In the Book of Genesis, Potiphar's profligate wife -- finding her affections unrequited -- falsely accuses Joseph of rape and has him thrown in prison. This story is an example of the nightmare that has filtered into our social consciousness, fueling the fear that irrational claims will supersede justice. But there is another nightmare about rape that occurs with far more alarming regularity: an individual who reports being victimized is met with skepticism. Skeptics imagine several explanations: perhaps the encounter was consensual but regretted afterwards, maybe it was completely fabricated or maybe the victim encouraged it somehow?
Unfortunately, we lack a parable for this situation; the endless string of real instances of sexual assault somehow fails to counteract our society's cynical mistrust of self-declared rape victims.
Last year, the Committee on Standards (COS) Task Force developed a list of recommendations for the reform of COS, one of which proposes to raise the burden of proof from "a preponderance of evidence" to "clear and convincing evidence." While academic dishonesty has been one of the issues motivating this change, much of the debate has centered on sexual assault. Advocates cite the need to critically examine the honesty of all claims out of concern that a false charge could destroy student's life. To the best of my understanding, the rationale for increasing the standard of proof is premised on the myth that women cry "rape."
The vast majority of women, however, tell the truth about being sexually assaulted. As with other violent crimes, the rate of false reporting is estimated by the Justice Department to be two percent. While few empirical studies offer information on such false statements, there exists a wealth of data on the underreporting of sexual violence.
The assumption that women lie about their victimization implies that reports of sexual assault will not be taken seriously. This idea contributes to a damaging, victim-blaming culture that dissuades survivors from reporting at all.
The pressures that exist for women on this campus to avoid reporting sexual assault notwithstanding, institutionalizing the belief that women lie about rape by increasing the burden of proof for conviction will deter victims from coming forward. It will not minimize unjust disciplinary action.
The majority of sexual assault cases at Dartmouth take place in dorm rooms and fraternities. They involve alcohol and students acquainted with one another; as a consequence, they rarely lend themselves to clear and convincing evidence. Acquaintance rape victims tend not to have bruises or eyewitnesses. Additionally, COS lacks the authority to call in witnesses or to search the room, belonging, Blitz records, etc., of the accused.
So exactly what kind of evidence can be obtained? A credible and convincing narrative may be a victim's only proof of an assault -- to ask for corroborative evidence thoroughly disregards the nature of the offense. COS does not function like a criminal court, nor should it. Rather than determining guilt, sexual assault hearings resolve whether the accused is more likely than not to have violated the Sexual Misconduct Policy.
This means that if both students' testimonies are equally credible, the accused is not considered responsible; if the victim has a more convincing story, however, he or she should prevail. In cases where testimony is the only available evidence, demanding more forms of proof is unreasonable.
There is a common claim that sexual assault charges ruin the lives of the accused. These claims ignore the fact that regardless of the outcome of a COS hearing, the victim's life has been irrevocably altered. Considering only the accused student's future is equivalent to ignoring the devastating consequences of rape for victims, not to mention the additional emotional trauma incurred by a COS hearing and inevitable campus backlash. I should also reiterate that false reporting rarely occurs.
The power of disciplinary action at Dartmouth is weighty, but let us not pretend that it is worse than the survivor's ordeal. Requiring "clear and convincing" evidence in cases of sexual assault will not only diminish students' accountability for their own actions, but also reduce the number of survivors willing to report assault. Let us not normalize a myth that already has too much detrimental power in American society.
