Actions speak louder than words. That is one philosophical idea that I have come to believe in. However, when one applies this criterion, one is usually disappointed. I have been specifically disappointed with regards to the College's policy on rape and sexual abuse.
Now we all know that the administration is always screaming about the evils of rape and sexual abuse. We go through orientations, speakers, articles, resource centers, et. al devoted to combating these problems. This is all talk.
The actions that the College takes concerning these issues is poor at best. If one were to judge this community not by its lip service but by its treatment of offenders, Dartmouth would remind me of 1950s America.
The specific incident which draws most of my ire occurred last fall. The biggest problem with analyzing these issues is in dealing with what happened. In order not to bias this column too much, I will simply state what was alleged to have occurred and what the College did about it. As simple as this may sound, it is as sad as the outcome.
It all begins with a fraternity party (i.e., alcohol was involved). At this event, two women allege that the same man raped them at separate times. One woman was a member of the house, another a friend of different members, and not a Dartmouth student. After the alleged incidents, both women saw a doctor as a result of what happened to them. The Dartmouth student decided to press Committee on Standards charges against the alleged male. Although the other individual was no longer in the area, she give a written account of what happened along with her medical records. The male involved in the incident hired a private investigator, who scoped out the town and tried to nose around the fraternity. The case went to COS the following term.
The resulting action from COS was as follows: the male was found innocent. The house that the female who pressed charges, belonged to, was given a series of formal/informal sanctions. Although these sanctions were not severe punishment some of these sanctions involved steps to ensure that such incidents would not happen again.
However the effect of this entire case was twofold: number one, the male was let free, and second the house of the female was punished. In other words, the underlying statement was: it was the victim's fault. This certainly isn't the College rhetoric on rape. I have never been to a college orientation program where they said if a woman gets drunk in her own house, its O.K. to take advantage of her, and anyone else in earshot, and in fact it is the woman's fault for letting this all happen. Not only is fault being incorrectly levied, but the effect of this decision is obvious: if this happens in your house, keep your mouth shut, or we'll punish you for bringing this matter out in the open.
What, are we living in the 1950s again?
Now, I'm certainly not a feminist, nor even that 1990s "totally into equal everything." But I believe that it is both ridiculous and hypocritical of the College to have taken this action. If someone got murdered, would it be the fraternity's fault for letting the murder occur in the house?
Now I realize that the male in question was found innocent by COS. However, if the College really believed this, why would they have then punished the house involved? If every frat were punished where supposed consensual sex occurred, we'd all be on probation (well maybe not every house). If this wasn't consensual sex, why was the individual found innocent?
Well, I guess I was naive to believe that Dartmouth really gave a damn about rape, I mean they don't even care much about their student's lives. But, after hearing all that lip service, I would have thought that the College would have acted positively, or at least not like a reactionary old fool. I guess when words are loud and actions are quiet, they think that no one is looking. What ever happened to 'We Are Watching?'
