The Footnotes are in. diSiac is in. International Relations Council is in. Your roommate is in. And we’re in.
We’re taking the WeSpeak survey this week because sexual violence at Princeton matters. It isn’t a women’s issue. It isn’t a Sexual Harassment/Assault Advising, Resources and Education issue. It’s a Princeton issue. When anyone on this campus is a victim of sexual violence, our community suffers. When anyone on this campus commits an act of violence, our community must ask what more we could have done to prevent it and how best to serve justice.
Sexual violence is coming to matter more and more on college campuses nationwide. In Congress, Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand of New York has condemned a nationwide “epidemic” of sexual assault. Princeton was under federal investigation for four years; last fall the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights released a resolution agreement which included new reforms to Princeton’s policies and practices that would put Princeton back into compliance with Title IX.
The issue has been covered extensively in the media, from The Daily Show’s witty puncture of the myth of false reporting of sexual violence to The Wall Street Journal’s recent story on lawsuits young men have filed against their universities for a disciplinary process they felt was prejudiced against them.
It’s clear that sexual violence is a contentious issue here at Princeton and nationwide. There is a wide array of views and arguments to be made, and Princeton’s policies need to attend to this wide range of concerns.
WeSpeak is a crucial chance for students to tell the truth of their experience and to guide the policy decisions that the survey data will inform. Every thinking and feeling person would agree that one incident of sexual assault is one too many. The question is: Where is Princeton starting from as we all work together toward a campus culture that reflects that agreement?
Here are some dramatic numbers you may recognize from the “Dear Colleague” letter published in April 2011: On college campuses nationwide, one in five women are sexually assaulted or escape an attempted assault. For men, it’s one in 17. For our own campus, data from a American College Health Association assessment found that one in nine Princeton undergraduates experiences some form of interpersonal violence in a 12-month period. You may also recall a 2013 ‘Prince’ article on the results of a 2008 survey in which 1 in 6 female undergraduates reported experiencing non-consensual vaginal penetration during their time at Princeton.
However, in all these previous surveys on our campus and others, only a small percentage of students participated. This means the full community was not represented. With low rates of participation, there’s no way to know if the incidence of sexual misconduct was underreported or overreported. With WeSpeak, the University hopes to collect and publish the results of one of the most representative surveys on this issue nationwide, results that reflect all of our experiences and opinions.
You may personally feel that the pervasiveness of sexual misconduct on college campuses has been grossly exaggerated. You may believe that our own University has been far too tolerant of a pervasive rape culture. Or your feelings may lie somewhere in between. Unfortunately, no one knows the complete picture. And we won’t until we get everyone’s input.
The WeSpeak survey is designed to answer two big questions: First, what are students’ attitudes toward sexual misconduct? Do students think it’s a problem on campus? Do students talk about what consent means — that yes means yes? Do students know where on campus victims and their allies can seek help, and where any student can learn more about how to talk to their partners about what they want and don’t want?
Second, what is the prevalence of sexual misconduct — of any kind — in this campus community? Sexual misconduct is notoriously underreported to campus authorities nationwide and for many complex reasons. But the data from this survey can help Princeton better address two of those reasons. First, some students may not trust the University’s disciplinary process to take care of them or their friends when they have been assaulted, harassed or stalked. Second, some students may not trust the disciplinary process to reach a decision that is fair to the respondent (the person accused).
We believe that every Princeton student deserves a community that is safe, inclusive, and just. We all need to know where we’re starting from as we build toward that goal over the next few years. We want to be part of a campus known for having great sex, the kind that both partners can feel good about the next day. We want to be part of a culture of prevention where we look out for each other when the night gets crazy, a culture where people talk with their partners about what they each want and what they’re just not into, a culture of respect where there is no substitute for a clear, enthusiastic yes. The University needs to know what students have experienced to find out what obstacles stand in the way of the culture we all deserve.
Carl Adair GS
Rebecca Basaldua ’15
Brandon Holt ’15
Alyson Neel GS
The authors are members of the Faculty-Student Committee on Sexual Misconduct.
Read More
An open letter to President Eisgruber and VP Calhoun concerning minoritized student safety
Patrick Jaojoco, Brandi Bushman, and Humza Gondal"We — the undersigned leaders, community members, and allies of cultural affinity groups of Princeton University — condemn in the strongest possible terms the University’s utter disregard for the safety and wellbeing of its students of color."
"We — the undersigned leaders, community members, and allies of cultural affinity groups of Princeton University — condemn in the strongest possible terms the University’s utter disregard for the safety and wellbeing of its students of color."
On the occupation of Clio Hall and the treatment of Graduate School staff
Cole M. Crittenden“There are real power differentials on this campus, and we all have an obligation to be mindful of them. The students, postdocs, and faculty who occupied Clio Hall seem to have abused their privileges in the ways they treated staff as an expression of protest. That is wrong.”
“There are real power differentials on this campus, and we all have an obligation to be mindful of them. The students, postdocs, and faculty who occupied Clio Hall seem to have abused their privileges in the ways they treated staff as an expression of protest. That is wrong.”
Regulations on ‘disruption’ restrict dialogue at Princeton. Let’s change the standard.
Rishi Khanna“When Princeton administrators suppress mere disruptions tied to progressive speech, they effectively suppress a substantial portion of the speech itself.”
“When Princeton administrators suppress mere disruptions tied to progressive speech, they effectively suppress a substantial portion of the speech itself.”
