#calloutyourcampus

[socialjusticeineducation-blog]

Call Out Your Campus - UIUC

The University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign has an extremely problematic Sexual Misconduct policy. In fact, it is so problematic that the repercussions for students who plagiarize are more severe than for students who commit sexual crimes. 

At UIUC, students cannot be expelled for committing sexual crimes. At most, the University may dismiss perpetrators for 2 years, often less. After the given time that the student has served their dismissal, they may reapply to the university. If and when readmitted, their crime does not remain as a permanent mark on their transcript. This limit to 2 years of dismissal comes into light when one considers the age of the student survivor. If the perpetrator was a sophomore and the survivor was a freshman, it is basically certain that the survivor and perpetrator will be on campus at the same time. This could place the survivor in an extremely unsafe or triggering circumstance. Furthermore, *“the majority of undetected college rapists are likely serial perpetrators, committing an average of 6 rapes each” (knowyourix.org). Since student perpetrators from UIUC do not have their sexual crime tacked onto their transcript, if they choose to apply to graduate school elsewhere, odds are that they will continue their horrible cycle of sexual crimes at other institutions of higher education.

Though far less severe than committing a sexual crime, plagiarism at UIUC can get a student expelled. These students are also unallowed to apply for readmittance to the University. Furthermore, it is placed on their transcript permanently. That is not the case when it comes to sexual crimes. Based on these policies, it is clear that according to the University of Illinois, plagiarism is more severe than committing a sexual crime.

UIUC claims to have such a policy of readmittance and lack of accountability in place in order to offer a “second chance” to perpetrators, under the premise that they will change their actions. This is despite the clear way *statistics show otherwise. Furthermore, why would the University not similarly assume that a student who plagiarizes could change their ways as well?  

The problematic nature of the University of Illinois regarding survivor support can also be seen in at the Women’s Resources Center. The UIUC WRC presently only has two full-time counselors. Uphold adequate assistance for a campus of over 44,000 students is therefore left to two people. 

“At Illinois, We Care.” 

Seems apocryphal.

UIUC Legislation and Policy:

Article I Part IV: http://studentcode.illinois.edu/article1_part4_1-402.html

Section 2.04 - Actions Possible in Individual Student Discipline Cases http://conflictresolution.illinois.edu/policies/student-discipline/articleII/#section2-04 

[socialjusticeineducation-blog]

Trying to implement “Restorative Justice” for perpetrators of sexual crimes is problematic. Here’s why.

In April of 2014, a research article titled Restorative Justice Approaches to Enhance Compliance With Title IX Guidance was published. This article covers some excellent points critiquing current survivor support, and the lack of clarity in collegiate policies to address all forms of sexual misconduct, including stalking, emotional or psychological abuse, non-penetrative sexual assaults, and the like. 

Through the Dear Colleague Letter (DCL) issued by the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR), many of these points are addressed. While addressing new and beneficial ways that institutes of higher education can support survivors of sexual crimes, this article also addresses ways to implement a helpful system for perpetrators. Some of the propositions such as Sentencing Circles, Circles of Support and Accountability, Conferencing and RESTORE Programming all seem reasonable and helpful.

That is, in the rare instances that perpetrators for such crimes are actually held accountable for their actions. Statistically, that is only the case .02% of the time. Present collegiate and federal policies inadequately hold perpetrators accountable and fail to prioritize the needs and circumstances of survivors. 

Perhaps when our system is refined to stop perpetuating rape culture, and more frequently holds perpetrators accountable at all, the proposition for Restorative Justice Approaches would make sense. The system should not first be refined in favor of perpetrators. The system should take priority in refining and ensure that survivors are being taken care of and believed first. Once this is done, and the needs of survivors are adequately focused on, the approaches to disciplining perpetrators can be refined. At the moment, very few perpetrators are being held accountable in the first place, so… 

How could we implement a system that tries to assist perpetrators of such crimes when they are not even being punished in the first place? 

Let’s look at some statistics and specific instances that further emphasize this.

For starters, 1 in 5 female students is sexually assaulted before they graduate college but only 1 in 8 student survivors will report it.

Only 2-10% of sexual crime reports are false, meaning, 90-98% of reports are valid. This does not line up with the fact that for every 100 rapes committed, approximately 2 rapists will ever serve a day in prison.

With only .02% of perpetrators actually being held accountable in any way, it is unreasonable to try and implement a system of Restorative Justice at the present time.

Furthermore, when there are instances that the perpetrator has been taken to court, punishments are mild anyways. Let’s use the case of People of the State of California v. Brock Allen Turner as an example.

Turner was indicted on five charges: two for rape, two for felony sexual assault, and one for attempted rape.

The convictions carried a potential sentence of 14 years in prison.

Turner was sentenced to six months confinement in the Santa Clara County jail to be followed by three years of probation.

He would be three months shy of a six-month sentence. Turner was released 3 months early based on “good behavior”

Turner is presently appealing his sexual assault conviction.

How can we justify implementing a system of “Restorative Justice” when perpetrators are receiving such mild punishments for their crimes in the first place?

Federal Legislation and Policy, as well as University Legislation and Policy, only perpetuate a system that protects and defends perpetrators, as seen by the instances above. These terrible wrongs in the system need alterations before concern for adding further benefits to a system that already largely favors the wrongdoers is implemented. 

Citations:

(2014, December 4). People v. Turner. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People_v._Turner

Oritz, Erik. (2016, September 1). Brock Turner, Convicted of Sexual Assault, Set for Early Release — What’s Next in Case? Retrieved from https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/brock-turner-convicted-sexual-assault-set-early-release-what-s-n640366

Koss, M. Wilgus, J. Williamsen, K. (April, 2014). Restorative Justice Approaches to Enhance Compliance With Title IX Guidance. Sage, Volume 15 (Issue 3, pages 242-257). Retrieved from http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1524838014521500 

[socialjusticeineducation-blog]

Let’s take a moment to evaluate these phrases. They are a critique of common phrases that perpetuate rape culture. 

But what is rape culture?  

It is a societal norm and perpetuation of an environment in which rape and sexual violence are normalized. Beyond this, it is the participation in a social norm that excuses perpetrators and blames victims. This victim-blaming is perpetuated in the media and pop culture through misogynistic language, objectification of females, glamorization of sexual violence in media, and a surplus of other oppressive ideologies that stem from a historically patriarchal norm. Our society participates in rape culture on a daily basis. These phrases are only a few examples of how.

If someone’s home is burglarized, family, law enforcement, friends, neighbors, etc. do not ask questions that might blame the person who has had such a crime committed against them. No matter if their door was unlocked, wide-open, or if the key was sitting out. No matter if the homeowner was drunk, no matter if the burglar was a “good person”. Questions posed are empathetic and exclusively go against the perpetrator of the crime.  

So...

Why do survivors of sexual crimes get questioned in ways that put the responsibility and the blame on them? 

“What were you wearing?” Does not matter. 

“Were you drinking?” Does not matter. 

“Did you flirt back?” Does not matter.

“Boys will be boys.” Justifies nothing. 

It’s time to stop perpetuating a system that advocates for the benefit of the perpetrators. It’s time to stop teaching how to avoid being a victim, and instead, start teaching how not to be a perpetrator. 

It’s time to support survivors. 

[socialjusticeineducation-blog]

These statistics come from the website Know Your IX, which encourages student awareness and understanding of Title IX Legislation and works to empower students to end sexual violence. For more statistics, resources, and ways to get involved, please visit: https://www.knowyourix.org/

Please remain mindful, sexual assault is EXTREMELY problematic and impacts all people, of all races, gender identities, sexual orientations and the like. 

[socialjusticeineducation-blog]

These statistics come from the website Know Your IX, which encourages student awareness and understanding of Title IX Legislation and works to empower students to end sexual violence. For more statistics, resources, and ways to get involved, please visit: https://www.knowyourix.org/

[socialjusticeineducation-blog]

These statistics come from the website Know Your IX, which encourages student awareness and understanding of Title IX Legislation and works to empower students to end sexual violence. For more statistics, resources, and ways to get involved, please visit: https://www.knowyourix.org/