CHE article: Rape Procedures

[marshwiggle]

But it's hardly the DCL that started bad outcomes. Maybe some schools that had bad processes either had bad results or poorly justified results. But keep in mind that before that, many schools were informed of potential sexual misconduct, including rape, but never acted. So, you can have a bad process that neglects true victims just as much as a bad process that can maybe find someone guilty in an unjust manner. The cure is to refine the process, not go back to the bad old days.

But this raises the issue:

Preponderance is still permissible, though you do have to be consistent across all college hearings (so, a general faculty grievance hearing or hearing on student cheating would have to use the same standards).

Exactly. I'd be surprised if the existing cheating hearing process at these places was as one-sided and biased as the sexual assault process. In other words, instead of taking the kind of precautions they already did for less serious allegations, they just threw it out and came up with a kangaroo court instead. They deserve to get nailed to the wall for ignoring their own already developed system for due process. (I've never heard of any cheating tribunal that always finds accused people guilty and always expels them as a result.)

Ever heard of one where accused are not told exactly what they are accused of? I bet not.

[apl68]

more has to be done in terms of curbing alcohol consumption and educating students on consent and alcohol/drugs.

Civilized alcohol consumption can be learned. It is learned in western Europe. The drinking age should be lowered to about 16. And parents can help teaching their kids.

[I feel a new Prohibition waiting in the wings, and we know where that led.]

Generational wealth for savvy immigrants who were otherwise blocked from polite society due to racism and religious prejudice?

And murders and violence and methyl alcohol deaths.

Alcohol-related deaths have already skyrocketed in the U.S. in recent years--at a time when the number of dry counties has gone way down, and drinking has become the socially-accepted norm in places where it once wasn't. 


https://www.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/alcohol-related-deaths-increasing-united-states


In my own home time the county went "wet" a few years back.  Supposedly this was going to help the economy by enabling the county to attract nice restaurants who passed them by for lack of liquor licensing.  Instead they've gotten a wave of sleazy little package stores and dives.  And alcohol in every dollar store, convenience store, and of course Wal-Mart.  The home town itself no longer has a proper grocery store, but there are now half a dozen places to buy alcohol.  It's swimming in it now.  Sure, people could go across the county line and get alcohol before.  But you can't tell me that consumption is not way up now that it's available on every other street corner.  Or that there won't be a significant long-term trend in alcohol-related deaths and illnesses now that problem drinkers can buy all they want right down the street, instead of facing the inconvenience of an hour or so's drive.

As for Western Europe's "civilized" drinking culture, there have been indications in recent years that binge-drinking is on the rise there.  I've seen quite a few articles about it in France, for example.  Here's one:


https://www.connexionfrance.com/French-news/Binge-drink-habit-on-the-rise-among-the-French


Fears of a new Prohibition my foot!  Legalization of pot is going from strength to strength all over the country, and once that victory is won there's no reason to believe it will stop there.  In only a few years Juul has undone decades' worth of slow progress on reducing nicotine use among teens.  People want to get high or snockered then okay, nobody can stop you.  But the dwindling number of us who don't think it's cool to get high as a way of coping with life aren't going to pretend we're okay with it, and we're not going to stop pointing out the problems with it.  Which problems include the well-documented link between drinking and other drug use and sexual assaults on campus.

[dismalist]

We've moved from alcohol related rape and sexual assault to alcohol related deaths.

Many of these deaths will be due to drunk driving. Yet we don't blame the cars and we don't demand their prohibition.

[marshwiggle]

We've moved from alcohol related rape and sexual assault to alcohol related deaths.

Many of these deaths will be due to drunk driving. Yet we don't blame the cars and we don't demand their prohibition.

I think in the context of sexual assault (and other problems on campus), restricting alcohol on campus would reduce a lot of alcohol-related problems. And what students do off campus shouldn't be the institutions' problems in most cases.

[dismalist]

Let me throw the anti-alcohol crowd a bone, justified:

It would be a good idea to raise taxes on alcohol to reduce, not eliminate, consumption. The reason this is efficient is that the drunk driving deaths are so costly that drink reduction is worth it. A further effect could indeed be to reduce rape and sexual assault.

There's plenty of room to raise alcohol taxes in most states, and surely some nationwide. There is an informative graph at the bottom of this https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/alcohol-tax-by-state

One fascinating price structure I have observed first hand is that of Belgium. Beer is cheap for the Flemish and wine is cheap for the Walloons, but anything distilled costs a fortune!

[Pass a high enough alcohol tax and we can lower the drinking age! :-)]

[Ruralguy]

Though I get that incentives and disincentives generally work, it might be better for some colleges to work harder themselves at reducing excessive alcohol consumption rather than just relying on a fairly passive state intervention.  They definitely can work harder to incentivize living on campus, and for my campus that would absolutely decrease the number of drunk/drugged driving deaths (small number stats mean a lot when a lot of people personally know the "small numbers"). It might also increase social interactions that have alcohol, but that are not alcohol-centric  (and thus also reducing all sorts of assault and vandalism). Right now we seem to either center on frat parties or blow out off campus drunken bashes. That's just my beef about my own campus. Not sure how well it would work at other places.

[dismalist]

Though I get that incentives and disincentives generally work, it might be better for some colleges to work harder themselves at reducing excessive alcohol consumption rather than just relying on a fairly passive state intervention.  They definitely can work harder to incentivize living on campus, and for my campus that would absolutely decrease the number of drunk/drugged driving deaths (small number stats mean a lot when a lot of people personally know the "small numbers"). It might also increase social interactions that have alcohol, but that are not alcohol-centric  (and thus also reducing all sorts of assault and vandalism). Right now we seem to either center on frat parties or blow out off campus drunken bashes. That's just my beef about my own campus. Not sure how well it would work at other places.

Yes, like dry and wet counties, we could have dry and wet campuses!

Alas, 'twould move the booze, and the rape, off campus. Taxes, taxes, taxes are what's effective. And passive is good.

[In my yute, I spent a year at a campus abroad. Drinking on campus was normal. Frat parties and drunken bashes, never mind sexual violence, were unheard of.]

Raise the alcohol tax rate and lower the alcohol drinking age!

[Ruralguy]

I think I'm done. Thanks for the mostly reasonable discussion.