There has been a good deal of discussion about Title IX recently. This guest post explains just what Title IX is and how the law impacts the current BYU policy.
The Law
In shorthand, Title IX means that universities must have a program for reporting sexual assaults. [It is much, much more, but that is the part of the law that is at issue in the news right now]. Title IX also prohibits retaliation.
There is significant information publicly disseminated through http://knowyourix.org/
Retaliation occurs when a school intimidates, threatens, coerces, or in any way discriminates against an individual who has brought a concern or reported a possible violation of a federal civil right. This includes formal or informal reports of a violation and reports regarding a violation of your own rights or the rights of others.
If you report a possible sexual assault, then you are automatically protected against retaliation. This is true regardless of the merits of the underlying claim — meaning even if the initial concern or report does not result in a finding that a civil right was violated, you still cannot be retaliated against. This is to ensure that individuals feel free to assert their federal civil rights and do not suffer adverse consequences for being whistleblowers.
Under Title IX, only the school’s conduct toward the recipient party qualifies as retaliation. This includes conduct by anyone acting on the school’s behalf, such as the administration, faculty, or other employees. That means that if you are being harassed, intimidated, or threatened by other parties — such as other students — it does not qualify as retaliation. However, it may be the basis of another Title IX complaint.
The Policy
All Title IX reports automatically cause an Honor Code Violation Investigation to be made of the person reporting the sexual assault.
To quote the BYU Spokesperson [quote in a newspaper story about the issue]:
The issue is not whether the report discloses any honor code violations, or whether or not there is a delay in the investigation, but that all Title IX investigations trigger an honor code file on the person who is reporting the assault.
The News Spin and the Facts
The news and many bloggers have reported the policy as retaliation. The school has taken the position that they are investigating not the assault but other information that may come up in the course of the investigation. Thus they are not retaliating for the report, but they are investigating, not only for disclosed violations, but also for potential violations — and keeping files open if the rapist, who is being prosecuted — decides not to talk with them.
The BYU Position
BYU’s position is that it complies with the act. That is:
- It has a published notice of non-discrimination.
- It has a Title IX Coordinator.
- It has a clear grievance policy and procedure.
- Employees are trained to address sexual violence with zero tolerance.
- It responds promptly.
- It has reporting options.
- It has an appropriate standard of evidence.
- It has an equitable Title IX procedure.
- It does not retaliate for the fact that someone was assaulted or claims to have been assaulted.
- Honor code investigations are completely separate from the Title IX matters.
You can compare the BYU approach to the guidelines in the “Dear Colleague” letter sent out by the Assistant Secretary in the Office of Civil Rights.
The Issues
There are three issues. The first issue is whether the policy is retaliation. Retaliation occurs if:
- Your school then subjected you to adverse action, treatment or conditions; and
- There is a causal connection between the protected activity and the retaliation.
If an honor code investigation counts as adverse action, treatment or conditions, then it is retaliation. If it counts only as investigation then it is not retaliation as long as any impact comes from things other than the Title IX complaints.
Note that automatically creating an honor code investigation file in response to a Title IX complaint is extremely problematic.
The second issue is whether the policy creates a hostile environment. That is, does the fact that an honor code investigation will automatically occur create an environment hostile to reporting.
The Yale Law Journal in February of 2016 published an excellent argument that ties in the concepts of retaliation and hostile environment in the context of the current issues and the issue of mandatory reporting to law enforcement (which in analysis is a good stand in for mandatory reporting to the honor code enforcement). This is the so-called Mandatory Referral issue as a source of a hostile environment.
The third issue is whether the policy enables rapists. While not under Title IX, the current bottom line is that if a rape occurs after curfew or after getting someone to use drugs or alcohol, a report will result in the reporting party being disciplined for the related honor code violation. As a result, a rapist who is concerned about prosecution or investigation will protect themselves by drawing the rape out so that it occurs in part after curfew or in the presence of drugs or alcohol.
This leads to under reporting and to those who report being punished in addition to the harm caused by the rape (though not because of the rape).
There is also the issue of access to records. Family Education Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) [20 USC 1232g and 34 CFR 99] requires access, but with limits (for more, read this material on why a school cannot withhold copies, but is not required to provide official transcripts). Some people report not being allowed to have copies of records that appear to fall within FERPA (but which may be privileged as to ongoing investigations).
What is next (and what should BYU do)?
That is a good question. The justice department has begun an investigation. BYU has responded to the firestorm of news in pretty much typical fashion. Attorneys are getting involved (all sides are “lawyering up” as it is called), but the issues and responses are still evolving.
Since this is a blog post, rather than a legal journal or opinion paper, I understand that instead of giving conclusions or predictions here, I should ask the readers to provide their own. Please use the comments to do so.
Wheat & Tares 
We have some Yale grads in the bloggernacle and I’m curious what they think. Obviously this is specialized law that perhaps takes a lot more knowledge than I have.
My two or three cents:
Kudos for the brave young women who raise this issue, publicize it, and–I hope–will force BYU to fix it.
The author raises the key point: connecting the crime of rape to an honor code investigation places a victim in an untenable position: possibly get booted out of school or report a rape. It is wrong to put a victim in this position.
If a victim is raped, regardless of any surrounding circumstances, and regardless of events leading up to the rape, regardless of any action by the victim, then the aggressor is guilty. That is what the law says, and that must prevail over any school honor code.
BYU’s policy of opening an honor code violation investigation for any reported rape amounts to retaliation, in my opinion. It adds another level of stress to a horrible ordeal, presents an untenable choice of being kicked out or reporting the crime, and allows *only* male perpetrators to game the system.
In response to “well, you shouldn’t have violated the honor code in the first place” I say that an honor code violation is inconsequential relative to a rape–so inconsequential that it must never be considered at all. If there’s even *one* case where a rape victim doesn’t get help or a rapist continues to rape multiple victims, that’s one too many.
In the online interview with BYU president Worthen, he kept repeating how BYU puts support for rape victims first. In fact, the existing policies not only intimidate rape victims, the policies allow rapists to continue raping multiple victims.
Hypothetical:
Suppose a young male African american BYU student out after curfew on his way to buy beer at a gas station, and he’s accosted and severely beaten by some racist white guys. Is BYU going to open an honor code violation? Is the violating the honor code of any consequence compared to the life of a young man in the ICU? Could opening an honor code violation investigation be seen as Title IX retaliation? Could it even be viewed as racist? What if the victim were white instead of African American?
A few additional tidbits here. Does BYU violate any or all 3 of the facets you listed?
Retaliation? Yes, on a couple of accounts. Madeline MacDonald did not violate the BYU Honor Code at all. In her words: “There was nothing in my reported assault that was an Honor Code violation. There was no alcohol, no drugs, never anything previously consensual between myself [and my attacker].” And yet, an Honor Code investigation was opened on her, naming her a SUSPECT only as a result of her making a Title IX complaint. And why, unless they were retaliating against her, would they not allow her to participate in meetings about her when nobody involved had made any claim that she violated the Code? Additionally, Madison Barney’s Honor Code investigation was only opened when her police report was handed to the HCO by a local police officer who used to work for BYU and who disapproved of her actions as a victim, considering her behavior unseemly for BYU. This officer’s actions resulted in her being unable to withdraw from classes and at risk of expulsion which has a definite dampening effect on her ability to pursue her rape accusation.
Next, let’s look at Hostile Environment. Sarah Westerberg, who is somehow allowed to continue as BYU’s Title IX coordinator, openly boasted to over 200 assembled students at a Rape Awareness event that the Honor Code had “a chilling effect” on the reporting of rapes. That goes hand in hand with what both victims who’ve come forward have said: that Westerberg is derisive of those who make Title IX complaints, assuming that they are false complaints designed to cover up misdeeds. Hostile environment? Without question.
In short, does the policy enable rapists? Any BYU alum knows that the last thing you want is to run afoul of the Honor Code office, whether it’s for something minor like razor stubble or a skirt that’s just above the knee. The process itself is far worse than being sent to the principle’s office. It’s more like being sent to detention with Dolores Umbridge or being brought in before High Inquisitor Torquemada. The presumption is always that you are guilty. Does automatically sending rape victims to the HCO enable rapists? Absolutely.
I hope that BYU is in the midst of real soul searching here, and that they do in fact find their soul. Right now, I suspect there are plenty of those who’ve been engaged in these immoral witch-hunts for so long that they are lamenting the wicked world in which we live that is pointing with scorn at them from the great and spacious building. The real great and spacious building in this story is the misnamed Honor Code Office. That place needs to be gutted, and the Title IX coordinator replaced with someone who actually believes that it’s possible to be raped without it being your fault.
All I can seem to think about when I read about this “road crash” of a situation is the scripture:
“Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel” Matt 23:24.
Culture, fanaticism and (to me) the unnatural wedding of a strictly conservative church and an educational institution, have collided to produce the perfect storm where we are somehow more concerned about curfews, alcohol consumption or where the alleged incident took place, than the violent and brutal actions of a sex offender.
The reference to gnats and camels seems appropriate here…
Yanks would call it a trainwreck. 🙂
thank you
“And yet, an Honor Code investigation was opened on her, naming her a SUSPECT only as a result of her making a Title IX complaint.”
Hawk, while I’m really afraid that might be true, my understanding is that this is an uncorroborated claim she made to the Union Trib. If true, it’s pretty damning, but it doesn’t make sense – named her a suspect of what? All I’m saying is be careful of spin (unintentional or otherwise).
“Sarah Westerberg, …openly boasted to over 200 assembled students at a Rape Awareness event that the Honor Code had “a chilling effect” on the reporting of rapes.” That sounds a little like spin — was she boasting or acting defensive? Either way, what she said was horrible, but still.
BYU should certainly not be referring rape victims to the honor code office. It’s not because women who violate their sworn honor have changed character simply because something bad has happened to them, but the priority of reporting and removing predators simply has to take priority, and you’d think that’d be obvious, even to those who would lack sympathy for the victims.
What I really don’t understand, is why some of these women were investigated at all. Sounds like there was no reason at all to investigate them. I love BYU, and I sure hope they can explain themselves.
I’d love to have them do an interview with us and explain their side of it more fully. Anyone know anyone at BYU who would like to add more than they have said so far?
This is great. At the very least there’s no way they’re NOT guilty of a hostile environment.
Kristine, it does look like mandatory referral even without any evidence of an honor code violation does look like a hostile environment issue. I’d like to hear from someone who knows 10th circuit law.
Why is there an honor code at all? Why not just farm it out to their ecclesiastical leaders and allow them to deal with it?
Doesn’t honor code office do the opposite of its intended purpose? Don’t people who probably want to go through the repentance process not so it for fear of being expelled?
Doesn’t it currently out bishops in a predicament whether to turn them in or not?
Why not just let BYU students be like normal folks – let them grow a beard, let them drink caffeine on campus and allow them to progress and fall short sometimes like the rest of us.
It frankly is almost like communist Hungary where everyone is out to report on each other. There’s a propaganda poster I saw once in Russia with a lady holding her finger to her lips, insinuating it was best to stay quiet; that honesty should be BYUs moniker.
I am a BYU grad for the record but am honestly second guessing guiding my daughter to go there
A few years ago I participated in training conducted by the Title IX Office at BYU. My impression was they couldn’t care less about victims or making campus safer – they just didn’t want BYU to get bad press. They’ve failed, spectacularly, on both fronts. All of this is so troubling. And appalling.
Thank you for this clarifying post Guest Author, and Hawgrrl, thank you for your insightful comment above.
I’ve been terribly troubled by the whole Honor Code situation. I’ve read words like “consequences” and “covenants,” “commitment,” and phrases about how an HC investigation is “separate” from the criminal one, and other sorts of pandering/defensive rhetoric from certain BYU reps or defenders of the HC.
The trouble is, it’s all about pride. Pride that BYU is a lofty institution of learning. Pride that it’s students tow a line that’s already covered by their baptismal covenant as members of the church. All of us members live by an honor code given by the Savior. And all of us — BYU administrators and HC office staff included — violate it. We all violate our Savior’s code of honor.
So He gave us the gift of repentance and a Bishop to talk to as needed to overcome ourselves and our violations. He taught nothing of being snitches, nor witch hunters, nor heaping on further consequences upon those judged guilty of offending BYU’s pride. Pride causes all kinds of woes, whether it be as an individual, a group, nation, religion, or institution. Pride causes us to blame, accuse, root out, lose perspective, and enable the wrong folks. It causes us to dig in our heels, and lawyer up.
What did Jesus do when the woman taken in adultery was brought before Him? He did not stone her, nor cast her out from among them, nor did He investigate her. What would He have done if a woman raped was likewise brought before Him? I’m sure He would have comforted her, and blessed her, and offered His support.
Let us go and do likewise. Let Madi be with her Bishop as Christ’s stand-in. And BYU and everyone else should let her know we have her back, and that angels go before her face.
As to false accusers? As Jesus taught, they have their reward. I’d rather err on the side of comforting those in need of comfort, and mourning with those who have cause to mourn (while in college)–even if they lied–than to further hurt those who have truly suffered, and suffer still.
I have been following this story but he not Heard until now that the Justice Department has opened an investigation. I’m happy to hear that, but can someone post a link to support that assertion? Also, if BYU suddenly changes its policy in response to its purported internal review of this policy then will that make the justice department investigation go away? Or will they still prosecute for past retaliative conduct by the school?
And let me echo the praise others have expressed for the bravery of these women who came forward. Hopefully some good will come of it. My daughter is a student at BYU currently and this whole thing has shaken me to the core. I sent her to BYU because I thought is was a safe place. Clearly it is not.
thank you. I hope people recognize this isn’t just BYU. It’s very much a Mormon problem.
The justice dept investigation is just part of news stories right now.
What kind and details and focus and such is not covered by the press stories I’ve seen.
If anyone knows more than the sort of thing in these stories I’d appreciate comments:
http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/byu-title-ix-complaint_us_57162229e4b0018f9cbb012a
I hope people recognize this isn’t just Mormons. It’s very much an American problem.
I hope people recognize this isn’t just the USA. It’s very much a human problem.
Hopefully we’ll learn as a species not to blame the victim sooner rather than later. Unfortunately the impulse to try and find some reason within our control that it won’t happen to us is very deeply ingrained in the human condition.
i am confused about a couple of points.
– Academic studies indicate woman almost never call rape unless it is true.
– Court room experience indicates it is difficult to get convictions in rape cases.
It would appear that many juries believe women sometimes do make false or exaggerated accusations. Where is the truth? I think that the answer to this question is not very clear to many people on all sides of the discussion.
This is separate from the issue of the burden of proof of being on the accuser/prosecutor in our courts. Do we make exceptions for certain crimes? Killing your brother or neighbor is different than killing a member of a historically underprivileged minority? Stealing a million dollars is treated under a different set of laws with different underlying assumptions than stealing a woman’s consent-to-sex through rape?
Is the definition of consent changing in a hyper-sexual environment? No means no. But is it often not that clear? Does intoxication make it even less clear? Isn’t that the point of drinking? Who bears this burden in the delicate dance of communication that precedes most experimental sexual experiences?
– Women are considered not as capable morally as men historically. In need of special protection. Maybe even contemporarily by some.
– Women are equally capable morally and responsible as men.
It seems to me that when a woman is raped she is then treated like she has less moral responsibility for everything else surrounding the event. She can not be expected to understand that getting in trouble for minor infractions is less important than pursuing serious felonies.
The “chilling effect” may well be powerful. But it seems to me to be mostly in the heads of the victims. I think if a morally capable person was raped, and then kicked out of school for drinking a beer or being out past a curfew, why would they want to attend a school that treated them like that? A morally responsible person might apply the chilling effect in the other direction and tell all their friends and relatives.
Except can a morally capable Mormon woman tell the difference in seriousness between curfew violations and rape? Can the institution charged with their higher education tell the same difference? When BYU harshly punishes minor violations, it leaves less room for serious violations to be even more harshly punished. Is getting dismissed from BYU as serious as going to prison?
Parents concerned enough to insist upon a unique and protected setting for the education of their children should listen to what I would call ‘the reverse chilling effect” and send their precious darlings elsewhere. And perhaps their tithing too.
the chilling effect is absolutely in their morally capable heads…because it has been instilled there via the culture and the Young Woman virtue of ‘choice and accountability’ which needs serious revision. when a victim has become strong enough to fully understand it was not her fault, she isn’t afraid to tell anyone. but what you missed and is a very important factor is trauma. that’s a whole other area which should be getting the most consideration and it’s hardly gotten any. trauma and blame and conditioning all contribute to the spiral of silence. victims have to feel safe to talk.
and also….rapists lie. lie. lie. that’s why it’s difficult to prosecute. they are lying predators.
Hawkgrrrl, I love your comment #4.
“why would they want to attend a school that treated them like that? A morally responsible person might apply the chilling effect in the other direction and tell all their friends and relatives.” Well, the story of Madeline makes it clear why she wanted to attend there–her whole family did, and she was proud to be accepted. She didn’t violate the code, and when she was put under investigation anyway, she got her parents involved on her behalf. She was telling her friends and relatives. But she didn’t want to be subject to academic penalties for simply being a rape victim. It’s already debilitating enough to go through the trauma of rape–that has to affect one’s grades.
In Madison’s case, the university put her ability to withdraw (with her credits intact) on hold, and they also are holding her under threat of expulsion. In both cases, academic consequences could be lost credits and money and time. Of course it’s worth it to leave over that, but it’s a heckuva weapon to put into the hands of lying rapists hellbent on shutting their victims up.
I would love to see the honor code go back to being student-led instead of the long arm of the religious leadership.
I do find it troubling how BYU administration seems unable to see how bad it looks with things like this and the “lose your LDS faith and you are kicked out of school” rule. It just seems Orwellian to most (even those in the church), but the administration seems blind to it. Which means they are most likely going to continue to make such blunders.
I know where your sympathies lie, A Happy Hubby, but this is much more than a crisis of appearance. This is a crisis of basic justice and propriety. And if the schools run by the church and administered by the hand picked officials of the church don’t recognize wrong headed and ham fisted policy or are willing to employ such strategies in the service of well polished PR, then something FUNDAMENTAL us very very wrong.
One should be safe in hoping the Lord’s Anointed would have picked up on that failure of basic values and acted much sooner in the interest of basic decency and the high standards of worthiness that should accompany such critical positions. A hard look in this direction would have done a lot more to protect the church than all of the petty excommunications of the last several years because what renegade members do is one thing but what the arms of the church do in their official capacity is another altogether.
Alice – no disagreements on anything you said and I can see where my short words make it look like I am lumping the closeness of a shave to this topic. I don’t feel that way at all. I am not a lawyer, but I suspect this could even end up in court if BYU does not do the right thing and fairly quickly.
My point was that over and over the administrators/leaders look like bumbling idiots. I worry that they are capable of even topping this serious procedural injustice with something even more morally objectionable. I think I am agreeing with your second paragraph.
I fear it could get to the point where all my $/time spend for my education, my wife’s education, and most of my kids education become something to hide on our resumes.
Maybe this whole thing is to decrease the demand for applications to BYU and we can be sure to see Utah county renamed to “Jackson County” and will be the most righteous place on earth.
@Happy
Your point about $/time and resumes leads to something that’s been on my mind.
If you Google BYU tuition, you see that students attending BYU are (more or less) LDS members on a church funded scholarship. If you aren’t LDS, then tuition roughly doubles. I am *not* sure if having BYU on your resume gives you an inside track to a better job in Mormon circles.
That being said, I can see how financial issues put huge pressure on kids not to run afoul of the rules. Then there’s pressure from parents and other members if a kid screws up. I expect most kids signing the HC are thinking “yeah, whatever”. I am pretty sure I’ve signed a few and I have no idea what they said other than “don’t cheat”.
So I have two points here. (a) The “break the HC get kicked out” thing puts a huge emotional and financial burden on kids and their families. (b) The concepts worked great as long as BYU was fairly isolated, but now that they are taking federal funds and, therefore, must have a Title IX office, I expect to see them dragged into the 21st century.
What applies at BYU applies to the LDS church: religious institutions are given a pass up to a point, but they *cannot* run afoul of public policy. Otherwise the Feds will step in and force church leaders to have a “revelation” that they can’t discriminate against minorities, for example.
I was raped on a date at BYU many years ago. I never said a thing. I took it as a sign that I was damaged goods and it put my life into a tail spin. It took quite a while to come out of that. I NEVER would’ve considered talking to the HC office or Provo Police. I saw those two offices as one and the same — and punitive. Provo was BYU back then.
I kept trying to figure out how it was my fault. As an LDS young woman, we are taught in all kinds of little ways that we are the gatekeepers of morality, and any impure thought or deed that a young man had was our fault for providing temptation.
Looking back, the entire dynamic was sick and twisted. I despise BYU .. Not because I was raped there .. But because of the culture of misogyny it promotes.
I’m so sorry. I know. thank you for sharing. there are many of us working to change that.
@Fulano
“This is not a Mormon problem”
It’s a Mormon problem. This is not about “searching for reasons in our control it won’t happen to us.” This is about how to stop brainwashing young women into believing they are somehow responsible if a man rapes them. This is about fixing a broken system at BYU that blames and silences rape victims and thereby encourages their attackers to rape again.
NY Times article Apr 26. Thanks to a few brave women, problems at BYU (and root problems with Mormon culture) are getting national attention.
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/04/27/us/rape-victims-brigham-young-university-honor-code-suspensions.html
I don’t think there’s any basis for claiming this is a “justice department” investigation at all. The link Steve provided said that the Department of EDUCATION is conducting an investigation. Yes it is a federal complaint, but the Justice Dept has nothing to do with it.
Thanks MH.
@MH
Agree. I did some searches as well and came up empty. The closest was at UNM starting last year. With all the publicity and the rather unique situation at BYU, I could see the DOJ stepping in if there are no substantive changes.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/grade-point/wp/2016/04/22/justice-department-blasts-u-of-new-mexico-for-failing-to-address-sexual-assault/
If you think this is a just Mormon problem, you need to pay closer attention. What’s going on at BYU right now is only a more obvious example of an attitude that affects American culture as a whole.
It was only a few years back that a congressmen said that a woman’s body could prevent pregnancy in a “legitimate rape”. That attitude hasn’t gone anywhere. Victim blaming is very much part of the natural man, and leads quickly to the shameful behavior we’re seeing from the HC.
My point wasn’t that this isn’t a problem for Mormons, just that we need to me careful not to be complacent. If we manage to excise this particular cancer, that’s progress, but not victory.
We’re jailing the poor for unpaid fines, but consistently let rapists walk. We’re perilously close to fitting the description in Helaman 7:5, “Condemning the righteous because of their righteousness; letting the guilty and the wicked go unpunished because of their money…”.
#27 I assure you that your intent was very clear, A Happy Hubby. I wanted to start with that. But I also wanted to discuss how much this is not a matter of public relations but of a deep moral confusion and dereliction on the part of the school as a general question and not as a charge that you are answerable for in any way.
If only the school and the Fifteen were being as responsive to this traumatic situation as you are.
@Fulano
Just so long as we’re clear that “it’s all part of a bigger issue” isn’t some kind of hand-waving defense of what’s going on at BYU. It sounds suspiciously like “well, everybody else is doing it, so Mormons and BYU aren’t so bad.” You that defense, I say “Sure, fleas are a universal problem, but you still gotta wash your dog.”
Of course, nobody will disagree that rape and the attitudes that promote it are near universal. It’s not a news flash that poor folks get the short end of the stick in court either. Don’t need a religious quote to tell us that.
You gotta start sometime, something, somewhere. I suggest starting right now. I suggest Mormons knock off the programming of gender roles making women second to men and making women responsible for male sexual behavior. I suggest in place of a “study” to stall for time, fixing the glaring mess at BYU because it’s the right thing to do, not because BYU is forced to.
Nobody realistically thinks this is going to solve the world’s problems, but I’d say it’s a pretty good start.
I was pretty clear in my original comment.
Your misquote changed “not just a Mormon problem” to “not a Mormon problem”. That’s a pretty substantial change.
Yes, fight to fix BYU.
No, don’t lose sight of the reality that we are managing the symptoms, not addressing the root cause – which runs way deeper than LDS culture.
@Fulano
“Unfortunately the impulse to try and find some reason within our control that it won’t happen to us is very deeply ingrained in the human condition.”
“No, don’t lose sight of the reality that we are managing the symptoms, not addressing the root cause – which runs way deeper than LDS culture.”
I was pretty clear too. Statements like the above are meaningless psycho-babble. The problems at hand are Mormonism’s teachings on gender and the broken system at BYU.
If I’m wrong, then, using your two quoted statement as a basis, lay out specific steps we can follow to fix the problems with Mormonism and the BYU system. If they aren’t actionable, why bring them up?
Understanding why something happens is not the same as knowing how to fix it. It is, however, far more likely to lead to a solution than dismissing it as, “those backwards Mormons hate and intentionally brainwash their women”, which is your hypothesis, as far as I can tell from what you’ve written.
While I don’t know how to fix the way our society (Mormon and otherwise) keeps messing things up in the way we treat the victims of heinous crimes, I can provide an example of how a similar problem has been mostly solved.
One of the most common features of pre-legal societies was vendettas. Without a legal framework that most of society agreed at least appeared just, the primary way of righting a perceived wrong was getting a bunch of your kin together and either beating them until you felt better about it, or outright killing them. This often escalated into a full blown vendetta, some of which lasted generations.
This provided an important benefit to the wronged party: closure. It took a long time to reach the point were it became a fundamental part of our culture to seek that closure in the legal system. The last vestigial practice, dueling, was fairly recently abandoned as a socially approved way of seeking redress.
I don’t know what the solution will be, but I know that if there is one it will address the fundamental need victim blaming currently satiates: a need to feel in control, to have some way of reassuring ourselves that whatever horrible thing happened to them doesn’t have to happen to us.
This is usually the primary motivation behind stupidity like asking a rape victim what they were wearing, or what mistakes they may have made leading up to the point when things went horribly wrong. The questions aren’t about them, they’re about reassuring the asker, and the LDS people are not the only ones guilty of this behavior.
I bring these things up because, while not directly actionable, if we don’t consider why society is messed up, then we have no chance of fixing it.
this is very accurate insight.
@Fulano
“more likely to lead to a solution than dismissing it as, “those backwards Mormons hate and intentionally brainwash their women”, which is your hypothesis, as far as I can tell”
I never said Mormons were backward nor that they hated women. They do indeed brainwash young children of both sexes about gender roles.
What I said wasn’t a hypothesis. I gave specific, actionable steps. These are things that I (and others, by the way) believe will help solve the problem.
You seem to be all over the place with your posts, but you never offer any specific solutions. I think you are just trying to deflect blame. After all the mumbo jumbo, that’s what it comes down to.
@Fulano
“address the fundamental need victim blaming currently satiates: a need to feel in control, to have some way of reassuring ourselves that whatever horrible thing happened to them doesn’t have to happen to us”
This idea is complete nonsense. Victim blaming and shaming is about silencing victims in order protect criminals and the institutions they inhabit. There’s no woo woo psychology behind it. At BYU, it prevents rape victims from speaking up in order to protect BYU’s reputation. It permits male rapists to dominate and further victimize the women they rape, and lets these men rape again and again with impunity.
There was a good interview on this topic at http://radiowest.kuer.org/post/sexual-assault-mormon-context
@Elder Anderson
“I suggest Mormons knock off the programming of gender roles making women second to men and making women responsible for male sexual behavior. I suggest in place of a “study” to stall for time, fixing the glaring mess at BYU because it’s the right thing to do, not because BYU is forced to.”
This is neither clear nor actionable, and boils down to “step 1: fix the problem”.
Just because you dismiss the current scientific understanding of the causes of victim blaming as “woo woo psychology”, does not mean they are not real. Here’s a good place to start educating yourself: https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/in-love-and-war/201311/why-do-we-blame-victims
If my comments seem all over the place, it’s because I’m addressing a phenomenon which is pervasive and manifests in many different ways. The situation at BYU is neither unique, or even the most disturbing place this manifests – having to explain that two young girls were not culpable in their own murders is a special kind of terrible.
There is no vast conspiracy attempting to silence victims and protect criminals, there doesn’t need to be. What we have is far more pervasive and entrenched: many small decisions and judgements by individuals, made to help them feel more in control of their lives, aggregate into a culture that blames victims for the acts of their victimizers. This culture silences victims and protects criminals as a side effect. It’s so ingrained that, without proper trauma counseling, victims often blame themselves.
I don’t offer specific, actionable, advice because I don’t know how to root out something that entrenched. I am, however, more than capable of pointing out that overly simplistic solutions that ignore what we know about how the human mind works are little more than an ineffective band-aid attempting to patch up a deep wound in our society.
@Fulano
You have a point regarding the psychology of the thing. I was being a bit facetious. On the other hand, I’d offer that a Band-Aid solution is a hell of a lot better than just talking about the problem. I stand by my statement that your posts *really* sound like you are trying to deflect blame from Mormons and BYU when they *are* plainly contributing the problem at hand and they plainly have a responsibility to act. Saying “it’s a universal problem” or “it’s part of human psychology” doesn’t diminish that responsibility in any way.
“This is neither clear nor actionable, and boils down to “step 1: fix the problem”.
Really? What’s unclear about what I said and what’s stopping anybody acting on it? Of course, I’m not going to sit here and write a detailed plan of action in the comments section of a blog. You can see with your own two eyes the gender programming that goes on. How about Mormons start with calling both male and female missionaries “Elder”? How about Mormons eliminate the idiotic messages about female “modesty”? How about putting women in the First Presidency? As for BYU, Hawkgrrl spelled those actions out in another post for you. Start with gutting the BYU Title IX office, etc.
Here’s a story describing how rapists use the HC to manipulate victims
http://www.sltrib.com/home/3817597-155/sexual-assault-victims-say-abusers-wield
Unbelievable that BYU is complicit in this
I don’t think they are complicit.
You’ve basically said “some rapists use money to manipulate victims, therefore the Federal Reserve is complicit.”
You’ve missed the point, I think. Unbelievably.
The complicit behavior would come from failing to take appropriate action on review.
Your position would make you complicit in giving publicity to a tool rapists could use if they use it by commenting on it. That is obviously nonsense.
The more honest position is to acknowledge that there is a universal problem, but the question is how we adjust our responses to the problem as we have a chance to analyze and adjust, given that rushing in to change without real analysis is often worse than not changing at all.
@Stephen
Well, you done schooled me. 🙂
I had to look up “complicit” and it doesn’t mean what I thought. I’ve been using it wrong for all these years. I take back what I said.
As for rushing in… I think it’s good to think things through, but I hope the schools are honest about it. Sometimes an institution or person (especially government officials) will say “we’re commissioning a study” as a way to sound like the body is taking immediate action when there’s no intent to address the issue. Seems to me that Mormon institutions can be a bit stubborn and defensive when faced with external pressure to change.
Just my opinion, but the problems on the BYU campus don’t require a study. The adjustments required are pretty clear, and they will have an immediate effect on removing an impediment to reporting and catching and removing offenders. If nothing else, BYU can consult with SVU which seems to have a working system. It’s like your house is on fire and you’re doing a study about where to aim the hose.
I hope it goes quickly and effectively and with kindness for the victims.
I think we agree on that.
As such, the university will not tolerate Sexual Harassment defined as sexual harassment, sexual violence, domestic violence, dating violence, and stalking. This standard for weighing evidence aligns with the university’s other discipline policies when weighing evidence. It is a very high standard of proof that is significantly greater than the preponderance of the evidence standard and is NOT used in BYU Title IX investigations.