of harassment reinforces gender norms that harm both men and women.

Crossposted at the RapedatTufts blog.

This year the theme for IWD is “Equal rights, equal opportunity: Progress for all.” The Blog for International Women’s Day campaign asked participants to answer what equality rights for all means to them. My mind immediately jumped to Title IX’s promise to enforce equal access to education. While many think about equality in just athletics when it comes to Title IX, it also requires schools to respond to reports of sexual violence and to repair the hostile environment created by being victimized by sexual harassment or assault.

What does equal rights look to me? It would make the reports released by the Center for Public Integrity unnecessary. Rape myths wouldn’t lead to schools not caring about students who were raped and assaulted as much as protecting their reputation. Admitted rapists wouldn’t be allowed to continue to be a part of the community to very likely victimize other people. Students wouldn’t avoid reporting their rape because their rapist came from an affluent family and opt to transfer schools instead. Classes about domestic and sexual violence wouldn’t be the first courses cut from the roster because of lack of funding.

Being a victim of sexual violence can be extremely hard. The aftermath causes so many scenarios – all of which would lead to some sort of disruption in one’s academic performance. If there were truly equal rights, I believe that there would not even be a need for SAFER; administrators would not be so resistant to create resources for students in case that they were assaulted or know someone who was.

Equal rights would mean students wouldn’t have to avoid certain teachers, certain classes, change majors because they were a victim of sexual violence or are afraid it could happen. A transwoman wouldn’t feel left out of the school’s policies in helping them heal after an assault.

How is equal rights relevant to a good sexual assault policy? Because if a school did its job properly and did its best to not only PREVENT sexual violence, but also support victims and do its best to punish and get rid of perpetrators, the female students would be able to have a fighting chance to have a successful, strong educational career.

Oppression can be manifested in many ways. A poor sexual assault policy is one of them. Equal rights would eliminate oppression and promote equality for all genders by acknowledging gendered violence and fighting with all we had to stop it from happening.

That’s the question posed by a staff editorial today in The Vanguard, a student newspaper out of Portland State University. I think they’re asking the wrong question. Rape is, unfortunately, used as a punchline ALL THE TIME. So that answers it: yes, it can be. But the better, more important question is, should it be? The Vanguard staff doesn’t really address that because they’re very concerned with addressing why offensive jokes about rape are protected by the first amendment and thus rape CAN be used as a punchline, a fact which is immediately established by the fact that it IS.

Let’s back up. The editorial is a response to anger over a cartoon published by one of their “sister publications” in February. Here’s a description of the cartoon:

Hagar, the cartoon’s protagonist and viking leader, notes that in viking rankings, the group’s pillaging rate is up but “we’re losing a lot of points in the ‘rape’ category.” When his male companion inquires as to how this can be fixed, Hagar responds with, “First, we get you another drink, baby.”

Unsurprisingly, (and thankfully) folks weren’t pleased:

At least one reader found this use of potential sexual assault as a comedic device to be offensive. In addition to a letter to the editor we received—calling for a public reprimand of the Rearguard and the resignation of comic artist Adam Barber—posters were placed around campus shaming the publication and stating that rape, even between two men, is not funny.***

The Vanguard staff then goes for the good old first amendment argument, noting that the cartoon may have been in “poor taste” but it is “protected speech.” This is an argument I hear a lot about humor involving rape, and it never fails to make me incredibly frustrated. There are commonly two parts to this argument, both of which are used in this editorial. The first is simple: you may find it offensive, but that doesn’t mean someone can’t say it. This argument has always struck me as totally irrelevant. Yes, “free speech” is a protected right. But is the right to assemble and protest. For as long as college newspapers publish offensive articles, other students will fight back. What newspaper staffs need to ask themselves is not just CAN we get away with publishing this cartoon/article, but SHOULD we? Are we really adding to dialogue on campus? Is this ACTUALLY entertaining? Sure, once you go through and decide to publish it, you can fall back on the first amendment, but WHY DO IT IN THE FIRST PLACE?

Which brings us to the second part of the argument, which is usually: we published it because it was so obvious that it’s satire. The vanguard’s version of this is as follows:

Parodies are a form of social commentary or critique that are protected under the free speech clause of our First Amendment as artistic expression. Artists often use the recognizable to shed light on the repulsive, and in this case, the repulsive was our institution’s connection to a barbaric culture.

Barber used the image of Hagar as a connection to our school mascot, the Vikings, who are historically known as barbarians who used heavy-handed methods of conquering far-off lands. Though historians still argue over whether the “rape and pillage” stigma is accurate, it is hard to dispute that the association nevertheless exists in people’s minds. Barber was making the point that, by proxy, that stigma falls upon our mascot as well.

OK look. I obviously don’t know the cartoonist or his intentions. But this really seems like a stretch. For one thing, this is a misuse of the word parody. What they mean is satire. Let’s look at what the dictionary says about satire:

1 : a literary work holding up human vices and follies to ridicule or scorn
2 : trenchant wit, irony, or sarcasm used to expose and discredit vice or folly

So, is it possible that the artist in question was trying to use the cartoon as a way to critique the behavior of the vikings and thus the fact that the school’s mascot is implicated in a history of violence? I guess so. Does it seem that way to the average reader? No. Vikings, as far as I know, weren’t really known for using alcohol to facilitate rape. Unlike some of the college students who are going to see this cartoon and laugh. Is it possible that the reader is meant to compare that asshole who sexually assaulted their drunk roommate last month with a viking, understand that the viking is being vilified, and then connect the dots to understand that the cartoonist is calling out that asshole and similar guys? Again, I guess it’s possible. But I think it’s pretty clear that it fails in a big way. And that the punchline, despite intentions, simply makes rape look like not that big of a deal.

So the point is that the first amendment might protect bad humor, but it’s still bad humor, and college newspapers (and all makers of media) shouldn’t be publishing bad humor just because they can. Newspaper editors have a responsibility to review what they are publishing, consider it’s point, use, and entrainment value, and judge whether or not it should be published accordingly. Again, they should ask, “should I be publishing this?” I was the editor of a college newspaper not too long ago, and I definitely fucked up more than a few times by not asking myself that question, or not thinking all that hard about it, anyway. And I had to make a couple of hard apologies. But that’s the job. And it can be a difficult, thankless job with which I, despite my tone in this post, sympathize with a lot. However, you can’t just hide behind the first amendment—we all make choices, and if we can’t defend them beyond “we didn’t do anything we’re not legally allowed to do,” you have some real ethical problems.

[***Why the need to make the distinction here??? Obviously a man raping another man wouldn't be less horrible than a man raping a woman. Obviously.]

Quickly wanted to highlight some positive steps coming out of a number of schools this week, some in response to the CPI work and some not.

A male columnist at UMass’ Daily Collegian newspaper reflects with anger on the information brought to light in CPI’s report on UMass, and calls on men to stop sexual violence. Choice policy-related quote:

You’ll notice in our Student Code of Conduct – if you’ve ever read it – that the “Appliance Guidelines” are about half a page. You know, stuff like unplugging your refrigerators over break. Sexual assault? One sentence. Rape? Nothing. It seems like UMass cares more about its furniture policy than about educating men and women about rape. The very day the Boston Globe article and subsequent Collegian coverage came out, UMass students got an e-mail from Housing and Residence Life reminding us about the “Fire safety Policy Compliance Advisory.” Seriously? How about e-mail reminders to all the men on campus that rape is illegal? Plagiarism is not illegal in American law, but I can get expelled for that. Rape is illegal, but I can still graduate with honors.

At the University of Maryland, a University Senate committee is “compiling a report to document the issue of rape at the university” after realizing how how the statistics are. In 2008, UMD recorded 17 incidents of “forcible sexual offenses.” 17…reported.

A writer from the University of Arizona’s Daily Wildcat responds to a column in last week’s Daily Princetonian (out of Princeton University) where a female student said of her friend who claims to have been sexually assaulted:

We all know that the more people drink, the less likely they are to make wise decisions. It is common sense. Therefore, the girl willingly got herself into a state in which she could not act rationally. This, in my opinion, is equivalent to agreeing to anything that might happen to her while in this state. In the case of our girl, this happened to be sex with a stranger.

Students at the University of Louisville are lobbying the university senate to “approve a bill that would expand domestic-violence protections to people in dating relationships.”

One of the last pieces related to the CPI report published last week was an investigation out of Wisconsin focusing on UW-Madison. UW-M’s PAVE (Promoting Awareness Victim Empowerment) released what I thought was a pretty respectful response including:

Despite all well-intentioned efforts to meet the needs of victims, at times, as demonstrated in the CPI report, these services may not meet victims’ needs or expectations. In these unfortunate instances, it is important to acknowledge victims’ experiences and to utilize their feedback as a means to continually evaluate the effectiveness of current services. While there are challenges that need to be resolved to address sexual assaults, we, as a campus community, are ultimately responsible for preventing these crimes and for holding perpetrators accountable. PAVE and its campus partners will continue to work together to implement the most effective preventative and educational measures and to support victims on this campus.

Keep it up!

I just wanted to make sure our loyal readers have seen this great feature article on RH Reality Check written by SAFER’s all-star board member and awesome blogger, Sarah! Sarah is responding to the recent report by the Center for Public Integrity on campus sexual assault (Part 2 was just released).

A little tidbit from the article:

For the past twenty years, experts on sexual assault, victims’ advocates, and students and their parents have repeatedly called on colleges and universities to take rape seriously and live up to the standards that, beginning with 1990’s Campus Security Act, have been outlined in Federal law. And for the past 20 years most schools have not been paying attention. Last week the Center for Public Integrity (CPI) launched the second series in a three-part investigative report on campus sexual assault, exposing what they call the “culture of indifference” on college campuses that allows perpetrators to go unpunished and re-traumatizes rape survivors. Indifference may indeed be putting it nicely…

…As a Board member of Students Active for Ending Rape (SAFER), a national nonprofit that provides resources to college students who are trying to change how their school prevents and responds to sexual violence, I’m unfortunately not surprised by the CPI findings. SAFER repeatedly hears from student survivors struggling to navigate the complicated process of getting support and seeking justice, and who are often left to fend for themselves…

Check out the rest of the article and leave a comment to let our friends at RH Reality Check know how you feel about it!

This video was making the rounds this morning, and really ruined my day. It was shown this at the Sex::Tech conference, which focuses on “using new technologies to  enhance the sexual health of young people.”  The video was made by Sex. Really., a project of The National Campaign to End Teen Pregnancy. And what message are they using to discourage teen pregnancy these days? “Guys are Assholes. Be Safe. Every Time.” Seriously.

The folks at This Is Misogyny sum it up quite well:

If you teach sex education on the ground for any amount of time you know one of the biggest challenges is getting young people to unlearn gender stereotypes around sex.

If you don’t know the ones I’m talking about, Sex Really has done a pretty good job of laying them out as fact: men are pigs with raging hormones that can only process sex on a Neanderthal level. They sit around and demean women because they lack the emotional capacity to have substantive relationships. And women are too stupid, or so focused on “catching a man,” that they don’t even notice their dude’s a d-bag.

Ya know what I think is generally not a good way to reach young women? Demonizing the men they profess to love enough to have babies with. Seems to me like that’s the best way to prompt a girl to say “but MY boyfriend’s NOT an asshole!” But that’s actually the secondary concern of mine here—the horrible perpetuation of gross stereotypes about guys is. For one thing, as a woman who knows a lot of straight men who are pretty respectful of women, even if they have conversations behind closed doors that would make me cringe, this is so ridiculously offensive to them and to me. And asides from the horrible totalizing of the statement, it’s just so insanely counterproductive. Why would you ever expect guys NOT to act like “assholes” if you’re accepting that kind of behavior as fact, normalizing it, and patronizing them by saying it in front of their faces but acting as though they aren’t there. Like it’s a cute little private joke with girls everywhere that “men are assholes so you better not get knocked up by one!”

And then there’s that part of it: by saying “men are assholes” end of story, you continue the whole cycle of victim-blaming that we are so used to talking about in terms of public discourse surrounding sexual assault. While I’m not comfortable referring to teen mothers are “victims” in the same way that we use the term when we talk about sexual violence, the words have the same effect: the Sex. Really. people are framing the issue as “you can never expect men to be anything other than sex-crazed degenerates, so you better make sure you don’t get pregnant.” (Much like, you can’t trust men not to rape you, so you better not wear revealing clothing out of the house). I see nothing wrong with encouraging young women have control in the contraception conversation and helping them know how to prevent pregnancy even when their partners aren’t all that concerned (or worse, are actively coercing them into getting pregnant). But there’s a slippery slope here to implying that it’s their own fault for getting pregnant because they were stupid enough to trust the asshole they were sleeping with.

This campagin is apparently geared toward women in their 20s. As one of those women, I say: fuck you, this is so gross. Please go back to the drawing board and stay away from using snarky “youth-speak” to make important points about birth control.